Her name is Tilley and Merlin it did get fuel injection. The injection was single point, not multi point as on the DBs.

As far as I am aware, the early Spitfires (as depicted in CoD) weren't fitted with the modification, so that's why all Battle of Britain era film of Spitfires and Hurricanes shows them rolling onto their backs before diving, to prevent fuel starvation.

It may have been a fuel pump issue rather than carbs, you could be right; to be honest, I'm not that much of an anorak about the RR Merlin engine.

Tilley's Orifice was introduced after the BoB. Sixty series and later Merlins got the fuel injection.

It was a combination of carb and fuel pump. The lean mixture cut out was a minor issue. What was the major issue was the rich mixture that flooded the engine. This was because the fuel flowed into the card unrestricted. Tilley's Orifice restricted this flow of fuel.

Sorry to be a pendantic pain in the rear, but the 'Me' designation is a misnomer. It was always called the Bf 109. :)

Is that so. Then why do I have a factory drawing for the 109 wing that is titled 'Flugel Me109F, Me109K' and another factory drawing that is titled 'Flugel Me109F, Me109G'?

There's no point in that documentary where it says the 109 could out-turn the Spit. This documentary was on uk tv some months back. Tom Neal who was commenting about the 109s being able to hit the British and escape when they wanted was largely being modest. If it really was as simple as that, Tom Neal would have died, and the Germans would have shot down more than they lost, but the reverse is true.

That's not correct. It could out gun the spitfire, but that's not so relevant in a 1 v 1, where only one plane gets to use it's guns. The 109 could out-dive the Spit in the first few seconds, but data suggests the Spit was faster in 1940, could out-turn the 109, and could out-climb it too.

A massive aerial battle like the Battle of Britain is too complicated for easy comparisons to be made. Both sides had advantages/disadvantages. The 109s were supposed to be protecting the bombers, but the British planes were starting on the deck and having to climb to meet the Germans. And each fight would have unequal numbers. The veterans also have different personalities, skill levels, egos/modesty, experiences, which all make it difficult to make accurate judgements.

From what I have read the 109 could turn inside a Spit in the hands of an elite pilot. However, with an average pilot at the controls the Spit would usually turn inside the 109.

Have to agree with TV presenter re the 109. You can argue all you like about the relative merits of the flying characteristics of the Spit and the 109. Firepower. And the 109 won out on that score. Pure and simple. Cant recall the name of a book I read re BOB years ago, where that was discussed in depth. Also compared the .303 vs 50 cals. With Fighter Command armed with 50 cals, it would have been a less close run thing. But that's counter factual of course, very much a what if. Hmmm, come to think of it, why was'nt Fighter command armed with 50 cals? Someone else can chime in here.

You cannot deduce from pure and general kill numbers during Bob (and even these numbers can be debated) if the 109 or the spit was superiour. This is utterly nonsense for several reasons:

- The numbers usually given for Bob are total numbers disrespecting types of planes. My bet is that most plane losses on German sides are bombers. So not helpful at all when comparing Spit vs 109 because bombers are no 109s. So you cannot say from these numbers how effective or ineffective the German fighter force really was with respect to the RAF on a fighter vs fighter comparison.
- you would have to compare kills of 109 by Spit and kills of Spit by 109 to get a statement. However most kills in Bob were made by Hurricane. So also if we had a number showing kills fighter vs fighter it would be pointless as we would have to distinguish between the two RAF fighter types. Remember that the Hurricane was the most numerous plane engaged in Bob on RAF side and scored most of the kills. A highly underestimated plane in the Bob celebrations. I have a lot more admiration for the Hurri pilots as they were performing in an inferiour plane.
- comparing pure kill numbers to deduce relative performance leaves out context. Who had the more advantage (for instance altitude, numbers) at the initial stage of a dogfight would likely come out victor.
- comparing numbers leaves out the significance of fighter tactics that are essential in a dogfight.


And even in a 1vs1 dogfight (if we had relevant statistical data to make conclusions) one could only compare if both pilots had the same experience and the same capacities.

So even if a Spit pilot says that he could outturn the 109 it has to be looked into detail. Perhaps the 109 pilot was a novice not very familiar with the plane and therefore did not dare to go close to the limits of stall in order to pull tight. Perhaps he also had not yet gained a good feel for when the 109 turns best.

The same goes for pilots claiming that they could outturn a Spit. If the 109 pilot knew the limits of his plane and could pull it to the limits while the Spit pilot was a novice it is highly believable that the 109 pilot could outturn that particular Spit.

So one has to be very very carefull when just deducing this and that by comparing summary kill numbers and even when listening to pilot narrations.