 | 
08-03-2006, 06:49 PM
|
#181 | | World Traveler
Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Royal Deeside/St Andrews, Scotland, UK
Posts: 11,751
Country:  |
__________________  "Success is not Final, Failure is not Fatal, it is the Courage to Continue that Counts"
Sir Winston Churchill
"To him the People of the World Largely owe the Freedom and Liberties they Enjoy Today"
Enscription on Hugh Dowding's (AOC Fighter Command 1936-40) statue in London
Moderator WW2 Talk: A WW2 Discussion Forum
My Photo Collections on Flickr
| 
|  | |
08-04-2006, 04:23 PM
|
#182 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 580
| Thanks Gnomey.
Now it's my time to ask for sources, bwahahah! 
- Can anyone point me in the direction of info concerning the Me109 turning with, or out-turning the Spitfire please?
Thank you, | |
| | |
12-05-2006, 03:45 AM
|
#183 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Cracow
Posts: 3,388
Country:  | Something for you, guys: Kurfürst
__________________ 
"A good fighter pilot, like a good boxer, should have a knockout punch..... You will find one attack you prefer to all others. Work on it till you can do it to perfection... then use it whenever possible." - Captain Reade Tilley, USAAF 7 Victories, WW-II - | 
| | |
05-05-2007, 03:02 AM
|
#184 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Sydney
Posts: 209
Country:  | With these two aircraft I think it was a toss of a coin. With successive variants they bettered each other. It all depends on the skill of the pilot. But, in saying that, my preference goes with the Spit. 
__________________
"I may disagree wholeheartedly with what you say. But, I will defend with my life your right to say it."_Voltaire. | |
| | |
05-05-2007, 09:30 AM
|
#185 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London
Posts: 2,878
| I would second that but my feeling is that as the war progressed and speeds increased the advantage tendeded to go with the Spitfire.
The 109 had a problem with its control surfaces at higher speed as they became very heavy, the higher the speed, the heavier the controls. This is of course something every plane had to deal with but on the 109 it was more noticable.
The other advantage the Spit had was in firepower. If the 109 had a 20mm it was better for fighting fighters but lacked the punch against bombers, with the 30mm it was better against bombers. The Spit with its 2 x 20mm (I ignore the 303in this) was more flexible and those with the 2 x HMG further increased the advantage. | |
| | |
05-05-2007, 09:37 AM
|
#186 | | Der Crewchief
Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 30,270
Country:  | Quote:
Originally Posted by Glider 
The other advantage the Spit had was in firepower. If the 109 had a 20mm it was better for fighting fighters but lacked the punch against bombers, with the 30mm it was better against bombers. The Spit with its 2 x 20mm (I ignore the 303in this) was more flexible and those with the 2 x HMG further increased the advantage.
|
Yeap but there is a reason for the 109s armament. What was Germany having to combat? The allied bomber streams.
If you look at the evolution of the 109s armament the armament was more suited for fighters in the earlier part of the war when they were escorting bombers over England, later as they went more on the defensive the armament changed to having to deal with bombers.
__________________  US Army Blackhawk Crewchief 2000-2006 Classic ww2aircraft.net quotes: fly boy said: "isn't that the first jet bomber? becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles" "wait what ok who made the b-2 crash come on people that messed up its a b-2" "ah yes the mistel those things are so annoying is games and in real life" | |
| | |
05-05-2007, 09:44 AM
|
#187 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,028
| Still having one center mounted 20-30mm cannon and two 13mm guns is a pretty good armament against fighters, the center configuration ensuring great accuracy.
And I doubt it was hard to hit a fighter with the 30mm cannon, it did after-all fire over 660 rounds pr. minute at 540 m/s - its all about the pilot knowing his weapons.
__________________  We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland
Last edited by Soren : 05-05-2007 at 09:49 AM.
| |
| | |
05-05-2007, 12:03 PM
|
#188 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London
Posts: 2,878
| The is no doubt that the approx 850 m/s of the 20mm gave much better ballistics than the 30mm at around 530 m/s. Also a point often missed is that from the Mk IX onwards the Spits had far better sights giving greatly increased accuracy enableing them to use the extra ballistics. There is no doubt in my mind that the Spit had the edge in firepower.
Plus of course the bombers were escorted by fighters and a more flexible armament would have been more benificial.
Had the Germas been equiped with the Spit then they would have had better flexibility plus the Spit could carry 4 x 20 mm at some cost to performance of course, but a lot less cost, than having to hang 2 x 20 under the wings in pods as per the 109. | |
| | |
05-05-2007, 01:07 PM
|
#189 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,028
| The 109's armament is much more precise though, simply because of the fact that its center fixed.
__________________ We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland | |
| | |
05-05-2007, 01:36 PM
|
#190 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London
Posts: 2,878
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Soren The 109's armament is much more precise though, simply because of the fact that its center fixed. | Shall we agree that the benefit of being center mounted is matched by the advanced sights that I think almost doubled the accuracy of the average squadron pilot? | |
| | |
05-05-2007, 02:35 PM
|
#191 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,028
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Glider Shall we agree that the benefit of being center mounted is matched by the advanced sights that I think almost doubled the accuracy of the average squadron pilot? |
Advanced sights as in K-14 ?? Or just the normal sight which most featured ?
If just the normal sights, no I do not agree. If the K-14, well it does help, however not enough to balance it. The 109 doesn't have to deal with conversion, the Spit does.
__________________ We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland | |
| | |
05-05-2007, 05:31 PM
|
#192 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London
Posts: 2,878
| Yes the K14 and we will have to disagree.
The spit doesn't have to deal with worse balistics of the German 20mm and extreamly poor 30mm Mk108 which is one reason why the 109 had to get so close. The K14 significantly increases the accuracy of the average pilot, that, plus the better ballistics of the UK 20mm more than makes up the difference. | |
| | |
05-06-2007, 01:11 PM
|
#193 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,028
| The 109 didn't have to get close, precise shots could be delivered at pretty much all normal combat ranges, long range shots could be made with accuracy as-well. The 20mm MG151 had good enough ballistics to be effective at long range, and the Mk108 could be used at long range as-well if the pilot knew his weapons. Just the fact that the Spit has to deal with conversion is enough to say its less accurate, and is only ideal at a certain range.
And as to the K-14 sight, well the ability of the pilot determined the effectiveness of the this device as range had to be plotted by the pilot.
Don't compare the K-14 to the radar gunsight of the F-86 Sabre..
__________________ We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland | |
| | |
05-07-2007, 06:42 PM
|
#194 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 1,517
Country:  | Hello, hello, hello! 
__________________ 
"His motor's conked out!"
"What's the differance, they're all Nazis!"
"Luke, shut up!"
"Fear the hook!"
"Oh.....I wanna fly."
"You mean the kind that go under water and fly up the stairs?"
"What you doing? Oh Nooooo!" | |
| | |
05-29-2007, 06:58 PM
|
#195 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Montrose, Colorado
Posts: 2,283
Country: | In 1944 the Spitfire IX began to use the E wing with 2-20 mm cannon and two .50 cal MGs. | |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:19 AM. | | |
