Author Topic: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A  (Read 3516 times)

Offline Gaston

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 170
  Hello:

  Here is what I recently uncovered in my research:

Pierre Clostermann: Audio from the past [E16], WW2 Pierre Clostermann. Chuck Owl channel in Youtube. https://youtu.be/c2zdA9TcIYo 12:44 "Alors il y a les legendes sur le Spitfire... Ahhh puis alors les legendes... Les legendes ont la vie dure... Une des legendes c’est que le Spitfire tournait mieux que le Messerschmitt 109, ou que le FW-190: Eh ben ca c’est une belle blague. D’ailleurs tout ceux qui se sont retrouves avec un FW-190A ou un Messeschmitt tournant a l’interieur, a basse vitesse, eh bien, en general ne sont pas revenus pour se plaindre de la legende. Pourquoi? Au dessus de 280 a 300 noeuds, le Spitfire tournait mieux que le Messerscmitt 109. D’abord en combat tournoyant la vitesse descend descent descent descent, et arrive a un moment, ou la vitesse tombant en dessous de 200 noeuds, le 109 tournait a l’interieur du Spitfire."

https://youtu.be/c2zdA9TcIYo
(At 12:44)

Translation: "So there are legends on the Spitfire... Legends are hard to kill... One of those legends is that the Spitfire turned better than the Messerschmitt 109, or the FW-190. Well that is a good joke... In fact all those who found themselves with a 109 or a 190 turning inside them, at low speeds, well those in general did not come back to complain about the legend... Why? Above 280 to 300 knots, the Spitfire turned better than the Me-109. But, first and foremost, in a turning battle, the speed goes down and down and down and down, and at one point there comes a time, when the speed has gone down below 200 knots, that the Me-109 turns inside the Spitfire."


  This correlates well with all other front-line sources I was able to find:

2-Johnny Johnson: -Johnny Johnson "My duel with the Focke-Wulf": "With wide-open throttles I held the Spitfire V in the tightest of vertical turns [Period slang for vertical bank]. I was greying out. Where was this German, who should, according to my reckoning, be filling my gunsight? I could not see him, and little wonder, for he was gaining on me: In another couple of turns he would have me in his sights.---I asked the Spitfire for all she had in the turn, but the enemy pilot hung behind like a leech.-It could only be a question of time..."

(Jonhson escaped when he abandoned the turn fight, and dived near a Royal Navy ship that fired AAA at his pursuer)


3-"-Squadron Leader Alan Deere, (Osprey Spit MkV aces 1941-45, Ch. 3, p. 2): "Never had I seen the Hun stay and fight it out as these Focke-Wulf pilots were doing... In Me-109s the Hun tactic had always followed the same pattern- a quick pass and away, sound tactics against Spitfires and their superior turning circle. Not so these 190 pilots: They were full of confidence... We lost 8 to their one that day...


4-Gray Stenborg, 23 September 1944 (Spitfire Mk XII): "On looking behind I saw a FW-190 coming up unto me. I went into a terribly steep turn to the left, but the FW-190 seemed quite able to stay behind me. He was firing at 150 yards-I thought "this was it"-when all of a sudden I saw an explosion near the cockpit of the FW-190, upon which it turned on its back." (Stenborg was killed the next day in a head to head engagement with a FW-190 over Poix)

Osprey Aces Series. "Griffon Spitfire Aces"


5-1-S/L J. B. Prendergast of 414 Squadron recorded in his Combat Report for 2 May 1945 (Spitfire Mk XIV vs FW-190A-8):

I observed two aircraft which presumably had just taken off the Wismar Airfield as they were at 800/1000 feet flying in a northerly direction and gaining height.-------The other E/A had crossed beneath me and was being attacked by my No. 2, F/O Fuller. I saw my No. 2’s burst hitting the water--------The E/A being attacked by my No. 2 did a steep orbit and my No. 2 being unable to overtake it broke away.


 6-2-RCAF John Weir interview for Veterans Affairs (Spitfire Mk V vs FW-190A-4 period): "A Hurricane was built like a truck, it took a hell of a lot to knock it down. It was very manoeuvrable, much more manoeuvrable than a Spit, so you could, we could usually outturn a Messerschmitt. They'd, if they tried to turn with us they'd usually flip, go in, at least dive and they couldn't. A Spit was a higher wing loading..."

"The Hurricane was more manoeuvrable than the Spit and, and the Spit was probably, we (Hurricane pilots) could turn one way tighter than the Germans could on a Messerschmitt, but the Focke Wulf could turn the same as we could and, they kept on catching up, you know."


 7-US 8th Air Force P-51 pilot observation: "We can out-turn the Me-109G at most altitudes, but more difficulty is encountered in out-turning the FW-190A." : From: Osprey "VIII Fighter Command 'Long Reach' "

8-Osprey "Duel" #39 "La-5/7 vs FW-190", Eastern Front 1942-45:
P.69 "Enemy FW-190A pilots never fight on the vertical plane.---The Messerschmitt possessed a greater speed and better maneuverability in a vertical fight"
P.65 Vladimir Orekov: "An experienced Fw-190A pilot practically never fights in the vertical plane"


9-In "Le Fana de l'Aviation" #496 p. 40: (Spitfire in Soviet use)
Première citation : " Dans la journée du 29 avril, le régiment effectua 28 sorties pour escorter des bombardiers et des avions d'attaque au sol et 23 en protection de troupes, avec quatre combats aériens. Les premiers jours furent marqués par des échecs dus à une tactique de combat périmée dans le plan horizontal, alors que le Spitfire était particulièrement adapté au combat dans le plan vertical."
[Translation: "The Spitfire failed in horizontal fighting, but was particularly adapted to vertical fighting."]

P. 40-41: " A basse et moyenne altitude, la version VB était surclassé par les chasseurs allemands et soviétiques de son époque. Pour tenter d'améliorer la maniabilité et la vitesse, les Soviétiques l’allégèrent en retirant les quatre mitrailleuses. Apparemment ce ne fut pas concluant, car il n'y eu pas d'instructions pour généraliser la modification."
[Translation: To improve the Spitfire Mk VB's maneuverability and speed to the level of contemporary Soviet and German fighters, the four outer .303 machineguns were removed. This attempt at lightening the Spitfire was not conclusive, and the modification was not widely adopted.]


10-Interview de Pierre Clostermann: "Votre ennemi intime, c'etait plus le 109 ou le 190? ---Ah non! C'etait le 190... Le D-9 etait d'une beaute epoustouflante. Par contre, alors la, il tournait moins bien que le 190 'normal' , parce qu'avec son nez, malgre qu'ils ont allonge le fuselage, avec une tranche pour reequilibrer l'avion, il tournait moins bien."

TRANSLATION: "Your intimate enemy, it was the 109? --- Oh no! It was the 190... The D-9 was of magnificent beauty. However, in its case, it did not turn as well as the 'normal' 190, because of its longer nose, despite the longer fuselage, with the added segment they added to re-balance the aircraft, it did not turn as well."

https://youtu.be/c2zdA9TcIYo

11-Donald Caldwell wrote of the FW 190 D-9’s operational debut in his "The JG 26 War Diary Volume Two 1943-1945" (pages 388 – 399): "The pilot’s opinions of the “long-nosed Dora”, or Dora-9, as it was variously nicknamed, were mixed. The new airplane lacked the high turn rate and incredible rate of roll of its close-coupled radial-engined predecessor."

12-1946 US evaluation of FW-190D-9: "1-The FW-190D-9, although well armored and equipped to carry heavy armament, appears to be much less desirable from a handling standpoint than other models of the FW-190 using the BMW 14 cylinder radial engine."

13-Eric Brown ("Duels in the Sky") p. 128:

FW-190A: "Care must be taken on dive pull-out not to kill speed by sinking, or on the dive's exit the FW-190 will be very slow and vulnerable."

14-Red Fleet, No. 37, November 4, 1943.:

"When climbing in order to get an altitude advantage over the enemy, there is a moment when the FW-190 "hangs" in the air. It is then convenient to fire." [This is in the context of dive pull-outs] -"However, the FW-190 is never able to come out of a dive below 300 or 250 meters (930 ft or 795 ft). Pulling out of a dive, made from 1,500 meters (4,650 ft) and at an angle of 40 to 45 degrees, the FW-190A falls an extra 200 meters (620 ft). [Meaning after levelling out, continues sinking nose up]

15-A translated Russian article from "Red Fleet" describing Russian aerial tactics against the German FW-190, from Tactical and Technical Trends, No. 37, November 4, 1943.

Quote:


-The speed of the FW-190 is slightly higher than that of the Messerschmitt; it also has more powerful armament and is more maneuverable in horizontal flight.

-They interact in the following manner:
Me-109G will usually perform dive and climb attacks using superior airspeed after their dive.
FW-190 will commit to the fight even if our battle formation is not broken, preferring left turning fights. There has been cases of such turning fights lasting quite a long time, with multiple planes from both sides involved in each engagement."

-Since the FW-190 is so heavy and does not have a high-altitude engine, its pilots do not like to fight in vertical maneuvers.


-A fairly good horizontal maneuver permits the FW-190 to turn at low speed without falling into a tail spin.


-Being very stable and having a large range of speeds, the FW-190 will inevitably offer turning battle at a minimum speed.

-In fighting the FW-190 our La-5 should force the Germans to fight by using the vertical maneuver.




   All courtesy of people who had NO idea what they were talking about... Especially compared to US Navy test pilots:salute  Or Eric Brown... Test pilots in general were just infallible geniuses compared to those ignorant fools fighting in the front lines...

  And the math! The MATH! Who can believe in something when the math does not agree with it? It's the SCIENCE that counts... Yes the SCIENCE... Humanity is well known to be full of geniuses who never, ever, eeever get THE SCIENCE wrong... :rolleyes:


   Gaston (It's the SCIENCE guys!!!)

  PS: I might also soon post about the Phillipines Japanese commander who cancelled Ki-84 orders to replace them with more Ki-43s, since all his units found the maneuverability of the Ki-43 Oscar far more valuable for front-line use than the much less maneuverable Ki-84 (in an Osprey book on Ki-43 aces). This will also include a Spitfire Mk VIII pilot account who describes inexperienced Spitfire pilots not knowing that, when making making a diving attack on Ki-43s below, hit and run style, this type of attack was so easily broken by slow turns that IF the Ki-43 spotted you, the thing to do was to INTERRUPT your diving attack and climb back up, or it would be the DIVER who would be on the receiving end... (Also remarkable is the Commander's comment that the Ki-84, if caught from above, was virtually useless, since its turning ability did not allow it to "break" diving attacks like the Ki-43 could)

  In a similar vein, check out the latest Pacific war research on the Zero, where historians recently found the Japanese Navy so obsessively used the Zero for hit and run, and never turning with it (this in ACTUAL combat), that US Navy pilots criticized them in the following way: "The Japanese Navy tactics are generally poor: Zeroes could not be shaken by us if they would shut their throttles and sit on our tails..." https://youtu.be/ApOfbxpL4Dg   at 1:01:32, but other mentions earlier from 58:50. And just listen to the video's guest DISAGREEING with this front-line pilot's assessment that the Japanese Navy was wrong to NOT dogfight enough: Priceless...

  Funny what you discover when your read what went on in the ACTUAL front lines isn't it?

   

« Last Edit: March 03, 2022, 10:52:47 AM by Gaston »

Offline Oldman731

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9342
Re: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A
« Reply #1 on: March 03, 2022, 12:06:05 PM »
Perfectly true that the anecdotal testimony from combat pilots doesn't match the performance we see in this - or any other - simulation based on specs.  The debate has gone on forever, or at least back to the early days of AW.  You've done a good round-up of the pilot testimony.

- oldman

Offline Gaston

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 170
Re: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A
« Reply #2 on: March 03, 2022, 12:38:43 PM »
Perfectly true that the anecdotal testimony from combat pilots doesn't match the performance we see in this - or any other - simulation based on specs.  The debate has gone on forever, or at least back to the early days of AW.  You've done a good round-up of the pilot testimony.

- oldman

  Very nice to hear hear you say it. I do believe, but can't prove so far, that the implications of these observations go far beyond merely a wrong assessment of each type: There is a misaprehension of their actual physics.

  I will point here to my own Youtube channel, Wrath of Atlantis: In particular to a video I made in reaction to a Veritassium video, where a professor of physics made a $10000 bet that claims about an engineless car (of speeds 2.8 times faster than the wind) were not possible...: He was proven wrong, and lost the $10000... The reason he lost is because of the counter-intuitive nature of leverages internal to an object. The video is titled "WWII fighter aircraft designers did not understand what they designed":

https://youtu.be/uYnCI3XURx0

  Internal leverages generated by a vertically asymmetrical prop loads can easily explain why a heavier aircraft can out-turn a lighter one in low speed sustained turns: All you have to do is understand the current Flight Physics for low-wing nose props does not take into account the interaction between the wing and the prop! Jets are assumed identical to props...

  Internal leverages are extremely counter-intuitive, and the example of a simple car confusing a professor of physics is quite relevant, despite the leverages being very different in aspect: It still is the same idea.

  These front line observations are not compatible with flight physics as they are currently understood, that much I am sure...

  Gaston

 

Online TryHard

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 339
Re: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A
« Reply #3 on: March 03, 2022, 06:55:49 PM »
Any spitfire will out turn a 190 in a flat turn fight. Not a question in my mind.

Once you take into account different energy states it will make a lot more sense why a 190 can turn inside a spitfire but a spitfire WILL out turn it sustained.

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20385
Re: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A
« Reply #4 on: March 03, 2022, 09:38:01 PM »
Been a while since you've been around with cherry picked info to try and prove the Luftwaffe won the war.  Good luck with that :)  Keep in mind, no one has ever claimed the Spitfire V was an equal of the FW190, so to throw that out as evidence is just silly.  But again, have fun with it :aok
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline nrshida

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8492
Re: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A
« Reply #5 on: March 04, 2022, 06:44:31 AM »
the Ki-84, if caught from above, was virtually useless, since its turning ability did not allow it to "break" diving attacks like the Ki-43 could)

Yes they are useless, never fly them is my advice. There's sufficient internal leverage because the prop is close to the wings like an air-cooled 190. Unfortunately in that particular airframe there exist further hidden forces beneath the hidden forces you have discovered which counter the first layer of hidden forces. It's probably due to improper heat-treatment of the scientists.



Happy Friday Pipz!
-=Army of Muppets=-
"Get stuffed Skyyr, you freak" - Zack1234

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A
« Reply #6 on: March 05, 2022, 01:47:05 AM »
Ahhh...Gaston, the bitter table top game developer is back.
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline FLS

  • AH Training Corps
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11602
      • Trainer's Website
Re: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A
« Reply #7 on: March 21, 2022, 08:02:12 PM »
It's the internal beverages that affect turning.

Offline nrshida

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8492
Re: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A
« Reply #8 on: March 22, 2022, 03:16:47 AM »
Of course it is possible that Gaston is well-meaning but misguided / poorly educated and has fallen into the bad ways of faulty-reasoning and informal fallacy so commonly promoted by today's culture.

Ought not mock the afflicted. But it is tempting.

Happy Friday Pipz!
-=Army of Muppets=-
"Get stuffed Skyyr, you freak" - Zack1234

Offline Vulcan

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9835
Re: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A
« Reply #9 on: March 23, 2022, 02:18:46 PM »
Clostermann was a frog wasn't he? Everyone knows the frogs had a stick up their backside over anything English made. They could never admit anything made for the King of England was war winning.

Besides that you can never trust the frogs, they cheat at rugby and blew up greenpeace!


Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23046
Re: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A
« Reply #10 on: March 23, 2022, 05:49:38 PM »
Gaston,

You can post cherry picked anecdotes all you want.  You can misrepresent what has been stated by others all you want.

Your problem is that regardless of all of that, physics simply doesn't agree with you.


It is like you read an account of an Fw190 out turning a Spitfire Mk V and, ignorant of the specific situation in which that happened, locked onto all other claims, practical tests and so on that find that the Spitfire Mk V easily out turns the Fw190, all other things being equal as being false due to your first exposure being the contextless account of an Fw190 out turning a Spitfire Mk V when all other things were not equal.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Oldman731

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9342
Re: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A
« Reply #11 on: March 23, 2022, 09:14:38 PM »
Gaston,


Good lord, it's Karnak.

Someone must have tripped the time machine.  Gaston, Karnak, Toad, Widewing, Slash...who's next...?

- oldman

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23046
Re: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A
« Reply #12 on: March 27, 2022, 10:58:02 PM »

Good lord, it's Karnak.

Someone must have tripped the time machine.  Gaston, Karnak, Toad, Widewing, Slash...who's next...?

- oldman
I check in from time to time.  I don't usually post anything, but I do still visit occasionally.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Online perdue3

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4661
Re: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A
« Reply #13 on: April 10, 2022, 08:05:28 PM »
Ahhh...Gaston, the bitter table top game developer is back.

Which game?
C.O. Kommando Nowotny 

FlyKommando.com

 

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6863
Re: Pierre Clostermann opinion of the Spitfire vs Me-109 and FW-190A
« Reply #14 on: April 10, 2022, 10:48:42 PM »
Is lost3 a shade for purdue3?