Quote:
Originally Posted by winny
I know, I didn't mean for my post to read like it did. I should have said on both sides when I mentioned tactics, pilots etc.. I re read your post and you did say it wasn't about about planes and pilots. I'm just saying don't dismiss the other factors in order to make your point (which was already well put).
It's hard comparing Spitfires and 109's. One was at it's peak in 1940-1 the other in 1942-3.
|
Yeah you're right, I should've said 'wasn't simply about etc'. Of course these are relevant, but they are 'available resources', which I thought I'd covered.
Bad sentence structure!! I've amended it accordingly. Thanks.
You're also correct about the comparisons, although in 42-43, the Spits had the 190's to contend with.
A Mate of mine has a copy of an actual signed combat report of Johnnie Johnson's. He shot at a 190 and damaged it, it dived away and he couldn't stay with it in a MkIXe. He managed to get in a last shot just before the 190 got out of range and brought him down.
By this time, I'd say a 109 in the same situation would've been 'easy meat'.
Having said that, Pete Brothers' favourite Spit was the Griffon Engined MkXIV, which probably would have stayed with the 190. Lots of differences between different marks of all these A/C.