Would the Bf 109E-7 available earlier change the Battle of Britain?

I'm sure a valve can be fitted that forces initial draw from the external tanks.

That is how drop tanks work. However as the 8th found the defenders then send up small groups of fighters to force the escorts to drop tanks. Do this enough times and you can strip the bomber escort away.

The 8th had to use relays of escorts Spitfires across the North Sea then P47s into Germany then Mustang's. On the way back it was reversed. It took hundreds of escorts and very good planning plus excellent radios to co ordinate everything. The Germans by September 40 are short of pilot's, fighters but most of all radios that can talk between escorts and bombers.

The 8th soon realised they could only do one raid into Germany per day even though they had the bombers to do more co-ordinating more than one raid was too much
 
If you google the Merlin engine wiki article itself, rather than the factory wiki article, it's a whole new world of different information. I got mine from a newspaper. I did have production figures from Sept 1940, but I'm old and feeble-minded and lost the source. Did you know that employees worked 82 hours per week, with a half-Sunday "holiday"?
I assume you have a source for that?
 
If you google the Merlin engine wiki article itself, rather than the factory wiki article, it's a whole new world of different information. I got mine from a newspaper. I did have production figures from Sept 1940, but I'm old and feeble-minded and lost the source. Did you know that employees worked 82 hours per week, with a half-Sunday "holiday"?
Actually, the Wikipedia article seems to state that the Hillington plant didn't start production until November 1940. Also, 82 hours a week was the reduced number of hours, from, I suspect, 84 (which would be 12 hours a day, everyday). Also, they got a half-Sunday "holiday" once per month.
 
Derby only ran 2 10 hour shifts a day. Posh.
Actually, the Wikipedia article seems to state that the Hillington plant didn't start production until November 1940. Also, 82 hours a week was the reduced number of hours, from, I suspect, 84 (which would be 12 hours a day, everyday). Also, they got a half-Sunday "holiday" once per month.
 
Someone asked earlier what would have happened if the Bf 109F-1 had been available earlier in the Battle of Britain.

But here's a more pertinent question: what if the Luftwaffe recognized the need for longer-range fighter operations and got the Bf 109E-7 with its 300 liter drop tank into service by early July 1940, or had them installed as Rüstsätze by mechanics on the front line on earlier Bf 109E models? With the ability for longer combat operations over the UK, would that have resulted in a lot more Spitfire and Hurricane losses, which would have made the British winning the Battle of Britain a lot more precarious situation?

Interestingly, the very same subject i was thinking recently (drop tanks for Bf-109). Imo, drop tanks would have the following effect: from memory, historically the Bf-109 was critically hampered by lack of range, f.e. only being able to spend 10 minutes or so over London, the pilots having to "fight with an eye on the fuel gauge", thus inhibiting them from fighting to their fullest abilities, and also having to leave the bombers early in many cases, and again if i'm not mistaken, an important number of Bf-109s ended running out of fuel and having to crash land. Yet despite all this, Bf-109 has a superior kill ratio to Spitfire (not to mention Hurricane). BUT, with drop tanks, the Bf-109E could stay for much longer above southern England, and probably stay with the bombers all the way in attacks as far as London (over which they can spend perhaps 25-30 minutes, not just 10), meaning they will engage more british fighters and thus save that many bombers from being shot down. They could even cope better following Goring idiotic instructions like waiting the bombers in the air (thus consuming precious fuel), or sticking to them all the way to and from target without disengaging to pursue RAF fighters. The following numbers are completely speculative, but imo i would guess that because of more fuel the Bf-109E would be even more effective against RAF fighters over southern England as far as London, so let's say that for whichever number of Bf-109Es lost over a given period, perhaps 15-20% more RAF fighters are lost over the same period compared to OTL, while Luftwaffe loses 25-30% less bombers over the same timeframe. But if Hitler and Goring are as idiotic as OTL and they still stop the attacks against airfields then likely Luftwaffe still will not manage to obtain air superiority over the southern England, but overall RAF will be even more bloodied compared to OTL, perhaps taking a bit longer to regroup and come back in numbers against attacks such as the one on Sept. 15th against London- so perhaps Battle of Britain day would be Sept. 30 or something. But overall i say the RAF loses on average 20% more fighters and germans lose on average 30% less bombers compared to OTL if the Bf-109E had drop tanks, IF the airfield attacks are stopped as in OTL. If not, then Seelowe is likely implemented, how that will go is of course another matter.

As for the 109F-1, well the simple answer is that if somehow they would have started it's developing and especially testing in 1939, even a few gruppe of these for the battle (the DB-601N engine was already there, only need the F airframe), with drop tanks, will cause havoc among the RAF fighters, not even 100 octane fuel will give them a fair chance, sort of like the Focke-Wulf scourge of 1941-1942. The Miles M.24 and the M.20 might see service in this scenario (and be wiped out without further ado). Really bad summer for RAF that would be.
 

Deleted member 1487

As for the 109F-1, well the simple answer is that if somehow they would have started it's developing and especially testing in 1939, even a few gruppe of these for the battle (the DB-601N engine was already there, only need the F airframe), with drop tanks, will cause havoc among the RAF fighters, not even 100 octane fuel will give them a fair chance, sort of like the Focke-Wulf scourge of 1941-1942. The Miles M.24 and the M.20 might see service in this scenario (and be wiped out without further ado). Really bad summer for RAF that would be.
As pointed out in the thread that inspired this one about the F-series being ready in July 1940, the structural issues of the series weren't worked out even 9 months later, so that problem would be a factor here.
 
Good ww2 fighter tactics is for the fighters to sweep ahead and to the flanks of the bombers and stop enemy fighters getting to close to the bombers. Being to close just meant getting in the way of the bombers gunners ( hesitation or blue on blue kills ) or disrupting the formation ( very bad ).
One of Hitler/Georings mistakes was to order the fighters to stay closer than they wanted after seeing the bomber losses ( originally they were ranging ). This allowed the RAF to mass the interceptors easier as well as being not as effective.
 
Good WWII fighter tactics cannot really be described in one or two lines. That said, it can certainly be said that close escort cannot be the only method, since it is defensive, without initiative, surprise and aggression.
Good ww2 fighter tactics is for the fighters to sweep ahead and to the flanks of the bombers and stop enemy fighters getting to close to the bombers. Being to close just meant getting in the way of the bombers gunners ( hesitation or blue on blue kills ) or disrupting the formation ( very bad ).
One of Hitler/Georings mistakes was to order the fighters to stay closer than they wanted after seeing the bomber losses ( originally they were ranging ). This allowed the RAF to mass the interceptors easier as well as being not as effective.
 
Top