[Six Nifty .50s]

Originally Posted by Franek Grabowski

Acceleration is one thing, maximum speed attainable - another. Airfoil and wing shape are decisive in regard of aircraft performance. Ridiculous comment, because it was essentially a modified Mk IX airframe with enlarged oil tank, wing leading edge tanks, unarmoured windscreen and retractable tailwheel. Not the changes making a substantial difference.

Air resistance varies according to height and which greatly affects speed and acceleration. Different results were obtained when diving planes from 28,000 feet as opposed to 40,000 feet. There is nothing ridiculous about it.

Originally Posted by Franek Grabowski

Those were not ordinary pilots flying those dives. Several flights had been done and it was found that the aircraft is surprisingly bad and dissapointing in dive.

Yet in actual combat the Spitfire's dive acceleration and ability to overtake a German fighter was much inferior to the Thunderbolt. I've yet to find a single German pilot who said otherwise.

Originally Posted by Franek Grabowski

nobody believed it is possible to catch a diving German, Helmut Wick believed this and it costed him life. It was quite a different story with tropicalised variants but for another reason.

Again this is misleading. Any fighter, including jets, could be caught from behind in a dive if the attacker's speed was higher before the victim tried to escape.

Many RAF and Luftwaffe aces who commented on escape tactics said that diving was the most common and successful means of escape from a pursuing Spitfire. I've yet to find any pilots who disagreed with their consensus, which was backed up after the British tested captured German fighters.