I read somewhere a while back that During BOB the RAF lost 2 spitfires and 4 hurricanes for every 109 shot down. Now thats not counting bombers its just the statistic for fighter vs fighter kill/loss.
So vs. spitfire the 109 had 2/1 ratio
and VS. Hurricane it had a 4/1 ratio
the argument was that Hurricanes were usually focused on the bombers when hit by the 109's
and that the Luftwaffe had far more trained pilots at that time.
Can anyone confirm this as I cannot remember or locate my source
Unlikely.I read somewhere a while back that During BOB the RAF lost 2 spitfires and 4 hurricanes for every 109 shot down. Now thats not counting bombers its just the statistic for fighter vs fighter kill/loss.
Total losses on operations for both sides were:
600 109s
235 110s
605 Hurricanes (approx)
395 Spitfires (approx)
That's a raw ratio of 1.67 Spits and Hurris lost per 109 lost, ignoring all the other German types. I expect the combats between the single engined fighters were even less in the Luftwaffe's favour, as large numbers of Spits and Hurris were lost to bombers and 110s, whilst 109s, concentrating on the fighter battle, suffered few casualties to other types.
Unlikely.Originally posted by hop2002:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I read somewhere a while back that During BOB the RAF lost 2 spitfires and 4 hurricanes for every 109 shot down. Now thats not counting bombers its just the statistic for fighter vs fighter kill/loss.
Total losses on operations for both sides were:
600 109s
235 110s
605 Hurricanes (approx)
395 Spitfires (approx)
That's a raw ratio of 1.67 Spits and Hurris lost per 109 lost, ignoring all the other German types. I expect the combats between the single engined fighters were even less in the Luftwaffe's favour, as large numbers of Spits and Hurris were lost to bombers and 110s, whilst 109s, concentrating on the fighter battle, suffered few casualties to other types. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Large numbers of spits and hurris were lost to bombers and 110's? What do you beleive that the 109's were doing. 110's performed below average and ended up being escorted by 109's! Also keep in mind that the bombers were the primary target of the RAF and that the 109's ranged well above them giving them a huge advantage over the R.A.F. who were usually co-alt with the 111's, ju-88's and Do-17's. I doubt that the bombers shot down more aircraft then the escort fighters (109's and 110's) accompanying them. Also a huge ammount of luftwaffe losses were to flak.
Unlikely.Originally posted by hop2002:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I read somewhere a while back that During BOB the RAF lost 2 spitfires and 4 hurricanes for every 109 shot down. Now thats not counting bombers its just the statistic for fighter vs fighter kill/loss.
Total losses on operations for both sides were:
600 109s
235 110s
605 Hurricanes (approx)
395 Spitfires (approx)
That's a raw ratio of 1.67 Spits and Hurris lost per 109 lost, ignoring all the other German types. I expect the combats between the single engined fighters were even less in the Luftwaffe's favour, as large numbers of Spits and Hurris were lost to bombers and 110s, whilst 109s, concentrating on the fighter battle, suffered few casualties to other types. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Do also remember that some of those 109 losses were low flying E4B with a 250kg bomb attached.
Also, sufficient damage to bring a 109 down in the channel only halfway home would merely have a Spitfire limping back to base 10 minutes away.
Historical figures are not going to give you more than a rough indication of how the types will fair in a SOW dogfight server. Which I assume is the point of the question.
The daily telegraph article "Battle of britian pilots could not shoot straight"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1567824/Battle-o...shoot-straight'.html
Fought over enemy territory with 20 minutes of fuel.....whilst 109s,
Anyway you slice it the Luftwaffe gave a very good account of themselves in aerial combat with the RAF. The fact the RAF fighters had numerical superiority in single seat fighters and pilots kept them in fight as well as leading to their success in the battle.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0IBO/is_4_24/ai_...g_1?tag=artBody;col1
Here is a good thread on this subject:
http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showth...t=14214&page=5
All the best,
Crumpp
Yes. Bungay has done an analysis for 10th July to 11th August. Out of 115 RAF fighters lost in combat, 87 were shot down by 109s. 19 were accounted for by 110s and bombers. That's about 75% for the 109s, without even adding in the losses to accidents, which would push the figure lower.Large numbers of spits and hurris were lost to bombers and 110's?
Of course not.I doubt that the bombers shot down more aircraft then the escort fighters (109's and 110's) accompanying them.
The point I was making is that 109s likely got a lower proportion of Spits and Hurris than Spits and Hurris got of 109s.
Not so many. Britain was very short of anti aircraft guns. I'll try to dig up some figures later.Also a huge ammount of luftwaffe losses were to flak.
Not so many. Britain was very short of anti aircraft guns. I'll try to dig up some figures later. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by hop2002:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Also a huge ammount of luftwaffe losses were to flak.
I had the impression that flak, like barrage balloons, was regarded by the British as more of a PR exercise to reassure the public than anything else. Especially at night, radar directed search lights and AAA did not exist this early in the war.