The Battle of Britain Five Months That Changed History, May—October 1940 by James Holland (z-lib.org).epub

although its roots were much narrower than that of the Spitfire, its legs were
splayed so that in fact, they were about the same width as that of the British
fighter. The Hurricane, with its inward folding undercarriage, was the most
stable of the three on the ground, but the great advantage of the Me 109
arrangement was that the legs were attached to the underside of the fuselage
rather than the wing. This meant wings could be replaced with comparative
ease without having to dismantle the wheels, legs and hydraulics. It is a
myth, however, that it was the narrow undercarriage that made the Me 109
so potentially lethal to the inexperienced. Rather, it was its unforgiving
nature at low speeds, more a result of its high wing loading and the
enormous torque of its DB601 engine. At Guines, for example, there was a
track running about two-thirds of the way across the airfield. ‘It was only a
slight dip,’ says Hans-Ekkehard Bob, ‘but it was just where you took off
and where you landed back down again. If you didn’t judge it right, it was
very easy to jolt the plane as the wheels went over it. Then a wingtip would
hit the ground, then the propeller, and before you knew it the machine had
flipped. It never happened to me, but it did to lots of others.’
It is true that considerable numbers of Me 109s were lost or damaged in
flying accidents, but there is little to suggest they were any higher than
those of the RAF, which suffered its fair share too. Despite its wide and
stable undercarriage, a staggering 463 Hurricanes, for example, were
damaged as a result of accidents between 10 July and 31 October. Some of
these were minor prangs, others were fatal. ‘Landed with undercarriage
retracted’, or ‘overshot’, or ‘hit rough ground’ were common lines scrawled
across the accident report cards. So too was ‘failed to open quick enough –
aircraft stalled’. ‘Taxied wrong way after landing on a very dark night,’ read
another report, ‘ran into ditch.’ ‘Carelessness. Unnecessary taxiing in the
dark when out of touch with Aldis lamp.’ There were also other noncombat-related
losses: mechanical failure, mid-air collisions, navigation
error, lack of fuel. In fact, it has been suggested that these contributed as
much as 20–30 per cent of losses during the battle – on both sides. Most
were caused by a mixture of inexperience, lack of concentration and
fatigue.
Yet, interestingly, the Farnborough tests also revealed that the British
pilots had no difficulties landing or taking off in the Me 109E once they got
used to it. Nor did Hans-Ekkehard Bob, or Dolfo Galland, or Siegfried
Bethke or Günther Rall. Ulrich Steinhilper dropped a wingtip and damaged