40 numbered A4 size pages of high quality gloss paper but in fact 43 pages because the inner side of the front cover and the both sides of the back cover are fully utilized with drawings, text and photos. By using a small font much information and many photos is succeeded to be crammed on those 43 pages.
30 colour profiles
one 5-view colour drawing  
1:72 scale 5-view line drawing of standard production model, two profile line drawings (Long Range Development Unit version and standard plane with extended cockpit canopy) and a scrap profile of the Bristol Hercules HE 18 powered prototype.

I bought a second-hand copy of this publication. It was fairly cheap and I have been interested in Wellesley since I saw the box art of the Matchbox plastic model of it as a teenager. The main reasons to buy the copy were the geodetic construction of Wellesley (Vickers Wellington has always been one of my many favourite planes) which is well illustrated and explained in the booklet and the very reasonable price of it. And I wasn’t disappointed, the publication is very good in explaining the geodetic construction of Wellesley and the use of the plane by the RAF. The main operational area for Wellesley during the Second World War was the Horn of Africa during the East Africa Campaign 10 June 1940 – 27 November 1941.

There is not much to complain, some small details, e.g. the fact that all escorts of the convoy BN 3 are given as HMS Xxxx, in other words as Royal Navy ships when in fact the light cruiser HMS Leander had been HMNZS Leander since 1933 and there was no HMS Parramatta but HMAS Parramatta.

On the pages 32 – 33 the story on the occasion on 21 October 1940 when according to White a Wellesley crew got eight light bomb hits on an Italian destroyer putting it out of commission for a while somewhere near the Straits of Mandeb. The place is given as off Haleah Island, probably same as Halib Island. I cannot find any confirmation to this from any of the sources I have in my possession. But on the same day according to the British Official History, Playfair et al page 248, the Italian destroyer Francesco Nullo was driven ashore near Massawa by the Royal Navy and was subsequently bombed and destroyed by three Bristol Blenheims of No. 45 Squadron. Rohwer’s & Hummelchen’s Chronology of the War at Sea, 1939–1945 on page 39 gives essentially the same info and confirming that the three Blenheims destroyed the ship on 21 October 1940. Wiki and wrecksite.eu confirmed the story and give the exact place, on Harmi Island. It, also known as Harmil Island, lays NE of Massawa while Halib Island is SE of Assab, so a considerable distance to SSE. The Italian destroyers in Red Sea area usually operated from Massawa and nothing I have seen on the operational history of the seven Italian Red Sea destroyers implicates that any other of them but Francesco Nullo would have been damaged on 21 October 1940. But the damage to that unidentified destroyer might have been so light that it is not mentioned in any of my source. Or the ship was not a destroyer but a smaller ship. It is certainly not unheard that aircrews claimed hitting a much larger vessel than their real target was whether they hit it or not. Even the fate of Francesco Nullo is not entirely clear. While Langtree in his The Kelly’s on page 109 claims that Francesco Nullo was sunk by a torpedo from HMS Kimberley off Harmil Island after the latter had disabled it with gunfire. This is agreed by Conway’s All the World’s Fighting Ships 1922-1946 but according to Whitley while agreeing that HMS Kimberley forced Francesco Nullo ashore he agrees with the Playfair et.al. and several other sources that after that the Italian ship was bombed and destroyed by the RAF. Strangely neither Shores in his Dust Clouds in the Middle East nor Warner in his The Bristol Blenheim mention this action even if this would have been a significant success to the RAF and particularly to the Blenheim unit if the ultimate destruction of a 1058 tons destroyer was their achievement.

On November 16, 1940 according to Shores and the FlyPast Special one Wellesley (L2695) failed to return from a bombing sortie against Massawa. White only mentions that three Wellesleys were sent to bomb Gura, circa 75 km SSE Massawa and did that without a loss. The anti-aircraft defences of Massawa claimed one Aden-based bomber shot down during a raid. The Wellesley was a part of the small on Prim Island based detachment of No. 223 Squadron. Perim Island situates circa 170 km West of Aden.

On 3 April 1941, there were only five Italian destroyers putting to sea for a raid because the sixth had ran aground earlier. And one of them aborted the mission early because of engine trouble, of the remaining four two were sunk by Swordfishes of HMS Eagle. Later five Wellesleys of the 223 Squadron attacked the remaining destroyers Tigre and Pantera while they were at anchor off Saudi Arabia coast south of Jeddah and transferring fuel and ammunition from Tigre to Pantera in order to scuttle Tigre and continue the operation only with Pantera. The attack foiled the Italian plan and their commander ordered abandonment and scuttling of both destroyers. The Wellesleys might well have sunk Tigre, which the Italians were already abandoning. Pantera might has been sunk by the British destroyer HMS Kingston. But it may be that both of the destroyers were already scuttled as the Italians claim.

The last active Wellesley unit was the No.47 Squadron Air Echelon flying A/S and convoy protection sorties over the Eastern Mediterranean from late April 1942 to the end of February 1943.

Tables:
Vickers Wellesley Production & Serial Numbers
Vickers Wellesley Technical & Performance Characteristics, there is an error in converting the capacity of the two auxiliary tanks of Wellesley from imperial gallons to litres which gives ten times too much volume in litres.
Vickers Wellesley Units & Representative Aircraft
Vickers Wellesley Units & Bases
Vickers Wellesley Kits and Decals

Two maps: the area of the East Africa Campaign, or the Horn of Africa and The Eastern Mediterranean.
The map of the area of the East Africa Campaign shows the locations of several Eritrean places mentioned in the text but of those locating in Abyssinia or British Somaliland only the locations of both capitals are shown. 

Airplanes with short production runs and fairly short service histories are good topics for books in the sense that their service histories are easy to describe in fairly short books. For example, describing the service history of the Messerschmitt Bf 109, Supermarine Spitfire, or Consolidated B-24 Liberator with the same accuracy would mean a massive series of thick books.

Barfield, Norman, Vickers Wellesley variants Aircraft Profile 256 (Windsor: Profile Publications, 1973).
Conway’s All the World’s Fighting Ships 1922-1946 (London: Conway Maritime Press, 1980).
FlyPast Special WELLINGTON Edited by Ken Ellis (Stamford: Key Publishing 2013).
Langtree, Christopher, The Kelly’s British J, K, & N Class Destroyers of World War II (Annapolis: Naval Institute
     Press, 2002).
Mason, Francis K, The British Bomber since 1914 (London: Putnam, 1994).
Orange, Vincent et.al., Winged Promises: History of No.14 Squadron, RAF 1915-1945 (London: The Royal Air
     Force Benevolent Fund Enterprises, 1996).
Playfair, Major-General I. S. O. et. al, The Mediterranean and Middle East Volume I (London: Her Majesty’s
     Stationery Offife, 1954).
Rohwer, Jürgen and Hummelchen, G., Chronology of the War at Sea, 1939–1945: The Naval History of World
   War Two (London: Greenhill Books, Second, revised, expanded edition 1992).
Roskill, Captain S.W., The War at Sea 1939 – 1945. Volume I The Defensive (London: Her Majesty’s Stationery
     Office, 1954).
Shores, Christopher, Dust Clouds in the Middle East. The Air War for East Africa, Iraq, Syria, Iran and
   Madagascar, 1940 – 42 (London: Grub Street, 1996).
Warner, Graham, The Bristol Blenheim A complete history (Manchester: Crecy Publishing, Second edition
     2005).
Whitley, M.H., Destroyers of World War Two: an international encyclopedia (Annapolis, Md: Naval Institute
     Press, 1988). 

http://www.wlb-stuttgart.de/seekrieg/40-10.htm
https://www.wlb-stuttgart.de/seekrieg/41-04.htm 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Convoy_BN_7 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sauro-class_destroyer 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leone-class_destroyer 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_shipwrecks_in_October_1940#20_October http://www.wrecksite.eu/wreck.aspx?138168 

128 pages, about 220 b&w photos and six sketches. ISBN: 978 1 78159 034 8
 
A pleasant surprise, not a perfect book on the subject but anyway gives information on an interesting subject and with plenty of interesting black and white photos on British fighters in various stages of construction.

The beginning of the content listing is a bit inaccurate, on the page 4 there is Selected Technical Glossary, which is a good idea. On the pages 5 and 6 the author gives very short summary on the RAF expansion schemes in 1930s, the Shadow Scheme etc. So the Spitfire chapter begins on the page 7. In many chapters the information how the aircraft type in question was built came mainly from numerous photos and their captions, the text in these chapters gives a brief production history of the aircraft. Four of the six sketches are in the Seafire chapter (of the wingtip joint and locking mechanism on the front spar, the main hinge of the front spar, the main hinge of the rear spar and the arrestor hook).

Small Scale Track Builds is a very interesting chapter on the manufacturing Martin Martinet target tug cabin tops, explaining an early 1940s mass production system.

Besides aircraft and aero engine production, propeller production is also explained and funnily there is the typo which according to an anecdotal information got the RAF to substitute the term propeller for airscrew, namely airscrew is typed as aircrew.

The article on a “real” cottage industry is very interesting. Volunteers, mainly half-time women, produced parts in garden huts, lounges of large houses, and usually these shops were for various hand-assembly and non-machine operations. The Ministry of Production, in conjunction with the Ministry of Labour and Supply Departments, extended the plan and by 1943 figures showed that there were some 20,000 outworkers in Britain, many in rural districts, but nearly half of them in the London area. De Havilland’s made particular use of this available labour force and ʽout-worked’ a lot of small components for their Mosquitoes. Long runs of light parts were the most suitable for outworking. A high degree of skill and accuracy was attained by women producing particular components in their own homes or local workrooms. Also in the London and South-Eastern region, 320 National Fire Service Station carried out productive work.

Also there is a chapter on the manufacturing of barrels of 20mm Hispano cannon. Lathes used in manufacturing 20mm Hispanos were longer than I had thought.

Supermarine Walrus, not the most modern plane in early 1940s but IMHO surprisingly it was the first British squadron-service aircraft to incorporate a fully retractable main undercarriage, completely enclosed crew accommodation, and an all-metal fuselage in one airframe.

Also pantograph routing and drilling machine is explained with a sketch.

Lastly de Havilland Hornet, which is IMHO a bit unnecessary addition. As the article itself noted, its production was much the same as that of DH Mosquito but in incorporating stressed Alclad lower-wing skins bonded to the wooden upper wing structure using the new adhesive Redux which technic was also in the fabrication of the aluminium/wood main wing spar even if this latter fact not mentioned in the article. And it was in essence post-war aircraft. The first series production Hornet F.Mk. 1 first flew on 1 February 1945 but the Pacific War was over before any could reach the combat area.

 I have a few complains. There are too much clip and paste text, e.g., in the Chapter on RR Merlin there is an interesting information on testing a new engine, but it only gives the last part of that, made after the final reassembly, clipped from a contemporary report. That part of the chapter would be much more informative if the author had given a short introduction in which he would have given the amount of running hours in earlier testing so that a reader would have got information how many hours a Merlin was run before it was handed over to a customer.

On the man hours needed to produce a Hurricane and a Spitfire. The book gives only one number per type but does not mention the date, but clearly the figures are those achieved in January 1940, probably taken from Postan’s British War Production. It is known that the man hours needed dropped during the production run as the experience and knowledge increased. And by January 1940 Supermarine had produced a bit over 500 Spitfires, so it was still fairly beginning of the learning curve. And Supermarine was a fairly small manufacture, a bigger factory was usually more efficient than a smaller one, e.g., the large Castle Bromwich shadow factory, which began its production in June/July 1940, needed later on significantly less man hours to produce a Spitfire V than Supermarine which itself used 2,200 man-hours less to produce a Spitfire Mk. VC in 1942 than had used to produce a Spitfire Mk. I in January 1940.

The Beaufighter chapter doesn’t make it clear that while the intention was a maximum re-use of Bristol Beaufort components, the end product, i.e., series production Beaufighters had almost no structural commonity with Beaufort. One can see from photos and drawings that Beaufighter's fin and rudder areas have been increased on production examples and the control surfaces have been changed as the trim tabs on the Beaufighter increased in size over those fitted onto the Beaufort. Also wings changed in structure owing to weapons fit and IIRC even landing gear was changed because of the weight increase. And contrast to many other chapters most of the text of this chapter is on the operational history of the type, but at least the photos are on production phases.

The book is clearly for us amateurs and not so much for those who design aircraft structures but an interesting book well worth of having giving interesting information on the subject not too often dealt with.

ʽForties Favourites – 5’, Aeroplane Monthly, Vol. 15, No. 9, September 1987.
Buttler, Tony, ʽType Analysis: Hornet and Sea Hornet: The ultimate piston twins’ International Air Power
   Review, Vol. 10 (2003).
Morgan, Eric B., Shacklady, Edward, Spitfire: The History, Fifth impression (revised) (Stamford: Key
   Publishing, 2000).
Postan, M. M., British War Production, (London: H.M. Stationery Office and Longmans, Green & Co., 1952).
Price, Alfred, The Spitfire Story (London: Cassell & Co, Revised Second Edition, 2002).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_Walrus
https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/spitfire-v-me109-i-have-found-these-links-on-the-net.29431/page-15
   message 07-03-2011 11:15 PM by Hop

I was a bit disappointed with the article on the technical evolution of the Beaufighter, because it claimed that the max. speeds and especially the service ceilings of the Beaufighter Mk. If, IIf and TF.X were exactly the same. There wasn’t much difference in max. speeds but service ceilings were different. That made me put the publication aside for a couple years. But when I continued the reading I found out that it is fairly good after all. It covers admirably the many roles in which Beaufighter was utilized and there are many interesting black and white photos. The articles are:

Close Shave on an encounter between a Beaufighter from 235 
   Squadron and a Focke-Wulf Fw 190 from1./JG 5 off the coast of 
   Norway on March 3 1943 by Andrew Thomas. Nicely checked also
   against German records.
Aces a table of the Beaufighter aces by Andrew Thomas.
Adapt, Improve, Excel, the evolution of the Beaufighter by M L 
   Wynch. The article also deals very briefly with Buckingham,
   Buckmaster and Brigand. There are 3-view drawings of
   Beaufighter If, II and TF.X plus several interesting b/w photos. 
    IMHO the most glaring shortcoming in this article is that it doesn’t reveal that the leading idea of using the
    most of the structures/components of Beaufort in Beaufighter didn’t work out. During the development of
    the prototypes the different demands of a fighter to a torpedo bomber necessitated alternations and so
    the idea of community between Beaufort and Beaufighter became only an unfilled dream.
Power, on the power plants used on the Beaufighters. Some good detail photos here.
Beaufighter Squadron Directory by Andrew Thomas. The photos here includes a rare colour photo of a 235
    Squadron Beaufighter Ic.
Malta’s Auxiliaries on the 600 Squadron brief deployment on the island by Robin J Brooks.
A London ‘Beau’, a colour 3-view of Beaufighter VIf X7887 of 600 Squadron in black night fighter camo by
    Pete West with a brief service history.
Rare Birds, the Beaufighter survivors.
Whispering Death on operational history of Australian Beaufighters by Jim Grant.
Under Other Flags on Overseas Use and Post-War Exports by Doug Hall.
Punch on the armament options of Beaufighter with a table of the armament options of Beaufighter Mk.
    VIf, Mk. X and Mk. 21 and good detail photos of different armaments.
A Bob’s Worth on 1944 booklet Beaufighter – The Account of the Part Played by the Aircraft in Defence and
    Offence by Jonathan Garraway.
Strike Wing on the North Coates Strike Wing 1942 – 1943 by Graham Pitchfork. Operations and tactics used,
    also something on the leading personalities. Some stunning photos taking during attacks but these are
    well known.
Deserts and Seas on the Beaufighter operations of 252 Squadron by Jonathan Garraway. There are some
    interesting tables in the article; one gives the aircraft types and versions used by 252 Squadron with the
    timeframes of the use, the second the bases used and the third is ‘Losses of First Squadron Mk.Ics 1941’.
Stars and Stripes on USAAF 417th NFS Beaufighter night fighters by Warren E Thompson. An interesting
    article with lot of references from combat reports. But the last statement that there was very little, if any,
    dissatisfaction with the aircraft seems to be an understatement, because according to Pape & Harrison, at
    least some Americans complained loudly about Beaufighter, not least because it was a tail dragger. 
    There were also complains that it was a bit slow making catching of Ju 88 difficult. Some Americans even
    claimed that the Beau was rather useless as a night fighter.
Night Owls on Beaufighters in their main duty, alongside that of a strike fighter, namely as British and
    Commonwealth night fighter by Andrew Thomas. And of course the combat accounts given cover besides
    the air defence of Great Britain and Northern Ireland also the Mediterranean Theatre of Operations and the
    CBI area. I would have liked if the place of Roy Butler’s Do 24 claim on 26 September 1944 had been given
    more unambiguously. Now I had to check the place of the claim from Aces High for confirmation that the
    victim was probably 1M+RR mentioned in de Jong’s book. The few actions which I compared against
    Thomas’ Beaufighter Aces of World War 2 are the same in both publications.
Tugging at sleeves not only on the TT.10 but also the post-war operations of the TF.X by Doug Hall. This is
    an interesting article. Target tugs were important but often forgotten planes. Also the few post-war
    Beaufighter TF.X operations, not only during the initial part of the Malaya Emergency but also earlier ones
    on Java and in Burma, are given brief notices.


http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/beaufighter/x7542.html
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/beaufighter/el290.html
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/great-britain/aircraft/fighter/bristol-beaufighter-fighter.asp

Bingham, Victor, Bristol Beaufighter (Shrewsbury: Airlife Publishing, 1994).
Bowyer, Michael J. F., Interceptor Fighters for the Royal Air Force (Wellingborough: Patrick Stephens, 1984).
Green, William, Famous Fighters of the Second World War (Garden City: Doubleday & Co., 1969).
Gunston, Bill, Classic aircraft. Fighters (Optimum Books, 1978).
Jong, Peter de, Dornier Do 24 Units Combat Aircraft •110 (Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2015).
Pape, Garry R. & Harrison Ronald C., Queen of the Midnight Skies: The History of America’s Air Force Night
    Fighters (West Chester, PA: Schiffer Publishing, 1992).
Shores, Christopher and Williams, Clive, Aces High (London: Grub Street, 1994).
Thomas, Andrew, Beaufighter Aces of World War 2. Osprey Aircraft of the Aces • 65 (Oxford: Osprey
       Publishing, 2005)

A very good purchase, this collection of articles proceeds chronologically through the first part of the year 1945. 130 A-4 size pages. At first it gives the development of the situation in the autumn of 1944 followed by an article on the Operation Bodenplatte, the surprise attack against Allied airfields on January 1, 1945 by the Luftwaffe.

This  12 pages article is good but of course if one wants a definite account of the operation the real thing, Manhro’s and Pütz’ excellent Bodenplatte book is a must, but that is of course not surprising. The text is informative and the photos are well-chosen. The figures of the LW losses are clearly taken from Manhro’s and Pütz’ book but they are only partially given, the infomation that 47% of the LW losses were by Allied AA and 23% were by Allied fighters is only a partial truth because according to the Manhro’s and Pütz’ book in addition 5% of the losses were by either Allied AA or Allied fighters and 11% were to unknown causes. The German flak, contrary to the old myth, contributed only 5% of the German losses.

The story of the shooting down of three Mistels by four P-51 Mustangs from the 55th Fighter Group on Feb 3, 1945 is a good one. It gives besides the good information on the combat a brief history of the Mistel and the planned attack on Scapa Flow by Mistels and flare-dropping Ju 88s and 188s and the fates of the four Mustang pilots during the last few months of the war. Out of the four one was shot down by the deadly German Flak and went missing, possibly murdered by furious civilians, another became a prisoner of war when his attempt to rescue a friend downed by Flak failed and one was killed either because he stalled at low level or because of he was shot down by ground fire.

Squadron Leader Clive Rowley has written an interesting article on the Australian ace Tony Gaze’s life. While serving in the RAF Gaze got 1½ jet kills while flying Spitfire XIVs before being posted on May 1, 1945 to command ‘A’ Flight of 616 Squadron on Meteor III jets. Naturally the eight pages article concentrates on his combat career and its ups and downs. The only complain I have is that Me 262s of KG 51 is sometimes given as a Me 262 of JG 51, which is totally wrong, JG 51 was a conventional fighter unit equipped in 1944 – 45 with Bf 109Gs and fighting in the Eastern Front, the only exception was the IV./JG 51 which during the last month of the war was equipped with Fw 190s, before that it also had Bf 109Gs. Also the KG(J) 51,  which Rowley sometimes uses, is wrong, the unit was a bomber/fighter-bomber unit not a fighter unit formed out of a bomber unit. Rowley gives a different WNr. and code to Gaze’s Me 262 victim, 500064 and 9K+CL than John Foreman and S. E. Harvey in their a bit dated Me 262 Combat Diary, 110615 and 9K+NL but the unit and the pilot are same even if both give the unit designation wrongly. Smith and Creek agree with Foreman and Harvey in the WNr., they don’t give the code, and give the unit designation rightly. But Andreas Brekken’s/Aviation History Society Norway’s webpage agree with Rowley see http://www.ahs.no/ref_db/lw_loss_public.asp?lossid=103175, so while both Andreas and Smith & Creek are very good researchers in this case I tend to believe Andress in that at least in loss documents the WNr. and code is given as 500064 and 9K+CL.

The eight pages Natter article is very good.

Yaks over Köningsberg, the story of the French Normandie-Niemen fighter regiment operations over Kaliningrad area/East Prussia in the early part of 1945, pure chronology based only information from one side other than the OoB of the Luftwaffe’s Luftflotte 6 on the 11 January 1945. One notice on it, while it is true that ground-attack versions of Fw 190s could be used as pure fighters as the author writes they were handicapped by the weight of their extra armour. In the introduction part of the article unit’s pilot losses during its early part of existence are compared to the claimed victories which is doubly misleading, firstly over-claiming was common in all air forces and secondly pilot losses were fewer than aircraft losses. Luckily in the main part of the article which tells the story of its participation to the fighting over East-Prussia also those losses where pilots survived are mentioned.

Ram Them! is a good blow-to-blow article on the Sonderkommando Elbe’s ramming attacks on April 7, 1945 with well-chosen B/W photos. It concentrates to the action between SKdo Elbe and USAAF heavy bombers and doesn’t spend much space on the fighter vs fighter combats between Luftwaffe fighters and USAAF escorts, mentioning only a couple air victories achieved by P-51 pilots or delve much the moral/ethical discussion amongst German commanders on the advisably of ramming attacks. But that is quite understandably, in a short article like this it is good to have a clear focus. The author is in opinion that only ten bombers were lost to the Elbe pilots while Weir in his book on the subject writes that USAAF seems to have lost 13 bombers to the Sonderkommando Elbe pilots. Also according to Caldwell’s Day fighters book Sonderkommando Elbe pilots got 13 or 14 bombers. According to Freeman’s The Mighty Eight War Diary at least eight and according to Boehme’s JG 7 history twelve heavy bombers at most. In the end of the article there is a short note on the Oberst Hajo Herrmann’s final wartime scheme – Sonderkommando Bienenstock, demolition teams flown on Fieseler Fi 156 Storck light STOL planes behind enemy lines.

King of Fighters The Best Single-seater of 1945.
The author rightly pointed out the importance of pilot quality in fighter combat and so paper figures were not all important The article claims that Bell P-63 Kingcobras were used against Germany in small numbers by the Soviets but because of the lack of corroborating evidence Yefim Gordon in his Soviet Air Power in World War 2 (2008) and in his and Sergey Komissarov’s US Aircraft in the Soviet Union and Russia (2008) writes that he/they stick(s) to the generally accepted version of events that the Kingcobras did not see combat on the Soviet-German front. So in its place there should be Bell P-39Q or N, if one Lend-Lease Eastern Front plane is wanted to be included. And why not, P-39 was widely used by Soviets until the end of the war and three (2nd, 3rd and 5th) of their five top aces got most of their kills while flying Airacobra.
While generally acceptable article but on the Soviet fighters there are a number of points on which I have a different view. The maximum climb rate given for the Spitfire LF Mk. IX (4,470 ft/min) seems to be that of the much rarer HF Mk. IX, which was lower than that of the real one for LF Mk IX, namely 5,080 ft/min at sea level and 4,725 ft/min at 2,000 ft with the boost of +25 lb/sq.inch. while using 100/150 grade fuel, and with +18 lb/sq.inch boost (100/130 grade fuel) 4,620 ft/min at sea level. As for Spitfire Mk. XIV the given 4,700 ft/min is correct for +18 lb/sq.inch boost, but during the last 1½ months of the war in Europe +21 lb/sq.inch boost was allowed with 100/150 grade fuel making possible the climb rate of almost 5,100 ft/min at sea level. On the contrary the rate of climb given to Tempest Mk. V (4,700 ft/min) seems to be optimistic, the maximum figure I have seen is 4,380 ft/min at sea level.
On Republic P-47 Thunderbolt the Spitfire version to which it and North American P-51 Mustang are compared is missing, the claims made are true only when the US planes are compared to Spitfire Mk. XIV, Spitfire LF Mk. IX was slower than P-51D at all altitudes and slower than P-47D at medium and high altitudes. And both mentioned US fighters zoomed better than any WWII era Spitfire. And not only Mustang but all WWII fighters powered by liquid-cooled engines were vulnerable to even light battle damage to their cooling system.
Contrary to claim of the author, P-38L didn’t lack stopping power, its armament, while not exceptionally heavy, was a good average for a late war fighter.
Lockheed P-80A had the same six .5 M2 as P-51D Mustang but its machine guns were all concentrated to the nose giving more concentrated and effective fire pattern.
While the first Lavochkin La-7s that reached combat zone had max speed of 406 mph and rate of climb 3,396 fpm, the late La-7s from late 1944 onwards had max speed of 418 mph and rate of climb 4,762 fpm , so in early 1945 and under 2,000m only Hawker Tempest was faster than it and Bf 109K-4 had equal speed. Spitfire Mk. XIV with +21lb boost became faster at little under 3,000 m and with +18lb boost at little under 4,000 m. Spitfire Mk XIV with +21lb boost out climbed it at all altitudes as did Bf 109K-4, but Spitfire Mk. XIV with +18lb only above appr. 1,500 m. La-7 was an excellent low- and medium altitude fighter and these were the altitudes where most of the Eastern Front air combats were fought. It suffered from engine unreliability which arose from the engine installation not from the engine itself. And while roll-over bar was recommended for production La-7s, according to Ves̆ts̆ík’s Lavoc̆kin La-7 book it wasn’t installed and that seems to be the case. But it isn’t all bad, according to the article La-7 had bigger spinner than La-5FN, I don’t remember seeing that information before but when I measured the spinners from the line drawings in Gordon’s Lavochkin’s Piston-Engined Fighters the results confirmed that. So at least according to the line drawings the information is correct. A pair more complains; the second photo seems to shows a Lavochkin La-5F not a La-7 and La-7 was powered by Shvetsov ASh-82FN not by ASh-82FNV, maybe the author means Shvetsov M-82FNV which was the prototype/pre-production version of the engine of which was installed in La-5FNs and La-7s. Its production version was at first designated as Shvetsov M-82FN but soon re-designated as Shvetsov ASh-82FN to honour its chief designer Arkadiy Shvetsov.
On Yak-3 there is a bit different problem, according to Gordon’s Soviet Air Power book the max. speed of it was 398 mph not 407 mph given in the article, but performance, especially the maximum level speed, of the partly wooden Soviet fighters varied even more than the metal Western ones. And I have seen Soviet/Russian graphs showing both 401 and 405 mph as the maximum speed for Yak-3. But again it is the maximum rate of climb that is my main problem, the table in the article shows 3,650 fpm while Soviet graphs showed 4,330 fpm, which is the rate of climb that would explain why Soviet pilots had so high regard on that little fighter and why German pilots thought it being so dangerous opponent. It seems that the author has got his Soviet aircraft specifications from Wikipedia, where somebody has calculated the Soviet rates of climb by simply using the time to altitude information from Gordon’s Soviet Air Power book and converting it to a rate of climb by dividing the altitude (16,400 ft) by the time needed to reach it. The results definitely aren’t the maximum rates of climb of those planes.
While as I wrote above, it seems that Bell P-63 Kingcobra didn’t see combat in Europe during the WWII, the climb data given in article seems to be too low, the internet site says 3,600 ft/min, according to Dean it was even better. This is in line with the time to height information in Gordon’s and Wagner’s books.  According to Dean P-63 had the best rate of climb of the all USAAF fighters seeing series production during WWII.  Otherwise the description of P-63 is ok and rightly pointed out reasons why USAAF didn’t use it as a combat plane, the lack of range and high altitude performance, it was low and middle altitude fighter.
Focke-Wulf Fw 190A-9, the speed given is that without compressibility correction which is the way how German data was rather often given, so almost 10 mph too optimistic when compared other planes whose maximum speeds are usually given with compressibility correction. Also its rate of climb seems to have given as 2,350 ft/min, which is same as given in Kens’ and Nowarra’s old Die deutschen Flugzeuge 1933-1945 and Wood’s/Gunston’s Hitler’s Luftwaffe for Fw 190A-8  when a German document I have seen gives 11.7 m/s which converts to 2,303 ft/min for Fw 190A-9. The same document gives only 9.7 m/s, that is 1,909 ft/min, for Fw 190A-8 but also 14.0 m/s (2,756 ft/min) with emergency power with increased boost.  On the other hand 3,445 ft/min for Fw 190A-8 with 1.42 ata boost is given in my very poor copy of the Focke-Wulf Flugzeugbau-Flugmechanic-L graph dated 12 Jan 1944. The maximum RoC isn’t better with 1,68 ata but this higher boost gives significantly better RoC between 1.500m and 5.500m. The figure 2,677 ft/min A-8 1.32 ata is given in Focke-Wulf Flugzeugbau-Flugmechanic-L graph dated 13 Nov 1943. A Soviet test gives maximum 3,563 ft/min with special power and 3,150 ft/min with the combat power (probably means Steig- und Kampfleistung) but the Fw 190A-8 used in it was without outer wing cannon and also had smaller fuel load and was 314 kgs lighter than the standard Fw 190A-8 in German flight tests graphs. I admit that Fw 190A-9 was a hard nut to open and in the end I didn’t find a reliable source for its rate of climb but IMHO the maximum RoC of a normal Fw 190A-9 fighter should be at least 3,445 ft/min.
The speed of Fw 190D-9 given seems to be some 8 mph optimistic relative to the delivered production aircraft because it assumes the installation of the engine gap seal. On the other hand, the speculation that the speed without MW50 might has been as low as 360 mph is rather odd, Soviet data gives that speed as appr. 390 mph, and Soviet data for Fw 190s tended to be clearly lower than values in German or Western Allied documents. Also the rate of climb value given, 3,300 ft/min, is rather conservative, in early 1945 Fw 190D-9 was capable to 3,405 ft/min with take-off power and 4,232 ft/min with special emergency power (Sonder-Notleistung).
I would not call Messerschmitt Bf 109 as long-suffering. On the Bf 109K-4, only the Bf 109K prototype had a slightly bulged canopy, the production machines had the standard Erla/Galland canopy.
The DB605DM was cleared up to 1.75ata, the DB605DB pushed the limit up to 1.8ata, and both could be sustained with use of either B4 fuel + MW-50 (as mentioned in various documents, even if it was an afterthought in the DM case) or with C3 fuel. With 1.8 ata boost and 2,800 rpm 605DB produced 1,850 ps/1,825 hp. Without MW-50 with B4 fuel it produced 1,430 ps/1,410 hp. However the DB605DC max power, with 1.98 ata boost and 2,800 rpm could be achieved only with use of C3+MW-50. It then produced 2,000 ps/1,973 hp. Problems were the scarcity of methanol for the MW-50 and the limited supply of high octane C3 for Bf 109 units because Fw 190As and Fs could use only it, so usually Bf 109 units had to be content with lower octane B4.
The given range seems to be too short when compared to the Spitfires but the same figure is given in Poruba’s and Janda’s Messerschmitt Bf 109K book. On the other hand Martinek’s article gives the range of Bf 109G-10 as 650 km, which converts into 404 miles and G-10, while otherwise very similar to K-4, had fixed tailwheel and lacked the outer wheel well covers (but often the tailwheel was locked down and outer wheel well covers removed in operational K-4s) so it’s range should have been shorter than that of K-4 or when compared to a K-4 with modifications just given in parentheses, the same. A plane had many different ranges depending on engine settings used and the flight altitude but IMHO the 404 miles range is truer when compared the ranges of Spitfires given in the article.
Messerschmitt Me 262 part is OK but again there was no KG(J) 51, it was simply KG 51.
Messerschmitt Me 163, MK 108 wasn’t slow firing with its 650 rounds/min rate of fire but it had fairly low muzzle velocity, 540 m/s (1,770 ft/s).
On the conclusion part of the article, IMFO Meteor III wasn’t non-operational but because of snaking and its poor rate of roll it wasn’t a top-class fighter in 1945. In the end the author concludes that the choice for the title of the best fighter in the ETO has to be made between Spitfire XIV and Me 262 and he chooses Spitfire XIV. I agree, that if the choice is made without thinking of the range and the combat altitude, the choice is between the two but even with the haste and desperate situation in which Me 262 was rushed into service and all the problems which followed from that, Me 262 would have dominated the duel between these two planes if the combat had begun from equal positions. Spitfire might survive because of its better horizontal manoeuvrability and acceleration but to win it should have to surprise the Me 262 or the Me 262 pilot should have to make a bad error.
So while otherwise passable article on the late war fighters in ETO it fails badly on the Soviet planes.

Then Wee Willie Ran out of Luck, an excellent article on the “career” of the Boeing B-17G-15-BO 42-31333 Wee Willie” and some of the numerous crews who flow combat mission on it during its 128 missions. Also showing the dramatic pictures of its fiery end on April 8, 1945 over Stendal on its 128th mission. My only complaint is that I’d have liked information on what was done to it at the completion and modification centre at Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Next article is on Hans-Guido Mutke’s dive on April 9, 1945. IMHO a bit unnecessary article because we had only Mutke’s word on the incident and he came into public with his story only 44 years after the incident. But this article takes only two pages and also tells how Mutke flying the Me 262A-1a/R1 “White 3” WNr. 500071 ended in Switzerland on 25 April 1945. The plane is nowadays at the Deutsches Museum in München.

Canadians against the Komet. An interesting article, but it still does not give a definite answer what was the target of the only combat use of the Sondergerät SG 500 Jagdfaust. Not that I criticize the author, it is often impossible to dig out the truth because of the overclaiming and conflicting eyewitness report. The lack of the Luftwaffe records doesn’t help, more so when we talked about the last months of the war with all the chaos on the German side. The author things that the Me 163 pilot Fritz Kelb attacked one of the Lancasters of 433 Squadron RCAF or 405 Squadron RCAF. According to Ethell’s & Price’s book, Kelb shot down a B-17. Different Wiki articles give different victim. Wiki article on Me 163 says “resulting in the destruction of a Halifax bomber, although other sources say it was a Boeing B-17”, Wikiarticle on Sondergerät SG 500 Jagdfaust says that “Fritz Kelb downed an RAF Lancaster using it.”

Then a two pages article on the well-known combat between a Piper L-4 Grasshopper and Fieseler Fi 156 Storch.

Piston Engine Zenit, a good and impartial article on Focke-Wulf Ta 152. At first a very short overview of the development and production of the Ta 152 followed by a description of its combat use at JG 301.  But the author forgot the very brief JG 11 part, it got 4 to 6 Ta 152s near the end of April 1945, but during its last movement during the war, from Neustadt-Glewe to Leck, two out of a formation of four Ta152s from the Stab JG11 were shot down by Spitfires during the transfer flight and the third had to make a belly-landing at Lech airfield.

Then an article on a murder of a shot down USAAF P-51 pilot.

And then the article which gave the tittle of this publication, Spitfires Over Berlin, the story of a Spitfire XIV formation from 350 (Belgian) Squadron combating with Focke-Wulf Fw 190s over the western fringes of Berlin. The Belgian side is well told but there is next to nothing on the German side, so very one-sided story. Besides the quotes from the Allied pilots’ combat reports the other interesting point is a couple photos showing rather battered Spitfire XIVs of the 350 (Belgian) Squadron, fitness of some parts of the engine cowling seemed to have been rather poor.

On the other hand the next article on the activities of the Luftwaffe on April 24, 1945 is interesting, even if the situation was hopeless to Germans and fuel reserves were very low, the Luftwaffe flew over 800 combat sortie on that day, of which nearly 500 were fighter sorties, almost 250 fighter-bomber, ground-attack and anti-tank sorties and some 90 recce, most flown by Fw 190s and Bf 109s. With only six pages it is only a short overview as the author himself admit but very interesting one.

The Ringmaster’s Grand Finale. April 26, 1945: JV44 and Adolf Galland.  The article is a good one, so I have nothing to complain on it but the subject. JG 7 was much more important Me 262 fighter unit than Galland’s JV 44 but much less well known, at least in English speaking world, so I would have been much more eager to see an article on the former unit.

Then a nice article on the Heinkel He 162A and the only possible air kill achieved by a He 162A pilot. It also gives information on the all nine fatal accidents suffered by He 162A pilots during its use in WW2, a couple more French and British pilots died in He 162A accidents after the war but that is outside the scope of this publication. These is even a photo of the wreck of Flying Officer Tom Austin‘s Tempest V JN877 but it is also clearly stated that we will probably never know for sure if Leutnant Rudolf Schmitt shot down the Tempest because of the time difference and not even the place where the Tempest crashed was exactly a match with the combat area reported by Schmitt. Austin reported that he had suffered a catastrophic engine failure and some sources say that the loss was allocated to a German AA unit. There are several fairly small photos of He 162As but what I miss is a photo showing the ventilation disc on the port side of the canopy of He 162.

The last but one article, Final Dogfight May 8, 1945 gives one probably answer but in fact there were later air combats in Europe, mostly friendly fire cases. USAAF Lockheed F-5 photo-reconnaissance planes (unarmed version of the famous Lockheed P-38 Lightning fighter plane) of the 39th Photographic Reconnaissance Squadron/10th Photographic Group, belonging to the 9th U.S. Air Force were then operating from Y-10 airfield in Wiesbaden, Germany.
On 8 May 1945, the unit was on a Prisoner-of-War Camp Pin-Pointing Mission in Dresden airspace, i.e. in the area recently seized by Soviet troops. Several Soviet Yak fighters of the 106th Guards Fighter Air Regiment from Cottbus airfield attacked Captain Malcolm L. Nash. Second Lieutenant Lazuta wrongly took Nash´s F-5E for a German Focke Wulf Fw 189 (twin-fuselage plane like F-5), and shot it down in Reichenbach area, approx. 40 kilometres West of Dresden. Captain Nash made a belly landing in the field. Though he escaping serious injury his F-5E was totally demolished.
On 9 May 1945 afternoon, the 39th Photo-Reconnaissance Squadron sent six Lockheed F-5s to search for the missing Capt. Nash. Two of the F-5s piloted by 1/Lt Thomas P. Petrus and 2/Lt. Thomas Jackson, flew as far as Prague. By coincidence, this happened when six Soviet US built Bell P-39 Airacobras patrolled the area. They were part of the 100th Guards Fighter Air Regiment. Soviet fighters covered Soviet tanks advancing to Prague, and one of them, Major Vasilyi A. Pschenitchnikov, took the American twin-fuselage F-5 for a German Fw 189 and shot down the plane over Prague. While 1/Lt Petrus, suffering heavy burns, saved his life on parachute, Maj. Pschenitchnikov on his return added to his score the kill of „Fw 189“, his thirteenth and the last WW2 kill.
There was also at least one another dogfight on 9 May: Ju88, from possibly II/KG200 (144032), was attacked and damaged by FAA fighters over Skagerrak.
And on 11May 1945 Anson XII PH539 of the Desert Air Force Communication Flight was attacked by three Yak fighters while off course. It force-landed in a field near Graz, Austria and struck trees.

The last article is Aftermath May 9, 1945 and beyond. It is on the Allied war booty planes and scientific intelligence during the last days of the war and immediate afterwards. There is a list of the Watson’s Whizzers’ Me 262s and a list of the German aircraft captured by the British and US. Surprisingly it seems that  British gave all four Focke-Wulf 190Ds they had captured to US while they kept few 190As and F-8s plus a two of the three Ta 152Hs themselves.  Not surprisingly there are many night-fighters, mostly Junkers Ju 88G-6s but I was a little surprised of the number of Messerschmitt Me 163Bs captured by British, at least 23.

All in all I am very positively surprised at this purchase, almost all articles are good and interesting with well-chosen pictures, almost all them clear even if some are rather small in size. It gives interesting and many-sided picture of the last five months of the air war on the Western Front. Only major complains is the lack of articles on the Soviet Air Forces and the underestimations of the performance of Soviet fighters.

Main sources:
Motorenmustern for DB 605D series engines

Boehme, Manfred, JG 7 The World’s First Jet Fighter Unit 1944/1945 (Atglen, PA: Schiffer Publishing, 1992).
Caldwell, Donald, Day Fighters in Defence of the Reich A War Diary, 1942 – 45 (Barnsley: Frontline Books,
               2011).
Dean, Francis H., America’s Hundred-Thousand The U.S. Production Fighters of World War II (Atglen, PA:
               Schiffer Publishing, 1997).
Ethell, Jeffrey & Price, Alfred, World War II Fighting Jets (Shrewsbury: Airlife Publishing, 1994).
Foreman, John and Harvey, S. E., Me 262 Combat Diary (New Malden: Air Research Publications, 1990).
Freeman, Roger A., The Mighty Eight War Diary (London: Arms and Armour Press, 1990).
Gordon, Yefim, Lavochkin’s Piston-Engined Fighters (Hinckley: Midland Publishing, 2003).
Gordon, Yefim, Soviet Air Power in World War 2 (Hinckley: Midland Publishing, 2008).
Hermann, Dietmar & Wunderlich, Markus, Die kurze Karriere der Focke-Wulf Ta 152, Flugzeug Classic, Apr.
                2010.
Kens, Karlheinz and Nowarra, Heinz J., Die deutschen Flugzeuge 1933-1945 (München: J.F. Lehmann Verlag,
                2. Ausgabe, 1964)
Manhro, John and Pütz, Ron, Bodenplatte The Luftwaffe’s Last Hope (Crowborough: Hikoki Publications,
                2004).
Martinek, Josef, ‘Bf 109G-10 – the most agile “Gustav”’, Zlínek, No. 4 / Vol. III.
Murawski, Marek J., JG 1 “Oesau” 1944-1945 (Lublin: KAGERO, 2002).
Poruba,T and Janda, A, Messerschmitt Bf 109K (Hradec Králové: JaPo, 1997).
Price, Alfred, The Spitfire Story (London: Cassell & Co, Revised Second Edition, 2002).
Shores, Christopher and Williams, Clive, Aces High (London: Grub Street 1994).
Smith, J. Richard and Creek, Eddie j., Me 262 Volume Three (Crowborough: Classic Publications, 2000).
Ves̆ts̆ík, Milos̆, Lavoc̆kin La-7 (Praha: MBI, 2000).
Wagner, Ray (Ed.), American Combat Planes (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., New
               Revised Edition, 1968)
Weir, Adrian, The Last Flight of the Luftwaffe (London: Cassell & Co, 2000).
Wood, Tony/Gunston, Bill, Hitler’s Luftwaffe. A pictorial and technical encyclopedia of Hitler’s air power in
               World War II (:Leisure Books, Reprinted, 1984).

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spitfire-IX.html
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14v109.html
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/P-63/P-63.html
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/leistungsdaten-1-10-44.jpg
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/fw190d9test.html
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/Methanol.pdf
http://users.atw.hu/kurfurst/articles/MW_KvsXIV.htm  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daimler-Benz_DB_605#Variants
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_163_Komet
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagdfaust
http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=40780
http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=7258