Hi all.
As you can see I comment very rarely on these forums, although I do browse them a lot. Until now I've always felt that I have had nothing to offer, since my knowledge of the WWII ground war is vastly inferior to most of yours, and I come here to learn about aspects I do not understand, driven by my love for CM and my increasing fascination with the subject in general. When it comes to the air war and aircraft recognition however, I'm a bit more knowledgable.
The aircraft that I originally considered possible candidates for this case were the Spitfire, Typhoon, P-51, P-47, Bf 109 and Fw 190, which will have comprised the vast majority of single-engined aircraft roaming the skies of Northern France in early August 1944.
Apart from a brief week's operations over Normandy after 8th June, the RAF's entire complement of Tempests were tasked with defending southern England from the V1 threat, and they didn't re-enter the skies over the continent until 25th August. Hurricanes of all marks had long since been reassigned to secondary service in Europe, and were not to be found scooting about alone, at low level, over heavily-contested areas of France.
I think the Bf 109, Fw 190, Mustang and Typhoon can all be safely discounted straight away. Multiple differences in appearance can be demonstrated between this machine and either German type. The aircraft has too many curves to be a Mustang and appears to have a high-backed fuselage, ruling out a Typhoon.
To my eye the wing looks like a Spitfire's, but I think the wing in this photograph is the wrong place to look for a distinction between a Thud and a Spitfire. The aircraft is clearly in a bank, as evidenced by the visible step of the cockpit canopy towards the nose and also by the angled line of the wing leading edge in relation to the axis of the fuselage. The wing's exact planform is therefore difficult to ascertain. Add this to the fact that the photo is hideously blurred, and I think you could argue forever about whether the wing belongs to a Thunderbolt or a Spit.
The length of the nose ahead of the wing leading edge is also misleading. The nose in the photograph looks short, but only if you measure to the end of the bright section of the fuselage. We have no way of telling whether the darker section ahead of that is part of the engine cowling, or is caused by the blur of the propeller, or otherwise.
The tailplane of the aircraft appears to start ahead of the fin. That would make it a Spitfire. The leading edge of the tailplane appears to curve rearwards. That would make it a Spitfire. Again however, the poor quality of the image means that this can't be relied upon.
At first glance the rear fuselage is not arched enough to be that of a T-Bolt, but, again, it is extremely difficult to tell, as is the angle of bank and therefore the depth of the fuselage.
Finally, the step of the cockpit canopy is clearly visible and is clearly located above the rear half of the wing, even allowing for distortion due to the bank. The windscreen of a razorback Jug C or D is located approximately 1/3 of the way back from the wing leading edge. That of a Spitfire is located approximately 2/3 of the way back.
Basically, In my opinion this aircraft is a Merlin-engined Spitfire (it's DEFINITELY too short-nosed to be a XIV), but I can only say that I am 75% certain. For some reason, every time I come back and look at it I immeditely think "Spitfire", and I have learned to trust my instincts in this respect. I'm afraid that's all I can say. If it is a Spifire then it could be a dedicated PR machine, such as a Mk XI, but it could just as well be a vanilla V or IX, since it's impossible really to tell what it's doing.
Can someone describe more accurately which hulk is the wreck of Wittmann's Tiger? I'm buggered if I can tell the difference between little dark blobs on the ground...
