#1 Piston Fighter was British

On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 00:08:31 -0400, (Peter Stickney)
wrote:

It's worth noting that,
until the introduction of the 2-stage/2-speed Merlin 61 in the Spit
IX, Merlin/SPitfire critical altitudes were dropping as well, from
16,000'+ for the Spit I's Merlin III, , to 13,000' for the Spit II's
Merlin XII, , to 9250' for the Merlin 45 on the Mk V, and, later 3700'
for the cropped supercharger Merlin 45M for the Spit L.F V.
Merlin 45 engined Spit Vs,

I'm not sure this is true for the Merlin XII and Merlin 45, as their
full throttle heights were higher than the Merlin III's. Do you mean
achieving maximum output (horsepower)?

The Spit certainly was an excellent fighter, and it had a lot of
stretch. I do find the claim that "Spitfires were sent after Figters
in the Battle of Britain, and Hurricanes after bombers" a bit dubious.

Apparently this is what Park ordered in one of his tactical
instruction memos issued by 11 Group HQ. The pressures of timing
often prevented it, but Biggin Hill Spitfire units seemed to be
scrambled first to engage 109 escorts towards the end of the battle.

Fighting area attacks were cumbersome and outclassed by the more
flexible Luftwaffe fighter tactics, but they were designed to deal
with unescorted bombers, and as such they were as good a way of any of
organising cumulative attacks on aircraft which would probably survive
a single pass by an eight-gun .303 fighter. Of course, the real
environment was somewhat different from one where the fighters would
have the time to engage in luxuries such as formulaic and cumbersome
approaches to the enemy bombers.

Gavin Bailey

--

"...this level of misinformation suggests some Americans may be
avoiding having an experience of cognitive dissonance."
- 'Poll shows errors in beliefs on Iraq, 9/11'
The Charlotte Observer, 20th June 2003