Your problem, AoA, is that you only accept results that are in accordance with your philosophy. I'd say IL2 1947 came up with results that used anecdotical evidence where hard data was not available and the job was not bad. You refuse this on a categoric basis and that is why we won't get anywhere in this discussion.
I do not convince you obviously.
You don't convince me either because I do think that anecdotical evidence can be used as a support (also because I do not believe your claim that those spit pilots if outturned by a 109 would inevitably have been killed. I am convinced that there would have been sufficient cases of lucky blokes who would have escaped nonetheless to report about them being outturned by a 109. Now even if their number would have been small we have to see that there is just zero accounts on this).
We might continue jousting but this won't lead to anything. So let's agree that we disagree.
|