I fear the use of CG would be inevitable. Even for the 1969 film – as you all know – the only "German" combat aircraft available, IIRC, were Bf-109s and He-111s. Because they were all Spanish, their Merlin engines stuck out like sore thumbs; visually and aurally.
Although CG is fairly expensive, I believe, because of the cost of designing and rendering frame by frame, it must be vastly cheaper than flying fleets of vintage aeroplanes. So do the producers of films like Red Tails employ visualisers with at least some knowledge of dynamics, if not aerodynamics? Or, if the animal doesn't exist, suitable people to advise the visualisers? Some of the sequences look little better than the old method of running small models at high speed along wires (as in parts of 633 Squadron).
Another point is that any perspective which puts the observer (i.e., the notional cameraman) in mid-air unsupported and/or in untenable proximity to the action destroys the illusion. You need to feel that you are there, and able to walk (or fly) away afterwards. Or am I just being old-fashioned?
BTW, NotGettingAnyYounger, the first and last of your Mosquito sequences look pretty good on my outdated PC. Are they CG?