The Air Battle over Normandy

Just like the Fw190 Anton and Bf 109 G6 (When the had fuel) were the mainstay.. your point is?

... is that there is nothing wrong with the IXs engaging K-4s and D-9s since both types were rather common in later 1944. Getit?

... is that there is nothing wrong with the IXs engaging K-4s and D-9s since both types were rather common in later 1944. Getit?

That is the problem though Kurfurst they simply were not that common.

Anyway I have had enough of this pointless debate, the figures speak for themselves the Kurfurst were about as common as the XIV and Tempest, which is to way not very common at all.

That is something I have always maintained as it is a fact.

P.S. Please refrain from giving a negative reputation simply because you disagree with something a poster said, that is an abuse of the tool and quite childish.

Indeed. The G-something/AS variants, as well as the later G-10 (which had the same 605D as the K) were all rated around 560 km/h at SL and 690 km/h at 7500m with MW boost, or roughly 20 km/h slower than the K, but also about a hundred kg lighter. Here's a trial of a G-6/AS w. MW. http://kurfurst.org/Performance_tests/109G_DB-G6AS_wMW/DB_109G6_ASM.html

 

The stopgap /AS ones came into being at around March/April 1944 and were continued to be produced till the end of the war parallel to the K because it did not require retooling the airframe plants.

 

A G-14 would be nice, but I am not sure we are getting it.

There was only 1 Bf109G-6/AS produced (Sept '44). All the other G-6/ASs were conversions from Bf109G-6s.

The Bf109G-14/AS was produced from Sept '44 and there was less of them than the G-14 (1377 vs 2035 + 654 /U4)

Out of the 240 claims by Tempests, 79 were Bf109s and 115 were Fw190s.

@MiloMorai, the OOBs you posted have quite a number of mistakes. They are in principal mostly correct but are off about the dates. I wonder what his sources are.

PS: I will not involve myself in this pointless discussion here, but doing some serious research on the Spitfires in the last weeks I can not yet find trace of more than ~90 Mk XIVs in the wohle RAF/RCAF/Recce in Jan 45.

@MiloMorai, the OOBs you posted have quite a number of mistakes. They are in principal mostly correct but are off about the dates. I wonder what his sources are.

 

PS: I will not involve myself in this pointless discussion here, but doing some serious research on the Spitfires in the last weeks I can not yet find trace of more than ~90 Mk XIVs in the wohle RAF/RCAF/Recce in Jan 45.

So lets do the math...

Normandy Based December 1944

XIV Squadrons:

Squadrons 402, 130, 350, 610, 41,

XIV Fighter Recce Squadrons:

Squadrons 2 and 430

7 Squadrons of ~20 aircraft each so ~140 aircraft in December, with more squadrons being equipped from Jan 1945 to the end.

There were ~1000 XIV built and production was stopped in 1945.

the XIV as far as I can tell (and this isn't by any means authoritative) were only in use in Recce units - and in RAF Service that means they were completely unarmed I suspect.

They simply weren't in use in fighter squadrons, period.

Totally wrong: the Tempests and Spitfire XIVs were fully armed fighters, being used by fighter squadrons: the F.R. XIVs were also fully armed and were used for tactical reconnaissance operations by Tac Recon units; they were just as capable of engaging in combat operations, and often did so.

While the Tempest and XIV squadrons didn't see much combat over Normandy, they were fully operational, integral parts of the RAF

To put that into perspective, in the combat between the USAAF and the Luftwaffe on the 2nd November 1944, on that day alone the LW lost some 130 fighter aircaft. During Bodenplatte they lost some 300 and so on.

What is interesting is that the Allied fighter pilots didn't notice any real difference when the 109K-4s became operational - the Luftwaffe fighters kept going up and they kept being shot down, regardless of whether they were 109G-6s or 109K-4s.

The reason the USAAF's 8th AF shot down more fighters than 2 TAF is simply because all of their fighters (mostly P-51s in November '44) were used in air-interception roles, or they deliberately sought out the German fighters once freed from escorting bombers. That, and the fact that the German fighters were forced to engage heavily escorted bombers, meant that the chances of engaging in aerial combat were far higher for the Americans.

Shores' and Thomas' 2 TAF books give a far more balanced perspective of 2 TAF's combat experiences, than Kurfurst's somewhat limited opinions will ever provide.

I'm enjoying following this thread. I agree that the K4 and the Dora were both in use in late 1944, (I won't say common, but they were there) but since the map we're getting is Normandy, these numbers are irrelevant, as are those for the Tempest and perhaps the XIV. The IX is the only real aircraft that fits the Normandy map, perhaps the P51D as well.

Point is there were no K4s in Normandy.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

So lets do the math...

 

Normandy Based December 1944

 

XIV Squadrons:

 

Squadrons 402, 130, 350, 610, 41,

 

XIV Fighter Recce Squadrons:

 

Squadrons 2 and 430

 

7 Squadrons of ~20 aircraft each so ~140 aircraft in December, with more squadrons being equipped from Jan 1945 to the end.

 

There were ~1000 XIV built and production was stopped in 1945.

Haha you are funny. I even posted of two squadrons flying mixed sorties already. There were also almost no squadrons equipped permanently with 20 aircraft. Ever heard of attrition? Bodenplatte alone cost ten XIVs. For a start you could tell me how many spits 2 and 430 Squadron really had in Jan 45, plus which other types and I will start taking you seriously.

What point are you trying to make here? It is absolutely obvious that the Gustav and Anton were numerically more important, and that there were no K-4’s or D-9’s during D-Day. No amount of number-nitpicking is going to change that. Whether you think that having these aircraft and not Gustavs or Antons is a problem is a matter of taste. If you want historical accuracy you do have a problem. If you want the German side to have more credible opponents – or if you just like D-9’s and K-4’s, like me - then you have no problem. There is no reason why a simulator should be historically accurate, unless it claims historical accuracy. I can fully understand that many would want, or prefer, historical accuracy, and I hope that someday we will see Gustavs and Antons. But we don’t have them now, and to me, that’s the end of it. Of course it is easy for me to say that since I prefer the K-4 and D-9, but that does not alter the fact that these planes are all that we have for the moment.

Haha you are funny. I even posted of two squadrons flying mixed sorties already. There were also almost no squadrons equipped permanently with 20 aircraft. Ever heard of attrition? Bodenplatte alone cost ten XIVs. So reconsider your maths once you know what you are talking about.

Known losses: RM856 (B), RM883 (E), RM833 (E), RM857 (B), RM848 (E)

What were the other 5?

What point are you trying to make here? It is absolutely obvious that the Gustav and Anton were numerically more important, and that there were no K-4’s or D-9’s during D-Day. No amount of number-nitpicking is going to change that. Whether you think that having these aircraft and not Gustavs or Antons is a problem is a matter of taste. If you want historical accuracy you do have a problem. If you want the German side to have more credible opponents – or if you just like D-9’s and K-4’s, like me - then you have no problem. There is no reason why a simulator should be historically accurate, unless it claims historical accuracy. I can fully understand that many would want, or prefer, historical accuracy, and I hope that someday we will see Gustavs and Antons. But we don’t have them now, and to me, that’s the end of it. Of course it is easy for me to say that since I prefer the K-4 and D-9, but that does not alter the fact that these planes are all that we have for the moment.

Unless the (historically inaccurate) presence of the "buffed" Axis aircraft (in game) is used as evidence that the upcoming Spitfire mk.IX is somehow "nerfed", and should really be a mk.XIV... or a mk.22 or a Spiteful or something.

Prior to D-Day, in May, Spitfire Mk XIV operated over England, the Channel and France (which all appears in bounds for the upcoming DCS Normandy Map). For example:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/91_Form541_1May44.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/610-Form541-13May44.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/322-Form541-15May44.jpg

610 Squadron Spitfire Mk XIV upgraded to 150 Octane fuel on 15 July 44 and here they are over France:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/610-Form541-26aug44.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/610-ORB-1sept44.jpg

And, even though used on anti-diver (V1 flying bomb) duties you can see that they also took part in D-Day Operation Overlord missions as well. Just because a squadron was used for anti-diver duties did not mean they sat around doing nothing when another on of the many other 150 Octane Squadrons (Mosquito, Spitfire, Tempest, Mustang) was covering anti-diver duties. As side note, the Spit Mk XIV we are getting with DCS will not be the 25lbs boost version.

These XIV Squadrons were also over France:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/130_Oprep-30Aug44.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/350-ORB-11Sept44.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/350-ORB-11Sept44.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/402-Form541-12Sept44.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/41-OpRep-17Sept44.jpg

So, prior to D-Day and during the following weeks and months of Operation Overlord the Spitfire Mk XIV was very much a player over England, the Channel and France, all areas of operations due to be covered by the upcoming DCS WWII map named 'Normandy'.

Likewise the Hawker Tempest V was not only used over England and the Channel but also over France. On May 21st 1944 a general offensive was laid on against railway systems in France and Belgium; Thunderbolts, Spitfires, Typhoons and Tempests took part.

From 19th May 44 to 1st June 44, there were 3,400 fighter sorties against the railway system. Individual locomotives were destroyed or damaged, as were railway bridges, loco sheds and tracks. All marshalling yards from Paris to Brussels were attacked and razed in the period from April to May 44.

All this before D-Day, let alone after, so lets not hear any more talk of the Spitfire XIV or the Tempest V not having a place on the new map, because they have more of a place on the map than any other WWII aircraft released by DCS to date.

Happy landings,

Kurfürst, we see this argument time and time again, but It doesn't seem like you're getting the point. When you call your game DCS WWII: Europe 1944 your player base is going to expect planes that are most relevant and representative of their airforces IN 1944. So to add powerful end war planes like the K-4 and D-9 that we all know and can all agree are not representative of the Luftwaffe in 1944 would not be fair to the Allies as their aircraft are the workhorses of 1944. Also in combination it is especially unfair to have the allied aircraft running on 1943 power settings. What would then be fair is to add non-representative aircraft or increased power settings for the Allies.

Now before anyone mentions the Mustang in game is not a 1944, you should know that a Mustang in 1944 would be about the same, but excluding the Tail warning radar.

IMO, this would be a proper 1944.

Spitfire Mk LF IXc

P-51D-**, K-14 gunsight + Dorsal fin as field modifications.

P-47D-**, K-14 gunsight + Dorsal fin as field modifications.

Bf-109G-14 or G-10

Fw-190A-8 or A-9

.... so lets not hear any more talk of the Spitfire XIV or the Tempest V not having a place on the new map, because they have more of a place on the map than any other WWII aircraft released by DCS to date.

That's not saying much though, is it? :P

Pre D-Day missions from England to France to take out railway systems and locomotive busting would be a nice mission to do one day in a Spitfire, Tempest, Typhoon, Thunderbolt, Mustang or Mosquito :)

I hope the DCS developers have ideas like this in mind for map mission potential. There could be many happy days ahead :joystick:

Happy landings,

Talisman

Prior to D-Day, in May, Spitfire Mk XIV operated over England, the Channel and France (which all appears in bounds for the upcoming DCS Normandy Map). For example:

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/91_Form541_1May44.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/610-Form541-13May44.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/322-Form541-15May44.jpg

 

610 Squadron Spitfire Mk XIV upgraded to 150 Octane fuel on 15 July 44 and here they are over France:

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/610-Form541-26aug44.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/610-ORB-1sept44.jpg

 

And, even though used on anti-diver (V1 flying bomb) duties you can see that they also took part in D-Day Operation Overlord missions as well. Just because a squadron was used for anti-diver duties did not mean they sat around doing nothing when another on of the many other 150 Octane Squadrons (Mosquito, Spitfire, Tempest, Mustang) was covering anti-diver duties. As side note, the Spit Mk XIV we are getting with DCS will not be the 25lbs boost version.

 

These XIV Squadrons were also over France:

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/130_Oprep-30Aug44.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/350-ORB-11Sept44.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/350-ORB-11Sept44.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/402-Form541-12Sept44.jpg

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/41-OpRep-17Sept44.jpg

 

So, prior to D-Day and during the following weeks and months of Operation Overlord the Spitfire Mk XIV was very much a player over England, the Channel and France, all areas of operations due to be covered by the upcoming DCS WWII map named 'Normandy'.

 

Likewise the Hawker Tempest V was not only used over England and the Channel but also over France. On May 21st 1944 a general offensive was laid on against railway systems in France and Belgium; Thunderbolts, Spitfires, Typhoons and Tempests took part.

From 19th May 44 to 1st June 44, there were 3,400 fighter sorties against the railway system. Individual locomotives were destroyed or damaged, as were railway bridges, loco sheds and tracks. All marshalling yards from Paris to Brussels were attacked and razed in the period from April to May 44.

 

All this before D-Day, let alone after, so lets not hear any more talk of the Spitfire XIV or the Tempest V not having a place on the new map, because they have more of a place on the map than any other WWII aircraft released by DCS to date.

 

Happy landings,

This!

Well said.

It would be lovely if someone could just list Spitfire XIV air to air victories against Luftwaffe manned planes between January -september instead of dubious alternate history snippets from long discredited revisonist sites.

How many K-4 claims of Spit XIVs from Jan to Sept 1944?

It would be lovely if someone could just list Spitfire XIV air to air victories against Luftwaffe manned planes between January -september instead of dubious alternate history snippets from long discredited revisonist sites.

Wouldn't it be lovely if Kurfurst would stop quibbling over properly cited, original documentation, and provide some real data of his own, proving that Spitfire XIVs were not operational over France Jan-Sept 1944.

In fact, it would be even lovelier if Kurfurst would provide some Luftwaffe K-4 combat reports or a list of K-4 air to air victories against 2 TAF, instead of complaining that the Spitfire XIVs and Tempests Vs scored insufficient kills to be considered (In His Humble Opinion) significant. :smilewink:

Although the Spitfire XIVs shot down relatively few manned Luftwaffe aircraft, it wasn't their fault that the Luftwaffe hardly ever turned up to be shot down in the first place! :lol:

I don't see why anyone would go to the trouble to fake historical documents about OOBs and such . . . I have to agree with Friedrich here.

posted from mobile, excuse stupid errors please!

Indeed...blah blah blah...Here's a trial of a G-6/AS w. MW. http://kurfurst.org/Performance_tests/109G_DB-G6AS_wMW/DB_109G6_ASM.html

Kurfurst's link only shows a single page of a 4 page document: The entire document ( Leistungen Me 109 G mit DB 605 AS) can be downloaded as a pdf from WW 2 Aircraft Performance

[ame]http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/VB-109-20-L-43.pdf[/ame]

This is part of a range of 109 G documents,

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/me109g.html

There are also Fw 190D-9 documents

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/fw190d9test.html

Also available are English translations, in HTML, translated by a native German speaker.

Well, when I started this thread, I was hoping it wouldn't descend as usual to this, but I guess it was just wishful thinking that we could have a civilised discussion.

It was inevitable it'd become a war over the XIV and K4 I guess.

Can we not just agree to differ now, and call the subject closed and move on to every other aspect of the Normandy campaign, like what airframes besides the Tempest, XIV, K4 and Dora were or weren't there?

Kurfurst's link only shows a single page of a 4 page document: The entire document ( Leistungen Me 109 G mit DB 605 AS) can be downloaded as a pdf from WW 2 Aircraft Performance

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/VB-109-20-L-43.pdf

Oh, but that's such a primitive lie. Anyone can see they are entirely different reports done on to entirely different aircraft. :D

More than were for the Bf109K-4 from Jan to Sept 1944.:music_whistling:

Is that really so, Milo. I think when you are starting to guess wheter this allagedely operational type even shot down more than one that wasn't even operational yet would mostly settle any questions about the operational 'signficance' of Mark XIV, so how about we adhere Neil's advice of moving from operatally very insignificant planes like the Tempest and XIV to more relevant ones.