Author Topic: Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI  (Read 2306 times)

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI
« on: July 22, 2004, 05:08:31 PM »
Comparison of the Bf110G-2 and Mosquito Mk VI as employed in a fighter role in AH2.

Comparative stats for the Bf110G-2 and Mosquito Mk VI in Tour 54 as of 14:00 PST, July 22nd:
The Bf 110G-2 has 4499 kills and has been killed 5642 times.
 
The Mosquito Mk VI has 1684 kills and has been killed 2134 times.

It seems that the Bf110G-2 sees approximately three times the usage of the Mosquito Mk VI and is somewhat more survivable.

I did some testing of the two aircraft last night.  It was not comprehensive, but it was enough to make me wonder.

Loadouts:
Bf110G-2: 50% fuel, external gunpack
Mosquito Mk VI: 50% fuel, overload ammunition

Sustained climb rate from SL using WEP:
Bf110G-2: 3,050fpm
Mosquito Mk VI: 3,500fpm

The Mosquito climbed at a distinctly higher rate.  As altitude increases, particularly above 15,000ft the Bf110G-2 should be superior, but for low altitude work the Mosquito has notably better performance in terms of climb.

Fuel range on internal at WEP:
Bf110G-2: 18 minutes
Mosquito Mk VI: 25 minutes

The Mosquito seems to be less fuel effcient, but carries so much more fuel that it's operational range is significantly better than the Bf110G-2's.

Level speed using WEP at SL:
Bf110G-2: 323mph
Mosquito Mk VI: 337mph

I didn't test this last night.  It is recalled from old tests.  The Bf110G-2 may not have had the external gun pack for this test.
At SL the Mosquito is faster on MIL power than the Bf110G-2 is on WEP.  Neither aircraft is nearly fast enough to escape the two most common fighters in AH, the La-7 and P-51D.

Acceleration:
I did not specifically test this, but the climb rate results would seem to indicate that the Mosquito will out accelerate the Bf110G-2.

Roll rate:
This is a subjetive test as I did not have a stop watch.  Neither aircraft displayed impressive roll rates, but the Mosquito felt 1/3 to 1/2 again as fast. The Bf110G-2's roll rate could only be described as poor.  The Mosquito's little better.  The only single engined fighter that both would out roll would be an A6M above ~300mph.  The Mosquito will probably out roll the Typhoon.

Turn rate:
There seemed to be little difference, but this is harder to see by flying solo.  I would give the edge to the Bf110G-2.  It may be a substantial edge.

Manueverability:
At low speeds both aircraft wallow.  They are unstable and respond slowly and sloppily to control imput.  At higher speeds the Mosquito seems to respond in a much crisper fashion than does the Bf110G-2.

Firepower:
The Bf110G-2 clearly has the more destructive gun package. Four 20mm MG151/20s with more than 1,100 rounds and two 30mm MK108 cannon gives the Bf110G-2 the single most destructive gun package in AH. The Bf110G-2 also mounts dual 7.92mm MG81z machine guns in a hand aimed mount from the back of the cockpit.  These guns are mostly useless and attemting to use them to defend the aircraft from rear attacts is generally futile.
Still, the Mosquito is no slouch, carrying four 20mm Hispano Mk II cannon with 700 rounds in the belly and four .303 machine guns (which could be happily ommited) with more ammo than it is possible to use.  This gives the Mosquito one of the deadliest gun packages in AH and owing to the higher muzzle velocity of the Hispano cannon may be better for killing fighters than the Bf110G-2's gun package.
Both aircraft mount all of their fixed guns in the nose/lower fuselage giving them tremendously leathal focused fire.

Durability:
There is little I have to go on here.
One is a test in AH1 (so it may not be valid any longer) with J_A_B where using the single Hispano M2 cannon in the P-38's nose we shot, from close range, the tails off of various aircraft.  It took two Hispano hits to take off the Bf110G-2's tail and three Hispano hits to take off the Mosquito's tail.  As a comparison it took seventeen Hispano hits to take off the B-17's tail and fourteen Hispano hits to take off the Lancaster's tail.
The other things I can note are very subjective and I can only note them for the Mosquito as I have not spent significant time using the Bf110G-2 in combat.  The first is that the Mosquito is very prone to pilot wounds when hit from the front quadrant.  GV pintle guns seem particularly prone to causing pilot wounds.  The second is that the Mosquito seems to catch fire significantly more often than any other aircraft, even the A6M2.





After having flown them a bit last night I cannot understand why people generally hold that the Bf110G-2 is the better fighter.  It seems clearly outclassed by the Mosquito and yet it is far more common in the MA (a fact which is probably due to its payload) and is routinely put as being a better fighter than the Mosquito on the BB. I would like to know why the Bf110G-2 is held in higher regard as a fighter than is the Mosquito.  It is to the point that people looking for a new ride have posted lists of aircraft they have tried, including the Bf110G-2 but ommiting the Mosquito.  They sometimes even express surprise when I suggest the Mosquito be tried as well, claiming that they thought it to be just a bomber.  The difference doesn't make sense to me given their relative perfromances.

I will edit this post later today/tonight after running some more tests, including a look at the Bf110G-2 without the gunpack.

NOTE: I did not compare ordinance capability as I am only concerned with air-to-air capability in this post.

NOTE: I did not compare the P-38L as it is obviously vastly superior to both the Bf110G-2 and Mosquito Mk VI.

Comments?
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI
« Reply #1 on: July 22, 2004, 05:27:46 PM »
I think you're a little delusional here, especially on the climb rate:









This is the determining factor: Both planes have similar engine power available however the Mossie weighs 22,221 lbs clean with 100% fuel, the Bf110 weighs 17,500 lbs clean with 100% fuel.

Your earlier argument that the Mosquito was heralded as a success while the Bf110 was a failure is a mismatch of contexts. Yes the Bf110 was a failure as a day fighter, but the Mosquito never was a day fighter. Both planes served well as night-fighters, and the Mosquito also was a successful light bomber/ground attack plane (its designed role) and recon plane. The Bf110 was designed as a fighter, and is much better than any bomber in a dogfight.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline simshell

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 786
Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI
« Reply #2 on: July 22, 2004, 05:29:47 PM »
due to the fact that the help file AH1 says that the bf110 is 17500 pounds and the Mosquto is 22000 some thing

i would think the BF110 would not lose speed as slow in tight fighting as the Moss


by the way the most destructive gun package is held by the ME262 4 30mms and alot of ammo for them
known as Arctic in the main

Offline simshell

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 786
Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI
« Reply #3 on: July 22, 2004, 05:31:39 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by GScholz
I think you're a little delusional here, especially on the climb rate:









This is the determining factor: Both planes have similar engine power available however the Mossie weighs 22,221 lbs clean with 100% fuel, the Bf110 weighs 17,500 lbs clean with 100% fuel.

Your earlier argument that the Mosquito was heralded as a success while the Bf110 was a failure is a mismatch of contexts. Yes the Bf110 was a failure as a day fighter, but the Mosquito never was a day fighter. Both planes served well as night-fighters, and the Mosquito also was a successful light bomber/ground attack plane (its designed role) and recon plane. The Bf110 was designed as a fighter, and is much better than any bomber in a dogfight.



the flight model on the Moss has been redone so those mean almost nothing

it climbs as well if not better now try it out
known as Arctic in the main

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI
« Reply #4 on: July 22, 2004, 05:40:20 PM »
It also means nothing because I was not testing a Mosquito with 100% fuel and 2,000lbs of bombs.  Remember that the 22,221lb weight includes 3,400lbs of fuel and 2,000lbs of ordinance. In my tests I eliminated 3,700lbs from that total.

Also keep in mind that, IIRC, the Mosquito's engines are each producing about 200hp more than the Bf110G-2's engines are.

Read the loadouts.


The fact is that the climb indicators say the Mosquito handily outclimbs the Bf110G-2 in the configurations I tested.  I will test the Bf110G-2 without the external gunpack when I get home, but I doubt it will gain 500fpm from it.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2004, 05:43:21 PM by Karnak »
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI
« Reply #5 on: July 22, 2004, 05:47:11 PM »
Just did. With 100% fuel they are virtually identical in climb up to 5k where the Mossie drops off and the 110 gains a slight advantage (which increase with alt).

With 50% fuel the Mossie holds a slight climb advantage (100-150 fpm) up to 5k where the 110 starts to catch up end eventually gains the advantage.

(Btw. no self-respecting 110 bus driver takes the extra guns)


Now unless this is just a fluke in the Mossie's FM, the two planes are now better matched than ever before. The 110 seems to have a marked acceleration advantage at low speeds, so I wonder about the accuracy of the Mossie's new climb rate.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI
« Reply #6 on: July 22, 2004, 05:48:07 PM »
simshell,

No, the Mossie always climbed at 3,500fpm in the configuration I tested.  Trust me on this one.  I know the Mossie's performance in AH1.

Also, the Bf110G-2's total destructive capability with it's guns exceeds the Me262 by a good bit.  It carries nearly as much 30mm ammo for it's two 30m cannon as the Me262 does for it's four and then it has four 20mm cannon with insane ammounts of ammo.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI
« Reply #7 on: July 22, 2004, 05:49:25 PM »
Frankly, I fly the 110 over the Moss because

- it can turn without stalling/flipping so damn much
- cannon are better than .303 MGs... 30mm are just nice to boot
- can load underwing rockets (if anybody has ANY info on how to properly USE the damn things, help!)
- drop tanks
- 2x500lb bombs
- rear twin MG (well.. I got kills with it in AH1... I think AH2 porked all defensive gunnery, but that's me)


Whereas the Moss may be faster, and/or lighter in a climb or at higher alt, getting its nose on target is MUCH harder than the 110. It stalls very easy, and at higher speeds, and is a bear to fly. Whereas I have good control of the 110G2 (and the WEP gives the 110 great acceleration when it's slow) at slow speeds, I have never to date had good handling experience in a Moss at slow speeds, where most of the kills happen.

I've gotten a few AH1 kills in it. Not many. Nothing earth-shatteringly wonderful. All were BnZ and on distracted targets.

P.S. the Moss sucks for taking damage, as well.

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI
« Reply #8 on: July 22, 2004, 05:49:49 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Karnak
Read the loadouts.


Where?
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI
« Reply #9 on: July 22, 2004, 05:54:12 PM »
The Mossie's FM has some odd quirks in it, like the flat "fall" rather than spin if you abuse her in a right hand turn. I have my doubts about this.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI
« Reply #10 on: July 22, 2004, 05:55:20 PM »
GScholz,

The Mossie hasn't changed in any good way other than fuel endurance in AH2.  It has only gained a more vicious stall and lost 1mph off its SL speed.

Also note that the 22,221lb weight is it's fully laden take off weight.  Bombs and 100% fuel.  No Mossie driver planning on air-to-air combat takes 100% fuel.

The loadouts I meant were listed in my opening post.  I listed the test aircraft:
Bf110G-2: external gunpack, 50% fuel.
Mosquito Mk VI: overload ammo, 50% fuel

Krusty,

Take another look at the loadouts for each aircraft.  You'll find the Mossie wins the underwing rocket's test and has far better teeth than .303 caliber machine guns.  You'll also find that the Bf110G-2 carries 1,100lb bombs, not 500lb bombs.

As I said, durability seems iffy.  I've had them hold together through tremendous poundinsg and all had them just ignite on the slightest hit.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2004, 05:59:54 PM by Karnak »
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI
« Reply #11 on: July 22, 2004, 06:04:21 PM »
According to my books the Mossie Mk IV had an empty weight of 14,100 lbs and a max load of 22,500 lbs. The 110G-2 had an empy weight of 9,920 lbs and a loaded weight of 15,430 lbs (no bombs I gather ... different books). The Mossie Mk IV had two 1,230 hp Merlins 21s (early IV) or two 1,680 hp Merlin 72s (FB.IV). The 110G-2 had two 1,475 hp DB605Bs.

A loaded 110G-2 weighs just over 1,000 lbs more than an empty Mossie.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI
« Reply #12 on: July 22, 2004, 06:12:46 PM »
I just realized something about the AH Mossie performance charts.  They were introduced at the same time the Mossie was, and when the Mossie was introduced it was in the bomber section.  So far as I know all the bomber charts are for performance with ordinance.  After all it isn't very usefull to know how a Lancaster climbs without bombs.  It wouldn't surprise me in the least if those charts are for a fully laden Mossie.


The Mosquito Mk VI we have is powered by two Merlin 25s, each at 1625hp or 1640hp depending on your source.

A small number of early Mk VIs were powerd by 1,230hp Merlin 21s or 23s.

The Mosquito B.Mk XVI was powered by a Merlin 72 and Merlin 73 with counter rotating props.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Bf110G-2 vs. Mosquito FB.Mk VI
« Reply #13 on: July 22, 2004, 06:16:13 PM »
Ah, yes I misread. Merlin 25s it is (1,635 hp in my book)
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Offline Scherf

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3409
Funny thing is
« Reply #14 on: July 22, 2004, 07:18:23 PM »
The Mossie AH2 speeds, climbs etc. are all pretty accurate for (saxophone exhaust / flame damper equipped) Merlin 25 aircraft,  but the EB6 (?) is slightly off.

Intermediate 1-hr limit (i.e. 100%) is + 9 boost, but WEP (5 min limit) is +18lbs, not the +14 in AH2. The +9 / +14 is a Merlin 23, not a Merlin 25.

Small point.

Oh, and mossie with a little e advantage can spank the 110, but don't try to turn a mossie with a co-e 110, as I found out (again) to my cost last night. Stoopid stoopid stooooooopid.

Cheers,

Scherf

PS - Can we get the dampers removed, now that there's no more night in AH? Please? Pretty please?
« Last Edit: July 22, 2004, 07:40:54 PM by Scherf »
... missions were to be met by the commitment of alerted swarms of fighters, composed of Me 109's and Fw 190's, that were strategically based to protect industrial installations. The inferior capabilities of these fighters against the Mosquitoes made this a hopeless and uneconomical effort. 1.JD KTB