I agree with Fruitbat.

i agree too. i think some people mustnt see it from just ONE side.
Theres a phrase it says "history was made by the victors" but before make a decission
please read what the other side think.
There must be a reason why the germans stil fly the 109.
Otherwise they turned completely to Fw 190 when they saw the great success against spits in the first encounters, but they dont

An industrial production issue IMO... they could have replaced it with the better FIAT G.55 but the production time per unit of the latter was greater... (quantity over quality)

About the 190: they knew of its bad performance above 6.5km... it would be a bad idea to end the production of their only high altitude fighter.

lol, so the sumtotal of your contribution in a debate exchanging information on 109 and spitfire performance is, "the brave one wins", "'cause you and your bestest friend did it that way" ?

your in the wrong department here, maybe google "fairytale forum" to go post that nonsense in :P

Actually what manu said makes good sense, you have to be confident with your aircraft if you want to stand a chance, so yes....if you are flying evenly matched aircraft then the better or braver pilot has the edge.

;-)

you've missed the point on how to grade the value of "first hand" pilot information somewhere between high skool and your first year of college. you'r locked into the false perception that "he-said" "she-said" has any meaning here.

in most sciences that is graded as anecdotal information, and basically meaningless to counter either expert opinion or objective factual evidence of any properly conducted scientific evaluation. hence i countered the previous posters quotes with an expert who's value both sides of the argument could respect, and quoted a broad statement from him on the matter. its easy enough to give quotes from brittish pilots stating the exact opposite of the german pilots he quoted (and they are easily available, and several already quoted in this thread), but has less value.

on the other hand, if you can come up with some german or allied comparisons of both of these aircraft, then this would have meaning (and both german and allied comparison of the same aircraft can be compared)

The 109 had better performance at higher altitudes than the FW-190. The Germans could not get the altitude performance out of the BMW radial engine. A significant disatvantage considering the altitude of the Allied bomber stream. It was not until the introduces the inline engine into the FW-190D did this get amended.

you are demonstrating a failure here to rationally compute simple facts

first we want to know what the actual BoB era performance was for these 3 planes. even if there will be slightly different perspectives on german or allied evaluations done, there will be some genral common ground.
second you can then look at how an experienced, expert, or novice pilot might handle that aircraft
third, you then asses how accurately these competing planes are modeled in CoD, to confirm/reject that what we have in the sim actually allows us to replicate the ww2 pilots experience as close as possible
fourth, and this is where you oddly seem to start off from and completely overlook the previous 3 points, you then want to see how we as armchair virtual pilots can master a specific plane with all its idiosyncrasies, so we have a change to use it strength correctly, and compete against other aircraft with a varied level of skilled pilots.

does that sequence ring any bells with you ?

if you still dont compute, the purpose of this discussion was to deal with step 1 and 2 :)

i really dont care what side was "better" at this or that, we all know what the eventual outcome of the conflict was :) what i do care about, is being able to use historical tactics and maneuvers with specific planes in this sim, and be able to rely on the aircraft i am (virtually) flying being able to execute it. that is for me (and many others here) the "fun factor" of this sim, and why we keep pushing for it to be better and more accurate.

He said it to wind up Goering who was being an arse to his squadron. This is in his book "The First and the Last", and in the same paragraph he also said that of course he preferred the 109 to the Spitfire.

There's plenty of test data about turning circles to demonstrate that the Spitfire and Hurricane both out turned the 109 comfortably, not to mention the wing loading. I can't believe anybody would think otherwise tbh. You don't hear Spitfire pilots going on about how the Spitfire could outclimb the 109 do you? Despite the existence of many reports about Spitfire pilots catching up 109's in the climb and shooting them down.