Me 109 Vs Spitfire comparision

Tomcat · #1 (**permalink**) May 11th, 2008, 06:44 AM

Hey I know this has been done to death but I found a website about trials between the two aircraft and with statments both from British pilots on the ME109 and the German Pilots on the Hurricane and Spitfire. It is quite interesting. There is also quite a few combat diaries from both sides used in comparing the aircraft.

Spitfire Mk I versus Me 109 E

Quote:

Major Werner Mölders, JG 51, compared the British fighters to his own prior to the Battle:

It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. The Hurricane is good-natured and turns well, but its performance is decidedly inferior to that of the Me 109. It has strong stick forces and is "lazy" on the ailerons.
The Spitfire is one class better. It handles well, is light on the controls, faultless in the turn and has a performance approaching that of the Me 109. As a fighting aircraft, however, it is miserable. A sudden push forward on the stick will cause the motor to cut; and because the propeller has only two pitch settings (take-off and cruise), in a rapidly changing air combat situation the motor is either overspeeding or else is not being used to the full. 92

Quote:

Oblt Hans Schmoller-Haldy of JG 54 commented:
My first impression was that it had a beautiful engine. It purred. The engine of the Messerschmitt 109 was very loud. Also the Spitfire was easier to fly, and to land than the Me 109. The 109 was unforgiving of any inattention. I felt familiar with the Spitfire from the start. That was my first and lasting impression. But with my experience with the 109, I personally would not have traded it for a Spitfire. It gave the impression, though I did not fly the Spitfire long enough to prove it, that the 109 was the faster especially in the dive. Also I think the pilot's view was better from the 109. In the Spitfire one flew further back, a bit more over the wing.
For fighter-versus-fighter combat, I thought the Spitfire was better armed than the Me 109. The cannon fitted to the 109 were not much use against enemy fighters, and the machine guns on top of the engine often suffered stoppages. The cannon were good if they hit; but their rate of fire was very low. The cannon had greater range than the machine guns. But we were always told that in a dogfight one could not hope to hit anything at ranges greater than 50 metres, it was necessary to close in to short range. 10

It is a very interesting read.

JCFalkenbergIII · #2 (**permalink**) May 11th, 2008, 06:52 AM

PSSSTTTTTT...tomcat. I think this belongs more in the WWII weapons Forum

.

Tomcat · #3 (**permalink**) May 11th, 2008, 07:00 AM

Opps you are right

I wasn't even thinking where I was putting it.

bf109 emil · #4 (**permalink**) May 24th, 2008, 02:46 PM

Perhaps these tests are taken with the older 2 speed propellors, as opposed to the ones which where fitted onto the Merlins prior to the Battle of Britain, would be like comparing a MKII to a bf109a/b/c with Jumo engines...

Quote:

Just before the Battle of Britain, a de Havilland constant speed propeller, of the same diameter as the two-position unit, became available. Although this was a great deal heavier than the earlier types (500 lb (227 kg)) it gave another substantial improvement in take-off distance and climb rate.

Quote:

Tests done in aug 1940 on older MkI's

Moelders himself called the Spitfire "miserable as a fighting aircraft", due to its two-pitch propeller and the inability of its carburettor to handle negative g-forces.

Tomcat · #5 (**permalink**) May 25th, 2008, 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bf109 emil

Perhaps these tests are taken with the older 2 speed propellors, as opposed to the ones which where fitted onto the Merlins prior to the Battle of Britain, would be like comparing a MKII to a bf109a/b/c with Jumo engines...

The comparision is between the Spitfire Mk1 and the Me 109E, both used in the BoB, the RAF fighters in the BoB had the negative G issue, it was solved after, a tactic by a German fighter was to dive straight down and back up, both using the RAF negative G issue and the Me109 higher rate of climb to their advantage. The RAF pilots often rolled over to chase the 109's in a split S rather then having the engine cut out.

diddyriddick · #6 (**permalink**) May 25th, 2008, 03:05 AM

This is fascinating. Nice post.