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

[Kev367th]

As I stated before -
Until they drain the English Channel we will NEVER know the true figures.
Any claim of 'X' got so many 'Y' kills is pointless considering the hugely inflated claims from both sides during the BoB.
If the German claims had been correct the RAF would have been down to a dozen or aircraft after 2 weeks.
The RAF overclaimed as well, there's just no way of getting exact numbers.

[Crumpp]

As I stated before -

Those numbers come from post-war actual loss analysis from each service, not fighter pilot claims made during the war.  

It does not matter if the wreck is at the bottom of the channel, the moon, or another solar system.

Both the RAF and Luftwaffe recorded their own losses.

All the best,

Crumpp

[MiloMorai]

Milo when the Luftwaffe came over in Mass....

They were not going to Church.

The RAF clearly says all of them could and did respond to air battles over south-east England.

All of the RAF? Tell me how fighters from RAF Sumburgh or RAF Kirkwall or RAF Wick or RAF Dyce or RAF Grangemouth, to name a few, participated in the air battles over south-east England.

By your attempt to say because the Luftwaffe was limited to Group 11's area, the rest of the RAF was too and could not participate in the BoB.

That is were the major air battles took place. Trouble reading maps? The RAF FC was spread all over GB. That is why squadrons, mostly from 11 Group, the major combattant Group, were sent to these quiet bases out of the main battle area for R&R.

Actually if you read and comprehend, your source did not break the numbers down into the types of aircraft.

My source does. That is if you could read, comprehend and looked fully at the link to see what it says. See post of 10-19-2005 05:53 AM for http://www.geocities.com/Broadway/Alley/5443/bofb1.htm of which
http://www.geocities.com/Broadway/Alley/5443/fcob8.htm  is part of and list the a/c types.

Nowhere have I seen a professional historian or military force conclude it was the Spitfire or Hurricane flying circles around the 109 that led to the Luftwaffe losing the battle.

Now that is quite the statement! Who here says that? I am not. You do have your troubles. Have you been taking lessons from another poster for arriving at melodramatic erronious conclusions. 'Gross exageration' is another from you.

From "Spitfire Special" by Ted Hooton:

Spitfire vs. Bf 109 : 219 to 180 lost.

Hurricane vs. Bf 109 : 272 to 153 lost.

You forgot to include the LW bombers that the Spit and Hurrie also had to fight. Just another attempt of stat manipulation.
No agenda on my part Crumpp, unlike you. I just understand the BoB better than you do.

[Angus]

Crumpp: the more you peek into the BoB, - the more amazing it gets! Promise;)

Ok, my source, which is the best research and breakdown I have seen:
AEROPLANE, Souvenir issue No1
July 2000.
Article: "TOP GUNS" by John Alcorn
His numbers go: RAF Claims 2480, confirmed LW losses linked 1194, total BoB related LW losses 1609 (unknown, accidents and so on)
Period is the 1st of July to the 31st of October 1940. 4 months.
Still there are uncleared issues from the Quartermasters (LW)
So, with merely 1 partially operating cannon-armed Spitfire squadron, as well as 2 Hurricanes or so, it can be safely said that the RAF gunned down in mid-air some odd 1200 LW aircraft with their humble .303's in the BoB.

On we go, another one:
"Milo when the Luftwaffe came over in Mass....
The RAF responded in kind to defend. However they did not fall into the trap of defending everything."

I think you should study this better. Basically they did try to defend everything, - therefore  their groups were so spread.  That is also why they were intercepting raids over the North Sea in the BoB, - the LW thought they had all their strength in the south.

All the best lads....off to bed.

[Kev367th]

The northern raids were a disaster.
One was intercepted by Spits from RAF Turnhouse (Edinburgh, my birthplace ) and absolutely gang plugged.

[Crumpp]

This is one of your sources Milo??

http://www.geocities.com/Broadway/Alley/5443/index.html

Alex is a heck of guy.  He say anything else you like to hear?

Well looks like Alex's number agree with everyone elses.  684 available fighters according to his site:

http://www.geocities.com/Broadway/Alley/5443/fcweek.htm

Unless of course your going to erroneously claim the listed reserves are not counted.  If that is the case, then the RAF has more Defiant's in reserves than they have aircraft to fly!
 
Especially since the RAF says they had 660 fighters to meet the Luftwaffe!

Allow me to recap since it just has not sunk in with you:

Luftflotte 2, 3 and 5 are NOT the entire Luftwaffe.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/bob1940/luftorg.html

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanave...ug40.html#13Aug

Lets see who was stationed at Group 11:

http://www.raf.mod.uk/bob1940/11group.html

It's kind of funny that the RAF does not claim the rest of the Groups sat out the battle. Why are you?? Guess it does not fit your agenda huh?

They clearly designate rest and refit areas:

   

Tern Hill was one of the 12 Group airfields used for resting units, and as a training airfield and maintneance depot. It was used as a relief landing ground and as a temporary base for night fighters operating against raids on Liverpool and cities in the north midlands.

The rest of Group 12 was participating in the BoB!

http://www.raf.mod.uk/bob1940/12group.html#leconfield

So wasn't Group 10 fighting the Luftwaffe:

http://www.raf.mod.uk/bob1940/10group.html

Even Group 13 got in on the action!

http://www.raf.mod.uk/bob1940/13group.html

Facts are your claim of the 109's outnumbering the RAF fighters 2:1 is nothing more than a fabrication. You made a gross exaggeration based on the faulty assumption only Group 12 participated in the BoB.

   
Looks like the RAF numbers agree with the rest of the sources numbers. They should as I took some time to research multiple sights. I just found some that give more complete breakdown to disprove your gross exaggeration.

   

By the beginning of July 1940, the RAF had built up its strength to 640 fighters, but the Luftwaffe had 2600 bombers and fighters.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/bob1940/background.html

Just some slight statistical manipulation to make things look a little better. No harm no foul.

   

At the start of the battle, the Luftwaffe had 2,500 planes that were serviceable and in any normal day, the Luftwaffe could put up over 1,600 planes.

he RAF had 1,200 planes on the eve of the battle which included 800 Spitfires and Hurricanes - but only 660 of these were serviceable.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.u...leofbritain.htm

I think you should study up before making wild claims. The Luftwaffe had numerical superiority counting all planes of just a tad over 2:1. It did not have a 2:1 fighter advantage nor did it have anything remotely near the numerical advantage the allies in the skies of 1944.

 

Glad you agree that the LW used the 787 to 891 109s they had available in Luftflotte 2 and 3. I would call that full use.

Actually I have claimed that number from the begining, Milo.  You just don't read.

660 to 787-891......

There was a numerical parity in single engine fighter numbers between RAF and the Luftwaffe. The ratio is more like 1.25:1.

Crumpp: the more you peek into the BoB, - the more amazing it gets! Promise

Not really IMHO.  Hardly any original research left on that subject, AFAIK.  Many of the worlds major air forces have throughly covered it.  It is referenced in many a doctrine on defense.


All the best,

Crumpp

[MiloMorai]

You do have your problems Crumpp.

This is one of your sources Milo??

You did not post it and is sure better than the generalized ones you posted.

Facts are your claim of the 109's outnumbering the RAF fighters 2:1 is nothing more than a fabrication. You made a gross exaggeration based on the faulty assumption only Group 12 participated in the BoB.

Especially since the RAF says they had 660 fighters to meet the Luftwaffe!

It's kind of funny that the RAF does not claim the rest of the Groups sat out the battle. Why are you?? Guess it does not fit your agenda huh?

The LW had ~800 fighters in Luftflotte 2 and 3. They were stationed directly across from the Kanal from the major Group that fought the LW. There was not 660 fighters stationed in southern England. I did not say the LW fighters had a 2:1 advantage overall, just in the south of England where 11 Group was outnumbered. Did I say all of RAF FC did not participate in BoB in some way or another? NO.  

Now where did I say 12 Group was the only participate in BoB? 12 and 10 Groups were support Groups for 11 Group, the major Group participating in BoB.

Did all 660 take-off all at once?

It is not a gross exageration that 11 Group was outnumbered 2:1 especially when there was LW bombers that also had the attention of RAF fighters. When is did 11 Group become the whole of RAF FC?

Since you have your problems: Tell me how fighters from RAF Sumburgh or RAF Kirkwall or RAF Wick or RAF Dyce or RAF Grangemouth, to name a few, participated in the air battles over south-east England.

No agenda from me Crumpp, for the umpteenth time. Only one that is paranoid insecure would keep saying that.

Please learn to read more carefully in the future.

[Crumpp]

The LW had ~800 fighters in Luftflotte 2 and 3. They were stationed directly across from the Kanal from the major Group that fought the LW. There was not 660 fighters stationed in southern England. I did not say the LW fighters had a 2:1 advantage overall, just in the south of England where 11 Group was outnumbered. Did I say all of RAF FC did not participate in BoB in some way or another? NO.

That is the problem, Milo!

According to the RAF and the sources you posted, the number of fighters the RAF used was around 660.

Even your friend, Alex agrees!

Group 11 according to the RAF was not the only Group used in the BoB.  Even in attacks coming straight across the channel.

Makes perfect sense.  They are fighting over home soil and could land at anytime.

England is just not a very big physically sized country.  The distances are not nearly as great.

The 395 mile combat radius of the Spitfire was more than sufficient.

If you check your History,  the RAF used Radar to ignore the fighter sweeps, BTW, further increasing the odds in their favour.


All the best,

Crumpp

[Angus]

Ehm Crumpp:
"--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crumpp: the more you peek into the BoB, - the more amazing it gets! Promise
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Not really IMHO. Hardly any original research left on that subject, AFAIK. Many of the worlds major air forces have throughly covered it. It is referenced in many a doctrine on defense."

Well, it seems that you still miss some points. The major points in comparing the BoB to the later airwar over Germany are not exactly the order of battle, "aircraft to aircraft". The very heavy weighting factors are the distances and time within radar covered enemy airspace and the enormous amount of flak mounted in the Reich.
As for defence of the UK, attackers could be expected anywhere (Bombers and 110's), - that's why FC had many a unit in odd places. But there was only one option for the 109, - the very south-east.

Anyway, I have some BoB statistics from Chris Shores to put into the pot
On the 10th of August he lists 805 servicable 109's, the WHOLE of FC mounting 708-764 servicable aircraft in the same period on a daily basis.
11th group (South-east) mounts to his countings some 21 squadron, 10th (South-West i.e. Cornwall, S-Wales etc.) has 9, 12th (Midlands and N-Wales) has 15, 13th (Scotland) has 14.
It was the 11th that bore the brunt of the fight most of the time with some help from the 10th, and some for the 12th, - the 12th didn't really kick in properly untill the LW went inland. (oh, you know, all the big wing debates and so).
He lists 16 RAF squadrons with 6 or less victories, while the heavy shooters cross the 100 and the 16th from the top has 70. So you can really see that there were many indeed that saw little to none of the fight.

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by Crumpp
That is the problem, Milo!

According to the RAF and the sources you posted, the number of fighters the RAF used was around 660.

Even your friend, Alex agrees!

Group 11 according to the RAF was not the only Group used in the BoB.  Even in attacks coming straight across the channel.

Makes perfect sense.  They are fighting over home soil and could land at anytime.

England is just not a very big physically sized country.  The distances are not nearly as great.

The 395 mile combat radius of the Spitfire was more than sufficient.

If you check your History,  the RAF used Radar to ignore the fighter sweeps, BTW, further increasing the odds in their favour.

As I said: Please learn to read more carefully in the future.

It says 660 available.

Who is Alex?

You still not have said how those squadrons from the north of 13 Group fought over southern England with 11 Group when 11 Group was in the air.

Did I say 11 Group was the only Group that participated in BoB. NO!  11 Group had the most combat time since it was in their area that most of the air battles took place.

395mi is the straight line range, not the combat radius. Another of your blunders.

Hard to ignore the LW fighters when the they were tied to the bombers further increasing the odds in the LW's favour especially when ~half of the British fighters would be after the bombers.

Just to further educate you, many times it was only 1 or 2 sections (3 to 6 a/c) that took off and engaged the LW with several Gruppen of fighters around.


Yes Angus, Crumpp does have his problems.

[Angus]

Well, the BoB was amazing wasn't it.
BTW, years ago I had this strategy game, Battle of Britain from Talonsoft.
It was a tad crude and boring at times, but excessively detailed. I crushed the LW bigtime by transferring most squadrons from the North to the S-Midlands.
Then I swapped sides and tried the LW. I crushed the RAF too, by mixing up their defences with quick raids and then hitting them wit a big one.
LOL that was when I had more time than these days..

[Knegel]

Hi,

Milo, you realy think the LW always did send ALL their fighters out??

What you tell wasnt possible, the Radar, the short range of the 109E3/4 and the stupid german HQ never gave this theoretical advantage to the groups.

All over the war the german LW HQ missed to make real mass attacks, they did the same like the british HQ did with their tanks in the desert until Monty came. They splitted off a advanced force and couldnt win again a much more smal enemy.  
The radar was another big advantage to bring as many of the few fighters in best attackingposition into combatarea as possible.

Another big problem was the not existing communication between the german bombers and fighters(unlike to the USAAF, where the bombers could call the fighters for help).

The short range of the 109´s made a splitting of the force particular necessary, one group escort the bombers to the max range of the fighters and another group bring them home. This made a 100% activity in combatarea almost impossible.
The british HQ very fast took notice of the max range of the 109´s. Many german pilots did complain that they only had 5-10 min in combatarea.
5-10min in combatarea(London) vs british fighters with plenty of fuel attacking from best postions(due to the radar).  
If you count "time to fight in combat area", the brits for sure had the advantage!

Its realy a incredible failsure (arrogance by Mr.Goering?), that they dont gave the 109E´s a droptank before or while BoB.
This would have given much more battletime for the 109E´s.

All over i think you be right that the germans messed up their advantage, but not due to less good performing planes in general, but due to incompetence in the HQ(droptanks was easy to make and massattacks to one target, good inside the 109 range also was possible) .

Even the 110c could have been same successfull in 1940 like the P38J in 1943/44, but not as a close escort dog fighter.

Greetings, Knegel

[Angus]

Not all true Knegel.
Your description applies to the latest phase of the BoB, - when the LW is attacking London in daylight and finally the controllers had enough time to vector some proper force (including 12th group) to altitude and into a good interception position.
But the first phases of the BoB were at the south coast, - first the convoys, then the radar sites then the airfields of FC. That left FC with very little time and as many have pointed out, - including those big wing theorists at the time, - the FC was responding to amazingly well supported raids with "penny pockets" of fighters. I can go and dig up some data on this but really, - sometimes a dozen or so of RAF fighters attacked a force with really heavy escorts, - many times their number. And there were long and hard dogfights about.
But once that the humble 50 miles or so from the coast to London had to be added, the LW was screwed. It gave RAF the time it needed to gather a bigger force - as said in the beginning.

[Crumpp]

Who is Alex?

Your source!!

Geez Milo, you have been holding him over what the RAF information and you do not know who you are quoting do you??

The one you have been quoting in your theory......

http://www.geocities.com/Broadway/Alley/5443/index.html

It says 660 available.

Correct, it most certainly does say available.

obtainable or accessible and ready for use or service; "kept a fire extinguisher available"; "much information is available through computers"; "available in many colors"; "the list of available candidates is unusually long"

not busy; not otherwise committed; "he was not available for comment"; "he was available and willing to accompany her"

http://www.wordreference.com/definition/available

Present and ready for use; at hand; accessible:  kept a fire extinguisher available at all times.  

Capable of being gotten; obtainable:  a bedspread available in three colors.  

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/available

able to be obtained, used, or reached:

http://www.freesearch.co.uk/dictionary/available

So your claiming that the available 660 RAF fighters were infact unavailable, unobtainable, could not be used, or reached.......

Correct??

In spit of the RAF's information saying they were infact available!

All the best,

Crumpp

[Angus]

Hey Crumpp, come on, - you are staring too close into the porridge, or rather your tug-of-war with Milo, to actually see what is about.
Look at this again. From Chris Shores.

"On the 10th of August he lists 805 servicable 109's, the WHOLE of FC mounting 708-764 servicable aircraft in the same period on a daily basis."

The whole of Fighter Command lists 764 at best at daily basis over the whole of the UK, - those include Defiants, Gladiators, and Blenheims.
A lower number than servicable 109's which would operate ONLY over the south east.
As I pointed out before, roughly 1/3rd of the RAF was absolutely out of range. Another 1/3rd or so could make it to the fight technically, - and in praxis once the LW turned to London.

So basically, the biggest piece of the BoB was fought between surprizingly little amounts of RAF fighters against quite big groups of LW bombers, escorted with up to many times their numbers of 109's and 110's. And the RAF had almost just .303's to plonk at them!

Told you that the BoB was something to have a look into! And if it wasn't in your opinion, you wouldn't be looking into this thread.