Spitfire - What If's

Are you sure???
How would the air-space above Germany affect the battlegrounds in the East and the West?
To my mind it wouldn't, the aircraft lost over Germany would be lost over the battlegrounds instead.The war in the Med is a good example, the Luftwaffe rushed loads of aircraft to Italy in 1943, but within days the extra Luftwaffe formations were smashed. It wasn't that the Mustang was a far better aircraft than the German types, it was numbers that defeated the Luftwaffe.
So in my view, if the Allies hadn't won the air-war over Germany they would have destroyed the Luftwaffe over the battlefields instead.

 

With talk of N.Africa/Med, no ones mentioned the ground assault role and dive-bombing role of the Spitfire, and, the numerous but underpowered Curtis Kittyhawk? Both continued providing ‘cab ranks’ in Italy.

How can you mention Malta without reverence to the four Gloster Gladiators – the greatest bi-plane fighter of all time.

No.9

 

This leads to the topic how much the air-war contributed to bring Germany down. This has already been discussed in here, and the answer is: A hell lot, mainly to destroy German fuel producing factories! Most of the successes were achieved in 1944, and this would not have been possible without the Mustang.

And as far as I can judge yet, the Mustang WAS superior to the German fighters when it occurred. It was much faster, and at high altitudes Me-109 and FW-190 were asthmatical anyway. The Germans countered with the improved FW-190 D, but weren't able to turn the tides any more.

 

Neat discussion. Morale value of Spit is good point. Have to agree MK 14 Spit a notch above Mustang, better climb, better turn, even better roll. My peev is that these aircraft are almost always compared to the G-6 & A series 190 instead of K-4 & D-9. Maybe no K-4's were captured & tested. It was a quantum leap over the G-6. Does anyone know about the Spit that was fitted out with the DB 605 motor? Last thoughts on Mk 14 Spit. One test pilot remarked that it needed constant trimming in level flight, It was a high altitude aircraft, end quote. Also Ginger Lacey looped one in Burma over the airfield & missed the deck by 4 feet. It weighed 3 tons more that the Mk 9, so at low speed low altitude, I find it hard to believe it was as nimble as the MK 9. The prop ran other direction & was a bear on takeoff with all the extra torque. Some Mk 9 pilots did not like MK 14 as well as MK 9.

 

The legendary 'Johnnie' Johnson - who flew them all - always rated the Mk IX as the best all-round Spitfire in terms of performance, armament and balance.

 

Well, there you go. Eric Brown rated the D-9 & 14 Spit a tie as best prop job of ww2. The D-9 was much quieter than the A series, slightly better turn, climb rate 4300 ft per min again , better than a seies 3100 or so ft per min. Much better dive & did not bleed off speed in high speed turns like A series. In short, a complete improvement over its radial predessor. top speed 426, but 440 on boost. & boost tank was much larger than 109 tank. good for somewhere between 20-30 min. It also neede no trim tabs whatsoever as it flew so well. Hope I didn't bore you with all that.

 

don't think he tried his hands and feet in a Ta 152 though.........

 

Brown said the 152 wingspan was too wide & it had poor roll & poor dive. Very good at high atltitude, outturned a Tempest with ease. But he met with Proffessor Tank after the war & they both agreed the D-9 was the best. They also agreed that Tank should have concentrated on upgrading the D-9 instead.

 

Erich, if you can find a copy of Captain Eric Brown's 'Wings Of The Luftwaffe' ( Airlife, 1987 and reprints ) you will find a very detailed first-hand description of his flights in a Ta152H-1 from Farnborough.

 

that would make sense Martin. I would of been most interested of his impressions if he would have flown in combat instead of his test rides. We have a nice personal exerpt from him in our book as we have written him about his thoughts in 1945 after the capture of the last Me 262B-1a/U1's of 10./NJG 11 at Schleswig. fun to get his approach

Erich ~

 

Taking into account that Friedrich is quite illiterate in these matters... how about Spitfires and Mustangs been compared to Me-109Ks in equal conditions?

At least for what I've read, on paper the K version can match the Mustang in speed, manœuvrability, altitude and even has superior weaponry...

 

Eric, how did you get an address for Eric Brown? I've been trying to reach him as there is a typo in his book "duels in the sky" where it says the D-9 could climb 6200 ft per min. Regarding the K model 109, I feel the same. Would love to see a fly off between a K & a Mustang. It was faster below 15.000 ft than the Mustang, had a small turn advantage. Mustang probably had better roll, unless the K had field mod flettner airalon tabs. Buligen had this to say; the 190 was better, however I did get a lightweight 109 at the end of the war & it flew wonderfully, end quote. Its fuselage was completely redesigned & lightened. I read in a book yesterday that it actually weighed less that a G-2.

 

I'm not so good about the later types of Bf109. The Spitfire MkIX was very close to the 109G, the Griffon-engined MkXIV could definitely outperform the G , and I believe the K was a development of the G. I had thought that by the latter part of the war, the Fw190 was the fighter to match and exceed the Allied fighters, but I'd like to read the comments of those who are more expert in this field than me.....

 

Its hard to get data on the K. it had a climb rate of 4850 ft per min & top speed 452 on boost. The new chin scoop gave it a similiar high altitude performance to the Mustang, however because of its lightweight, it tended to waffle at high altitude. The redesigned higher tail probably gave it better directional stability,( a guess ),My question is regarding turn. If it weighed less, it should be more responsive in the turn. Can't find hard data on that though.

 

But wasn't the G version too heavy and therefore, less manœuvrable because of its heavy weaponry? Within its main advantage came its main flaw…



I know it'd be an extreme, but what about Lt. Erich Hartmann shooting down four (?) Mustangs with his 109 over Romania in one day?

 

in reality Eric Brown got ahold of us. When he found out through the long change of contacts that we have he concluded we had a acouple of pics of him in the cockpit of a Me 262B and he was most interested in the German Luftwaffe gents standing and kneeling around him picking his brain on his thoughts of the Schwalbe.

incidently in our book we will be covering at some detail the Bf 109G-6/AS which was the fastest G-6 variant equipped with MW boost. In some earlier postings two years ago I do think that I covered some sort of mph stats with 10./JG 300 that were performed against the LNSF mossies towards Berlin in the fall of 44. The sppeds bear close resemblance to what the K could perform

E ~

 

Well Eric, I should like to have that book. Yes Frederich, the G was chin heavy. The wood tail actually weighed more than the metal one. Whether this was intentional To provide a counter balance I do not know. Hartmann had this to say; any less maneuverability was more than offset by the heavier firepower, you had to get close, but the 30 mm cannon was devastating. I've just read a Nowarra book where the weights of various 109's was listed in back. 2346 for the K & 2700 for the G-6. I went to go buy it, & had the guy hold it for me at the counter, then he sold it by mistake. but nonetheless the lightweightness of the K is an interesting factiod.

 

Chrome :

according to a friend who knows a bit about the K variant the wooden tail was derived as a last resort due to the limited supplies of raw aluminum for the make up of the a/c fuselage and in fact more than the tail was made up of wood during those last months that the Luftwaffe could fly.
If Otto will allow I will post more information on our book as it comes closer to the illusive publishing date.............man I hope it will be next year !!

as Hartmann rightly said the Mk 108 3cm was a nasty weapon from close range. One round alone of the Minen Geschoss could blow an Allied fighter fuselage in half. 3-4 of the M rounds could take out a Allied heavy bomber by hitting the inboard engines and the wing supported fram-work. have some cine-films that are just plain ugly in the photographic description of "tearing a bomber apart"

Erich ♪

 

Another interesting story I've just read was that a mock dogfight between a D-13, ( minus armament & MW 50 boost ),& a Tempest took place after the war. A Canadian against a German. The Tempest had a small low altitude speed advantage which quickly disapeared as they gained altitude. The D-13 had no difficulty gaining altitude & sucessfully engaging the Tempest in a turning dogfight. It was speculated that the D-13 with MW 50 boost would outrun the Tempest at all altitudes. I was surprised.

The D-9 did not get MW 50 boost until Dec 44 when 213 A-2 motor was installed. This would explain disparities in speed comparisons between D-9's & Mustangs.

 

I believe that this is the incident of a captured JG 26 machine flown by an ex-JG 51 ace. D-13 or D-9 Chrome ?

In any case reading about JG 301's D-9's in II./JG 301 always gave the appearance that the D-9 was not on par with the US P-51 at any altitude nor speed. One reason why the unit insisted it attain the Ta 152 in it's scant inventory........though only III./JG 301 flew it for a short time and then all Ta's went over to Stab./JG 301. Pretty silly to me to have the pilots revert back to the short nosed A-8 in the spring of 45 but that is exactly what happened.