Spitfire Vb: Did it carry 120 rnds OR 240 rnds of Cannons?

[Crumpp]

Normal range, not radius, of the Spit I was 575mi.

Your correct I misread it.  Point was that almost every RAF base was within easy range of London.  Within a very short period of time the RAF could move forces within the theater.

As the RAF says, over 900 serviceable RAF single engine fighters were available to intercept the Luftwaffe in August 1940.

A far cry from your gross exaggeration of 2:1 odds in 109's to RAF single fighters!

Milo says:

The 109s did pretty good? Not with 51.5% of the LW casualities being 109s and out numbering the Spits and Hurries of 11 Group by at least 2:1. (11 Group being the main combat area)

The reality is the RAF Spitfires and Hurricanes outnumbered the Luftwaffe 109's.  At least according to the RAF's own strength reports!

The figures for Fighter Command are somewhat higher than those quoted in other sources but have been taken directly from PRO AIR 20/2307.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0IBO/is_4_24/ai_74582443/pg_5

Shore is the standard refererence for any researcher worth his salt.

I am sure he got many things right, Milo.

All the best,

Crumpp

[MiloMorai]

Not the only words you misread.

Still have your problem Crumpp.

Nice to see that you think 11 Group was the WHOLE bloody FC of the RAF.

"out numbering the Spits and Hurries of 11 Group by at least 2:1."

You need a reading comprehension refresher coarse.

Now you can keep on twisting and manipulating numbers like another poster does but it does not change the fact that 11 Group  was out numbered by the LW.

11 Group, is not Fighter Command
11 Group, is not Fighter Command
11 Group, is not Fighter Command
11 Group, is not Fighter Command
11 Group, is not Fighter Command

Keep repeating Crumpp until you understand.

[Crumpp]

"out numbering the Spits and Hurries of 11 Group by at least 2:1."

Looks like they got plenty of support Milo when fighting the Luftflotte II!

Not the whole Luftwaffe.

11 Group was far from outnumbered 2:1 and had numerical parity with the RAF single engined fighters as shown.

Unless of course you want to contend that Fighter Command did not bring any of it's additional single engine fighters to the battle.

By August they outnumbered the Luftwaffe 109's.

All the best,

Crumpp

[MiloMorai]

Since one can't edit post after a short time, you can change: '11 Group was out numbered by the LW force opposite them'. Should not really have to add those words as it was Luftflotte 2 and 3 that were the major LW particpants in BoB, with Luftflotte 2 opposite 11 Group.

Your last post illustrates your problem very nicely Crumpp.

Only 11 Group is mentioned. No where is support from other Groups mentioned.

Aug 15

Luftlotte 2

109s > 544
other a/c > 1358 (ie bomber types)

RAF 11 Group

Spit/Hurries > 418

Now our dear Crumpp thinks that these 1358 other a/c are going to fly unmolested in the British airspace of 11 Group and the Spits/Hurries will only oppose the the 109s flying in British airspace of 11 Group. How nieve of him. At least half of the Spit/Hurries will have to go after those 1358 other a/c.

So if all the a/c on both sides participated in one huge air battle on this day in Aug, then the 109s would out number the Spit/Hurries tasked with taking care of them by 2.6:1. Looks like I underestimated my 'gross' exageration. And so began Crumpp's 'problem' in this thread.

Now Crumpp you can 'nickel and dime' all you want, but the numbers show that the Spit/Hurries of 11 Group  were out numbered by the a/c of Luftflotte 2 including the 109.

[Angus]

Hello Crumpp.
Not yet have I brought my summary of some numbers and engagements - well it's a computer problem actually
Anyway, what must be kept in mind is really this: The BoB chops down in many phases, i.e. channel fight, radar hits, airfield hits, and then London Bombed.
In the channel fight you have 10th and 11th group. In the radar hits the same. The airfield hits were almost exclusively 11th group. Then, when London got hit, you have some part of 10th, much of 11th, and some piece of 12th group participating.
With 100% strength those available could muster at best some 300-400 aircraft to intercept, - and the biggest number I have found to have made interception in a day within a short timeframe is 250, - the biggest by far. The German escorts that day were some hundreds more.
An interception of 100 fighters seems to have been quite some news.
It all boils down to the same pot, and hereby I really think you haven't read too much up on this, - The BIG WING DEBATE. If your theory sticks anywhere, there wouldn't have been one. Ok, for the less knowledgable who might come across this thread, - in short:
The RAF 11th group under the control of Park, were operating in small groups, but operated rather switftly. Things however start getting sour when 12 aircraft have to attack some 100 bombers with another 100 as escorts. So, there is this big fight within the Fighter command. Some want biger interception units to form up. Park and Dowding point out that there simply isn't TIME enough (this is during the attacks on 11th group airfields).
Okay, Park and Dowding keep in control, and IMHO keep the RAF's FC from being destroyed. LW then Switches to London. Suddenly the big wing theory can actually function. There is TIME to set up a big force, - the LW has to cross a bit more space on the plotting table. The big wings work as far as the daylight and clouds allow. LW gets hit with a steadily growing PROPORTION of fighter command. And London, being the target, day after day, well just scramble and grab some alt once LW activity is detected and head for London! Some good proportion of 12th group, as well ast 11th and some 2 squadrons or so of the 10th can possibly make it to the show.
Big numbers hit the LW on the 15th of September. I have seen the figure 250. The escorts may still have been that many over the area - haven't got the number yet. Must have been a shock to the LW, and the RAF was vigourous. Big wing theorist gained more support, and the true winners of the BoB, Park and Dowding, got demoted, while the big wing theorist Leigh-Mallory got the chair.

[Crumpp]

Now our dear Crumpp thinks that these 1358 other a/c are going to fly unmolested in the British airspace of 11 Group and the Spits/Hurries will only oppose the the 109s flying in British airspace of 11 Group. How nieve of him.

The argument was not whether all the LW aircraft outnumbered the Spitfires and Hurricanes by 2:1, it was the single engine fighter vs single engine fighter.

Guess it must be convienant for you to change the argument.

For brevity, the analysis focuses primarily on the single-seat fighters deployed by the respective air forces. It was in this arena that the Luftwaffe needed to prevail if it were to achieve air superiority over southern England and, in so doing, defeat the Royal Air Force.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0IBO/is_4_24/ai_74582443

At least half of the Spit/Hurries will have to go after those 1358 other a/c.

Did not seem to matter in your last discussion on the Luftwaffe in 1944.

All the best,

Crumpp

[Angus]

From Crumpp:
"The argument was not whether all the LW aircraft outnumbered the Spitfires and Hurricanes by 2:1, it was the single engine fighter vs single engine fighter."

Correct. We (you and me mostly) are now tugging about those numbers.
May I point out that it was within the power of II Flotte to mount in a single raid, more 109's than the whole Hurricanes and Spitfires available to the 11th group of Fighter command, and there was never a chance to make the interceptions with all squadrons, - there was action enough, but not enough time for all to make it to the fray.

[Crumpp]

May I point out that it was within the power of II Flotte to mount in a single raid, more 109's than the whole Hurricanes and Spitfires available to the 11th group of Fighter command, and there was never a chance to make the interceptions with all squadrons, - there was action enough, but not enough time for all to make it to the fray.

Sure, depending on the time frame you reference.  I don't think at anytime though it was quite as dramatic as 2:1.

The RAF experienced nothing on the scale of the Luftwaffe’s numerical disparity in the bombing campaigns of early 1944.

Which is what would have been required to win such a campaign now that the theory is formulated and battle tested.

All the best,

Crumpp

[Angus]

I've seen it documented much more dramatically. Like 2 squadrons engaging some 600 escorts, - the whole mass of Luftflotte 1 available escorts. Later on more joined the fray, it was 1:3 at best.
Think it was early Sept.
24th of August, from Johnny Johnsson's big Circle, p 142:
"At breakfast time the bombing began with small unopposed raid against Great Yarmouth ,and shortly afterwards five strong patrols , numbering about one hundred aeroplanes in all, reconnoitred south-east England, from the coast to Biggin Hill, and were challenged only  by a brace of Spitfires.
Two hours later during the mid morning two seperate raids, each consisting of a bomber wing, well protected with 109's, missed their primary target, Manston, and dropped their bombs near Cantebury. Only a few minutes elapsed before a Heinkel wing, escorted by twice as many fighters, headed towards Dover, where it was tackled by some twenty Spitfires and Hurricanes, who failed to get through to the bombers before they dropped ....."
Where does that leave you?
Shortly thereafter, the LW moves inland to get at airfields more to the North. 109's have to return and many bombers start getting shot down on the return. This fuelled a dispute between the fighters and the bombers and Göring was right in the middle of it. What follows, p. 145:
"Göring supported the bomber commanders, and had some harsh and unfair things to say about the fighting qualities and morale of his fighter arm. He had already decided to switch the bombers of Luftflotte 3 from day to night operations, and the fighters of this air fleet would assist those of Luftflotte 2. In future, Göring ordered the bombers would have close, high, and top fighter escorts; there would be three fighters for every bomber."

So Squire's tip about fighters being moved between flottes seems to have some ground. This leaves you with what - oh nearabouts 2:1 if RAF makes a very good scramble. Which they didn't, - p.145 again
"Since the RAF usually intercepted in small packets, rarely more than a squadron strong, life was not to hard for the escorting pilots"

On the 7th of September the RAF made it to action, - but the LW raid was big. The RAF finally made it to action with the Duxford Wing for two reasons - the leader (Bader) disobeyed patrolling orders and the LW force had headwind so it moved slower towards the target.
Still, Bader didn't catch them before they were already on the way home, - so where would that leave a squadron from Lincolnshire, Yorkshire or Wales?????
Anyway, Bader still hadn't got the altitude so he attacked the whole force with 36 fighters while climbing.
There were 21 defending squadrons in action so the odds can't have been that bad, but they attacked SINGLY, not even in Pairs which was Park's plan. That leaves a horrible ratio to say the least - like 1 to 10 or perhaps even 1 to 30!!!!!

[Crumpp]

Like 2 squadrons engaging some 600 escorts

The Luftwaffe would have been very hard pressed and very lucky to have anything even near 600 escorts in the air at once.

Where does that leave you?

Does not change a thing.  I am sure to him it seemed that way.

So Squire's tip about fighters being moved between flottes seems to have some ground.

You don't seem to understand the significance of the RAF having more fighters than the Luftwaffe.  

On the 7th of September the RAF made it to action,

I hope not, the RAF had more fighters in August than the Luftwaffe.  By September their numerical superiority would have increased even more.

All the best,

Crumpp

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by Crumpp
The argument was not whether all the LW aircraft outnumbered the Spitfires and Hurricanes by 2:1, it was the single engine fighter vs single engine fighter.

Guess it must be convienant for you to change the argument.

The point which you can not get into your head is the British fighters had 2 enemies > the 109 and the bombers. The British fighter force would be split between the enemy a/c types. The main objective of the British fighters was to knock down German bombers, not German fighters and the greater number of British fighters would go after the bombers.

Change the arguement? Nope, only your problem would see that.

What you do Crummp is compare the base numbers of fighters on both sides, without considering how the British used their fighters. I repeat, less than 1/2 the British fighters in the air at any specific time would target the 109s.

[Angus]

Crumpp, 600 escorts are documented.
It is also well documented how many RAF could get TOGETHER, - the highest numbers I find are some 20 squadrons or 250 fighters.
I have now also found it documented that after a certain timeperiod the fighters of Gruppe III were also fighting 11th group.
So....a flood coming in

[Angus]

Crumpp: first wave
From Shores, 7th of Sept 1940. 1st big raid on London.
348 Bombers, 617 fighters.
That's the Day mentioned from Johnny above. All in all some 20 squadrons of the RAF are defending.
From Martin Gilbert, same day: 300 bombers and 600 fighters.
On the 15th of September, he actually gives 230 bombers and 700 fighters.
Gilbert also provides some LW sortie numbers. On a good day there could be 2 sorties while there still was daylight.
13/8 1.485
14/8 1.270 fighter and 520 bomber.


ORDER OF BATTLE
(well, the numbers I have)
Spits and Hurricanes of the RAF, 8. Aug 1940
10th group 7
11th group 19
12th group 11
13th group 12

LUFTWAFFE
Luftflotte II
5 JG's of 109's, 2 ZG's of 110's
Luftflotte III
3 JG's of 109's, 1 ZG of 110's
Erpr.Gruppes are not included in this list.
That makes, none the less, according to your own sources, 800 109's or so, as well as 224 110's. Might have to subtract a few because of the Erpr.gruppes.

BTW, your RAF numbers look to me as a tad high. From the timeframe I have I get 588. It probably includes the NF's, and OTU's, as well as squadrons being formed and some reserves.
Anyway, you put something up
"Point is that almost every RAF base was within easy range of London. Within a very short period the RAF could move force within the theater"
Could have and should have...Scotland , Wales and even N-Ireland do not have the time to intercept a raid heading even as far as London. And another thing enters the equation. Luftflotte V. There is a lot of heavy industry in the NE of England, - Newcastle, Sunderland etc., While there are also big NAVY bases which need to be covered. While the RAF had the option of leaving half the island naked (which the LW thought they had), they DIDN'T. 13th group saw little action, - but served as a somewhat welcome rest for rotation perhaps.
In the meantime, the 109's could and did Exclusively work on the south.
The biggest number of RAF fighters making it to the mix, - that I found so far, were all available squadrons from 11th group, the Duxford wing, and 2 squadrons from 10th. Those are able to make it decently when the Luftwaffe has some headwind, and/or are hitting well inland. Yet, as you can see if you scroll upwards and re-read a little, the highest number attacking at once, is some 36 aircraft. Didn't find any bigger yet.
To those down to 12, attacking hundreds, it has been described as that the LW fighters were so dense that they were like the escalator on Piccadilly Circus!

Now the quest is yours. Find me bigger numbers Actual engagements in the south of England where 109's get swamped by RAF fighters, and please, while yer at it, prove Gilbert and Shores to be publishing rubbish.

[Crumpp]

From Shores, 7th of Sept 1940. 1st big raid on London.

AS I said, hardly typical.  You citing the largest raid the Luftwaffe was ever able to assemble during the BoB and holding that up as the "average".

The Luftwaffe single engine fighters were on average outnumbered in as many engagements as the Spitfires.

The RAF simply had more single engine fighters than the Luftwaffe did.  At least according to the RAF strength reports.  According to even Shacklady and Morgan, 808 Spitfires entered service during the 116 days of the BoB!!

Luftflotte V.

Anything coming out of Luftflotte V inherently had plenty of warning.

Luftflotte III

Hardly an effective player.  Simply just did not have the range to fight effectively nor reach many of the targets.

Angus, I have provided documentation for all the general conclusions made.  You keep pulling up exceptions trying to claim them as the rule.

All the best,

Crumpp

[Angus]

Crumpp: I cannot see any evidence of the RAF mounting all their might on the south-east corner.
What I DID find is that this is wrong:
"Luftflotte III
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Hardly an effective player. Simply just did not have the range to fight effectively nor reach many of the targets."

Firstly the 109's from Flotte III HAVE the range to tackle with 11th group.(140 miles all the way to London, the southern coast airfields are within some 100 miles))
Secondly, they were very close to 10th group and jostled with them in the first three phases of the battle (channel, radar airfields)
Thirdly, they 109's from III got the orders to move and help out with the London escorts in the 4th phase of the battle, while the bombers were assigned to Night bombing. (Merseyside for instance)

Then there was always Luftflotte V. I don't know what you mean when you say that there was ample warning. Radar range remains the same, bomber speeds remain the same. Anyway they had their try with 13th group.

Then finally, the RAF had a problem that has not been mentioned yet. It wasn't really aircraft or rather aircraft replacement shortage, - it was pilot shortage.
Oh and I don't really see me pulling up any particular exceptions I pulled up the raids in which the RAF got to gether the biggest force against the LW's biggest force. It's quite interesting to look at earlier engagements, - when the RAF really was throwing in penny-packets.