Well, Jester-er,
My comment is not solely directed at this particular set-up.
It's an overall comment; I could have made the same point about the early PAC set-ups that include a Ki-67 Peggy with a basic fighter set of A6M2's and F4F's. It's just unreconcilable and, to me, totally nonsensical.
As to the Battle of France, yes, the 110 did pretty well against essentially unprepared, suprised and ill-equipped adversaries starting on 10 May 1940.
Amazing how fast things changed in the Battle of Britain; the story was quite a bit different just three months later on 10 July 1940, wasn't it?
When suprise was not a factor, when preparations had been made, the description of 110's in combat almost always include the words "massacred" and "slaughtered".
Funny the Luftwaffe had to detail 109's to escort the dreaded 110's against the Hurricanes isn't it?
There's also the British combat reports:
The opening phase of the Battle consisted of German attacks on shipping by day, usually in the Channel, although some convoy raids occurred off Clacton. Attacks were also made on naval bases. By night much of the German activity consisted of mine laying in various estuaries, however at this stage in the war Britain possesed no effective night defence against aircraft.
The first day of this phase was notable for the way that Me110’s when attacked by Hurricanes formed themselves into a defensive circle, therefore being unable to bring their heavy nose armament to bear, and indicating they required as much escorting as the bombers.
Nonetheless, my point remains that I'd rather do without some planes rather than have nonsensical substitutions made for ones we do not have modeled. In ANY time frame or set-up.
YMMV.
