PDA

View Full Version : Spitfire Mk XIV versus Me 109 G/K A Performance Comparison



S.taibanzai
03-22-2005, 04:40 PM
Very interesting read:

http://www.kurfurst.atw.hu/articles/MW_KvsXIV.htm

faustnik
03-22-2005, 04:59 PM
Sweet! Another chance to use this:

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/mdegnan/_images/Dr.jpg

WOLFMondo
03-22-2005, 05:15 PM
Lmao! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

LEXX_Luthor
03-22-2005, 05:27 PM
But, was the Spitfire faster than the Luftwaffe?

I must find that link to P~51H article that said "The Mustang was faster than the Luftwaffe"

DIRTY-MAC
03-22-2005, 05:43 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

SlickStick
03-22-2005, 06:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
I must find that link to P~51H article that said _"The Mustang was faster than the Luftwaffe"_ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you trying to say that the Mustang was not faster than the Luftwaffe?!?! Surely you jest as everyone knows that the Mustang won the war.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Buzzsaw-
03-22-2005, 06:42 PM
Salute

Let's remember that Isegrim/Kurfurst posted this material.

That he refers to Mike Williams, the respected member of the Flight community, whose website is scrupulously accurate and backed up by original documents as "Spitdweeb Mike". That tells you something about Mr. Isegrim.

Mike's site here:

http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spittest.html

You will find detailed notes on the 109K4/Spitfire XIV comparisons here:

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14v109.html

In regards to Isegrim's claims about the Spitfire XIV.

First of all in regards to the number of Squadrons equipped with the Spitfire XIV, he only mentions RAF Squadrons, and forgets to mention Commonwealth Squadrons also equipped with the aircraft.

Second, he makes his usual claim that the 109K4 operated at 1.98 ATA, when any careful examination reveals that not to be the case. Oleg certainly does not accept the K4's operated at that boost.

Third, when he denigrates the number of Spitfire XIV's in service, he conveniently forgets to mention the 109K4 was in service in even smaller numbers, and that fewer K4's were produced.

4th, you will notice that Isegrim rarely includes complete documentation, preferring instead to clip tiny segments out, those sections of a document which support his position, but not the complete document, which when seen as a whole, would tend to refute his claims.

SkyChimp
03-22-2005, 07:02 PM
Calling Mike, who I've never communicated with, a Spitdweeb, is over the top. But Kurfurst was accurate in some of his challenges.

VW-IceFire
03-22-2005, 07:10 PM
Here's what I need to know:
1) The Spitfire XIV and the Bf.109K-4 represented the pinnacle of frontline useage of the two competing designs.
2) Both aircraft were within a hair of each other as far as performance were concerned. Where one was better, the other made up for it in some capacity.
3) Both were excellent designs that served in smaller numbers than previous variants (the Spitfire IX and the Bf.109G) but were no less important on the frontlines.

The XIVs low numbers I think is made up for the fact that it was concentrated in high numbers along the northern area of the Western Front invasion as part of the 2nd TAF. Similarly, the 109K-4 was, as I remember, playing a huge role in the missions that Pierre Closterman flew at the end of the war. I suppose they could have been late Bf.109G-10s as well.

Basically, I'm going to complain about anyone who complains about the XIV and not the 109K-4 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

p1ngu666
03-22-2005, 07:12 PM
think i have some of the same tests in a spitfire book, i think they tally up with whats on mikes site, i havent checked, but nothing has stood out as wrong.

we all know what kurfy is like aswell http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

LEXX_Luthor
03-22-2005, 08:34 PM
Found it...I just advanced googled "faster than the luftwaffe" and, it worked.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR><span class="ev_code_yellow">The Mustang was 50 mph faster than the Luftwaffe.</span> The Mustang had between 3000 and 4000 lbs. more weight, and so was able to outdive either German plane. The tightness of its turns were much better than the Me-109 and slightly better than the FW-190. The aircraft, which was to become the best piston engined fighter ever produced, took World War II by storm.

~~> http://nasaui.ited.uidaho.edu/nasaspark/safety/types/P51H.htm
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That paragraph alone could start an online war between teh internet Aces. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

VW-IceFire
03-22-2005, 09:04 PM
Yes you see...the Mustang...its quite fast. Its 50mph faster than the entire Luftwaffe. Even if they start out infront of the Mustang, the Luftwaffe, as one combined mass, will be doomed to chase the single Mustang all the way across the Atlantic. Didn't you know? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

LEXX_Luthor
03-22-2005, 10:05 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Ice:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>the Luftwaffe, as one combined mass, will be doomed to chase the single Mustang all the way across the Atlantic <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Luftwaffe will fall like Atlantis into the sea. Mustang had 500 mile more range than the NAVY.

DIRTY-MAC
03-23-2005, 05:00 AM
So what is exacly the performances of the SpitXIV and Bf109K?

IIJG69_Kartofe
03-23-2005, 06:38 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DIRTY-MAC:
So what is exacly the performances of the SpitXIV and Bf109K? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is very simple ... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

For a spit fan spit MUST have the best perf.
For a 109 fan the 109 K MUST have the best perf.

Don't espect ANY OTHER advice here. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Kurfurst__
03-23-2005, 07:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Let's remember that Isegrim/Kurfurst posted this material. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let`s remember Kurfurst is hated by Mr. BS, because Mr. Isegrim proved Mr. BS wrong so many times that it developed an inferiority complex in him. Ever since Mr. BS spends considerable time filling the forums with agitating against him - with little success, most just take Mr. BS as forum clown.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>That he refers to Mike Williams, the respected member of the Flight community, whose website is scrupulously accurate and backed up by original documents as "Spitdweeb Mike". That tells you something about Mr. Isegrim <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Quite irrevelant, but let`s get to that field, well Mr. Williams tended to call people who disagree with his spitdweeb attitude a nazi brownshirt partisan among others niceties, which otoh describes Mr. Williams, who as I proved, also having problems telling the truth, falsifies historical documents and so on.So I think I was actually too kind with him. As for his bias, I doubt anybody would argue about that. He can`t see a thing from it. I wonder who forms the circle of respect for Mr Williams though. Is it a two man club of you and him?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
In regards to Isegrim's claims about the Spitfire XIV.

First of all in regards to the number of Squadrons equipped with the Spitfire XIV, he only mentions RAF Squadrons, and forgets to mention Commonwealth Squadrons also equipped with the aircraft. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Like what Squadrons? If you can`t be specific, I guess we should believe you just made up an ad hoc excuse for the small numbers of Mk XIV squadrons around.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Second, he makes his usual claim that the 109K4 operated at 1.98 ATA, when any careful examination reveals that not to be the case. Oleg certainly does not accept the K4's operated at that boost. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Careful examination...? Like...? No specifics again?
I guess I documented the extent of use of 1.98ata quite well on my site, which is the same thing what butch says.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
Third, when he denigrates the number of Spitfire XIV's in service, he conveniently forgets to mention the 109K4 was in service in even smaller numbers, and that fewer K4's were produced. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sources/References?
The number of XIVs in service is coming from Mike himself. So basically you say he denigrates the number of Spitfire XIV's in service. That`s news and would be unusual from Mike.

The literature otherwise states 1700 K-4s were produced as 900-odd Mk XIVs, some of the latter only after the war.

The number of K-4s in service varied around 200 in October, November and December 1944, by the end of Jan 1945 there were 314 in service/ The maximum number of XIVs was 120 at any time, including reserves. Sources on my site, they are taken from German strenght reports of the period.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>4th, you will notice that Isegrim rarely includes complete documentation, preferring instead to clip tiny segments out, those sections

of a document which support his position, but not the complete document, which when seen as a whole, would tend to refute his claims. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That`s Mike`s way of tricking. Specifically, he does that with SpitI/109E roll rate graphs (stickforces cut out), Spit I boost levels (parts noting 87 octane fuel cut out). Otherwise he didn`t post any of his curves for Messerschmitt performance, and the reason can be seen on my critic of it. He hides the details away so he could play trick with them.

To support your accusation, maybe you can show some examples of documentents 'which when seen as a whole, would tend to refute my claims.'

You won`t be able, simple because I don`t get as low as Mike and do such, and you`re just repeating your usual foul and baseless accusations here.

Vipez-
03-23-2005, 07:52 AM
The numbers are very similar, considering Germans had two fronts to fight in..

VW-IceFire
03-23-2005, 08:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DIRTY-MAC:
So what is exacly the performances of the SpitXIV and Bf109K? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Let me be specific: they are fast, climb like rockets, and are armed with each countries biggest or most effective guns. They are ugly or very beautiful in relation to their earlier models depending on who you ask.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Kurfurst__
03-23-2005, 08:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vipez-:
The numbers are very similar, considering Germans had two fronts to fight in.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There is no breataking difference indeed. Some things to take into account is that the Spit numbers include reserves because the RAF hold some reserves with the Squadrons (12+8=20 plane/sqaud), the LW didn`t. And by 1945, there was hardly two real fronts, just Germany.
However, while the 109K was the best performing, there were many G-14/AS and G-10 around as well with good high altitude performance, whereas the RAF had no comparable Spits to the XIVs (or these 109s) performance at altitude.

Buzzsaw-
03-23-2005, 09:02 AM
Isegrim/Kurfurst

First: Before you make the very serious accusation that Mike Williams has falsified historical documents, you better provide proof. Otherwise we can consider it is just scurrilous nonsense.

Second: I don't remember losing any discussions with you. In fact, the major disagreements we have had going back, as for example, P-47 performance, in particular rollrate, have ended with Oleg revising the Flight Model to reflect the historical data that I and others pointed out.

Finally, in regards to what your political leanings are, and whether or not you are a brownshirt or not, I can't comment. You can better illuminate that.

Perhaps and explanation of your signature and its homage to the heroic stand of the S.S. Mountain Corps and ArrowCross might clarify things?

As anyone who has studied Hungarian history knows, the ArrowCross were the Fascist organization which, supported by Hitler, overthrew the Regent of Hungary, Admiral Horthy, in late 1944. Hitler had always hated the old Admiral, who had refused to bow to him, and retained as much of his independence as possible. After Horthy's overthrow, Ferenc Szalasi, the head of the ArrowCross, launched a pogrom against the Hungarian Jews, who had been protected by Horthy against the Nazis. Almost 600,000 were massacred or sent to death Camps by the ArrowCross.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9f/Arrow_cross.PNG

And of course, everyone knows who the S.S. were.

WOLFMondo
03-23-2005, 09:08 AM
The RAF had P51's also. I'd say the RAF was more concentrated on night boming and tactical support by the time the K4 was in operation. The LW had enough to deal with the USAAF at high altitude to worry about Spitfire XIV's, many of which look like they were used for armed recon. Below 20,000ft the 109 pilots had much more scary things to worry about because the 25lbs boosts in IX's gave them excellent performance lower down. Not to mention at those heights there were roaming Tempest squadrons out hunting for the Luftwaffe.

Kurfurst, you should do a similar objective and open minded study on the XIV as you've done on the K4 so you can truly show things as they were. Theres myths about both planes.

DIRTY-MAC
03-23-2005, 09:27 AM
Let me be specific: they are fast, climb like rockets, and are armed with each countries biggest or most effective guns. They are ugly or very beautiful in relation to their earlier models depending on who you ask.

thanks
thats the most revealing post in this topic http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Kurfurst__
03-23-2005, 09:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Kurfurst, you should do a similar objective and open minded study on the XIV as you've done on the K4 so you can truly show things as they were. Theres myths about both planes. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is already planned and started under the title "SpitvsMesser; A study of rivalry 1939-1945". I will attempt to give an objective, clear view on how they related and faced each other from the technical aspect, summerizing all known evidence up that we gathered on the net. It will contain basic information on the engines, armament, operational use and production, as well as comparisons of performance on a yearly basis.

@Buzzsaw,

"Perhaps and explanation of your signature and its homage to the heroic stand of the S.S. Mountain Corps and ArrowCross might clarify things?"

I`d like to point it out for you, that implying that I am in any way symphtatizer of the arrowcross party or any other nazi organization,as you just did by connectig me to the SS and the Arrowcross`s "heroic stand" (YOUR words, not mine) in your post, by our forum rules has high probability of an immidiate, and permanent banning from ubi forums - as some have experienced. Especially if the community looses little with it. I highly recommend you to edit your post, before Ivan or the other moderators find it out, on their own, or with some help.

WOLFMondo
03-23-2005, 10:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Kurfurst, you should do a similar objective and open minded study on the XIV as you've done on the K4 so you can truly show things as they were. Theres myths about both planes. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is already planned and started under the title "SpitvsMesser; A study of rivalry 1939-1945". I will attempt to give an objective, clear view on how they related and faced each other from the technical aspect, summerizing all known evidence up that we gathered on the net. It will contain basic information on the engines, armament, operational use and production, as well as comparisons of performance on a yearly basis.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Good to hear that! Let me know if you need anyone to go and visit any of the imperial war museum sites or the RAF museum at Hendon..not that I need an excuse to go there but its nice toohttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

p1ngu666
03-23-2005, 11:30 AM
sortie rates for XIV and k4 would be interesting http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

the germans ability to have a decent defense in 45 was very much reduced. was german night fighter pilot, they would haveto take off early and stooge around, because there was no radar coverage till somewhere in the middle of france or something, so they hadto be in the air climbing before details of a attack was know.

also they would have days of inactivity, then a large amount would be active for a day, then rest again, because of lack of fuel.

kurfy are u sure of squadron numbers? i remmber bomber command squadrons had their number of aircraft increased several times during the war, maybe past 30. similer may have happened to fighter command squadrons