Spitfire vs BF109

[superyob]

I have always been fascinated by the military hardware of the 2 world wars and beyond, particularly comparisons that pit similar opposing machinery against each other. Upon watching this comparison between the Spitfire and BF109 of 1940, the declaration was that they were evenly matched.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moreRketqek

Without question the Spitfire is one of the most beautiful aeroplanes ever made while the BF109 looks like a meccano set, however that is not a decisive factor.

I want to know which one was superior, thus I am asking which one would you choose to dogfight in and why?

[Legit290]

At what stage of the war? I reckon before the Mk9 id rather be in a Messerschmidt - injected, 20mm cannon, surrounded by my ace mates from Spain

[superyob]

1940, Battle of Britain...

[Tex Scrotum]

Well there's a lot of variables but seeing as you asked (and I love both) it would have to be the Spit only because of it's advantage at low altitudes where I do most of my dream flying 😉

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by Tex Scrotum

Well there's a lot of variables but seeing as you asked (and I love both) it would have to be the Spit only because of it's advantage at low altitudes where I do most of my dream flying 😉

image

Beautiful picture...but it's about to stutter as it starves for fuel because it uses carbies instead of injection and they won't run upside down in a turn like that...

[4vxc]

Spitfire and P-51 would have to be the most beautiful designs as far as fighters go.

[Legit290]

Battle of Britain Bf 109 Emil but I would want to have a drop tank or be over Calais rather than Dover

[davenl5l]

Spitfire for me but then you haven't included the zero

[flooded one]

and they both sound nice flying over

[CoupeKing]

Both equally good. But If I was a pilot in the Battle of Britain I would pick the Spitfire. Least If I had to bail-out, I'm home - and I don't have to run the risk of ditching in the drink or copping a Farmers Hay fork to the chest.

Heck, I'd equip my Air Force with more Messerschmitt's simply because they a slighty more versatile outside of a dog fight - and their armaments were better.

[superyob]

Apparently a pilot was more likely to be severely burnt in a Spitfire because of the fuel tank location. That is a definite negative for me...

But such a beautiful set of wings...

I'll probably start an argument here davenl5l but I think both the Spitfire and BF109 were more than a match for the Zero, which was light and fast but armed with the equivalent of air rifles in comparison to the Browning 303 or 20mm cannon...

[Itsme]

It took quite of few refinements of the spitfire models over a few years to finally match the BF109, I favour the BF109 over the spit.

Both were good fighter planes!

[mcflux]

Despite the controversy of strategic bombing, I'd have flown with my Pa in a Short Sterling:

[Tex Scrotum]

Originally Posted by Ghia5L

Despite the controversy of strategic bombing, I'd have flown with my Pa in a Short Sterling:

image

Ewwww...........Short Stirling!!!

Didn't they like to catch fire or just breakdown at the worst possible times?

For shear payload, I would choose the Lanc everyday of the week, they carried twice the payload of their rivals which made risking your neck a little easier too bear!

[mcflux]

It was certainly inferior to the newer bombers that came out later in the war (payload, armament, ceiling, speed), but it was part of the first wave that Bomber Command used to take the fight back to Nazi Germany.

The only issues that Pa brought up with it were:

* The radios were so bad that basic commands had to be spoken in code. For example, "Left, Left" (said twice) or "Right" (once) in case the static was so bad that the word was indecipherable.

* In an early mission over Holland they copped zero flak nor and run-ins with fighters, and thought they'd gotten away scot-free, but when they returned to base they discovered their rear gunner had died from groundfire - a single bullet or piece of flak shot up through the plane & up his *** :-S

* The pilot in one of their bombers bunny-hopped across the runway once upon landing & stacked into a hedge.

* One of the crewmen "Mikael Ekvalled" himself because he didn't use the john before a long-range mission. They wore full leathers so stripping off wasn't an option until they'd returned to base. How's this for a funny coincidence: I have my Pa's bomber jacket, but the pants are strangely missing.

Also how embarrassment, mis-spelling the name of the aircraft! Short Stirling!

[CoupeKing]

At least you'd go out in style flying a Sterling. You're fate would be similar to a Stuka Pilot that suffers from a severe case of Narcolepsy.

[SB076]

I would go with the Me109 for Battle of Britain, but then I would switch to an FW190. I wouldnt touch a Zero (not knocking it great plane) Mustangs and Spitfires were better later in the war

Best looking plane for me was a Mosquito

[marty351]

Originally Posted by SB076

I would go with the Me109 for Battle of Britain, but then I would switch to an FW190. I wouldnt touch a Zero (not knocking it great plane) Mustangs and Spitfires were better later in the war

Best looking plane for me was a Mosquito

My centemonies as well!
The "wooden wonder", It could dogfight any of it's equivalent planes, and do any other role it was put to task.

My favourite for actual single engine was the JUG.

[Uncle_Ken]

Originally Posted by SB076

I would go with the Me109 for Battle of Britain, but then I would switch to an FW190. I wouldnt touch a Zero (not knocking it great plane) Mustangs and Spitfires were better later in the war

Best looking plane for me was a Mosquito

That's what my father flew (from 1944). Very fast only worried by jets.


UK

[marty351]

Originally Posted by Uncle_Ken

That's what my father flew (from 1944). Very fast only worried by jets.
image

UK

My grandfather serviced the radar units on the night fighter units based at Bristol aerodrome.
Just after the war ended, my father (about 4 years old) remembers crawling up the nose of a mosquito and could smell the cordite and gunpowder along with the high octane petrol.

I don't know why when I immediately saw for the first time a picture of a mosquito,I fell in love with it.
If I had 3 wishes, the first would be to own one.

[Squalo]

If you like a good wartime read and are into the aerial stuff - this one's a ripper. I read it when I was 14.

http://www.amazon.com/Night-Fighter-.../dp/0907579671

[Rockape]

Spitfire for me just love them. Also a big fan of the Me 109. But my fav Fighter of all time would have to be the FW 190. The butcher bird.

[Rockape]

Just thinking about this makes me want to play war thunder

[Legit290]

I have a few plane games. I used to play one online, a playstation 2 game and choose the Boulton Paul Defiant. I would fly super slow then roll on my back and blast them with 4 .303's from the rear gunner. Sweet!

[Bill M]

This is a good read, published in 2012. Good Christmas stocking filler

See more here... http://spitfirevsbf109.com/

[Avanti]

Both have their up's and downs

109's have very turny variants such as the 109E and the 109F but they aren't as heavily armed or as fast as a 109K 4 or 109 G14 but these birds lack manoeuvrability!

Spitfire's on the other hand are great climbers, turny and heavily armed (some variants more so than others) BUT couldn't take as much of a beating, that's why the hurricane was loved by pilots due to it's durability! even though it climbed like a brick

All in all history has already decided the winner ;)


If any of you are interested in a great WW2 Flying sim,

i'd have to suggest aces high 2
very realistic compared to war thunder

http://www.hitechcreations.com/

If any of you decide to give it a go, let me know and I can help you out!

[SB076]

Originally Posted by Avanti

Both have their up's and downs

109's have very turny variants such as the 109E and the 109F but they aren't as heavily armed or as fast as a 109K 4 or 109 G14 but these birds lack manoeuvrability!

Spitfire's on the other hand are great climbers, turny and heavily armed (some variants more so than others) BUT couldn't take as much of a beating, that's why the hurricane was loved by pilots due to it's durability! even though it climbed like a brick

All in all history has already decided the winner ;)


If any of you are interested in a great WW2 Flying sim,

i'd have to suggest aces high 2
very realistic compared to war thunder

http://www.hitechcreations.com/

If any of you decide to give it a go, let me know and I can help you out!

Correct, it comes down to how the pilot flies them, lot of German pilots literally fell asleep whilst flying (to make up for lack of pilots they flew a lot more sorties) Hence the reason German Aces could achieve hundreds of kills (even 352) whilst Allied pilots never had that many

[Avanti]

Originally Posted by SB076

Correct, it comes down to how the pilot flies them, lot of German pilots literally fell asleep whilst flying (to make up for lack of pilots they flew a lot more sorties) Hence the reason German Aces could achieve hundreds of kills (even 352) whilst Allied pilots never had that many

Luftwaffe also had much more bombers to deal with compared to the allies
the Lancaster was pretty much defenceless once the rear gunner was killed and when butcher birds and 109K4's are flying around with 30mm cannons... not much survived the front end of those once they were hit

[jaydee]

Spitty for me, just ask this guy what he thinks, crank up the volume.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QefGfX_IbWY

[eed-250]

I wouldn't want to be flying either in a war, only peace time!

Give me a Do335 so I can get the hell out of there as quick as possible and pray I don't catch fire.