Spitfire - The Painful truth

[facthunter]

Slower always turns quicker. Flaps  therefore make you turn faster on a given aircraft. You also use full power often as the drag is high closer to the stall. I would have thought that is easily proven and most trained pilots would know it. You wouldn't live long in a dogfight if you didn't.. Nev

 

 

[kgwilson]

The comment about Spitfires requiring skilled workers and 12500 to 13000 hours to build may be true but by the end of the BoB there were more Spitfires available than there were at the beginning. The Germans were not able to destroy the factories and it is also interesting to note that the British workforce included a very large proportion of Women and they distributed assembly of Spitfires all over the place, including Church halls and community centres. The resolve of the British public was something Hitler did not really consider. They were fighting for their very existence and unskilled labourers and housewives soon became battle hardened, very skillfull, resolute and inspired by Churchills oratory.

 

The Spitfire had its faults but that is why there were so many new improved versions, the Mk IX being the best it seems. As far as I am concerned, hype or not it is still the most beautiful fighter aircraft ever made, it sounds fantastic and by all accounts was/is a joy to fly.

 

One of the best and most humbling speeches I have ever heard on the BoB was by Wing Commander Tom Neil at the 70th anniversary of the battle. It is 40 minutes long and well worth a watch. He talks about the issues with the location of the petrol tanks in both the Spitfire and Hurricane and other issues but it was recalling of how he lost so many friends and saw so many badly disfigured from burns that is quite unsettling. Like it is for most of us when we go flying he recalls often going out in search of the enemy to see absolutely nothing most of the time.The youtube clip is HERE

 

 

[facthunter]

"Improved " would be purpose specific. (Job to do. ) In many planes the original design is the Best.  (especially as to nice flying characteristics). The alterations corrupt it though they make it more useful and less obsolete in performance and enable it to remain in service for longer and be sort of operationally effective for longer. All that is at best a "stop gap" A newer complete design would be better but the COST? Operating from Carrier decks showed a lot of shortcomings and vices more acutely. where that was required. The Hawker Sea Fury was a great plane with good performance and got  away from of the Vulnerable liquid cooled engine. A later arrival, but shows the direction to go. Nev

 

 

[M61A1]

Slower always turns quicker. Flaps  therefore make you turn faster on a given aircraft. You also use full power often as the drag is high closer to the stall. I would have thought that is easily proven and most trained pilots would know it. You wouldn't live long in a dogfight if you didn't.. Nev

I imagine that like many things in life, you have to be committed. You can't just go in halfarsed . To get really slow in the middle of a bunch of enemy aircraft (especially when the general consensus is go fast, hit and run) would have taken some balls and skill.

One of the things mentioned in the article was that he regularly trained for what he did. This applies to us as well, if you train for what you will do in case of engine or other failures and are familiar with the edges of the envelope, your chances of a good outcome are greatly improved.

 

 

[facthunter]

 If you can't outrun you must avoid by manoeuvering. Diving from above, especially from the direction of the sun. (the Hun in the Sun) by surprise at high speed  is  a well documented technique. Once a group engages that  phase is over. You don't' slow the plane and then drop a bit of flap and think of turning like you do in a circuit. If someone's on your tail you try to run and turn tighter so he can't get you in his sights. The final result of that is who can pull the tighter turn wins.  Nev

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

2 hours ago, facthunter said:Slower always turns quicker. Flaps  therefore make you turn faster on a given aircraft. You also use full power often as the drag is high closer to the stall. I would have thought that is easily proven and most trained pilots would know it. You wouldn't live long in a dogfight if you didn't.. Nev

Japanese aces liked to do flick turns; they would use aileron to deliberately stall one wing to surprise a pursuing enemy with a rapid roll.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

The Spitfire is not unique by far in being claimed the greatest by the English purely because it's English.

 

I have never liked the look of them, I happen to love fastbacks such as a BF109 or earlier P51 (always overlooked in favour of the P51D).

 

Love Zeros too. Captain Eric Brown, the Chief Naval Test Pilot of the Royal Navy, recalled being impressed by the Zero during tests of captured aircraft. "I don't think I have ever flown a fighter that could match the rate of turn of the Zero. The Zero had ruled the roost totally and was the finest fighter in the world until mid-1943."

 

Sorry Marty, but Spitfires suck.

 

 

[Yenn]

The one I like is the Sea Fury, faster than the Spit and looks much more workmanlike.

 

Does anyone here know who designed the Zero?

 

Somewhere I have an old book about the Spitfire, produced as a sales brochure

 

 

[facthunter]

OK.   I certainly did NOT say that.  You can do flick rolls. That's not a turn. It's a horizontal spin. and I wouldn't see it as a good evasive maneuver. You lose a lot of speed.  Nev

 

 

[rgmwa]

Does anyone here know who designed the Zero?

Jiro Horikoshi

 

 

[bexrbetter]

Japanese aces liked to do flick turns; they would use aileron to deliberately stall one wing to surprise a pursuing enemy with a rapid roll.

The more experienced Zero pilots when being tagged would lure the pursuant into a climb where the Zero excelled, when the pursuer reached peak and went back down, the Zero above would then merely drop on top of him for an easy kill.

 

It was an American Hellcat that first outclimbed them and took a fair number of them down using their own technique against them before they realised the Americans had this new model.

 

The Hellcat of course would have wiped the floor had it been against Spitfires.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

52 minutes ago, facthunter said:OK.   I certainly did NOT say that.  You can do flick rolls. That's not a turn. It's a horizontal spin. and I wouldn't see it as a good evasive maneuver. You lose a lot of speed.  Nev

That was my post, Nev. I was trying to link it to a comment you'd made. 

I'm still having trouble making a reply on the new site.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

 

 

The Hellcat of course would have wiped the floor had it been against Spitfires.

 

...but it was bloody ugly!

 

 

[Marty_d]

Sorry Marty, but Spitfires suck.

Humanity is a broad church Bex... there's room in the aviation pantheon for all our favourites!

 

(You can like pregnant ducks like the Hellcat if you like... I'll stick with the classical beauty of the Spit...!)  

 

 

[Peter Anson]

All of these famous aircraft had their faults, as do many modern aircraft, but they were the best that the various combatants could produce at the time.  Compare them with some  of the aircraft that were obsolete within a few years of their design;  the Bolton Paul Defiant, Brewster Buffalo, nearly all of the early British bombers or the ME110 as a day fighter.  It took actual combat to show up those faults and the theory of air combat was changing rapidly.  In this the Axis forces started with the advantage of more recent combat experience.

 

Producing combat aircraft in large numbers was such a massive undertaking that  even in the heat of war it sometimes took years to turn things around.  The allies accepted staggering heavy bomber losses when they had DeHavilland Mosquitoes that could carry substantial bomb loads and had far fewer losses.  Germany continued to produce vast numbers of ME109s right to the end of the war even though the FW190s were superior.

 

Probably all of the combatants mythologized their own aircraft to some extent.  For the British, it's the Spitfire, for the Americans it's the Mustang, and for a time when things were going well for the Germans, it was the Stuka, which I guess shows that an aircraft doesn't even have to be pretty to be mythologized.

 

 

[M61A1]

For a good looking curvy WW2 fighter you can't go past an F4U Corsair.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

The comment about Spitfires requiring skilled workers and 12500 to 13000 hours to build may be true but by the end of the BoB there were more Spitfires available than there were at the beginning. The Germans were not able to destroy the factories and it is also interesting to note that the British workforce included a very large proportion of Women and they distributed assembly of Spitfires all over the place, including Church halls and community centres. The resolve of the British public was something Hitler did not really consider...

It's amazing how late in the war, when they had lost in North Africa and were retreating in the east, that Germany finally mobilised the population and introduced extra shifts. Their arrogant reliance on working Slavic prisoners to death eventually doomed the Nazi state.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

can't go past the mosquito for an outstanding fighter come fighter bomber

 

 

 

[old man emu]

We are getting stuck on the aircraft of only three of the belligerents. What about some of the Italian fighters. Or Russian MIGs. Don't forget the CAC-15 which was a pretty prototype.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

We are getting stuck on the aircraft of only three of the belligerents. What about some of the Italian fighters. Or Russian MIGs. Don't forget the CAC-15 which was a pretty prototype.

Good point, OME. There is that story about the international squadron being offered their choice of the best aircraft the allies had. 

The didn't choose Spitfires or Mustangs. They chose the best. The Yak-9D

 

 

[M61A1]

We are getting stuck on the aircraft of only three of the belligerents. What about some of the Italian fighters. Or Russian MIGs. Don't forget the CAC-15 which was a pretty prototype.

I didn't think it was about 'belligerents', but aircraft. Yes, some of the Russian aircraft were very functional, but sooooo ugly. I think the first good looking Russioan aircraft was the SU-27. I've not seen an Italian aircraft I've thought was good looking either.

The CAC-15 looked nice , just like a P-51.

 

If what I've read is correct, the Hellcat had the highest kill ratio in WW2, followed by the F4U.

 

Maybe we need to define how we determine "best".

 

 

[facthunter]

 The Kiwi's used the Corsair. A quite formidable aircraft by all accounts People flew this stuff with minimal training and to a certain extent had to learn on the job often with a bit of alcohol used to make it more easy on the mind. . More a technique used by the Americans but fairly general in active service.

 

 The TBM Avenger takes the prize for Fugly in my books but it's designed to drop torpedoes.. and always looks underpowered ..Nev

 

 

[bexrbetter]

If what I've read is correct, the Hellcat had the highest kill ratio in WW2, followed by the F4U.Maybe we need to define how we determine "best".

Yup, took 3/4s of all Allied Pacific Theater kills. The Hellcat was also an accurate bomber to boot.

 

If not for the Hellcat, not the Spitfire, you guys might be drinking Fosters Sake today.

 

Not sure why you guys are going on looks, these are planes for the purpose of destruction, and only factually how they fulfilled their purpose should matter.

 

I love the Hellcat look anyway, as mentioned, I'm a fastback man, and they don't get much more fastback than a Hellcat.

 

 

(You can like pregnant ducks like the Hellcat if you like... I'll stick with the classical beauty of the Spit...!)  

You seem to be mistaking musclular brawn for other.

 

But it's ok, it's 2018 and men admitting to a more feminine sway is now completely acceptable. Mostly.

 

 

[Marty_d]

Yes, some of the Russian aircraft were very functional, but sooooo ugly.

Yak 3 isn't too ugly.

 

 

[M61A1]

The TBM Avenger takes the prize for Fugly in my books

If you think that's ugly have a look at a Grumman Duck!