Comments by "Barrie Rodliffe" (@barrierodliffe4155) on "BBC News" channel.

  1. This pilot flew in the Luftwaffe on the Eastern front from 1943 and scored all his victories in the East, I can`t find out where and when he joined the Luftwaffe. My father was in the RAF from 1933 to 1945 so on the other side and he was involved in the Battle of France and then at various squadrons in Britain and Africa until the end of the war. Dirung the war they were enemies and it took a while after the war until my father came round to understand that most Germans were not the real enemy I find that I am as against the people calling all Germans Nazi as I am against the pro Nazi faction who try to deny how bad the Nazi`s were.
    20
  2. Very hard to strafe the Tower of London in Russia
    11
  3. Petertildtmann The Me 262 was ok as long as it was flown gently in a straight line, it could not accelerate well, could not turn and could only maintain top speed for a short time, they usually came off rather badly if they met a Spitfire.
    9
  4. Nit in Kataria. The most modern design which was not modern at all, designed with straight wings that were bent back slightly to correct the balance and had no aerodynamic benefit. The garbage RAF which shot down Me 262's while the Me 262 could not shoot down a single Spitfire or Tempest. The Spitfire had a higher dive speed. One Spitfire gave chase to three Me 262's and shot one down, they other two kept running away. Other Spitfires shot down quite a few Me 262's. For you a complete loss is a tie. The V and V 2 were useless as weapons.
    8
  5. No, he flew on the Eastern front and did not shoot down any Spitfires, he was lucky enough not to face any in combat.
    5
  6.  @stevek8829  He did not claim a single Spitfire.
    5
  7.  @specialperson335  Very stupid of you to make a vague comment without referring to which of my comments you were replying. Quite simply if you want to look you can also find out that there was much over claiming, apart from the German records there are many claims that are false. Kurt Welter for a start who when he flew Me 262's claimed about ten times the number of Mosquito's that were lost in total at the time. Marseille who in the Battle of Britain claimed a Spitfire when no Spitfires were even there at the time, maybe to be generous it was a Hurricane, but he also claimed two Hurricanes on a day only one was lost, another of his claims for six P 40's out of ten by his squadron does not hold up since there were only ten P 40's and 5 of them got back.. The first claim for a Me 262 of a Mosquito over Germany fails because that Mosquito got back to Italy with no combat damage. I have seen some seven claims for Spitfires shot down by Me 262's and of those i was able to prove six false, the other one there was not enough information to verify or deny it.
    5
  8.  @Oof_2nd  Of course Spitfires were not the most powerful but they had the best performance. Britain did not almost lose the Battle of Britain, Germany failed to achieve a single objective. Bad planning would be not preparing for a fight against a well organised air force with very good fighters. Bf 109's were good but not equal to a Spitfire. Yak 9's came late in the war and maybe they were deadly to their pilots, they did have some issues. You really should try to learn about the subject before making such a fol of yourself with your very stupid comments.. I always have a nice day.
    4
  9.  Ricardo VS  Not according to German records which have been released. It seems the Luftwaffe was as bad as the USAAF..
    4
  10. Antbrain. Try looking it up, Spitfires 20,351, Hurricanes 14,583, P 51 , over 15,000, P 47 15,636. Of these about 20,000 Spitfires were made during the war, about 200 - 300 post war some of the P 51 post war. The Hurricane is recognized for playing a part during the Battle of Britain and in North Africa and Malta, The Spitfire as the fighter that played a very big part in every major action in the war.
    3
  11. The Me 262 was designed as a fighter, it changed a lot before production and was used as a fighter bomber and as a fighter but not sent after fighters, mainly after unarmed photo reconnaissance aircraft or bombers, it had no success against the former and limited against the latter. The Gloster Meteor made at the same time was a capable jet fighter.
    3
  12. jaz. Well we do know the Meteor was in service a long time and was not a bad fighter, a few victories against the DH Vampire and Mig 15.
    3
  13. stewen. The Meteor being the first generation jet fighter was certainly quite good, reliability was no a big problem and the total losses were not that bad compared to some, it was able to fly as fast as the Me 262, more reliable, better overall performance and maneuverability. The Me 262 was not a good design, it had to be modified because the original jet engines did not work and the replacements were heavy which meant they had to either move the wings back or sweep them back slightly which made no difference to the performance. The Me 262 losses to piston engine fighters was not good and no one excpet Czechoslovakia tried to make the Me 262 after the war and it took them a long time to get into service only to be dropped very quickly.
    3
  14.  @blezen4727  Of course radar helped but won is a stretch, the RAF could have sent up Sopwith Camels and won by that reasoning.
    3
  15.  @blezen4727  Radar and Enigma certainly helped but without the pilots and good aircraft they would not have mattered.
    3
  16. None.
    3
  17.  @stevek8829  Same engine but the Spitfire was better.
    3
  18. He never flew such a good fighter, in fact probably lucky he never encountered any during the war or he probably woud not be round.
    3
  19. You sound like a real loser. This pilot flew all his missions on the Eastern front and lucky for American pilots in their P 51`s did not meet any. Like The Luftwaffe pilot who had 352 victories mostly in the East, no Spitfires however he did shoot down a handful of P 51`s.
    3
  20.  @stefanragler9584  ignorant is to rant away like you do without a clue. This German pilot flew mostly against Russian and maybe a few Americans, if he did fly against any British pilots he did not shoot any of them down. Quite simply the P 51 was only an average fighter. I do respect all pilots. Maybe you should learn to read and learn a bit of history.
    3
  21. mikey. I know that , but as other Luftwaffe pilots on the Eastern front have said late in the war the USAAF and RAF started to turn up. the Spitfire was the fighter they feared most. also the RAF were in Russia flying Spitfires for a time and the USSR used quite a lot of Spitfires, I have done more research than you have had hot dinners.
    3
  22. In a Tornado 40 miles is like close your eyes for ten seconds and you are there.
    3
  23. The engine does not stop, it cuts out momentarilly and it was hardly a problem since the pilots new how to avoid it. Try a bit of reading up on why Rolls Royce used carburetors rather than fuel injection, it helps if you know what you are talking about.
    3
  24. Most of the pilots did not think so.
    3
  25.  @specialperson335  Or more likely you do not have a clue
    3
  26. Poor Chaos Clot. Hugo Broch never killed any British in a dogfight, he was on the Eastern front from 1943 which is where all his 81 victories were. With your poor brain you will likely be in a home for the senile long before 70.
    3
  27. No point in a nuclear war, just tell since WW II how many nuclear weapons have been used in any war?
    2
  28. Yes when they introduced the 60 series Merlin with a two stage two speed supercharger..
    2
  29.  @hans-1940  I know but when do you hear of the Spitfires being in the fight? I have had people tell me that the Spitfires from Britain were used and in bad condition but in truth the few that were used were refurbished before being sent and some of them flown by RAF pilots while Russian pilots were being trained up on them also most of the Spitfires supplied were straight from the production lines. If you look at what some Russians claim the Spitfire was not a good fighter and it was the La 5, Yak 3 and other Russian fighters that won. All I do know is that if you look at Luftwaffe aces who flew in the East they do not seem to have any claims for Spitfires, I have also seen how Luftwaffe pilots were more afraid of the Spitfire than any other fighter. A comment from an Fw 190 squadron serving in the East " In the closing stages of the war were were seeing more of the USAAF and RAF with P 51's and Spitfires than we had, we were most afraid of the Spitfire followed by the P 51"
    2
  30.  @b-chroniumproductions3177  Wrong on so many counts. The Spitfire LF MK IX was used for low altitude work and it had excellent performance, what Bf 109 could climb at over 5,000 ft/min from sea level to over 11,000 feet? Early in the war as in the Battle of Britain the Spitfire Mk I and II held an advantage over the Bf 109, the Spitfire had more efficient engines and the slight cut out problem had been much improved, RAF pilots did not find it a flaw at all. The Bf 109 may have been easier to produce but production numbers were low until 1944.
    2
  31. It does have dual controls and most flights they do let the passenger take control.
    2
  32. He never did before.
    2
  33.  @proud_tobe_texan2890  Not for us? You would have sat out profiteering but for the Japanese.
    2
  34. Not the only good fighter of the war but the best, it was in service before most of the ones you mention and still in service after maost of them were gone. The A6M 2 was slow and not able to match a Spitfire. The Fiat G 55 was good but again no Spitfire. The P 47 and P 51 were not as fast, did not go as high and could not maneuver with a Spitfire. Maybe if you read up on what happened when USAAF pilots in both the P 47 and P 51 tried to shoot down Spitfires. The P 38 was not even much of a fighter. The Ki 84 no match for a Spitfire. The Bf 109 was good but out classed by the Spitfire. The Fw 190 had an advantage for a short time over the Spitfire but from the Mk IX on the Spitfire was better. That is the only fighter that ever gave the Spitfire any trouble. The Yak 3 was ok, it had some problems and was only good at low altitude, the faster Spitfire good from sea level to over 40,000 feet. La 7 again good but it had it;s faults. You missed out the best, The Tempest V which at low level was better than a Spitfire, in fact they were used together for a time rather effectively, the Tempest low down and the Spitfire above giving top cover, an unbeatable combination.
    2
  35. Lets look at the A6M2, it entered service in July 1940 so after the Spitfire Mk I and about the same time as the Mk II some Mk II had 20 mm cannon. The A6M2 was not able to be developed as much so it was good for a short time. The Fiat G 55. would have little trouble against P 38's and P 51's but against the Spitfire it would be up against it, the top speed similar, acceleration and climb would go to the Spitfire M VIII which would reach 25,000 feet over two minutes faster and the Spitfire had a higher service ceiling. P 51 D in mid 1944 when it entered service top speed 703 kmh, Spitfire Mk XIV in late 1943 720 kmh, acceleration and climb the Spitfire was much better. The P 51 D dive speed limited to mach 0.8, the Spitfire mach 0.86. The heavy P 51 would enter a dive faster but the Spitfire could follow and out turn and outclimb the P 51 so it is no contest. The P 47 is not even close, dive speed about mach 0.7. The Spitfire was used in combat quite often, it was before D Day and apart from when it was used for chasing V 1's which it was better than the P 51 for, that was from the 13th June the P 47 never used for chasing V 1's, but by August 1944 the V 1 threst was less and the Mk XIV went back to combat, soon being based in Belgium and Holland and flying all over Germany. The P 38 L was slower than most fighters, 414 mph and not great climb, sure t had about the speed of a 1941 Fw 190 A, the P 38 was the last fighter to be shot down by a biplane. The USAAF used Spitfires a lot until they got P 51's. The P 38 had a worse dive speed than even the P 47. Ki 84. entered service a year after the Spitfire Mk XIV but lets compare it to the Spitfire Mk VIII, Similar top speed, rate of climb goes to the Spitfire which also went higher, similar armament, the Ki 84 had good range but the Mk VIII range was not too bad. The Bf 109 had fuel injection which Rolls Royce did not use because it was less efficient, the smaller RR engine gave more power. The Spitfire MK XIV was contemporary to the Bf 109 G 10 but lets see how the Bf 109 K 4 compares to the Spitfire MK XIV. The Bf 109 K4 had similar top seed to the Spitfire Mk XIV from sea level to 25,000 feet but then the Spitfire was faster all the way. That is fine except before the Bf 109 K 4 arrived the Spitfire Mk XIV's had been approved to use + 21 lbs boost and that meant the spitfire was faster all the way except about 25,000 feet where the speed was similar, Rate of climb the Spitfire was better all the way. The 30 mm was prone to jamming leaving the poor pilot very much outgunned by the Spitfire. The Bf 109 like the Spitfire was in action right through the war. Fw 190 A. The Spitfire from the Mk IX on had an advantage and there were no special clipped wing versions, the wingtip could be changed very quickly as was sometimes done between operations. The Fw 190 D arrived over 8 months after the Spitfire Mk XIV which maintained a decisive advantage. The Yak 3 which had engine overheating issues, most combat took place at low altitude because apart from the Spitfire and Bf 109 there were no fighters that could manage high altitude. The comment from a Luftwaffe pilot who fought on the Eastern front. In the closing stages of the war the USAAF and RAF were appearing and the fighter we feared most was the Spitfire, followed by the P 51. The La 7 max speed 661 kmh at 6,000 metres or similar to a spitfire Mk IX. at sea level the La 7 was quite good, but beaten by the P 51, Tempest Mk V and Spitfire Mk XIV. The Tempest Mk V was like the Spitfire Mk XIV used against the V 1 but also like the spitfire Mk XIV they were based in Belgium and Holland and flew over Germany a lot. The Tempest Mk V it was fast in a dive, it would enter a dive faster but the Spitfire had a higher mach limit than even the Tempest, the only fighter to achieve over 1,000 kmh in a dive without damage.
    2
  36. Berhnit. The A6M2 was no match for the Spitfire Mk V in Burma. The Spitfire Mk V did very well against the Fiat G 55, it was the Spitfire along with the Seafire that gave air superiority until the Spitfire Mk IX and VIII came along. The P 47 D and P 51 D which were much later than the Spitfire Mk IX yet did not accelerate or climb with the Spitfire at any height and they could not go as high. P 47 D as flight tested in September 1943 rate of climb drops to 0 by 40,000 feet. 35,000 feet climb rate 550 ft/min. WEP was not available until 1944, but the P 47 D was still not up to even the P 51D for climb rate P 51 D as tested in June 1945 rate of climb drops to 0 at 42,300 feet climb at 36,000 feet 850 ft/min time to 40,000 feet 22.4 mins these figures are at WEP. The P 38 G as tested in February 1943 time to 39,400 feet 22.04 mins. rate of climb at 39,700 feet 0. P 38 J as tested in February 1944 time to 40,000 feet 25.14 mins rate of climb at 40,500 feet 0 Spitfire Mk IX as tested in October 1942 rate of climb at 42,400 feet still 100 feet/min. climb rate at 40,000 feet 480 ft/min. climb rate at 36,000 feet 1,140 ft/min time to 40,000 feet 20.6 mins. These figures are at normal rating with a drop tank. The Ki 84 might have fought on equal terms with the P 51 D, P 38 L, F 4 U and P 47 N ( the P 47 M was not in the Pacific ). They were not Spitfires. The Bf 109 in the Battle of Britain had a slight altitude advantage but most combat took place at about 15,000 feet where the Spitfire held the advantage. After the Battle of Britain the Bf 109 was unable to match Spitfires, the Bf 109 G was beaten by Mk IX and Mk VIII, the Bf 109 K 4 on paper may have been a match for the Spitfire Mk XIV but in practice it wasn't. The Fw 190 A had an advantage over Spitfire Mk V's but from the Mk IX on that was gone. The FRw 190 D was good and certainly P 51 and P 47b pilots would have a bit to be afraid of but against a Spitfire Mk XIV which had better climb and maneuverability, no as for dive the Fw 190 D was only faster at the start of a dive and no match on a long dive, when they pulled out of a dive the Spitfire was faster and better. RAF pilots reported in late 1944 that the Me 262 was not quite as rare as it had been but not very dangerous, in fact no Spitfires were ever shot down by any Me 262's, Spitfires did shoot down Me 262's. Strange how on the Eastern front the Luftwaffe pilots reported that late in the war USAAF and RAF fighters were appearing and the most feared fighter was the Spitfire, followed by the P 51 D, no mention of the Yak or La. I prefer to take the opinions of pilots including USAAF and Luftwaffe about which was the best fighter rather than someone who hates the Spitfire because it is British.
    2
  37. How was the Spitfire inferior to the Me 262? Me 262';s never shot down a single Spitfire, not even unarmed photo reconnaissance Spitfires that they were sent after because no other Luftwaffe fighter could catch them. Spitfires did shoot down quite a number of Me 262's and not just when taking off or landing, I have copies of combat when Spitfires chased and shot down Me 262's sometimes after a chase of 50 miles or more. As for Spitfires shot down, Galland may have claimed 55, I do know that Galland was shot down 3 times by Spitfires and said he was very impressed by the Spitfire. I have looked very hard at Luftwaffe claims and find many are not accurate. I have also found that the Spitfire Mk XIV had no losses in air combat, the only losses were to anti aircraft fire.
    2
  38. Maybe Douglas Bader did not say anything about Gallands claims but many claims were shown to be false. Unfortunately I have been researching German claims and have found out that many of these claims were not true. I have no figures for Galland but Kurt Welter is one and I can prove he over claimed at least 90 % when flying Me 262's. Marseilles claimed to have shot down 1 Spitfire when there were none in the area at the time and two Hurricanes on a day that total RAF losses were just 1 Hurricane, he also claimed 6 of 10 P 40's shot down by his squadron but total losses were 6. I have only just started to look at the claims and so far not looked at Gallands claims beyond finding that one day when he was leading a group of 40 Bf 109's they were attacked by just 12 Spitfires, Galland only just got away and they lost 4 Bf 109's to 2 Spitfires. I have found that while the Luftwaffe were supposed to have strict confirmation of kills that the system fell down and the claims of more experienced pilots were often accepted without confirmation. Hartmann had 352 claims and again I have not checked but of his claims they were all in the East and not a single Spitfire, he did claim a few P 51s, that brings me to how a Luftwaffe Fw 190 squadron flew in the East and their records show that towards the end of the war both USAAF in P 51's and RAF in Spitfires were around and the fighter they feared most was the Spitfire.
    2
  39. No he was ground maintenance in a Fairey Battle squadron in France before D Day the back in England and West Africa at different stages of the war, he was involved with Bristol Beauforts, Lockheed Hudsons and later DH Mosquitos. after the war he worked for Miles and DH. I have long been interested in aircraft and lucky enough to have met WW II pilots including one who flew Typhoons and the WW II test pilot Alex Henshaw, I also worked for a while with the late John Frost on a project of his, he was a designer who worked with Airspeed, Miles, Blackburn, Westland and DH before moving to Avro Canada. I have been researching the Spitfire for some time and rate it very highly, in fact even if it had not been a great fighter it earned a place in history for how it was a symbol for Britain. I haven't been to Duxford but am involved with a museum in New Zealand, not aviation but technology, I have been lucky enough to go to many airshows in Britain and have seen many WW II aircraft in flight. I inherited a lkot of books from mu father and have managed to increase the collection, some years ago I bought 3 of a series, 1 on Spitfires, 1 on Bf 109's and 1 on Fw 190's. I still think of these 3 as the best fighters of the war. I also have books on the Mosquito which was a remarkable aircraft.
    2
  40.  @gentlemanvontweed7147  The Nazi's were the enemy, most German's were not Nazi's, nothing wrong with my statement at all. My father was in the RAF right through the war and he would have no problem with this pilot getting to fly a Spitfire. Letting an old man do what he obviously enjoyed doing is just fine. maybe you hate German's for some reason but My father made friends with some lovely German's and so have I. The war is long over, get a life and move on. Hate only eats away at you. I know a lovely young German lady who does not like to talk about the war and she hates what the Nazi's did, I did say that if she was in Germany just after the war and I was in England we .would be bitter enemies but there is no reason why we should not be friends now, I could not wish for a better friend.
    2
  41.  @truereaper4572  Hard to make a dumbass like you any dumber. maybe if you could look it up you would find that everything i say is true
    2
  42.  @Sam-im5tc  USA did a lot, at least we are always told they did, the great US battles in Europe like D Day and the Battle of the Bulge were led by USA were they not? The truth is rather different.
    2
  43. vinDimwit. The Spitfire and Hurricane won the Battle of Britain, more Hurricanes but the Spitfire had the performance to take on the Bf 109. The Bf 109 was in Northern France in bigger numbers than both Spitfires and Hurricanes in the South East of England. That is why even when very outnumbered by experienced B f 109`s the Spitfire won so often, like when Adolf Galland was leading a flight of 40 Bf 109`s and tehy were attacked by just 12 Spitfires, the Spitfires won that little fight. In the Pacific the Spitfire was outperformed by what, Wildcat slower than a Hurricane, Hellcat about as fast as a Mk I Spitfire. In fact no fighter in the Pacific could match the Spitfire, the best fighter of the war. We owe it to try to be accurate, you do not try. Goring never said any such thing to Hitler idiot Galland said that to Goring and Galand said more, he said more than once how impressed he was with the Spitfire and most Luftwaffe pilots were afraid of spitfires not p 51`s, P 47`s or p 38`s. William R. Dunne an American who flew with 71 (Eagle) squadron Said "Once you`ve flown a Spitfire, it spoils you for all other fighters. Every other aircraft seems imperfect in one way or another.” Eric Brown (RN test pilot and holder of the world record for number of types of aircraft flown): "I have flown both for many hours, and would choose the Spitfire [over the Mustang] if given a choice in a fight to the death." Writer Jerry Scutts, quoting German pilots in his book JG 54: "The Jagflieger had to keep a wary eye out for enemy fighters, particularly Spitfires, a type JG 54's pilots had developed a particular aversion to...Pilot reflections do not, surprisingly enough, reflect over-much respect for the Mustang or Lightning" Karl Stein, Luftwaffe Fw 190 pilot (who served mainly on the Eastern front): "English and American aircraft appeared on the scene in those closing days of the European war. Spitfires were the most feared, then Mustangs..." USAAF pilot Charles McCorkle (who flew both in combat), reporting on a mock combat between a Spitfire and Mustang in 1944: "Now we could see which was the better aircraft...a Mustang and a Spit took off for a scheduled 'combat', flown by two top young flight commanders. When the fighters returned, the pilots had to agree that the Spitfire had won the joust. The Spit could easily outclimb, outaccelerate, and outmaneuver its opponent." I have much more including when the RAF received Spitfires in Burma and turned the tables on the Japanese Are all these pilots so wrong then?
    2
  44. If Britain had an election during the war Churchill would have been elected but it was a coalition government led by Churchill. Being able to break German codes helped the war effort and when a bombing raid was on the way air raid sirens warned everyone. Hess and the supposed peace plan, Hitler did not know about that, Hess only said as much to try to avoid being locked up. Everyone in debt? my daughter lives in London and is not in debt. When I lived in England I was never in debt. When was the last time the British economy crashed?
    2
  45. Since some of the comments seem to make out he was the enemy and should not be allowed to fly in a Spitfire, others make out he shot down Spitfires I feel it should be pointed out he flew on the Eastern front and that is where he scored all of his 81 victories. I do not know what type of aircraft he shot down except some were IL 2's and none Spitfires as far as I know.
    2
  46. vinm. There were more Hurricanes in the Battle of Britain but the Spitfire had a higher kill ratio and a lower loss ratio. The Spitfire was more than a match for the Bf 109 and in the Pacific no fighter was equal to the Spitfire. Maybe you could look up performance figures and show how all these fighters in the Pacific outperformed the Spitfire. Maybe you can try to find any that were faster with better acceleration or climb, good luck with that little problem. We owe it to learn a bit of true history before telling lies like you do. Goring never said that, Adolf Galland said to Goring " Give me a squadron of Spitfires" If you read Adolf Gallands book you would see why he said that.
    2
  47. The Spitfire was better than the Bf 109 right through the war, there were times the Bf 109 got close but that is all. The Spitfire in the Battle of Britain had a higher kill ratio and lower loss ratio than the Hurricane. That is a fact. Try to learn a bit of history before making more of an ass of yourself.
    2
  48. More fighters? most of the time the Luftwaffe had more fighters in the air. If we only had Hurricanes it would have been much harder. The Luftwaffe lost both bombers and fighters as reported by a Bf 109 squadron " not a day goes past when there is not another empty place at the mess table" The yanks did not churm out a single Spitfire, they did not have the ability to do so, in fact NAA wanted to improve the P 51 and went to Supermarine to see how the Spitfire was made. When did the Spitfire struggle? It beat the Japanese in Burma and Australia. Maybe if you like unbiased historical fact, try to learn a bit of true history.
    2
  49. Weilun and Frampol in Poland, the centre of Rotterdam, many more towns and cities in Norway, Belgium and France then cities in England including Bournemouth 47 times, the centre of Bournemouth which had no military or industry, even a small market town in the New Forest using HE and incendiaries, no military or war production. They also strafed civilians in Europe who were trying to escape the bombing. There is no one source, but it is not hard to look it up and find out more than you want to know.
    2
  50. Adolf Galland was annoyed when he said he would like Spitfires, he did not really mean it,he did say the Spitfire was better for the job it had than the Bf 109 for the job it had to do. Galland was shot down 3 times by a Spitfire and on one occasion when he was leading 40 Bf 109`s they were attacked by 12 Spitfires, the Spitfires came off best losing two while four Bf 109s were shot down and Galland himself said I only just managed to escape, he said he was very impressed by the Spitfire and the RAF pilots.
    2