Spit/109 sea level speed comparisons in 1.08 beta patch

[Robo.]

Originally Posted by Glider

I do find this theory that the 109 will be able to turn better than a SPit at higher speeds a little foolish.

Oh yes, 109 could indeed turn tighter than a Spitfire at speeds around and above 400 kph.

In reality this was not very relevant in pure horizontal turnfight for the reasons you named. It was great advantage at BnZ maneuvring, even turning with a Spitfire that is breaking away from your attack - you can turn long enough to score nice deflection shot on him. But that is not anywhere close to sustained turn, you do a a 1/8 of a turn and away you break. If you stayed at that turn, you would burn your E and you would end up with a very angry Spitfire on your tail very soon.

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Robo.

Oh yes, 109 could indeed turn tighter than a Spitfire at speeds around and above 400 kph.

Are you aware of anything apart from a theory that agrees with this?

In reality this was not very relevant in pure horizontal turnfight for the reasons you named. It was great advantage at BnZ maneuvring, even turning with a Spitfire that is breaking away from your attack - you can turn long enough to score nice deflection shot on him.

No you cannot, if a higher speed is such an advantage in a turn then turning when bounced would be an almost suicidal tactic. Yet it was that ability to turn that saved so many pilots. It was the one advantage that Spit V pilots had over the Fw190 and was emphasised at every plot briefing.

But that is not anywhere close to sustained turn, you do a a 1/8 of a turn and away you break. If you stayed at that turn, you would burn your E and you would end up with a very angry Spitfire on your tail very soon.

That would sum up the best tactic for Luftwaffe Pilots fight in the vertical and only do minor, brief turns to get a better shot. Try to turn it into a turning fight and the 109 loses.

[Robo.]

Originally Posted by Glider

Are you aware of anything apart from a theory that agrees with this?

I did not mean I agreed with Crumpps bizarre theory regarding superior sustained turn rate of a 109. I was trying to explain to him the whole time that high speed turn rate of a 109 (or 190) was only usable in unsustained turns in actual dogfight - e.g. you would do 1/4 of turn or less and extend vertically. You would certainly not keep that turn sustained.

I was also saying the same thing to Kurfurst (IvanK and JtD both said it much better using proper terminology) - 400kph sustained turn is practically impossible to use because the 109 will bleed its speed rather fast - certainly faster than the Spitfire. Spitfire would be able to get the guns on the 109 if the 109 pilot maintained the sustained turn anyway.

Originally Posted by Glider

No you cannot, if a higher speed is such an advantage in a turn then turning when bounced would be an almost suicidal tactic. Yet it was that ability to turn that saved so many pilots. It was the one advantage that Spit V pilots had over the Fw190 and was emphasised at every plot briefing.

I respectfully disagree - higher speed is a great advantage 'especially' when bouncing a slower target. All depends on the situation but in the example you name, the Fw 190 would really be able to outturn a Spitfire at very high speeds for long enough to get guns on him. That is obviously not sustained turn and therefore irrelevant.

Originally Posted by Glider

That would sum up the best tactic for Luftwaffe Pilots fight in the vertical and only do minor, brief turns to get a better shot. Try to turn it into a turning fight and the 109 loses.

Agreed completely, I guess we ment the same thing. There was also some confusion with what is and what is not sustained turn.

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by Glider

No you cannot, if a higher speed is such an advantage in a turn then turning when bounced would be an almost suicidal tactic. Yet it was that ability to turn that saved so many pilots. It was the one advantage that Spit V pilots had over the Fw190 and was emphasised at every plot briefing.

Crossed wires I think. It's entirely situational and depends where and when the Spitfire turns relative to the FW, and their speeds. The common tactic was, and one of Sailor Malan's 10 rules, to always turn into the enemy. This doesn't mean necessarily to do a head on, but to change his angles to one where he cannot get a shot off. A hard break, nose slightly down, from the high 6 is enough simply because in order for him to pull the snap turn (yes, a fast turn if you like) for the lead required, then he will overload and black out. The result is that the attacker usually misses behind or breaks off and gains height for another attack. So, the turn is no problem for the attacker, but only a fool would follow because as he unloads his turn becomes worse (as brilliantly described by other more intelligent posters than myself) and the advantage switches.

What I find confusing though is what I've often read, that a 109 would dive from above and the spitfire, lower and slower, would make a left hand spiral break yet catch the 109 and shoot him down. I guess it's just descriptions, only I can't picture that exactly. Maybe the speeds are similar in the DF the pilot talks about.

Can people stop referring to the Spitfire as slower when it isn't. Thanks.

[NZtyphoon]

These are the precautions given to Spitfire pilots facing the Fw 190:





Essentially the advice was to cruise as fast as possible, especially in the danger zones where Fw 190s were expected, partly because the Spitfire was slower to accelerate than the 190.

As for claims that the Bf 109E generated less drag than the Spitfire I - there has been no objective data presented to prove this, but here are the figure for the Spitfire I: