Nice shots(camera-wise). Another probably true story of a poor young RAF pilot that stayed in a bomber formation instead of diving onto them or coming from the sun. Those were sad days.
During the Battle of Britain Spitfires were not armed with cannons, they had 4 machine guns on each wing. This model of spitfire came much later in the war.
The RAF had 30 x cannon armed Spitfire IIc available in for the Battle of Britain. They were assigned to the fighter group defending Essex and the north east approaches to London. The extra weight of the cannons made them underperform compared to the machinegun armed Spitfire II.
@Andy Reid, these is news to me, I’ve read many books on the Battle of Britain and most of the pilots were begging for the spitfires to be armed with cannons instead of eight Browning 0.303 machine guns, which the pilots thought were ineffective.
Why don't you use IL2 Cliffs of Dover if you want to make a Battle of Britain video - it has the actual planes and map for the Battle of Britain, these are totally the wrong marks of Spitfires and Ju-88s.
It's cool, very cool, actually, but I think historically very innacurate (as video games always are). They wouldn't attack in individual combat. There would be a massive formation of bombers in "Kettes" of three in any kind of formation. Spitfires were arranged in a series of 4x3 Vics of Spitfires early. They would adopt a 3x4 "Finger Four" formation after "The Battle of Britain". A section of three would be vectored towards the formation, which was protected by 109s or 110s. Then, both sides would come upon the bombers, and an intricate ballet would ensue. They learned gradually rolling onto the formation from the flanks was usually optimal, and each section of three would try to select one small kette and try to all go for the same planes, one after the other, because it usually took more than three planes to bring a bomber down. They would try to match the speed and do it again from the other flank back the original position. After that, or before if the fighters were high, they would sweep down upon the Spitfires and try to hit them before they had a chance to get to the bomber formation. It was much more coordinated than this shows. I've heard The Few say in multiple accounts, that it was two minutes of planning punctuated by two minutes of sheer terror. All of the sudden, if you were able to shake the 109s or the 110s, you'd be way out in the middle of nowhere all by yourself, either low on ammo or fuel or both, and then hopefully you had to find your way back to base. Hellfire Corner at Dover was always the landmark they would try to navigate off (in 11 Group).
I know that IL-2 Sturmovik doesn't have the Spitfire Mk I or Mk II, but you could have used the Mk Vb instead of the Mk IXe. The Mk Vb would have been closer in performance to the Mk II. Nevertheless, a good video.
To everyone in the comment section talking that the Spitifre model is wrong, 2:12, he’s aware... But IL-2 GB doesn’t feature the Mk I nor Mk II models, so please just stop complaining and enjoy!
If you cannot show the correct Spitfire Model, don't make claims about "accuracy" . Be honest and explain to viewers that the correct model cannot be shown! C. R.
The first and most obvious historical inaccuracy is the presence of Spitfire fighters with 20mm cannons. 19 Sqdn actually had Spit IIB fighters outfitted with Hispano Suiza 20 mm guns, but they proved so unreliable that the squadron refitted with Spit IIAs, with 8 Browning .303 mgs. Improvements in the positioning and feed systems for the 20 mm guns resulted in 19 Sqdn being reequipped with MkIIBs in June 1940, but their contribution to the Battle of Britain was very low, as only this squadron flew this aircraft. The Spit MkIIA was the Spitfire that was predominantly used in the air battles between June and September 1940. It wasn't until November 1940 that the Spitfire was finally fitted with a 20 mm that would not jam after only one or 20 rounds. The Spit MkIIB would be used thereafter as the primary fighter type in the "Rhubarb" fighter sweeps over Western France until replaced by the MkV variant.
Actually, that is a Spit with the E wing (2 outboard 20 mm cannon and 2 inboard M2 50 cal mgs) which didn't appear, even on atrial basis, until November 1943.
Boyd, if you has been watching you would see at 2:09 "(Yes I know it isn't the exact model of spitfire for 1940, please relax guys LOL)" god sakes he just making a fun video to watch.
It's a real shame that you portray a model of Spitfire that did not exist in the Battle of Britain. It would be more convincing if you had done your homework when producing this Video. C.R.
Come on really. It’s CZcams and for fun. It’s not the history channel. It was clearly stated at the beginning of vid. He’s aware. How many vids have you produced on your channel. All historically accurate I presume.
@@cubicmaddness2052 Before you castigate my offering of Historical Videos, you should check my Channel and that of my father PO Hugh William Reilley where you will see that I have added a Pathe News Clip Titled "66 Spitfire Squadron at Gravesend 1940" in which he actually appears before he was shot down and killed. Is that accurate enough for you?. The Title of this Gaming Video is Video is:- "Battle of Britain Dogfight - Spitfires clash with Ju-88 Bombers! IL-2 Sturmovik Flight Sim". Whatever else it may be, it is not HISTORIC. It would be interesting to know if any member of your family helped to defend this Country from the enemy during the last War? C.R.
lockhandsreilley My point is that he clearly had a disclaimer regarding aircraft in question. And that perhaps viewers of his channel should not be so stringent in their approach with a person who does this for fun / hobby. I mean for Pete’s sake it’s a game. The question sir is not one of courage and honour. But rather one of understanding. Like say this videos composition and intended audience. As for your question of my family’s service. The answer is yes. Both grandfathers. They fought so that we didn’t have to. If you know what I mean? And in conclusion to our delightful interaction. I will take the opportunity to apologize for any offence to you, your channel or your ancestors that my comment may have caused. However sir my point remains. And you have done nothing but solidify my position. That being: if viewers wish to see serious and accurate videos there are venues for that such as your channel. However this is just a gamer having some fun making some pretty cool videos so I say let’s all chill bro have a beer and take it for what it is.
@@cubicmaddness2052 I understand your remarks and I accept your apology. My opening remark was "It's a real shame that you portray a model of Spitfire that did not exist in the Battle of Britain. It would be more convincing if you had done your homework when producing this Video." and that comment still stands. However it is pretty obvious to me that I am not the only one who has criticised the content :- "This video follows a simulation of young RAF pilots experience flying the Spitfire to intercept German Ju88 Bombers in the Battle of Britain." as claimed in the opening description. There is a very simple way out of this conundrem and that is to remove the words "HISTORIC" and "HISTORICAL" the references in the Title and Description. It is also unfortunate that the Author used the version of the IL-2 Sturmovik Version:- "IL-2 Sturmovik Great Battles series (Kuban, Stalingrad, Bodenplatte, Moscow)", whereas they could have used "IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover BLITZ" which uses aircraft, Airfields and lots more Battle of Britain detail which would have been historically accurate. This would have avoided any Historical criticism all together. My main point is that it should not have any reference to Historical Accurany in the Title or description. The rest of it is well produced. C.R.
Lol, seriously?? you call it a Dogfight between these planes...A dogfight, or dog fight, is an aerial battle between fighter aircraft conducted at close range. Dogfighting first occurred in Mexico in 1913, shortly after the invention of the airplane. Until at least 1992, it was a component in every major war, despite beliefs after World War II that increasingly greater speeds and longer-range weapons would make dogfighting obsolete. By the way, a historical simulation of what?? The Germans don`t send their Bombers without "Jagdschutz". Even if the Me 109 had no additional tanks, the German Air Force received additional tanks for its fighters much too late at the end of the Battle of Britain. Nevertheless, the Me 109 flew fighter protection, even if that meant that they only had fuel for 20 minutes over English ground. Short time to fight the spitfire, and if you didn't watch your clock you went swimming in the canal on your return flight! Only once German bombers flew an attack on England without protection, namely they flew from Norway at night over the North Sea. Much too far for the German fighters. Because of the high loss of aircraft, they never did it again ...Mfg Magnus
Thanks for watching! If you enjoyed, please consider supporting me on Patreon! It helps support my videos! Thanks! Patreon.com/TJ3Gaming
Nice shots(camera-wise). Another probably true story of a poor young RAF pilot that stayed in a bomber formation instead of diving onto them or coming from the sun. Those were sad days.
EXCELLENT VIDEO GREAT WORK AS ALWAYS!
1:44
those are some LOUD sirens
Nice video keep it up bro 👍
Amazing I like it
ok so TJ3 gaming the model was the Mk I
Airfield targets... *sirens go off* RAF pilots: go go go go!!! me: :o
You have done a good work, don't worry.
What game mate and this is so cool
This the the most lit video I ever seen i love it
During the Battle of Britain Spitfires were not armed with cannons, they had 4 machine guns on each wing. This model of spitfire came much later in the war.
Also 4-blade prop?
@Tulipan 57 I think.you are right, this early Spitfire model had a 3 blade propeller,
The RAF had 30 x cannon armed Spitfire IIc available in for the Battle of Britain. They were assigned to the fighter group defending Essex and the north east approaches to London. The extra weight of the cannons made them underperform compared to the machinegun armed Spitfire II.
@Andy Reid, these is news to me, I’ve read many books on the Battle of Britain and most of the pilots were begging for the spitfires to be armed with cannons instead of eight Browning 0.303 machine guns, which the pilots thought were ineffective.
@@javierloya4086 I'm sure about it even the very first had only 2 blades. But those were not is use in action.
More more more more!
Why don't you use IL2 Cliffs of Dover if you want to make a Battle of Britain video - it has the actual planes and map for the Battle of Britain, these are totally the wrong marks of Spitfires and Ju-88s.
It's cool, very cool, actually, but I think historically very innacurate (as video games always are). They wouldn't attack in individual combat. There would be a massive formation of bombers in "Kettes" of three in any kind of formation. Spitfires were arranged in a series of 4x3 Vics of Spitfires early. They would adopt a 3x4 "Finger Four" formation after "The Battle of Britain". A section of three would be vectored towards the formation, which was protected by 109s or 110s. Then, both sides would come upon the bombers, and an intricate ballet would ensue. They learned gradually rolling onto the formation from the flanks was usually optimal, and each section of three would try to select one small kette and try to all go for the same planes, one after the other, because it usually took more than three planes to bring a bomber down. They would try to match the speed and do it again from the other flank back the original position.
After that, or before if the fighters were high, they would sweep down upon the Spitfires and try to hit them before they had a chance to get to the bomber formation. It was much more coordinated than this shows. I've heard The Few say in multiple accounts, that it was two minutes of planning punctuated by two minutes of sheer terror. All of the sudden, if you were able to shake the 109s or the 110s, you'd be way out in the middle of nowhere all by yourself, either low on ammo or fuel or both, and then hopefully you had to find your way back to base. Hellfire Corner at Dover was always the landmark they would try to navigate off (in 11 Group).
I know that IL-2 Sturmovik doesn't have the Spitfire Mk I or Mk II, but you could have used the Mk Vb instead of the Mk IXe. The Mk Vb would have been closer in performance to the Mk II. Nevertheless, a good video.
If the plane is on fire and he can’t bail why not put it in the water near the shore where its not too deep?
To everyone in the comment section talking that the Spitifre model is wrong, 2:12, he’s aware... But IL-2 GB doesn’t feature the Mk I nor Mk II models, so please just stop complaining and enjoy!
If you cannot show the correct Spitfire Model, don't make claims about "accuracy" . Be honest and explain to viewers that the correct model cannot be shown!
C. R.
First, Haven't watched yet, but I know it'll be good!
EnD3r Gamer its always good
We need a Dogfight video between Spitfires and BF-109 (late models)
3rd also good stuff
Epic
Remarkable! nice videography! Keep up the good work, (but stop asking for money,,, im broke...)
The first and most obvious historical inaccuracy is the presence of Spitfire fighters with 20mm cannons. 19 Sqdn actually had Spit IIB fighters outfitted with Hispano Suiza 20 mm guns, but they proved so unreliable that the squadron refitted with Spit IIAs, with 8 Browning .303 mgs. Improvements in the positioning and feed systems for the 20 mm guns resulted in 19 Sqdn being reequipped with MkIIBs in June 1940, but their contribution to the Battle of Britain was very low, as only this squadron flew this aircraft. The Spit MkIIA was the Spitfire that was predominantly used in the air battles between June and September 1940.
It wasn't until November 1940 that the Spitfire was finally fitted with a 20 mm that would not jam after only one or 20 rounds. The Spit MkIIB would be used thereafter as the primary fighter type in the "Rhubarb" fighter sweeps over Western France until replaced by the MkV variant.
Actually, that is a Spit with the E wing (2 outboard 20 mm cannon and 2 inboard M2 50 cal mgs) which didn't appear, even on atrial basis, until November 1943.
Boyd, if you has been watching you would see at 2:09 "(Yes I know it isn't the exact model of spitfire for 1940, please relax guys LOL)" god sakes he just making a fun video to watch.
Am 4th
It's a real shame that you portray a model of Spitfire that did not exist in the Battle of Britain. It would be more convincing if you had done your homework when producing this Video.
C.R.
Come on really. It’s CZcams and for fun. It’s not the history channel. It was clearly stated at the beginning of vid. He’s aware. How many vids have you produced on your channel. All historically accurate I presume.
@@cubicmaddness2052 Before you castigate my offering of Historical Videos, you should check my Channel and that of my father PO Hugh William Reilley where you will see that I have added a Pathe News Clip Titled "66 Spitfire Squadron at Gravesend 1940" in which he actually appears before he was shot down and killed. Is that accurate enough for you?.
The Title of this Gaming Video is Video is:- "Battle of Britain Dogfight - Spitfires clash with Ju-88 Bombers! IL-2 Sturmovik Flight Sim". Whatever else it may be, it is not HISTORIC.
It would be interesting to know if any member of your family helped to defend this Country from the enemy during the last War?
C.R.
lockhandsreilley My point is that he clearly had a disclaimer regarding aircraft in question. And that perhaps viewers of his channel should not be so stringent in their approach with a person who does this for fun / hobby. I mean for Pete’s sake it’s a game. The question sir is not one of courage and honour. But rather one of understanding. Like say this videos composition and intended audience. As for your question of my family’s service. The answer is yes. Both grandfathers. They fought so that we didn’t have to. If you know what I mean?
And in conclusion to our delightful interaction. I will take the opportunity to apologize for any offence to you, your channel or your ancestors that my comment may have caused. However sir my point remains. And you have done nothing but solidify my position. That being: if viewers wish to see serious and accurate videos there are venues for that such as your channel. However this is just a gamer having some fun making some pretty cool videos so I say let’s all chill bro have a beer and take it for what it is.
@@cubicmaddness2052 I understand your remarks and I accept your apology. My opening remark was "It's a real shame that you portray a model of Spitfire that did not exist in the Battle of Britain. It would be more convincing if you had done your homework when producing this Video." and that comment still stands. However it is pretty obvious to me that I am not the only one who has criticised the content :- "This video follows a simulation of young RAF pilots experience flying the Spitfire to intercept German Ju88 Bombers in the Battle of Britain." as claimed in the opening description.
There is a very simple way out of this conundrem and that is to remove the words "HISTORIC" and "HISTORICAL" the references in the Title and Description.
It is also unfortunate that the Author used the version of the IL-2 Sturmovik Version:- "IL-2 Sturmovik Great Battles series (Kuban, Stalingrad, Bodenplatte, Moscow)", whereas they could have used "IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover BLITZ" which uses aircraft, Airfields and lots more Battle of Britain detail which would have been historically accurate. This would have avoided any Historical criticism all together.
My main point is that it should not have any reference to Historical Accurany in the Title or description. The rest of it is well produced.
C.R.
Showing a mk VIII Spitfire,only MKl and II were in Battle of Britain.
It’s a Mk IX, not Mk VIII.
@@HawkerMkIII nope ,MKVIII ,you can tell by the wide tail and symmetrical radiators underneath
thomas Gokey bro, in IL-2 is literally called Mk IX... you can also tell it’s a Mk IX because of the tail wheel, it is not retracted.
thomas Gokey Also the Mk IX had symmetrical radiators, and, I don’t know what you mean by “wide tail”, but I’ll just assume that it also has one.
@@HawkerMkIII the MklX was a MK V airframe with a Griffon engine ,yes the tail on MK lV was smaller ,end of story ,goodbye.
Lol, seriously?? you call it a Dogfight between these planes...A dogfight, or dog fight, is an aerial battle between fighter aircraft conducted at close range. Dogfighting first occurred in Mexico in 1913, shortly after the invention of the airplane. Until at least 1992, it was a component in every major war, despite beliefs after World War II that increasingly greater speeds and longer-range weapons would make dogfighting obsolete. By the way, a historical simulation of what?? The Germans don`t send their Bombers without "Jagdschutz". Even if the Me 109 had no additional tanks, the German Air Force received additional tanks for its fighters much too late at the end of the Battle of Britain. Nevertheless, the Me 109 flew fighter protection, even if that meant that they only had fuel for 20 minutes over English ground. Short time to fight the spitfire, and if you didn't watch your clock you went swimming in the canal on your return flight! Only once German bombers flew an attack on England without protection, namely they flew from Norway at night over the North Sea. Much too far for the German fighters. Because of the high loss of aircraft, they never did it again ...Mfg Magnus