13 Spitfires in the sky not too far from Sheffield

[beechnut]

But it's not as simple as that. Hitler's eastern campaign tied up 75% of german manpower. Therefore we resisted a wholly lesser german force just in the air. The russians took the brunt...

In 1939-40? Edited August 16, 2015 by beechnut

[drummonds]

During/before the war I meant, I believe Ambrose Shardlows or one of the other large steel works down Attercliffe produced and finished them so it would have been nice to give us a fly over

 

i'm pretty sure that during the battle of britain shardlow was the only supplier of merling crankshafts. the production method was very specialised and required a flat forging which then had the crankpins bent to make a v12.

 

there are around 500 merlins currently in use. most were made in the usa or canada and when the uk scrapped its spitfires the usa sold its mustangs to private flyers along with the spare engines.

 

most spitfire airframes have virtually no original parts and have been totally recreated around a chassis plate. the engines on the other hand are continuously rebuilt using many original parts usually from canadian stock at bristol engines.

Edited August 16, 2015 by drummonds

[hillsbro]

In 1939-40?

Yes, beechnut, you were clearly referring to the early part of the war in your post. If we hadn't resisted the Germans in 1940 we would have become another occupied country, at least until Hitler bit off more than he could chew by invading Russia in the summer of 1941, and the USA entered the fray a few months later. The Spitfire, Hurricane etc. were (as things turned out) instrumental in maintaining our independence. Edited August 16, 2015 by hillsbro

[Event Horizo]

Yes, beechnut, you were clearly referring to the early part of the war in your post. If we hadn't resisted the Germans in 1940 we would have become another occupied country,

 

No the limited fuel range of the 109's saw to the defeat of the air campaign. External fuel pods on 109's would have seen the he111's and Do's with huge fighter escorts over our cities. Hurricanes and spits would have been overwhelmed

Edited August 16, 2015 by Event Horizo

[beechnut]

No the limited fuel range of the 109's saw to the defeat of the air campaign...

So having got the history wrong, you now turn to the range of the 109's. The 109's actually had better fire power than our fighters, but apart from faster fefuelling and rearming, the RAF pilots had (1) faster fighters, (2) the psychological advantage of defending their homeland and (3) radar assistance. But the subject of the thread is a commemorative display of Spitfires, and there can be no denying that the Spitfire played a big part in defending the country in 1940.

[hillsbro]

... the Spitfire played a big part in defending the country in 1940.

I think we can all agree on that!.. My cousin tells me that he saw a single Spitfire flying over his home near Grantham on Friday. Perhaps this was one of the planes on its way "home".

[NERVY-OWL]

No the limited fuel range of the 109's saw to the defeat of the air campaign. External fuel pods on 109's would have seen the he111's and Do's with huge fighter escorts over our cities. Hurricanes and spits would have been overwhelmed

 

maybe but if we hadn't bothered with radar we would most likely of lost. more fool them for not fitting them, even without being able to have fighter escorts all the way the the odds were massively against the spitfires/hurricanes defending us.

[Scozzie]

Ah, that what it must have been.

I was cursing them due to a hangover. The sound seemed to go on for ever

[drummonds]

So having got the history wrong, you now turn to the range of the 109's. The 109's actually had better fire power than our fighters, but apart from faster fefuelling and rearming, the RAF pilots had (1) faster fighters, (2) the psychological advantage of defending their homeland and (3) radar assistance. But the subject of the thread is a commemorative display of Spitfires, and there can be no denying that the Spitfire played a big part in defending the country in 1940.

 

in addition during early 1940 100 octane fuel was available to the raf. it allowed supercharger pressure to be increased from 6.5lbs to 12 lbs and power increased to 1350 bhp. combined with constant speed propellors the spitfire was superior at all altitudes when compared to the messerschmitt. the spitfire also carried rather more pilot armour which did quite a lot to prevent losses.

 

during the battle of britain a messerschmitt was probably rated at little more than 1000 bhp.

[NERVY-OWL]

in addition during early 1940 100 octane fuel was available to the raf. it allowed supercharger pressure to be increased from 6.5lbs to 12 lbs and power increased to 1350 bhp. combined with constant speed propellors the spitfire was superior at all altitudes when compared to the messerschmitt. the spitfire also carried rather more pilot armour which did quite a lot to prevent losses.

 

during the battle of britain a messerschmitt was probably rated at little more than 1000 bhp.

 

suppose it depends what you prefer. spitfires had far more speed and manouverability where as the 109 had better weapons. i watched the guy martin progamme about the spitfire and was surprised to learn they only had around 12 seconds worth of ammo before they ran out, makes it even more impressive what the achieved