Robo,

This is the key performance parameter for a fighter. It gives the aircraft which can sustain a higher load factor at a higher velocity the initiative in a dogfight.

This characteristic allows the Bf-109E3 to force the Spitfire to a lower airspeed in order to survive the fight.

The outcome of any dogfight is not predetermined. There are too many "what if's" and pilot skills are the determining factor.

What it tells Spitfire pilots is if you enter a sustained turn fight at high speed, the Bf-109 will win if you don't slow your speed down to the point you have a better sustained turn rate.

What it tells the Bf-109 pilot is you can maneuver against the Spitfire, just don't drop your IAS below 400 kph. If he breaks off and zooms at the point the Spitfire begins to out turn him, the Bf-109 will be above his opponent, out of reach, and able to engage/disengage at will.

400 kph is not a difficult point for the Bf-109 to maintain especially given the stability of the design. It is the trim speed and given the correct amount of power, where the airplane wants to be....

Not at all! The fact is (still) that 400kph was NOT chosen by Mtt because of 'good speed for dogfight' reason, contrary to your statement. No matter how you try to re-pack your words, you were wrong.

:rolleyes:

I specifically told you that posting the cruise speed calculation and graph is not necessary and irrelevant, but thank you anyway, it was interesting.

Did he even read your post Robo? Your point just went whoosh over his head.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lr...2g5fo1_500.jpg

Why did they pick it then, Robo? :confused:

Given the fact cruise speeds are fixed by design? ;)

Which point would that be? That I am wrong and don't admit it? Certainly I will if I am wrong.


On the otherhand, I did go to college for this stuff, worked hard for my education, and learned a thing or two about the science of flight.

I also have plenty of practical experience working and flying airplanes.

So do you think I am some jerk who can't admit he is wrong or maybe have some knowledge that makes me question conclusions that don't fit the facts or the science??

:rolleyes:

Yes, I agree, you said that already before, and this is very well known to most virtual pilot on this forums. You're not saying anything new here. Yes, the 109 turns better at higher speeds, Spitfire wins at lower speeds. What I was trying to explain before was that in a TnB fight, it's usually lower speeds that matter and decide the fight.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with what you're saying, it just doesn't make sense in regards to actual combat. If you keep the 109 in 400kph sustained turn, the Spitfire will be able to shoot at you for long enough to kill you, even being slower.

If he breaks off and zooms we don't talk about sustained turn competition anymore. Everybody is well aware of 109s BnZ characteristics (if he extends vertically). Again, you're not saying anything new. It's the TnB that matter here. Pure TnB rarely happened because it would be a suicide for the 109 pilot.

What you're saying with this whole post of yours is basically:

109 can win a turnfight against the Spitfire as long as it won't turn with it

Spitfire has had better sustained turn rate than 109 and it was generally a silly idea to turn with it. This is the case in the sim as well and all other sims.

Yes, that is correct.

Sure we are...

The Spitfire has lost and the Bf-109 has used its sustained turn performance to gain advantage and win the dogfight.

That is because a computer game is not representing reality in this case.....

There is a very good engineering reason designers have strived for speed as the number one performance parameter for a fighter.

I'd have hated to have been in your classes (not that I was ever a chicken feeder) because you'd have constantly put the class off with your maniacal theories.

I loved this bit

Total misunderstanding of air combat or brilliant trolling?

This!!!.....Ironic that Crumpp would come up with the best description.


No, you question the facts and science because you have a little knowlege and a big agenda.

Its a gut feeling of course - I wasn't there when it was drawn (thank God for that!). To me it just seems that, given that the original was drawn with pen AND was labeled, compared to the rough approximation visibile on the pencil drawn +12 and +16(?!) lines, the latter lines were probably made by some aircraft enthusiast well after the war. The lines/figures look more or less a reasonable guesswork, but I very much doubt it has anything to do with any test establishment.

IMHO the real question is how much time to Spit has to shoot at you? Because if the Spit turns at around its peak sustained turn rate - at about 250 kph? 300 max? - its going to be a good deal slower than the 109; maybe slow enough to fall so behind that it will be out of realistic guns range? You cant shoot what is not in range, even if your nose points towards it..

Moreover if say both aircraft start at 400 + kph, the 109 maintains it while the Spit bleeds it off to get a snapshop, all the 109 has to do is to level out with a very significant E advantage, and if the pilot is good at Energy fight, its all cat-and-mouse from there on.

Generally it seems to me a good idea to keep the speed over 400 km/h in a 109. If the Spit tries to follow you in sustained 400 kph turn, or if he slows down to try to get you, he seems to be ... to have gotten into a bad position. Especially in a multi plane enviroment.. you can shoot what is slow, you cant shoot what is fast.