1. #1
    One hears about the 109 having better visibility for the pilot but......

    Adolf Galland, who had the opportunity to fly BOTH the 109, and on several occasions postwar the Spitfire, commented that even the Spitfire, which had its own reputation for the straight-ahead line being obscured until the tail lifted...had better visibility than the Bf109! IIRC Gunter Rall made exactly the same comment.

    Flugkäpitän Willy Ellenrieder who flew the DB 605 A-1 engined Spitfire Vb conversion attributed the Bf 109's bad visibility before the take-off to its nose pointing skywards on the ground. According to him the DB-engined Spit had a far better visibility because of the shorter legs of the front undercarriage; "Flying Review International, 9/1966".
    Markus


    Interesting.
    Share this post

  2. #2
    TheGrunch's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,018
    Originally posted by yuuppers:
    Flugkäpitän Willy Ellenrieder who flew the DB 605 A-1 engined Spitfire Vb conversion attributed the Bf 109's bad visibility before the take-off to its nose pointing skywards on the ground. According to him the DB-engined Spit had a far better visibility because of the shorter legs of the front undercarriage; "Flying Review International, 9/1966".
    Markus

    I don't think many people believe that the 109 had better visibility apart from below and in front. Besides, that's not the best quote to illustrate that considering that it refers to a DB605 conversion of the Spit. I don't think anyone's likely to be surprised that the inverted V engine is easier to see over than an upright V. How many operational British Spits used Daimler Benz engines?
    Share this post

  3. #3
    R_Target's Avatar Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    3,686
    IBTK.
    Share this post

  4. #4
    Waldo.Pepper's Avatar Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    5,176
    I don't think anyone's likely to be surprised that the inverted V engine is easier to see over than an upright V.
    Quite correct. Pilots who have flown the Buchon and a proper 109 have made this observation about the comparatively better view forward with the proper 109 (compared to the Buchon.)
    Share this post

  5. #5
    I see people have a hard time reading and comprehending what was said.
    Share this post

  6. #6
    Waldo.Pepper's Avatar Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    5,176
    Not at all. My comment was extremely narrow. Much like those individuals who would even think that 109 visibility is (overall) better than in a Spitfire.
    Share this post

  7. #7
    Share this post

  8. #8
    TheGrunch's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,018
    Originally posted by yuuppers:
    I see people have a hard time reading and comprehending what was said.
    I don't think so. I think that everyone just disagrees with this:
    Originally posted by yuuppers:
    One hears about the 109 having better visibility for the pilot...
    I don't think anybody thinks that who isn't a frothing-at-the-mouth Luftwhiner, except like I said forward and below the nose, which could go either way, really. It doesn't really make much difference because they both required the pilot to weave while taxiing. Also, you chose the most vague quotes to post ever. One doesn't specify what marks of the aircraft are being compared and one refers specifically to a unique, modified aircraft.
    Doesn't the forward view in the 109 vs. the Spitfire depend on whether you're talking Merlins or Griffons and indeed the 109E or F and later?
    Talk about a weird thing to post.
    Share this post

  9. #9
    Share this post

  10. #10
    Nice thread, luftluuver.... milo... whatever other logins may have
    Share this post

Page 1 of 19 12311 ... Last ►►