Why Did America Use British Spitfires? The Full Story
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 30 พ.ค. 2024
- The legendary Spitfire has become synonymous with the RAF, and all things British, but they of course were not the sole operators of the aircraft during the Second World War. The US, being close allies, also made use of the aircraft, although use that is admittedly underreported on. Here is the story of Americans in the seat of the British legend.
Consider supporting us on Patreon: / aviationdeepdive
Join our Discord community: / discord
Donations to support the channel: www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted...
Sources:
www.spitfires.com/post/americ...
www.iwm.org.uk/history/9-icon...
britain#:~:text=The%20Spitfire%20entered%20service%20with,of%20230%20of%20
their%20own
theaviationgeekclub.com/the-d...
asked-reich-marshal-hermann-goering-a-squadron-of-spitfires/
www.rafmuseum.org.uk/research...
britain/battle-of-the-
nations/#:~:text=303%20Squadron%2C%20was%20one%20of,in%20the%20Battle
%20of%20Britain.
www.americanairmuseum.com/arc...
www.americanairmuseum.com/arc...
aircrewremembered.com/smith-r...
aircrewremembered.com/brettel...
www.londonremembers.com/subje...
www.americanairmuseum.com/arc...
www.americanairmuseum.com/arc...
www.markhillier.net/to-war-in...
www.airuniversity.af.edu/News...
tradition-carries-on-through-third-aviator/
weaponsandwarfare.com/2019/04...
ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads...
325th-fg-aircraft-of-the-aces-gb.30302/
www.kenleyrevival.org/content...
spitfires-over-dieppe-the-308th-fighter-squadron-at-raf-kenley
www.goodwood.com/flying/lates...
warisboring.com/americas-
spitfires/#:~:text=The%20American%20Spitfire%20pilots%20were,American%20land
ings%20at%20Salerno%2C%20Italy
www.ghostbombers.com/JG2/52FG...
www.key.aero/article/white-st... - ภาพยนตร์และแอนิเมชัน
![[TH] VCT Pacific Stage 2 - Week 4 Day 3 // GEN vs TS | PRX vs ZETA](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nspkjQuZve0/mqdefault.jpg)
Feel free to join our Discord community! - discord.gg/WCevgcufwJ
Consider supporting us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/AviationDeepDive
Not unlike underreporting of US aircraft with Coastal Command.
if Northern France counts as Northern Europe, then anything South of Pyrenees, Alps and Danube is North-Africa.
@@nickdanger3802 who did that Nick ?we paid for the Coastal Command planes and the 200 spitfires were given to you free of charge Nick
@@nickdanger3802 These are what you sold to Coastal Command
US
Catalina 322
B24 368
Avenger 69
Hudson 736
Ventura 30
B17 30
Total 1555 Brit 2602
Sold Nick NOT GIVEN
The Spitfire's contributions to U.S. airpower are acknowledged at the National Museum of the Air Force in Dayton, Ohio and several examples are on display. We Buckeyes haven't forgotten. I personally love PRU blue and have a model of the recce version waiting to be built on the bench.
Greatest museum ever.
The Smithsonian has the only mkVII.
@@SvenTviking fastest Spit fighter of them all. 426+ mph. Not sure how much faster it was with 150 octane. Not bad for a 1935 design.
@@bobsakamanos4469 Fastest was the Mk XIV 448 mph@26000ft Source Mike Spick Fighters
@@jacktattis Sorry, I should have said fastest production Merlin Spitfire.
"joyless jackbooted opponents"
Reminds me of the Mitchell and webb comedy sketch. "Hans, are we the baddies!"
Anyway, great video as always.
Won't lie, first time I saw a Spitfire with the American star on the side, it made my mind hiccup and I had to go look. Fortunately, it was at the USAF museum in Dayton, so there was plenty of data. It was parked near a Mustang and a Warhawk in RAF rondels.
A nice show of technical exchange between the Allies
The US acquired over 600 Spitfires.
@@bobsakamanos4469 and not charged a penny
And is marked as 31st FG!
My grandfather flew as a B-17 tailgunner with the Eighth Air Force, during it's early days of operations in the autumn of 1942. The one story he told me that stands out is during one mission, a Luftwaffe fighter was closing in on his plane. Suddenly a USAAF Spitfire zoomed in and chased the German away.
The 52nd Fighter Group flew P39s in the US. They were shipped across the Atlantic to Belfast, Northern Ireland, and moved by truck to RAF Eglinton near Londonderry on the shores of Lough Foyle. The Fighter Group was based at Eglinton and it's satellite airfield at Maydown. They flew Miles Magisters before converting to Spitfires. They flew 6 combat convoy escort patrols (90 sorties) before being moved to England. The 52nd FG was deployed to North Africa (Operation Torch), then Sicily and eventually Corsica. It was whilst based in Corsica, they converted to Mustangs. The 52nd FG was followed at Eglinton by the 82nd FG which were equipped with P38 Lightnings. Those came from the Boeing Overseas Corporation facility at Langford Lodge on the shores of Lough Neagh. Eglinton and Maydown were transferred to the Royal Navy in May 1943. The bases were then used to fly aircraft on/off the escort carriers in the Battle of the Atlantic. The US Navy Base 1 Europe was at Londonderry.
Guinness sales went through the roof !
The Spitfire has to be one of the most beautifully designed and iconic aircraft of all time. I do love the Hurricane, if flown well it could take on and defeat Bf 109E types. Was actually more maneuverable than the 109, could absorb more battle damage than a Spitfire. Hurricane was a steadier gun platform and the wide track undercarriage made it able to utilize rougher airfields. God save the RAF and the pilots who flew them!
Lots of partial facts and half truths there.
The Hurricane's only advantage against the LW fighters was turning radius at low level. The germans didn't normally play that game until forced by Goering to stay with bombers. In all other performance metrics, the Hurricane underperformed... speed, climb, acceleration, roll rate and especially dive (dive limit was only 390 mph). It was also a fire trap and more vulnerable than the Spitfire.
A US Army Airforce pilot named Fred Ohr flew a Spitfire in WW2 and he shared his experience, and it is on youtube. He survived despite the Spitfire's prop hitting ocean because the prop broke partially only because it was made of wood.
In the video he talks about flying a Spitfire in bad weather, over ocean, hunting for enemy boat to strafe. The weather was bad, with 100 feet ceiling, over ocean. There were large, huge waves and he flew between tops of the huge waves to sneak up on an enemy boat to strafe.
He did that successfully a few times while attacking a boat. He got kinda cocky and his Spitfire prop hit the ocean water.
He wasn't sucked into the ocean because the Spitfire's wooden prop blade broke off partially and he was able to return to base alive. But the Spitfire's engine was totalled.
The Korean American pilot, Fred Ohr, was born on July 15, 1919, in Oregon to Korean immigrants Wanda and Wan Ju, and grew up on a farm in the Boise, Idaho, basin. You may think, wait an ethnic Asian man flew a fighter for US Army Air Force in WW2? Yes. True story.
You can go to youtube at watch?v=OBPEBqrZOzg&list=PLOYR_5-_Drr80b7sZ2TVksYTwsMVEAc70&index=4 and jump to 1:56 time to watch him share his experience flying a Spitfire over the Mediterranean ocean in WW2.
You can also get to the video by searching for "81fg fred ohr 04" in TH-cam search. 81fg is an RC plane club in S. Korea who reuploaded the video. His testimony about flying Spitfire is in video 4 of the 5 videos uploaded.
The video was originally done by a high school student in Indiana, USA as a high school project around 2012 - 2013. The interview is broken up into 5 videos and uploaded to youtube.
His story is incredible. I encourage all to watch all 5 videos.
Good share.
Fyi, High Ercall is pronounced High Arkle. My father flew Spitfires in Italy for the RAF, and he had the opposite happen to him, he was a Brit awarded the American DFC.
As a warbird buff I can say with confidence that most warbird aficionados have high praise for the Spitfire as well as the Mosquito and Hurricane. In spite of my research I have found too little information on British planes wearing the stars and bars.
Stars and bars is the Confederate flag.
Yesterday's Air Force: Reverse Lend Lease
th-cam.com/video/6BjJt_hVKmM/w-d-xo.html
Another well-chosen topic, well written and produced. Thanks to all involved!!
Thanks again!
I had no idea that so many Spitfires flew with USAAF markings and crews and populated so many squadrons. Very unsung indeed!
I expect the yanks will get all the credit for winning the war as usual but the English don’t care we know the truth
@@philipwelsh1862 “Now at this very moment I knew that the United States was in the war, up to the neck and in to the death. So we had won after all! ... How long the war would last or in what fashion it would end no man could tell, nor did I at this moment care ... We should not be wiped out. Our history would not come to an end ... Hitler's fate was sealed. Mussolini's fate was sealed. As for the Japanese, they would be ground to a powder. All the rest was merely the proper application of overwhelming force.” ― Winston S. Churchill
Oh yes the USAAF did not want to have too many comparisons of the Spitfire to the US planes AND it was kept quiet just how good the Spitfire was
I have read that some Americans were switched from Spitfires to P-47s... and their pilots were none too happy at first. Although the P-47 is a good plane, it is certainly not as nimble as the Spit. I imagine the transition involved a lot of learning new tactics (and certainly a lot of profanity was uttered).
@@jfess1911 They adapted well but never forgot how great it was flying the Spitfire Sources Irving Miller ex Eagle sqn
I found that this documentary taught me a couple of things and that is I never knew that the U.S, military were using the British SpitFire and being used by the navy a well.I have read numerous history books and not one of them mention it.Thank you for posting!!!
Very informative!
The British flag on the map at 18:30 shows gives the impression that the Commonwealth were far back in eastern Libya but were actually on the western border whilst Algeria just shows an American flag but that allied force was both American and the British 1st Army.
The French had already been beaten by an under sized Commonwealth force in the Syrian campaign, including cavalry on both sides, which was hard fought over June and July 1941 until the French surrendered and most of them chose to return to France rather than join the Free French. The French Air Force in Syria was defeated and the French navy driven off or torpedoed by Royal Navy submarines and Swordfish torpedo bombers plus surface actions.
The was every reason to expect a strong French defence against the invasion of North Africa. Similarly the Commonwealth invasion of Madagascar from May to November 1942 took seven months to finally defeat all French resistance.
Yes a friend of mines father was there. Part of a Band of Brothers that makes the US Airborne seem babies in comparison
@@johnfisk811 During Torch Allied tried initially to keep British at back, and show Americans on front everywhere possible. For good reason. British back stabbing and m***er of French navy sailors in 1940 wasnt forgetten. Allied knew very well that French units might fight against Brits to death, but surrender to Americans.
Best aviation history channel on TH-cam!
I will become a patron in a couple of months, need to move first.
That's very kind, that means a lot!
Very Informative
The Spitfire was unfairly credited with saving Britain during the blitz, whereas in actuality, the Hawker Hurricane performed the vast majority of the heavy lifting. This takes nothing away from the Spitfire, it is simply a matter of established fact.
Also, the Hurricane was the reason that the British didn't fought that battle in gladiators, since the british air ministry were so hard heads and didn't want to change from biplanes to monoplanes
@@ricardobeltranmonribot3182have you any actual research or are you just repeating bullshit? The Air Ministry wanted 8machine guns in a future fighter before the 4 gun Gladiator had entered service. They also wanted more fire power than the 0.303in Vickers before tge Epitfire or Hurricane had been selected. They tested Browning 0.303in and 5in, the Vickers 0.303in and 0.50in, and the Hispano 20mm. The 20mm automation was selected even though it had many faults. They also supported tge development of radar and stopped Handley Page from developing and building the 2-engined HP.56 with RR Vultures and instead got them to build the 4-engined Halifax, just because they had doubts about the Vulture engine and didn't want all of the main bomber force to be grounded with engine problems.hardly the actions of short-sighted fools and block heads.
@ricardobeltranmonribot3182 yeah, I find it interesting that they made a video on Americans using the spitfire....barely. but we don't see any videos on all the American equipment the Britts used because their doctrine, concepts, purse strings and poor manufacturing let the brave british fighting man down. P40s, corsair, Shermans, the list is very long.
BoB was won by the best air defence system in the world, aircraft were just the tip of a spear. Any aircraft.
And yes, Hurricane's part in it is undervalued.
@ricardobeltranmonribot3182 20mm cannon selected in 1937 although in need of serious development at the time of selection. HP.56 cancelled over doubts about the engines giving us the HP.57 Halifax, which time proved correct. Development of radar. 3 decisions made by the Air Ministry that showed foresight.
What is often understated but is a fact is that the later post 1940 Spitfires in good condition and with decent pilots were able to outfight the Zero being faster heavier armed and armoured and more agile though the Zero even in 1945 could outmanoeuvre any US carrier fighter and that Seafires were regarded as the best point defence fighters available in the Pacific
Source ?
@@nickdanger3802 This may answer you Nick This is from Eric Brown "Wings of the Navy" page 144 and in reference to the Seafire. And I quote " there were undoubtedly pluses and Minuses ,but the Fleet Air Arm owes the Seafire an enormous debt of gratitude because it gave the Royal Navy's intake of young wartime pilots the experience of the best that there was--- an incalculable morale booster at at a critical moment in World War II end quote
Now it was NOT Browns favourite that was the Wildcat but he tested every allied seaplane of WW2
Brilliant documentary
'Shouts of 'Achung Spitfeuer' only exist in Hollywood films. The main RAF fighter during the Battle of Britain was the Hurricane. The average battle life expectancy of the pilots was 6 weeks, they worked 16 hour shifts and were often outnumbered in the air by 25:1.
The average life expectancy of replacement pilots was a few days, since the OTU's at that time did not train them very well and the Op Sqn thrust them straight into battle. Very sad war preparation by the Brits and the Hurricane was outdated to boot.
@@bobsakamanos4469Hurricane “outdated to boot” fortunately the RAF Polish 303 squadron knew better and blasted Me109E out of the sky during the Battle of Britain. Do some research. Between 1939 and mid 1940 the British started using 100 octane fuel and constant speed variable pitch propeller which gave both the Spitfires and Hurricanes a significant boost in power and maximum speed. A 1940 Hurricane was 25mph faster than a 1939 model.
@@neilbone9490 yup, I don't disagree with the evolution of the Merlin, fuel and DeHavilland props. Hawker on the other hand sat on their ass for years without upgrading the Hurricane aerodynamics, except for joining the modern world and covered wings with aluminium vs WWI fabric. It still couldn't dive at 400 mph, so they couldn't outdive or out run the 110's.
Ref the Poles' efforts, had the LW not changed targets and shackled their 110s & 109s to the bombers, the Poles wouldn't have lasted as long as they did. Also, had the RAF not been fighting over their own land, attrition of pilots would have ended the battle by mid August.
@@bobsakamanos4469 That is because they could not, not because they did not want to. The design of the Spitfire allowed for further upgrade of the engine with relative ease, the design of the Hurricane did not. it would have required extensive redesign to the nose section of the aircraft and it was considered better to simply replace the Hurricane over time with Spitfire as production ramped up and relegate the Hurricane to ground attack.
The fact is the hurricane was an aircraft design and built on older technology than the Spitfire, and it showed in the relatively few options they had in order to upgrade the aircraft. That being said it was ideal for the start of WWII as the Hurricane was easier and faster to build than the Spitfire, which meant the RAF could rearm in volume much more easily with the Hurricane than they could with the much more difficult to produce Spitfire.
That is the reason why during the Battle of Britain you saw a mix of Spitfires and Hurricanes, and NOT a mix of Spitfires and Gloster Gladiators, which were completely inferior to the Me 109's in everything except turn rate. The Hurricane at least was a match for early 109 models. Had the Hurricane not been in service two thirds of the RAF fighter pilots would have been flying a Biplane.
Now I don't know about you, but I rather suspect had that been the case pilot and aircraft losses suffered by the RAF during the Battle of Britain would have been ever so slightly higher. The Hawker Hurricane was in the right place a the right time. The fact it was all but impossible to meaningfully upgrade the aircraft in the same way that was possible with the spitfire is less important than the fact that when a modern, fast, monoplane fighter was required in numbers IT WAS THERE....
When judging an aircraft or any other bit of military kit its usually best to stop fixating on the on paper numbers and look at the bigger picture. Real life and real combat is just a tad more complex in reality than a game of top trumps.
Well, there was 808 spitfires in the battle of Britain and 1700 hurricanes. So a third were Spitfires .
That's quite a lot of "Achtung Spitfire"
My favorite, the 31st FG and the 308th FS with Lt. (later colonel) Leland (Tommy) Molland flying the "Fargo Express". 6 kills in the Spitfire and 5 more in the P-51. I was friends with his daughter and was fortunate enough to introduce her to her deceased father, whom she knew nothing about.
I bet his kills in the Spitfire were attributed to the P51 kills at wars end
@@jacktattis actually not. Most WW2 ace tallys show AC type. At least what I've found.
@@robertslevin2446 Not so in the ETO some US fighter groups went from Spitfire to P47 to P51 with the last one getting the credit
The mark 8 Spitfire was a defacto new version. The mark 9 was a mark 5 with a new, more powerful Merlin engine. More mark (MK) 9's were made than any other. Featuring LF wings. These could house the following armament combinations. 4×20mm cannon, 2×20mm cannons and 4× •303 machine guns, or 2×20mm and 2× •50 machine guns. Photo recce versions typically had no armaments and a larger oil tank, and more fuel.
Regarding Galland's remarks about wanting Spitfires, the only evidence we have that he ever said this to Goering is Galland's recollection. Over the years Galland refined and retold various versions of this story, and the movie "The Battle of Britain" has ingrained it in the public psyche (although the character representing Galland is given a fictional name). When I met him in the early 1980s, he said he had made the comment out of a sense of frustration at Goering's failure to heed the advice of his fighter wing commanders. It was not meant to be taken seriously. His comrades, noting Goering's reaction, half-kidded him that he would soon be visited by the Gestapo. When I asked him what happened, he replied, "Well, the Gestapo didn't visit me, but I never got the Spitfires either." He certainly had a wry sense of humor. He then signed a Spitfire print I had just purchased and which still hangs in my house. It reads "Please, Herr Reichsmarschall, equip my wing with Spitfires, Adolf Galland".
Cool story! Something of this nature, naturally the only evidence we have is from Galland himself - I’m not sure what other evidence we feasibly even could have. I always took it as a joke, but Galland was definitely fed up with Goering and wanted to say something that would put him in his place and humiliate him.
I also have a print in my room signed by Galland, super cool stuff.
@@aviationdeepdive I bought mine from Douglas Bader's niece, Virginia Bader, who hosted the event where Galland spoke to a small group of USAF officers.
The Spitfire and Hurricane perfectly combined resulting in a great division of responsibilities, Spitfire mainly Fighters, Hurricane mainly Bombers , However because the Spitfire had more potential to be the main Fighter the Hurricane went to other duties and were very good at them.
Nope you’re just peddling the same old bedtime story that Spitfires took on the escort fighters allowing Hurricanes to deal with the bombers. During the BoB the RAF launched intercepts according to whichever Squadron or entire Wing was best-placed (geographically and in terms of alert status) to meet that particular raid, and of course neither Squadrons nor Wings contained a mixture of both types. Equally pertinently, the mission for both types was simply to bring down the bombers I.e. escort fighters were to be avoided wherever possible and just a “hazard of the job” whether you were flying a Spit or a Hurricane.
@@neilturner6749 The Big Wing was the best pys ops victory of the battle. It used both Spits and Hurricanes, but the Hurricanes were too slow and the Spits had to wait for them.
Had the LW not changed strategies and forces their fighters to stay with bombers, the LW fighters would have continued to wipe out the Hurricanes, engaging and disengaging at will.
Spitfire deserved high praise, But the Mosquito is the plane i praise the most. Its abillity to have large cannons and fitt numerouse roles is an amazing achievment for a wooden aircraft.
The Spirfire of the crash landing at 3:40 was piloted by American pilot John S Blyth; his Spifire's landing gear was stuck. He flew reconnaissance as far as Berlin in American marked PR blue Spifires. See: th-cam.com/video/ie3SrjLlcUY/w-d-xo.html
Yes and he said he got into many a argument in his mess when others said the Spitfire could not make Berlin I think he did 52 missions. Mark XI 44000ft not one German fighter could touch him
It should be noted that the RAF and USAAC were especially concerned with the lower performance of the Hurricane in 1940.
Guidelines for the Merlin modifications and use of 12 lb boost were issued in Mar 1940, with the quote :
"... the use of this emergency 12 lb boost is strongly urged by Fighter Command particularly in the case of the Hurricane..."
The US was clearly informed of the Hurricane's lesser performance and motivated to request the better Spifires. They acquired about 600 Spitfires of different Mks in total.
Why would the USAAC be concerned with the Hurricane in 1940? They did not get over here until 1942 .
@@jacktattis yes, I should have added that the USAAC did follow the progress of the Hurricane early on, as they did all foreign fighters, and then the Eagle Sqn that flew them in 1940. NACA evaluated the Hurricane again in 1942. The report was quite damning.
@@bobsakamanos4469 NACA had no influence on RAE, AFDU, A@AEE or any other Brit testing authority Apart from wing profiles
@@jacktattis I never said they did, but they knew the Hurricane was inadequate.
Watched from Old Harbour Jamaica.🌴🌴
Nice!
The USAAF also operated British Bristol Beaufighters. The 414th, 415th, 416th and 417th flew mainly night fighter operations in the Med and France.
In 2012 the Dieppe Raid was declassified from the 70 years of the Ultra Top Secret rating. It revealed that is was infact a raid to capture a enigma machine and when the Germans had switched to the four rotor machine and they were desperate code books. They did not know where the German Submarines were any more and in November of that same year the invasion of North Africa was to happen. They had no intelligence any more and were desperate for a new machine and code books. Dieppe was a intelligence hub for the German Navy and they knew there was a very good chance there was at least one there. That is why it was not cancelled when they ran into some vessel from the German Navy, as there was no surprise after that. Also it was the first time that the new special 30 unit of intelligence was used as it had just been formed. This was all revealed on WW II TH-cam and I first learned about it in 2012 as I was always suspious that since it was to be classified for 70 years, there was a lot more to the story. Yes, even Ian Flemming was there aboard a F type British Destroyer waiting for the booty, I believe the neame was the Fernie.
All true. The Brits in N.Africa were also at a disadvantage from '41 to '42 because the Italians had stolen code books from the US embassy in Italy. The germans knew of Brit strategies in the Western Desert everytime the US used their Black Code out of Cairo to report Brit intentions in the desert and the resupply of Malta.
That didn't change until the Brits figured it out and advised Washington in June 1942. Only then did the tide turn in Africa with the Brits being able to cut german supply lines across the Med.
there is no 109th squadron in the RAF. its one oh nine squadron, one one one squadron, three one six squadron etc. before that its ninety nine squadron, thirty three squadron, seventy two squadron. no th nd or rd after. Hope this helps in future.
I'm a big fan of American used Spits, the Spitfire Mk VIII most of all!
The Mk1 Spit, which was the most used variant in the Battle of Britain, was not "Easily the equal" of the BF109E used in the Battle. The 109 in many regards was the superior aircraft, only in rate of turn, radius of turn, and speed at low altitude, was the Spitfire Superior. The 109 was faster at higher altitude, could climb and dive better, had better armament, it's engine didn't cut out during negative G manoeuvres and had a slightly better roll rate, although both aircraft suffered from severe aileron stiffening at speeds above 300kmh.
Sounds about equal to me.
And the Hurricane performance was even worse, making it a fine target for the hit and run 110's and 109's.
@@bobsakamanos4469 No not so Bill Gunston Combat Aircraft and I quote" In the hectic days of 1940 the Hurricane was found to be an ideal bomber destroyer with Steady sighting and a devastating cone of fire : turn radius was better than any monoplane fighter but the all round performance of the B109E was considerably better . END QUOTE
So the Hurricane went for the bombers and the Spit for the Fighters and the Spit was much better than the 110
@@jacktattis and the LW tactic was hit and run, not a turning fight. They could engage & disengage Hurricanes at will... until forced to stick with the bombers. Goering defeated the LW over and over.
I wonder how that felt, transfering from spitfires to thunderbolts
Perhaps a bit like moving from driving a sports car to a bus.
Lt Irving Miller said when they first got into the cockpit of the P47 they were lost, it was enormous after the Spit. It was not as comfortable as the Spit or as good to fly however they got used to it .
@@aviationdeepdiveI read the one thing that made the transition easier was the fact the Thunderbolt could take immense battle damage and it also climbed like a home sick angel once the P47 got the four bladed paddle prop
@@marklittle8805 No that is a fallacy ,the paddle prop did not make that much difference The P47 climb rate was never very good to start with.
The Hawker Hurricanes did more for the Battle of Britain. In reality, The Spitfires received unfair credit for what the hurricane accomplished
Well sort of. The Hurricanes were tasked with shooting down the slower bombers while the Spitfires took on the accompanying fighters.
Both played their part but doing different tasks in 1940.
Anyone with knowledge of the BoB understands that the majority of Fighter Command pilots flew Hurricanes. The Spitfire became the more iconic aircraft.
The Hurricanes lacked performance and had the worst kill ratio of the battle. Credit ALWAYS goes to the brave young lads who had to fly them against the superior fighters of the LW. Hawker/Camm could have upgraded the Hurricane when he realized his design mistakes in 1936, but Hawker was content to be a war profiteer and did very little with the Hurricane but rode the coat tails of RR Merlin upgrades.
@@bobsakamanos4469 Actually Bob the Hurricane pound for pound were better than the P47and the Spit in the G/A role
Nice documentary.
But too little attention is given to the important Photo Reconnaissance role of the Spitfire within the USAAF.
Some of these PR Spitfires, almost accidentally shown in this documentary, show plexiglass cockpits without an armored glass windscreen!
Because of weight saving and they were not intended for aerial combat after all...
In April 1940, fighter versions of the Spitfire were being delivered without armoured windscreens.
@@neiloflongbeck5705Yes, but when the USAAF joined the fight, all Spitfires intended for aerial combat were delivered standard with armored windscreens.
But those lighter PR Spitfires were not standard.
@Franky46Boy and the footage may not be period specific to the narration. More often than not, it is whatever footage that is available.
@@neiloflongbeck5705Yes, 'generic' footage..., like in most YT-documentaries and even TV-documentaries.
@@Franky46Boy Too right, the PR Spitfires had their weapons and armour removed and could carry extra fuel in the voids in the wing. With that loadout they could make a round trip to Berlin.
There's a documentary specifically about that on here somewhere.
Bf 109 F as the 'Fredrich'? I thought it was the Ferdinand.
The G model was the 'Gustav'.
Friedrich is correct IIRC for the German phonetic alphabet.
@@heneagedundas I am confused... I agree about the phonetic Ferdinand, and Wikipedia backs you up, calling it the Fredrich as well, and even though I do have a mild form of dyslexia, I am damn sure I've read books calling it the Ferdinand.
One book had a German pilot comparing the Emil, Ferdinand and Gustav models, preferring his old Ferdinand to the newer Gustav...
Maybe I misunderstood, and that's his personal name for one particular Me 109, perhaps a humorous referral to the artist, Ferdinand Messerschmitt?
Now I need to go back through my books and figure out what up.
The Hurricane was the backbone of the Battle and Polish Airmen were a vital element without which we would have lost.
Deep Disgrace: Polish Airmen were excluded from the Victory Parade!
Wrong, wrong and lastly very wrong.
I knew about the American PR-11 Spitfires before seeing this excellent video. However, I'd like to know whether the recon version got an F number like the recon version of the P-38 Lightning, i.e. the F-5, F for "Photography".
not to my knowledge In the 15 A/F their PR unit still used F5
The actual primary reason the Germans lost the battle was the 109 had such limited range. Many times, the Germans had to break off an attack that was going well and flee for home because their low fuel warning light would go on. It wasn't till far after the battle that the Germans developed a satisfactory drop tank system.
Between mismanagement by Goering and Kesselring, stupid decisions led to the Luftwaffe changing their focus from the English aerodromes to London in time to spare the RAFs defeat.
The second reason was the main British strength: the combination of radar and observers giving vital reports to Combined Ops to tackle the German bomber formations and leave the German fighters alone.
Towards the end of the BoB, British fighters were tasked with distracting the Me 109s near the coast so as to use their limited fuel up, thereby leaving the bombers unescorted.
Read Patrick Bishop's Battle of Britain for a fresh view. It contains quotes and stories from the individuals involved, from ground staff to Combined Ops and the pilots from both sides.
An excellent read!
There were only 8 days in the Battle of Britain where the Luftwaffe had more kills 8 days out of 114
I had no idea Spitfires flew against Dewoitines. Just one of the many unacknowledged stories from this time I guess
Because they needed a painfully short range and not terribly robust interceptor only. Maybe to offset the 1,500 mile max range P-51? The ones that finally took out the Luftwaffe. Because of the genius of General Jimmy Doolittle.
General Doolittle had the weapon and he released them from bomber escort to hunting down the Luftwaffe fighters.
Remember Goering didn't say "I knew Germany lost the war the day I saw a Spitfire flying over Berlin. He said "I knew Germany lost the war the day I saw a P-51 flying over Berlin.
Seems he outta know eh wut?😎
This is not a hit on ANY of the Empire pilots and the other commands of the RAF.
Doolittle wasn't a genius for that directive, he merely reacted to old reports regarding the LW ever since the Spanish Civil War; ie fighters cannot defend against a determined attack on bomber by flying with them. The LW also was winning the Battle of Britain by attacking airfields in 1940. It was nothing new, but the US media likes their hyperbole and rewriting history.
Spitfires with 170 gal Belly tanks flew 1200 miles to Malta with 90 gal Belly tanks thy could do 550miles radius Get it through those THICK SKULLS the Spitfire flew as far as the RAF WANTED THEM TO GO. Not what the USAAF wanted them to do. You lost 125290 fighters in WW2 AND DID THEY EXPECT WE LOSE OURS FOR YOU AS WELLL.
12520 Not what I wrote
I was getting annoyed
USAF started with the Spitfire when the 3 Eagle squadrons went from RAF to USAF in 1941. My father was a RAF engineer on 121 Eagle squadron, and as a Brit had to change squadrons when the Yanks inherited the planes....
Those Squadrons were officially transferred to the USAAF 29 September 1942
Correct, got the year wrong...
A superb documentary !
Minor niggles: British ranks with the word Lieutenant are pronounced LEFFtenant.
British Squadron numbers are cardinal, not ordinal. ie: 1 Sqn. not 1st Sqn.
If I remember correctly, the lieutenant in question was a Yank.
@@davidwhite4874 It was a British rank- Flight Lieutenant.
@@WgCdrLuddite Oh ok, then. No excuse.
Over Macho Grande?
I'll never get over Macho Grande...
I’ve always wondered what P- designation was given to USAAF Spitfires
Oddly enough, there wasn't one.
The Spitfire’s main performance problem was that it used a carburetor fuel delivery system that stalled the engine during certain combat maneuvers . The ME-109 had fuel injection.
Early Spitfires suffered from this defect, but by 1943 Rolls Royce had introduced the Bendix-Stromberg pressure carburettor, allowing the Spitfire to perform negative G manoeuvres.
"For the next important and powerful Merlin 66 engine, Rolls Royce finally decided to use the Bendix-Stromberg Injection carburettor. The American Bendix-Stromberg pressure carburettor was developed in the mid 1930’s and was in production from 1938. This carburettor was designed to operate as a fully pressurised fuel system that dispensed with the problematic float controlled fuel level with its emulsion tubes and diffusers. Negative G had no effect on fuel flow or carburettor function. The pressurised and metered fuel flow was delivered as a spray into the inlet air stream just in front of the supercharger inlet. This feature virtually removed the risk of carburettor icing, in fact the throttles and chokes of the injection carburettor did not need heating by hot oil or coolant circulation at all and their deletion removed several other problems associated with the previous provision of those heating circuits. Rolls Royce had been aware of the Bendix-Stromberg Pressure type of carburettor for several years and versions of the carburettor were used on many American engines including the Allison V-1710. Notably, Packard built their Merlins in the USA with a version of the Bendix PD16 from the very start of Packard Merlin production. For the high power Merlin 66, Rolls Royce needed an even larger choke carburettor and decided to modify the Bendix PD18 type Pressure carburettor to suit. Suitably modified, this carburettor was fitted as the Stromberg 8D44/1. There were some problems with the Bendix pressure carburettor, particularly if excess air was allowed into the fuel system, but this was resolved with internal bleed venting of the D chamber of the carburettor and, by using a vane type fuel pump that could clear the airlock."
ROLLS-ROYCE MERLIN CARBURETTOR DEVELOPMENT © Chris Starr 2023
@@nickdanger3802 Yes Nick Colonel Blimp is back The Pressure Carburettor made by Bendix was from Drawings of the R/R -S/U CARBIE that were sent to Bendix free of charge Source A Brief History of Aircraft Carburettors and Fuel Systems Part 9 Speed Density Systems. R/R -S/U Speed Density Fuel System diagrams sent to Bendix By Terry Welshans Bardstown Kentucky for Aircraft Engines Historical Society Aug 2013
So it was NOT originally a American carbie but Bendix did make many mods.
So bad luck Nick another claim of US superiority in almost everything if not shot down at least a dent
A workaround was introduced by March 41. Amusingly nicknamed after the engineer who invented it: Miss Shilling's orifice.
@@jacktattis Colonel Blimp is a British cartoon character by cartoonist David Low, first drawn for Lord Beaverbrook's London Evening Standard in April 1934.[1] Blimp is pompous, irascible, jingoistic, and stereotypically British, identifiable by his walrus moustache and the interjection "Gad, Sir!"
What this bloke has not told us that during the transition to the P47 from the Spitfire. New P47 pilots from the States challenged the Eagle Sqn blokes to mock fights . Four P47s were lost in quick succession trying to stay with the Spitfire in the turns. The C.O. stopped any mock fights below 8000ft
And yet this was NOT even remembered when he P47 was to be used in the G/A role
The USAAF SHOULD have left the P47 stay up high and developed the A36 to do the G/A role after all the RAF had been using their Mustangs as G/A planes very successfully
There is no competition between P-47s and Spitfires in dogfights, it should be of no surprise to anyone that a Spitfire can turn circles around a P-47. However, that's simply not what the P-47 was designed for, so it's a redundant comparison.
@@aviationdeepdive Back then the new US pilots from the States were very impressed with size. They were brought back to earth very quickly.
@@aviationdeepdive When I say they lost four they lost the pilots as well. Too low to get out
Most of the comments here seem to have missed the point that the aircraft shown in U.S. markings taxiing out at the start of the video has a 4-blade prop, no guns, and dual radiators - and it was painted blue. This makes it a PR Mk 11, I suspect. This had the high-altitude 2-stage Merlin. and the wings were full of fuel, giving it a ceiling of 44,000 feet and a range of over 2000 miles, and a max speed of 440 mph. At the time, the USAF in Britain had nothing comparable.
They had nothing comparable at any time
@@jacktattis A situation of which Hap Arnold was acutely aware.
Where's Soaring Tractor aka Wilbur Finnegan, gone these days? Normally he would have been all over a video like this with his bile. Ah the good old days, eh.
I was thinking that as well! Is it still alive?
He is around somewhere He has posts elsewhere
The first scene had Hawker Tempests, not spitfires. Why?
No it did not, those are Spitfire Mk Vs with chin radiators.
Excellent coverage of the US flying Spitfires in the Med, something that US media has seriously avoided over the years. Hopefully, some of the fanboys of the obsolete Hurricane will understand the critical importance played by the Spitfire throughout the war.
UK media avoids coverage of the 30,000 aircraft Lend Leased to the UK.
@@nickdanger3802 yup. I just proves how the media exists to manipulate opinions, values and the truth.
The Hurricane was the better all round plane Credit where Credit is due. No Spitfire could carry what the Hurricane carried in North Africa Hurricane had 4 x cannon the Spitfire did not until late
@@jacktattis 4 cannon made it even slower with less performance than the Mk.IIB. The Hurricane was simply a target for the LW. They were replaced by Tomahawks and Kittyhawks for good reason. By fall of '42 they were held back to cover airfields while the real fighters took on Rommel's LW.
So which part of Canada are you from?
_Chicago_
The AeroCobra after a Spitfire..😮
The legendary Bob Hoover was shot down in a Spit when his drop tank wouldn’t jettison in a fight
Yes, so he says. He also conned his way into an operational squadron, despite his poor vision. A great test pilot, but fighter pilots need good vision.
Who was Bob Hoover ?
I do not think Spits used drop tanks they had belly tanks
The Hawker Hurricane shot done more German fighters in the battle of Britain. A fact sadly ignored
and Hurricanes had the worst kill ratio of the battle. Can't win a war of attrition when all those Hurricane replacement pilots out of the OTUs were so poorly trained.
Star roundel with bar marking was not adopted until mid 1943. Except for spitfire -- sez you
Easily the equal of the Me109 ?! Didn't the Me have injection ? According to my calculations you had to be a well trained pilot to remember your spit didn't have injection during the BoB.
In practise, fuel injection is far less of a factor in aircraft combat than people have made it out to be.
@@aviationdeepdive How can engines stopping due to gravity not be a factor ?
Rolls Royce kept carburetion as it cooled the fuel making it denser giving more power
...bloody frogs!...always sitting on the fence, or changing sides.
I always Thought no Americans were involved in the Great Escape in real Life ?.
They weren't Not many Americans attempted to escape during WW2 in ETO
Did the USAAF also flew a few Spitfires under the South East Asia Command?
I don't think so.
Most kills were made by hurricanes because we had more of them. They had the main job of downing bombers. The smaller number of spitfires took took the German fighters on and that allowed the hurricanes to their job. It was a winning partnership but the glamourous spit gets too much credit.
Glamour is not why a fighter is famous. The Spit is famous because it was a superior fighter. The Hurricane had the worst kill ratio of the battle and lacked performance, and the RAF knew it.
We didnt have planes ready to fight.
Because hey were available
The Americans used the Spitfire for exactly the same reason the British used the Mustang. We call it Horses for Courses.
Not exactly. They had other birds to choose from. So did we.
The British used the Mustang because it was designed for and ordered by the British, in response to British requirements for a fighter. The RAF were the first to use it. Then the US adopted it.
The Americans needed those Spitfires in the MTO, because the Allison P-40s needed top cover from an effective fighter. The US acquired about 600 Spits of various Mks.
@@bobsakamanos4469 that's partially the reason. You had some American Eagle squadrons from the RAF that kept them. And then you had some p39 units that came over and had to re-equip.
@@WALTERBROADDUS yes, everyone wanted and needed the best fighter possible.
My wifes father was from New York and he was on holiday in the UK when WW2 began. He joined the RAF in 1940 and was initially sent to a Polish squadron. But in 1941 he was transferred to 121 Eagle Squadron as a ground crewman, so we did research the squadron. They originally had the Hawker Hurricane, but received the Spitfire when they moved to North Weald. They were flying the Spitfire MkVb. In Septenber 1942 they rebadged as the 335 Fighter Sqn, 4th Fighter Group, USAAF, The Spitfire was retained as no other American fighter was in its class. The P-39 and P-40 would not have survived over Europe, the P-47 did not arrive until the Spring of 1943 and the P-51B not until 1944. The P-38 was fast at 30,000ft but not agile enough to mix it with German single seaters.
My father probably knew you wife's father as he was an electrician on 121 Squadron from the beginning and until it transferred to USAAF in '42. He then went to 256 Squadron. I have his service log...
@@davidwedlock2622 Probably so, he was with 121 from day1 until after the change to 335 FS. Some time after the change he was trained as an S2 as he spoke fluent German. He ended the war with 392 Bomb Group, as we found him listed on one of the last missions of the war crewing a B-24. We never got his USAAF records due to a fire at the archives. We have been looking into his RAF records, but those are still classified and the wife will have to dig out his birth certifacate to apply.
@@billballbuster7186 we got my father's RAF records just as a simple request to Ministry of Defence. My guess is your father in laws records would be obtainable ( unless he was a spook!!)
@@davidwedlock2622 We do know the procedure but we live in the US and the wife has to re-apply to get another birth certificate before we can do anything. His personal papers were lost over the years.
Short answer why not
The fighters shown in the opening clip are actually Typhoons, not spitfires.
Nope... those are spitfires. You may be confused due to the pronounced chin radiator present on some Mk V spitfires.
@@aviationdeepdive Sort of correct those are Vokes air filters for the carby air intake , and not radiators used commonly on tropicalised Spits, such as the Mark VC's...there was also the Aboukir filter used as well which was a refined modification of the original Vokes made at No. 103 MU Aboukir which had less drag due to the more compacted result.
The yanks also put the rolls Royce Merlin engine in their mustang and the pilots were overjoyed at the massive performance it gave. The English engines were as usual the best later the English made the griffin engine to replace the Merlin engine which was also superb
Rolls Royce Griffon engine, not Griffin!
No they didn't. The RAF put the Merlin in the P51.
@@jester5ify and the yanks then flew it 🤪the yanks would not know how to put it in please use common sense
And the production Mustang had an Allison license built Merlin, not a RR Merlin. The Mustang was an answer by North American Aviation to a British MOD specification for a new aircraft, so essentially a British idea from the get go. Also, the bubble canopy on the P-51 was a British request because of the highly improved all round visibility it provided.
@@donyoung1384 just amiss spell is it worth the comment get a life please
So that's the story behind this.
Meh. A better title would (should) have been: "When Americans Flew Spitfires", since the USAAF only flew Spitfires for a few very short years.
Really? 1940, 1941, 1942, 1943, 1944. Oh right, because americans think the war only started in 1942.
@@bobsakamanos4469 Fuck off, Bob. Here's some concrete advice for you: read what the person WROTE instead of what you wanted to READ....
You yakk about these planes as if they were pixar animated planes in War Story. They were just tools. The pilots used them to do combat related work.
Just infatuated with the name.
Yanks might have big .mouths! But none have bigger hearts. ❤
Yes and where ? We paid for everything
As opposed to non-british spitfire?
There were no non-British Spitfires all built in the UK
Too bad that these UK spitfires were only saw SE Asian theatre at a poor beginning to show due to Zero and Ki-43 manouverity superiority that some of RAF veterans faced and might have been the same in US AAF hands if they didn't have a nasty encounter of both fighters. Hawker Typhoon might fared the same fate in inexperience hands.🤔
That's not accurate. You had Spitfire use in the CBI all through the end of war.
@@MythtellerPilots with BoB experience in Australia 1942 might have turned, like they did against Bf-109s. Turn in slow airspeed against Zero got Spitfire pilot killed in seconds.
Was Major Thyng related to Singhiz Thyng?
Mustang. British orderd, US designed, British fixed to make it good. US blinkers at its finiest.
'Why Did America Use British Spitfires?' Answer: for the same reason that they had (and still have!) air force bases in Britain. This American occupation was the price Britain had to pay for American help to defeat the Germans.
There by invitation of HMG so not an occupation.
@@nickdanger3802 So, your idea is that the UK is a nation that invites other nations to occupy it… for 100 years?
@@1943colin US Visiting Forces in the UK
The United States has had military forces permanently stationed in the UK since the Second World War. The United States Visiting Force (USVF) is in the United Kingdom at the invitation of the UK Government. The 1951 NATO SOFA and the 1952 Visiting Forces Act (VFA), along with supplemental bilateral acts between the two countries, establish the legal status of the USVF and its personnel in the UK. US Visiting Forces are subject to both US and UK law.5
The overarching agreement setting out this relationship is the Churchill-Truman
Communiqué of 1952 which states:
Under arrangements made for the common defence, the United States has the use of certain bases in the United Kingdom. We reaffirm the understanding that the use of these bases in an emergency would be a matter for joint decision by HM Government and the US Government in light of the circumstances prevailing at the time.6
US Forces in the UK: legal agreements
Standard Note: SN06808
Last updated: 8 January 2015
Author: Louisa Brooke-Holland
Section International Affairs and Defence section
Rubbish they used them because they were better than what they had at the time
@@nickdanger3802 No Nick you kept threatening to call in the Loan
Because they had nothing as good.
And Britain only needed 38,000 US aircraft starting in 1938 because "our factories were being bombed day and night".
FLEET AIR ARM.
HL Deb 27 January 1943 vol 125 cc794-829
"There is a controversy between those who say that the Admiralty did not get what it wanted for the Fleet Air Arm and those who say that the Admiralty was not very clever at explaining what exactly it 796
was that it wanted. I noticed quite recently that Air Marshal Dowding has gone on record as saying that the Admiralty got precisely the types which it specified and demanded. Whatever may be the rights and wrongs of this controversy there is certainly no doubt whatever about it that war found the Fleet Air Arm equipped with extremely bad aircraft."
@@nickdanger3802 Nick there is something Amiss here.38000 Us planes in 1938 and factories being bombed day and night does not gel
2. List of those 38000 would be nice. Because these are the planes the FAA got Chesapeake,Wildcat, Dauntless, Corsair, Helldiver, Avenger and Hellcat.
Catalina was Coastal Command .
June, 2024. Currently and for many years the UK is building no fighters. Zero. And, they have only a little over 125 fighters.
Wake up! Even RUSSIA has flewn some Spitfires.
Poor Mk.V was in the wrong place, wrong time in Western Europe, 1941-42. FW-190A "Anton" was just outclassed it, and the Bf-109F "Friedrich" too. The B-wing (60rpg for the 20mm Hispano cannon) was also anything but good. The C-wing with double the ammo capacity for the cannon (120rpg in box magazine instead of the 60rpg drum magazine) was much better, but the Mk.VB was the most numerous variant. Over the North African desert and the Mediterranean and Malta the Mk.V did much better, but also was no good against the Japanese fighters, especially over Darwin, Australia. Mk.IX was way much better and Mk.VIII was simply the best of the Merlin Spitfires.
25:25 LOL, I cannot believe that those pilots were REALLY that stupid.🤣 Mk.VIII was a totally new design, Mk.IX was just the old crap airframe tinkered together with the new Merlin 60 series engine. Basically like putting a Ferrari engine into a Fiat Punto.
They are not involved in production. And the name and designation systems are rather arbitrary. The mark IX was the more used anyway.
"Mk.VIII was a totally new design, Mk.IX was just the old crap airframe tinkered together with the new Merlin 60 series engine."
Not really though, Mk.VIII's primary advantages were in the small improvements like the retractable tail wheel and wing fuel tanks (situated in the leading edge).
Other than that, most significant improvements of Mk.VIII were implemented in Mk.IX during production (such as the new intake filter and wider rudder surface). The performance difference between the two types was also very slight.
Have a read of the Mk.V evolution. It went through numerous design changes making it as fast as the 190 at low level, but a better climb rate. Metal ailerons also gave it a competetive roll rate. Now that was with the upgraded Merlin 50 series, which also went into the Seafire III making it faster than the Corsair at low level.
Poor MkV could still fight the Bf109 and did
Over Darwin the Spits were clapped out ready for the scrap heap A present from Churchill when the Australians would not go to Burma or stay in North Africa Very vindictive fat slug . We eventually got the MkVIIIs
There not Spitfires in the opening sequence but chuffing Tempests. Another con job!!!
You need to work on your aircraft identification skills. Those are clearly Spitfire Mk Vs with the chin radiator modification, not in a million years to be confused with a Tempest. At 0:11
@@Alexandros11 Zing!
Waffle...
Throughout WW2 there was never any shortage of Spitfires in Britain and RAF pilots did not know where they came from - they came from America.
you know this is false, and so do i
I'm guessing you are confusing American built Merlin engines (built by Packard) with entire Spitfire airframes.
@@heneagedundas i doubt he would even know that at all, because surely anyone with that tid bit of knowledge would know that those were license built merlins and were used on P-51s than spits and happened far later in the war
NO Spitfires were built by America! They did build Merlin engines.
Really? NOT during the Battle of Britain, in fact the Yanks were scared to help the Brits because they thought Britain would fall.
The American ambassador to Great Britain, a certain Mr Joseph Kennedy, father of JFK, was advising Roosevelt NOT to help Britain as it could not possibly survive!
It took the BoB to convince America that Britain had the will and ability to see Germany defeated eventually.
The Nazi's continuously underestimated British aircraft production, when the main problem was finding enough pilots.
Between aircraft production and the Civilian Repair Organisation, there were more aircraft available than pilots, thanks to Lord Beaverbrook.
Any American help in production came after the Battle of Britain.
We Brits could never thank these heroes enough ❤️
So strange now, to see young American & British men willingly joining up with the Nazi regime in Ukraine 😪
You gotta stop watching Russian sponsored news like Fox.
Putinesque propaganda, try not to believe everything he says.
Go away Russian Troll
Young people are always manipulated by the media.
@@bobsakamanos4469 Yes indeed and do you notice NO American troops on the ground