Useless comparison, because the styles of combat were so vastly different between the Western and Eastern fronts. Cases in point:

– Hans Phillip. He was a master of Eastern Front combat, downing nearly 200 aircraft before being posted as Kommodore of JG 1 in the spring of 1943. He managed to reach 208 victories before being shot down and killed just a few months later (October 1943).

– Kurt Brandle. Another highly experienced Ostfront fighter, he was posted as the Kommandeur of II./JG 3, but shot down and killed by Spitfires on 3 November 1943, not long after being transferred from the Eastern Front.

– Siegfried Schnell. He was a “Spitfire expert”, downing over 49 Spitfires between 1940 and 1944 with JG 2. He was transferred to the Eastern Front on 11 November 1944 to take over IV./JG 54, and was shot down and killed within two weeks.

What worked in one theatre did NOT work in another.

Lynn

The Stuka is more accurate, but it’s biggest failing is that it required complete German air superiority to be effective. The Il-2 could fight it’s way in and out, at least with more hope of survival than the Stuka.

It’s the difference between a dagger and a club, really… the dagger will always be more effective, but will only work in a certain set of circumstances. The club, however, can be swung from a distance and will certainly achieve the desired results if applied forcefully enough. That seems to sum it up pretty well.

Lynn

No indeed. As a design, the 109 is fundamentally flawed and wasn’t really suited to further development. It probably would have been superceded as a front line type had the war not started in 1939. I wonder why the type wasn’t dropped as the FW190 came on stream and the resources pushed at that and other types – the continuing need to produce large numbers of machines presumably as the war position became more and more desperate for the Germans.

No more flawed than the Spitfire, being the same basic configuration. The aircraft had reached the end of it’s development life in it’s current configuration by mid-1943 with the G-6/AS and G-14/AS; note that the K retained the same exact configuration, with only minor internal equipment arrangement differences (and of course more horsepower). To put it in parallel with the Spitfire, the Mark IX would probably be a close equal in terms of development; note that the Mk XIV retained only the basic fuselage and horizontal stabilizer form from the earlier Spit models, with a completely different engine, wing, and vertical stabilizer designed to cope with the gobs of torque produced by that massive Griffon.

The 109 was the finest fighter in the world through early 1943, with the development peaking with the G-2… only the Mark 21 Zero would have a legitimate claim for equal greatness in the same time period. Every 109 model afterwards was a reactive development rather than proactive, including the /AS models. The basic G-6 was a step backwards in many ways, sacrificing manouverability and performance for firepower, and the K-4, while a very capable aircraft, still lacked a number of features which were considered standard on Allied combat aircraft at that time, including cockpit adjustable aileron and rudder trim, gyro-stabilized gunsights, and much more reliable all-weather capability. Credit the Allied bombing campaign for creating such a pressure-cooker environment that Messerschmitt and it’s various satellite factories were forbidden to explore any significant developments as it might interfere with production of the current models.

The 190 was a fine aircraft as well, but the BMW 801 crapped out above 18,000 feet or so… lots of work took place to try and rectify this through the war, but it wasn’t until the lashed-up D-9 entered service that the 190 got any kind of decent high-altitude performance.

Welcome back Jules, glad to hear you’re on the mend… I also have no questions, but just wanted to thank you for being available to answer our questions, and wish you a Happy New Year! 🙂

Lynn

Nice shots! I didn’t realize they had a CR.32 in any fashion… that’s quite a spectacular piece. And I have to say, that Triplata (the Hispano-engined 109) is one of the sexiest versions of the 109 out there… yet it’s completely ignored in model form, what a pity!

Thanks for the photos-

Lynn

Thanks for the insight, Mark V… it’s genuinely appreciated. In your experience, how involved are owners during the painting process, once the bird is actually in the shop? I seem to recall from threads here on the board that SX336 had quite a bit of hands-on involvement during the finishing stages of her restoration, and the results were nothing short of stunning; is this level of attention not the norm?

Thanks again,

Lynn

Thanks for that Fluffy, and if that’s the gloss black Spitty, that’s gonna be dead sexy when it’s done! (And AUTHENTIC! :diablo: :diablo: :diablo: )

Cheers, and Merry Christmas!

I’m sure it’ll be wicked to see airborne, especially in a tailchase with a Spitfire, but it’s awfully disheartening to see that the aircraft’s painter graduated (with honors, no less!) from the Jerry Bruckheimer School for the Historically Challenged.

One would think that out of NINETEEN THOUSAND AIRCRAFT, they could pick at least one attractive and historically accurate scheme… **sigh**

But, it’s his plane and his money, after all.