posted 08-31- 01:50 PM            

In any of the major WWII flight sims out, why would anyone pick to fly the Me-109 for the Luftwaffe? This excludes Battle of Britain scenarios, of course.

I can see why you would choose fighters like the Spitfire, Typhoon, Mustang, Zero, Lightning, or FW-190, but why the 109?

It really baffles me that the Lufwaffe's greatest aces preferred the 109, even when offerred the choice between that plane and the 190!

Thanks for any responses.

posted 08-31- 08:13 PM               

I think Cpt Farrel pretty much has it right.

I personally pick it cause its freaking beautiful. I REALLY like the Emil. But I think my fav would be a blend of parts from the different varients.

posted 09-01- 04:46 PM               

Why is the 109 so great? Well i've just finished reading a book on the subject. All i can conclude is that in its early stages the 109 was the best thing since sliced bread. The only thing i can conclude is that the Me109 was more vastly produced and easier to work with (from the ground staff point of view). As mentioned before it was loved by pilots because it was what they knew...

Its hard to say realy why it was more widely used? Maybe because it was and Me aircraft and willy had earned the reputation and contracts?

I personaly would rather fly a 109 than a 190 as i feel more comfortable (be it more crampt and poorer vision) but it just feels better...maybe this is what the pilots felt?

Also if you think about it the 109 was a better turn fighter than the 190...maybee this is why?

posted 09-01- 06:29 PM               

I also believe (and I can't remember where I read it) that the official German documents of the time refered to the 109 as an "Me" and not a "Bf".

...but I could be wrong

posted 09-01- 08:06 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Colibri:
In any of the major WWII flight sims out, why would anyone pick to fly the Me-109 for the Luftwaffe? This excludes Battle of Britain scenarios, of course.

---

The single biggest reason is a perfect example of paper vs. reality. As you note, the 190 looks like it could eat 109's for breakfast. It's faster, better armed, tougher, better range, etc.

However the answer lies in the question "at what altitude?". Above about 18k the 190 started to fade fast (poor supercharger) but the 109 was good to way up high. As a result there were places where the 109, while perhaps not faster, was far "jauntier". This was very true at the B-17 altitudes around 25k or so. Too bad for them the P-51 was even better!

Now add in better overall handling (yes, aside from roll anyway) and a SUPERB climb rate (at least in the G's and K's, but the earlier ones held their own) and you've got a plane that is all too often in it's element while the 190's are gasping.

posted 09-27- 09:23 AM               

Yes, a lot of Germany's famous fighters aces were 'blooded' on the 109 especially during the Spanish Civil War and the Battle of Britain and many also flew the FW 190 in it's differing variants. From what I've read on the 109 a lot of Luftwaffe pilots who flew both the Messerschmitt Me 109 and the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 favoured the Me 109 and the E (Emil) over the later F,G & K variants with the possible exception of Hans Joachim Marseille who I think amassed the greater share of his kills in the Me 109F4 Trop???.

No matter what the variant the Me 109 was a nimble and smaller, lighter fighter compared to the Hurricane & Spitfire and was fairly evenly matched against both in performance & manouverability and it surpassed both in terms of firepower.

In Sdoe I find flying the Me 109K4 a real buzz and find it a very stable and capable high energy fighter. Even compared to the Spitfire IX, which I think is also a superb fighter, she is a delight to fly and fight with.

------------------
Karaya 2=FC=

posted 09-27- 02:08 PM               

1)The German pilots flew for the whole war. They had several years to accumulate kills (the ones who survived). Allied pilots rotated home.

2) Most of the large German kill numbers were from the Eastern front where inferior but numerous Russian planes made multiple kill sorties common.

posted 09-27- 07:41 PM               

In a large bomber group you might have 20 gunners all shooting at the same EA. When he went down they all thought they had hit him and put in a claim. So the number of "claims" is never a valid number to judge the merits of gun crews, and shouldn't be used to judge their honesty.

posted 09-28- 02:30 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by semmern:
Statistics show that the Germans claimed [b]three times more kills than the Brits really lost![/B]

---

Statistics also show that the Brits grossly overestimated how many German fighters and bombers they shot down. Whe compared to actual German loss figures and recovered wrecks found on British soil, the number of downed German planes claimed was much higher. Fighter Command was actually aware of this discrepancy as the events unfolded but didn't 'correct' this figure as the claimed kills made for better headlines (and British morale at this point in the war needed those headlines). When persons outside Fighter Command asked about the discrepancy, they were told that the majority of the kills claimed had gone down in the channel (!).

posted 09-28- 03:22 PM            

First,itīs a fact that a few german pilot kills so many,but i think this is not so important.Itīs more interesting to see who was the opponent.Was he a rookie or an ace, outnumbered or not and so on.
In the last month of the war many of the german fighter pilots were kids,16 year olds low trained "mens".These kids were drilled by the nazis only to do their job as cannonfodder.
So you can see that is not important to count the kills,this was not a football game,this was war and no friendly match.

posted 09-30- 09:24 PM               

Besides which, the term "kills" should be replaced by the term "victory".If you damage an a/c 2 the point that it must break off the fight and escape, only to crash land and damage the a/c beyond repair (unbeknownst 2 u), u r not awarded a "kill", when in fact u surely did cause the destruction of the other a/c.The term "victory", therefore ,should be used instead as an apt description.If u best your opponent by dmaaging his steed and causing him to run 4 his life, then that may not be regarded as a "kill" per se, but it is definitely a "victory".

Nonetheless, as I mentioned earlier, u can be confident that German victory claims during WW2 were, in fact, more valid than that of their Allied counterparts.So if u want 2 question 'Bubi" Hartmann's claims, u must also question those of the top Allied aces, like 'Johnnie' Johnson, the top Allied ace in the ETO with 38 confirmed "kills", or the claims of other Allied aces like Preddy, or Bong, etc etc.

The fact is that in the decade immediately after WW2, Allied airmen and historians scoffed at German victory claims as being wildly inflated and nothing more but Nazi propoganda.In J. 'Johnnie' Johnson's book about his WW2 experiences, 'Wing Leader', which was published in the early-mid 1950's, he makes derisive statements re: the claims of Luftwaffe pilots.But decades later, even he now admits that, given the "fog of war", Luftwaffe victory claims were as accurate as were humanly possible under the difficult circumstances.

The fact is that generally speaking, LW pilots who went on 2 become 'Experten' flew many more missions than their Allied counterpart - especially when compared 2 their US counterparts.Not only that, but, after the Battle Of Britain, German pilots were generally outnumbered by a decisive factor.As 'Johnnie' Johnson once said, after admitting the validity of German claims, " 'Pips' Priller and I flew over the same stretch of territory for roughly the same amount of time, but he saw many more enemy aircraft than I did.". If u fly more sorties and encounter more enemy a/c, AND u manage 2 survive and become proficient in the art of aerial fighting, than it is a matter of course that u will shhot down more enemy a/c.

It should not be forgotten, also, that most of the huge number of LW victories were made in the East against Russia, especially during the period of 1941-1943 when they faced tens of thousands of generally obsolete a/c, flown by thousands of generally inexperienced and poorly trained Soviet pilots,But "easy" kills in the East became considerably more difficult after mid-1943 when Soviet fighters like the La-5FN and the La-7,the Yak-9 and its lighter, supremely maneuvrable sibling, the Yak-3 came on2 the scene.These a/c were equal if not superior 2 their German counterparts at low-medim altitudes.So get your facts straight be4 u make ridiculous statements that u can't back up.

As 4 the original question as 2 why most LW 'Experten' preferred the Me 109 (though there r notable exceptions), it is quite easy.Whilst the Fw 190 was the superior 'dogfighter', it was a fighter optimised 4 low-medium alt operations.It was not until the Fw 190D series and the Ta 152 that 190's with superior high-alt performance were introduced (especially the Ta 152 H-1), and they were produced in too small a number 2 make any difference.The 109 had superior climb ability which became pronounced above about 18k-20k.It generally had better acceleration and later models of the 109 were faster.It also had far superior performance and handling above 20k, which was vital when fighting Allied a/c like the Spit IX and above, or the P-38, -47, and -51 which all had very good hi-alt performance.

The 190 had an excellent hi-speed ,instantaneous turn, but it bled E very quickly which meant that if a firing solution was not achieved within the first 270 degrees of turn, the 190 pilot would normally have 2 disengage 2 retain speed and E.The 109 had a far superior sustained turn, which although inferior 2 the Spit, was at least equal 2 the Mustang's, and superior 2 the P-47 at all altitudes below about 33-34k.As was mentioned earlier, the centrally placed guns of all 109's from the 'Friedrich' 2 the 'Kurfurst' afforded a concentrated cone of fire, and the lack of wing guns in standard 109's (yes, some 109's used the 20mm under-wing 'gondolas', or gun-packs as optional Rustsatze) meant that pilots did not have 2 worry about gun harmonization as did pilots of fighters with wing mounted armament.This made gunnery considerably easier for newbie pilots.

Some earlier respondants mentioned that that after the Friedrich it wasn't until the 'Kurfurst' that the 109 regained its ascendancy.That is not entirely true.Early model 'Gustavs' had lost some handling ability when compared 2 "Friedrichs" but that was made up by increases in performance.Many G-2's were fitted with GM-1 nitrous-oxide boosting systems which increased high altitude performance, so that many G-2's were able 2 achieve speeds of (TrueAirSpeeds, of course) of 406 mph @ approx. 28k.It is true that the majority of 'Gustavs' built were in fact G-6's or their close siblings, the G-14,and they were generally inferior 2 their Allied counterparts.

However, many 'Gustavs' built in the last 7-8 months of the war in Europe were the superior G-10's.The K-4 was in fact a refined and standardised G-10, and the difference between them in performance were not as large as some may think.Aside from a minority of G-10's that were built with the DB 605AS engine, most G-10's were powered by the DB 605D.Carrying this powerplant and using MW-50 methan-water injection (which was a common combo in later model G-10's), the Me 109G-10 was easily the fastest Gustav of them all, with a speed not too inferior 2 that of the 109K-4.Most sources give the G-10 a top speed of around 428mph (as opposed to 452 mph for the K-4), but there are some sources that state that the DB605D/MW-50 powered G-10's were actually much closer in speed 2 the K-4 than many realise.The designers of "Aces High" supposedly used "official" test data 2 model their late-model Me 109G-10 and the speed of their Gustav is not that far off that of the 'Kurfurst'.

Don't forget that, as Luftwaffe Fw 190A's were attacking Allied bomber formations, it was Me 109's ,particularly Me 109G-10's and K-4's which flew top cover and tangled with the Allied fighter escorts in an effort 2 give the more heavily armed Focke Wulfs a chance 2 destroy their targets unmolested by Mustangs or Thunderbolts.