[Franek Grabowski]

Only two of the 39 Spitfires on that list were Mk XVI and they belonged to No. 421 Squadron. Because the engines were changed so frequently it is possible that both planes had their Packards replaced with Rolls-Royce Merlins before they crashed.

What does it mean - frequently? Otherwise claim that Packards were exchanged for RRs in a Mk XVI equipped unit I find just ridiculous.

No one should be surprised. Here is something you'll never find in Rolls- Royce press releases:

No doubt but where I can find it? What is the source?

I doubt that was anywhere near the average. It sounds like more company propaganda from Rolls-Royce, and sales were poor.

Frankly, I do not see any civilian market for high power in-line engines and I believe this was the main reason of lack of successes.

I would like to see what happens to a Spitfire in a speed of Mach .91, or Mach .89, or whatever it was. That story has been rubbished by British aerospace engineers. They said that long before it reached that speed, the Spitfire would have broken up, much like those from the list I posted earlier.

Which British engineers? Could you name them? I understand you claim that engineers at RAE Farnborough were unable to calculate IAS properly.

This topic has come up often on the Usenet message boards over the past 10 years. Been there, done that.

Well, I cannot find usenet boards a completely reliable source of opinions.

My research indicates the exact opposite.
I just surveyed 162 Spitfires for engine failures and only nine were Spitfire Mk XVI. And it is not clear if any of these Mk XVIs had the original Merlin 266 installed. Possibly all nine of them had Rolls-Royce replacement engines when they were lost.

Well, it is not clear if those Spitfires that suffered structural failures were made of US Alclad but it is absolutely clear Packards were not exchanged for Merlins.

Except for one plane, the No. 133 Eagle Squadron was wiped out near Brest on 26th September 1942, partly due to the poor leadership of the Englishman who was leading the squadron. It started with the RAF weatherman who failed to predict high winds and the controllers at Exeter who did not keep track of their progress, but then the mission commander Flight Lieutenant E.G. Brettell made several mistakes that one would expect from a novice pilot, not a seasoned veteran. Only Don Gentile escaped because he aborted early. Robert Beaty managed to fly all the way back to the UK, although he ran out of fuel and crashlanded with serious injuries.

A well known story but I would like to read enquiry board report concerning the event.

It was a gradual process starting in May 1944, but nearly all USAAF fighters had a natural metal finish by August 1944. New planes were delivered unpainted and old planes had the paint stripped off, except for spot colors on the noses, tails and glare panels. There are hundreds of photographs to prove it.

A risky thesis having in mind a lot of aircraft were moved from 8 to 9 and there is just enough photos of rather worn camouflaged P-47s. Also, some US units continued to camouflage their aircraft. correctly considering it caused more disadvantage than advantage.

With thousands of engagements over the skies of Europe, a few cases of misidentifiation matters little. But if you insist on playing that game, here here are a few others:

A few? Even during the Battle of Britain there were claims for He 113 even if it was known the only German fighter was one-oh-nine. Misidentifications between 109s and 190s were so common that I think I can double your samples here working solely on my not too good memory.
Also, I have an account of Ottomar Kruse, II/JG26, in which he clearly states that all enemy aircraft were US to them.

29th December 1944
An Fw 190D-9 of JG26 was shot down in error by a Bf 109, probably from JG27. Shit happens.

Do not you mean the case of Siegfried Benz downed on 24.12.1944?

Agreed, but I noticed that RAF fighter pilots did not shoot at USAAF planes so often after natural metal finish and bright spot colors became standard.

I do not think they were shooting them that often before, because it was decided already in 1943 to make separate sectors for USAAF and RAF - my source - W/C Tadeusz Sawicz.

Found some relevant comments from LeRoy Gover, who piloted Spitfires with 66 and 133 Squadrons, RAF and later flew Thunderbolts with the 336th Fighter Squadron, USAAF....

What is the source? Anyway, ground defences of every nation fired at everything in the air and those were not US boys simply because there were none at the time.
I have to note here that I have heard several RAF pilots complaining about US abilities to identify own aircraft.