Spit/109 sea level speed comparisons in 1.08 beta patch

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by JtD

I agree it looks simplistic, but technically it is sound and I see no reason it not being an original document. No reason for it being one either, but I will accept it on face value as I see no reason to mistrust Mr.Williams on this issue. If you have more than a gut feeling, I'm willing to re-evaluate my opinion.

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.

Originally Posted by Robo.

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.

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.

[bongodriver]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

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.

But aren't you missing the point completely......you are not describing a turning engagement, the whole issue here is that if the 109 tried to engage in a 'turning' fight with a Spit it 'will' loose, there has never been any disagreement that the 109 had better speed to maintain an overall tactical advantage, the 109 could choose when to engage but the Spitfire was more than capable of evading, if you felt frustrated by that as a 109 driver and decided to try for a propper knife-fight with a Spit you were likely to lose, the 109's best tactic was to run in quick when an opportunity presents itself and run away quicker once the job is done.

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by bongodriver

But aren't you missing the point completely......you are not describing a turning engagement, the whole issue here is that if the 109 tried to engage in a 'turning' fight with a Spit it 'will' loose, there has never been any disagreement that the 109 had better speed to maintain an overall tactical advantage, the 109 could choose when to engage but the Spitfire was more than capable of evading, if you felt frustrated by that as a 109 driver and decided to try for a propper knife-fight with a Spit you were likely to lose, the 109's best tactic was to run in quick when an opportunity presents itself and run away quicker once the job is done.

I don't think I have missed anything, but it depends how you define a turn fight. And I am not meaning a 'propper knife-fight' at usually some low speed like 2-300 kph.

What I mean that if
- both the (+6) Spit and the 109E try a sustained turn contest
- near ground level (where the 109 has more power and is faster),
- and both are at or above about 400 kph and try to sustain that,

the Spit WILL loose that turn contest. The Hurricane even more so. As Jtd noted, its simply too hard to overcome some 30(+) km/h speed advantage, and the fact that parasitic drag will be dominant. The general advise is though (apart from don't turn with the Spit at low speeds) is that the faster the 109 turns, the better it is for its pilot.

The other comparisons (one plane flies sustained, the other unsustained, level outs and climbs etc.) I do not adress here. These tactics are essentially combinations of the best peformance envelope against the opponent's worst.

[Robo.]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

I don't think I have missed anything, but it depends how you define a turn fight. And I am not meaning a 'propper knife-fight' at usually some low speed like 2-300 kph.

What I mean that if
- both the (+6) Spit and the 109E try a sustained turn contest
- near ground level (where the 109 has more power and is faster),
- and both are at or above about 400 kph and try to sustain that,

the Spit WILL loose that turn contest. The Hurricane even more so. As Jtd noted, its simply too hard to overcome some 30(+) km/h speed advantage, and the fact that parasitic drag will be dominant. The general advise is though (apart from don't turn with the Spit at low speeds) is that the faster the 109 turns, the better it is for its pilot.

The other comparisons (one plane flies sustained, the other unsustained, level outs and climbs etc.) I do not adress here. These tactics are essentially combinations of the best peformance envelope against the opponent's worst.

I agree in general except for the fact (major flow I would say) that the Emil will slow down rather fast in this sustained horizontal turn. Spitfire will win in RL situation described by you, because the pilot would obviously not try to sustain these 400kph, he will try to bear his guns on the 109 and will do so rather soon. No matter what you do in a 109, if you chose to remain horizontal, the only way of evading the Spitfire would be flying straight. And flying straight is not sustained turn. See?

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Robo.

I agree in general except for the fact (major flow I would say) that the Emil will slow down rather fast in this sustained horizontal turn. Spitfire will win in RL situation described by you, because the pilot would obviously not try to sustain these 400kph, he will try to bear his guns on the 109 and will do so rather soon. No matter what you do in a 109, if you chose to remain horizontal, the only way of evading the Spitfire would be flying straight. And flying straight is not sustained turn. See?

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

a) There are no, repeat no tests, from any side that support this theory.
b) The 109 locked up faster than a spitfire at higher speeds so the spit will have all the advantages getting into the turn by which time the 109 will be in the smelly stuff
c) You quickly lose speed in a turn which will nulify any theoretical advantages
d) The above description of what will happen shows the folly of this theory
e) The 12 boost throws the theory out anyway as it passes the power to weight ratio advantage to the SPitfire
f) Its worth remembering what the German test establishment said about the turning ability of these aircraft:-

Before turning fights with the Bf 109 E type, it must be noted in every case, that
all three foreign planes have significantly smaller turning circles and turning times.
An attack on the opponent as well as disengagement can only be accomplished on the basis of
existing superiority in performance.

Notice it doesn't say:-
a) The SPitfire is better at slow speeds
b) That the 109 can turn inside the Spitfire at high speeds
c) Ensure you keep your speed up against the Spitfire in a turning fight

It says basically DON'T GET INTO A TURNING FIGHT.

Can someone explain how the German test establishment got it so wrong.
After all they only had the real aircraft, real pilots to fly mock combats who obviously were very up to date on the Me109, amongst the finest engineers and designers in the world, people both well versed in the theory and experienced in this field, plus the resources of a test establishment.
I repeat the question, how did they get it so wrong?

[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.

[Kurfürst]

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.

a) There are no, repeat no tests, from any side that support this theory.
b) The 109 locked up faster than a spitfire at higher speeds so the spit will have all the advantages getting into the turn by which time the 109 will be in the smelly stuff
c) You quickly lose speed in a turn which will nulify any theoretical advantages
d) The above description of what will happen shows the folly of this theory
e) The 12 boost throws the theory out anyway as it passes the power to weight ratio advantage to the SPitfire
f) Its worth remembering what the German test establishment said about the turning ability of these aircraft:-

Before turning fights with the Bf 109 E type, it must be noted in every case, that
all three foreign planes have significantly smaller turning circles and turning times.
An attack on the opponent as well as disengagement can only be accomplished on the basis of
existing superiority in performance.

Notice it doesn't say:-
a) The SPitfire is better at slow speeds
b) That the 109 can turn inside the Spitfire at high speeds
c) Ensure you keep your speed up against the Spitfire in a turning fight

It says basically DON'T GET INTO A TURNING FIGHT.

Can someone explain how the German test establishment got it so wrong.
After all they only had the real aircraft, real pilots to fly mock combats who obviously were very up to date on the Me109, amongst the finest engineers and designers in the world, people both well versed in the theory and experienced in this field, plus the resources of a test establishment.
I repeat the question, how did they get it so wrong?

Just explain how a plane with less or no excess thrust can pull a sustained turn better than a plane with more excess thrust, thank you.

How much excess thrust does a Spitfire at SL, running at +6 1/4 boost has at about 280 mph 1g at David?
How much more excess thrust does a Spitfire at SL, running at +6 1/4 boost require in 2g turn at about 280 mph David?
How much excess thrust does a Bf 109E at SL running at 1.35ata bppst has at about 280 mph 1g at David?

Which has a better sustained turn at 400 mph David, a Spitfire IX or a Me 262 (P-80 if you like)?

[Osprey]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

How much excess thrust does a Spitfire at SL, running at +12 boost has at about 280 mph 1g at David?
How much more excess thrust does a Spitfire at SL, running at +12 boost require in 2g turn at about 280 mph David?

I edited it to suit reality, otherwise you may as well have put down 1ata or something equally 'not full power'.

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Kurfürst

Just explain how a plane with less or no excess thrust can pull a sustained turn better than a plane with more excess thrust, thank you.

How much excess thrust does a Spitfire at SL, running at +6 1/4 boost has at about 280 mph 1g at David?
How much more excess thrust does a Spitfire at SL, running at +6 1/4 boost require in 2g turn at about 280 mph David?

Interesting that you keep talking about the 6 1/4 boost and not the 12 boost.

How much excess thrust does a Bf 109E at SL running at 1.35ata bppst has at about 280 mph 1g at David?

less than a 12 boost Spitfire

Which has a better sustained turn at 400 mph David, a Spitfire IX or a Me 262 (P-80 if you like)?

Spit every time.
Show any acual test that says otherwise. Show any 262 pilot who says that he would turn faster than any piston fighter.
No, their advantage was speed and the key was keeping your speed high and making it almost impossible to get a shot at you

I am still trying to work out how the German test authorities got it so wrong. I admit that I cannot find any reason and neither can anyone else, so maybe, just maybe they got it right and the 109 couldn't turn inside the Spitfire, after all thats what their official report says