109's are well known to be far superior to Spitfire's, in both turn/climb/armament, but most importantly lack of "gayness". Post Battle of Britain, the 190A's that first appeared held a 4-1 kill to death ratio over the RAF, and then once the 109F2/4's came out, they dominated the BarbieFire5's in African theaters.
@GmanSig220 Thats absolute rubbish, Spitfire was well known to turn better, comparing same year aircraft of course. SPit had 2x20mm, 109's after the E usually only had onex20mm. Climb depends on the models you are comparing. A mk IX Spit climbs fater than the 109G6 for instance, but a 109F is better climb than the Spitfire V. Your post is either trolling or you are badly informed.
@Xiolablu3 wtf is rubbish? Does that mean garbage or something? If it does, why not just say GARBAGE instead of some strange obtuse word nobody uses any longer, except the weirdos from the UK. 109's after the E didn't usually have only ONE 20mm, many, MANY variants of the G6, G10, G14, K4 etc had the 30mm not the 20mm, and also the lions share of the defense of the Reich 109's had 20mm gondolas which makes THREE 20mm not just ONE. Spitfires were/are gay, and look at the k/d ratio of Marseiie
Problems with turning ones head around .. show me a modern jet that you can see 360 degrees of view Michell got it right My only dislikes are the carb VS fuel injection which was fixed with a gravity plate to keep it from stalling out on - G forces .. most people said the guns were too small ..yes but it was hard to have thin wings and store ammo This aircraft was a Race plane design turned combat Hard to do even before a war broke out and finsh knowing your dieing of cancer
This pilot doesn't know about design Its hard to add parts into 1 area thats already full Having the Throttle and the landing gear Bunched up in 1 area with Hyd, lines was unwise ..think about if your fuel line gets hit you still have landing gear. Having them in the same area has more chance of losing both ..Not smart if your flying low level dogfights like so many were I do think having 3 or 4 settings for flaps would of made it better But then again you have to change the wing form
Really though, you CAN'T compare a Spitfire with a modern jet fighter, I mean there weren't any around in 1938. Compare its pros & cons with a Gloucester Gladiator, the type that preceded it
And Paul, I hope you're not one of those pansies who flies aircraft of WW2 vintage wearing a non vintage hard helmet. It spoils peoples photographs, magazine features, camcorder footage & their day out
@FireOfEire Two well co-ordinated spitfire will eat a Guns only F16, no problem. People forget that its not just technology. You can only go after one aircraft at a time. So while your doing that, what do you think your going to do about the other one. If they know what they are doing. Those boys will have you. End of story.
I hope you don't mean that. I know that it's more important to go slow than to go fast in a dogfight but it doesn't really count when you can outrun the guy pursuing you, fly high to turn around and shoot him from up top.
@FireOfEire ARe you sure that at slow speeds an F16 can out turn a spitfire?
I think you will find that with a wing that is a higher angle of attack it will turn without stalling at much slower speeds and much tighter radius.
It doesn't quite work like that in the tactics when you have two pursuing you. Also the F16 pilot has to come down onto of what. If he does an immullmen and the spit turns up, the spit can turn harder. he will get him in his sights.
If he hates the wing obscuring his downward view so much, maybe he should climb into the cockpit of an IAR 80/81. The pilot's position is so far back that the wings end up half a meter in front of you... Of course, you then get the teensy problem of almost four meters of nose obscuring the emergent nastiness of the next ten miles or so (usually involving Mustangs, loads and loads of Mustangs), but your side will be clear and you get pretty good vision over the shoulder as well.
Anyone making any criticism of Sq Ldr Days dialogue who ISN'T a pilot and more specifically a war bird experienced pilot, should hush up.
This man is a seasoned veteran and acknowledged expert unaffected by emotion or bias in his appraisal. ALL fighter aircraft of WW2 were flawed in various ways, some worse than others, the least flawed generally were the most successful. Considering the Spit was developed very early in the war it was a remarkable design but did play catch up for a time.
I gather from many of the comments here that many don't know who this man is. This is Squadron Leader Paul Day, universally known as "The Major", formerly the CO of the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight. Although now retired from the RAF, he still regularly flies a Sptifire T.9 at air shows, and one of the highest houred Spitfire pilots in the world today, if not THE highest. In short what this man doesn't know about flying a Spitfire isn't worth knowing!
is it me or does this guy come across as a complete prick?
"as a combat aircraft of it era its pretty good" i should imagine the visability is even more restricted by him looking down his nose all the time to.
@th3sp0rk How's that then? I know this man personally, and can tell you that he loves the Spitfire, if he didn't he wouldn't still fly one at air displays. In this film he is mearly giving an honest viewpoint as a professional pilot, the Spitfire wasn't a perfect aeroplane and does suffer visability problems both forward and downwards (Griffon Spits are indeed worse!). I've been around these machines for the past 8 years, and an honest professional opinion doesn't make Paul a "hater"!
"big trouble": I understand that the Spit is a symbol of British triumph in BoB but I always think it's a pity that the role of the Hurricane is so much underestimated. It bore the burden of the fight and scored more victories than the spit.
Yes, and I think that invalidates his variable-pitch-propeller point, since the MK I did only have a two pitch propeller (I might be wrong, in which case please correct me)
They look vaguely similar, so they must be the same in other words? the mathematical 'pure' elliptical wing was known before then. the he70 and spitfire used the same idea but modified it in their own ways. he70 used anhedral and dihedral, different construction, different wing sections, flaps etc.
109's are well known to be far superior to Spitfire's, in both turn/climb/armament, but most importantly lack of "gayness". Post Battle of Britain, the 190A's that first appeared held a 4-1 kill to death ratio over the RAF, and then once the 109F2/4's came out, they dominated the BarbieFire5's in African theaters.
GmanSig220 5 months ago
@GmanSig220 Thats absolute rubbish, Spitfire was well known to turn better, comparing same year aircraft of course. SPit had 2x20mm, 109's after the E usually only had onex20mm. Climb depends on the models you are comparing. A mk IX Spit climbs fater than the 109G6 for instance, but a 109F is better climb than the Spitfire V. Your post is either trolling or you are badly informed.
Xiolablu3 3 months ago
@Xiolablu3 wtf is rubbish? Does that mean garbage or something? If it does, why not just say GARBAGE instead of some strange obtuse word nobody uses any longer, except the weirdos from the UK. 109's after the E didn't usually have only ONE 20mm, many, MANY variants of the G6, G10, G14, K4 etc had the 30mm not the 20mm, and also the lions share of the defense of the Reich 109's had 20mm gondolas which makes THREE 20mm not just ONE. Spitfires were/are gay, and look at the k/d ratio of Marseiie
GmanSig220 3 months ago
What a scup piper
toonsis 7 months ago
The spitfires nose didnt help... On landing they'd have to turn left and right to see where they were going
Olinolan190 7 months ago
@Olinolan190 this is pilot you should perhaps listen his word's
OSI821 6 months ago
@Olinolan190 thats the same with all tail dragging single engine prop aircraft.
stephenpprice 4 months ago
Problems with turning ones head around .. show me a modern jet that you can see 360 degrees of view Michell got it right My only dislikes are the carb VS fuel injection which was fixed with a gravity plate to keep it from stalling out on - G forces .. most people said the guns were too small ..yes but it was hard to have thin wings and store ammo This aircraft was a Race plane design turned combat Hard to do even before a war broke out and finsh knowing your dieing of cancer
freakyflow 7 months ago
This pilot doesn't know about design Its hard to add parts into 1 area thats already full Having the Throttle and the landing gear Bunched up in 1 area with Hyd, lines was unwise ..think about if your fuel line gets hit you still have landing gear. Having them in the same area has more chance of losing both ..Not smart if your flying low level dogfights like so many were I do think having 3 or 4 settings for flaps would of made it better But then again you have to change the wing form
freakyflow 7 months ago
has he got anything good to say, its a 40s fighter ,jerk
jive091 10 months ago
Really though, you CAN'T compare a Spitfire with a modern jet fighter, I mean there weren't any around in 1938. Compare its pros & cons with a Gloucester Gladiator, the type that preceded it
And Paul, I hope you're not one of those pansies who flies aircraft of WW2 vintage wearing a non vintage hard helmet. It spoils peoples photographs, magazine features, camcorder footage & their day out
Poopingbotham 1 year ago
This guy only describes the negative points of the Spitfire.
9MinamiKe6 1 year ago
Wouldn't you just like to jump an F16 into a WW2 dogfight with a timemachine.
FireOfEire 1 year ago
@FireOfEire Two well co-ordinated spitfire will eat a Guns only F16, no problem. People forget that its not just technology. You can only go after one aircraft at a time. So while your doing that, what do you think your going to do about the other one. If they know what they are doing. Those boys will have you. End of story.
gmanzeroalpha 10 months ago
@gmanzeroalpha
I hope you don't mean that. I know that it's more important to go slow than to go fast in a dogfight but it doesn't really count when you can outrun the guy pursuing you, fly high to turn around and shoot him from up top.
FireOfEire 10 months ago
@FireOfEire ARe you sure that at slow speeds an F16 can out turn a spitfire?
I think you will find that with a wing that is a higher angle of attack it will turn without stalling at much slower speeds and much tighter radius.
It doesn't quite work like that in the tactics when you have two pursuing you. Also the F16 pilot has to come down onto of what. If he does an immullmen and the spit turns up, the spit can turn harder. he will get him in his sights.
gmanzeroalpha 10 months ago
This man has no soul. FUCKING LOVE IT
hunterhalo2 1 year ago
If he hates the wing obscuring his downward view so much, maybe he should climb into the cockpit of an IAR 80/81. The pilot's position is so far back that the wings end up half a meter in front of you... Of course, you then get the teensy problem of almost four meters of nose obscuring the emergent nastiness of the next ten miles or so (usually involving Mustangs, loads and loads of Mustangs), but your side will be clear and you get pretty good vision over the shoulder as well.
wingsofwrath 1 year ago
Anyone making any criticism of Sq Ldr Days dialogue who ISN'T a pilot and more specifically a war bird experienced pilot, should hush up.
This man is a seasoned veteran and acknowledged expert unaffected by emotion or bias in his appraisal. ALL fighter aircraft of WW2 were flawed in various ways, some worse than others, the least flawed generally were the most successful. Considering the Spit was developed very early in the war it was a remarkable design but did play catch up for a time.
turboslag 1 year ago
... and it comes with that tea cup holder, which the Bf 109 is severely lacking, therefore, the british can fight at four o clock. alles gute!
czwij 1 year ago
he is just being objective
brokristian 1 year ago
I gather from many of the comments here that many don't know who this man is. This is Squadron Leader Paul Day, universally known as "The Major", formerly the CO of the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight. Although now retired from the RAF, he still regularly flies a Sptifire T.9 at air shows, and one of the highest houred Spitfire pilots in the world today, if not THE highest. In short what this man doesn't know about flying a Spitfire isn't worth knowing!
planejunky 1 year ago
what a snob that plane helped win a war this pompus ass needs to remember where his airforce heritage came from.
19thSFGA 1 year ago
is it me or does this guy come across as a complete prick?
"as a combat aircraft of it era its pretty good" i should imagine the visability is even more restricted by him looking down his nose all the time to.
daveymojo 1 year ago
Comment removed
daveymojo 1 year ago
what a negative guy...
DCDUBHH 1 year ago
@DCDUBHH He's just Honest...
06paull 1 year ago
Jesus - he is comparing it to MODERN fighters, and consequently pointing out its weaknesses.
Therefore it's ok, and you guys should at least try to think before you post(such BS).
TheSchaufelberger 1 year ago
Hes a hater
th3sp0rk 1 year ago
@th3sp0rk If he's a hater why the hell does he fly Spitfires?
TopGunSGA 1 year ago
@th3sp0rk How's that then? I know this man personally, and can tell you that he loves the Spitfire, if he didn't he wouldn't still fly one at air displays. In this film he is mearly giving an honest viewpoint as a professional pilot, the Spitfire wasn't a perfect aeroplane and does suffer visability problems both forward and downwards (Griffon Spits are indeed worse!). I've been around these machines for the past 8 years, and an honest professional opinion doesn't make Paul a "hater"!
planejunky 1 year ago
@planejunky Yes, I know. I was just joking around. This guy is pretty awesome.
th3sp0rk 1 year ago
Really idiot pilot..
vexxi1 1 year ago
@vexxi1
How so?
TopGunSGA 1 year ago
"big trouble": I understand that the Spit is a symbol of British triumph in BoB but I always think it's a pity that the role of the Hurricane is so much underestimated. It bore the burden of the fight and scored more victories than the spit.
13Filmrisse 2 years ago
The narrator states that it's a Mk I when in fact it's a Mk II
TopGunSGA 2 years ago
Yes, and I think that invalidates his variable-pitch-propeller point, since the MK I did only have a two pitch propeller (I might be wrong, in which case please correct me)
MesserschmittBf109g6 2 years ago
The early production Mk Is had the two pitch prop but the later Mk Is had the variable-pitch-prop
TopGunSGA 2 years ago
Oh, so the ones used during the battle of Britain were variable-pitch?
MesserschmittBf109g6 2 years ago
Yeah by the summer of 1940 they had they variable-pitch
TopGunSGA 2 years ago
Lol...*he said "make-up mirror"
harpoon1541 2 years ago
brits are english speaking germans. lol. great people.
Rico8458 2 years ago
What show is this?and do they have any other videos besides the spit and 109
Flyingazzmunky 2 years ago
1990-sept TV show I have it...
terryjohn 2 years ago
What a dry-shite!
gmanpower21 2 years ago
search Heinkel 70 ;-)
radick09 2 years ago
They look vaguely similar, so they must be the same in other words? the mathematical 'pure' elliptical wing was known before then. the he70 and spitfire used the same idea but modified it in their own ways. he70 used anhedral and dihedral, different construction, different wing sections, flaps etc.
UKChris012 2 years ago
the wing is from germany
radick09 2 years ago
perfect english pronunciacion, sir.
meschio 2 years ago