ADS NOT DISPLAYED TO REGISTERED USERS.
View Poll Results: Do you agree with the report?
- 57. You may not vote on this poll
Spitfire IX v. FW 190A
|Polls Discuss Spitfire IX v. FW 190A in the World War II - Aviation forums; If I can add to Claidemore's posting these test results were supported by the combat reports I posted on Posting ...|
If I can add to Claidemore's posting these test results were supported by the combat reports I posted on Posting 96.
However to deal with the Fw 190 being outturned the following examples were in the link I did give you.
PO J Stewart 30th July 1942
I stall turned to attack the rear two Fw190, They broke and turned with me but I could easily out turn them and got several bursts at the rear one.
S/Ldr Watkins 19th August 1942
A FW 190 dived down to my height and swept around behind me, I easily turned inside the enemy aircraft and fired a short burst at 45 degree deflection
Flt Lt Manak 5th September 1942
One of them got onto my tail I avoided him by a left hand climbing turn
S/Ldr T Gaze 11th October 1942
Whilst the left one turned, I easily out turned him and fired a long burst.
So we have the test reports being supported by pilots combat reports that the Spitfire can easily turn inside a Fw190.
Against this we have a report from a Hurricane Pilot. Now lets think about his for a moment.
a) Did this pilot ever fly a Spitfire in combat? I don't know but the probability is that he didn't. Most Hurricane Squadrons were either posted overseas or converted to Typhoons. His comment makes sense if he was flying Typhoons against Fw 190, as there was little in it so the tactical situation and skill of the pilots involved would have a major influence on the result.
b) If he was only a Hurricane Pilot did he fly combat against Fw 190? Possibly as a Hurrie Bomber which adds another factor to the debate. The RAF knew that the Spit V was clearly outclassed by the Fw 190 and would not knowingly send Hurricane fighters against the Fw 190, as their chances of success were very slim, at best.
Last edited by Glider; 11-21-2010 at 06:52 PM.
Originally Posted by Gaston
I don't have any combat reports about Me109's turning tighter than other fighters but then again:-
a) As the Me109 would have won the battle the loser is unlikely to have been around to write the report.
b) I did post previously the advice given to his Pilots by Clostermann (someone you were keen to quote when you thought it suited you). I repeat it here in case you have forgotten it
I kept reminding my pilots to keep their speed above 300mph for Me109's could turn better than we could at lower airspeeds and you had to watch out for the 30mm in the nose as it wouldn't give you a second chance. The Best Technique was to do a spiral dive and work the speed up to 450 mph, do a straight climb and start all over again.
I think its safe to assume that he wouldn't have kept reminding his pilots of this advice without good reason.
Finally as you are talking about still waiting for things. I remind you (again) that my offer is still open re analysing the ten combat reports either side of one of your choice to see how common a sustained turning combat was.
I have no preference of aircraft type, Spitfire, Tempest, P51 or P47. The choice is all yours.
I was going to let this lie but you keep repeating this type of comment recently saying:-
There is not ONE instance of that in 600 reports (where sustained or near-sustained turning combat is almost always used).
So all I am asking you to do is support this clearly incorrect statement.
I await your reply with interest.
Last edited by Glider; 11-21-2010 at 06:51 PM.