Author Topic: Bf-110G questions.  (Read 1559 times)

Offline 1K3

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3449
Bf-110G questions.
« on: November 14, 2004, 11:48:32 PM »
I know that Bf-110G exceled as a night fighter, but did LW use this plane as a daylight bomber destroyer (shooting down B-27s/24s) throughout the end of the war in the West?

Offline Soulyss

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6558
      • Aces High Events
Bf-110G questions.
« Reply #1 on: November 15, 2004, 12:27:27 AM »
I'm not 100% cetain but it's been my impression that the 110 was used as a bomber interceptor up untill probably right around mid '44 or so.   The P47's chewed them up pretty good, and when the 51's arrived they couldn't linger outside the range of the escorts anymore... I know some of the 51 aces ran into them... but it's been my impression that when the 51's started showing up in numbers the 110's were regulated more and more to the night squadrons.   I'm sure someone around here could give you a more solid answer.
80th FS "Headhunters"
I blame mir.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Bf-110G questions.
« Reply #2 on: November 15, 2004, 09:59:49 AM »
Specifically, the Bf110G-2 that we have is a day fighter.  It has no radar.

IIRC, the nightfighter Bf110G was the G-4.  I'm not certain of that and am at work without my books so I may be wrong.  It certainly wasn't the G-2 though.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
Bf-110G questions.
« Reply #3 on: November 15, 2004, 10:17:20 AM »
Yes they used them as bomber interceptors

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Bf-110G questions.
« Reply #4 on: November 15, 2004, 10:43:52 AM »
I also recall one P-47 pilot describing the Bf110 as "meat on the table."
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Bf-110G questions.
« Reply #5 on: November 15, 2004, 01:08:29 PM »
Something I just read, and might add something to this :)
In September 1944, operation Market Garden , the biggest paradrop yet, it was considered a lower risk dropping in daylight than at night.
Reasons:
1. Navigation was easier, hence more successful drop.
2. The German night fighter force was seen as a serious threat.
3. Daylight allowed the allied forces some premature bombing, strafing and hunting as well as protecting the "bus"

Now this was a huge airlift operation, and the airlift "convoys" would have been very vulnerable if intercepted. It sort of tells the tale how the allied air superiority was vastly above the LW in the cases of something quick-happening like this (other example: Normandy)

Might explain why the 110 was more at night ops. It had a chance to survive, since in daylight it was no way to run away from the fast fighters like P51 or a diiiiiiiiving P47.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Rasker

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1265
Bf-110G questions.
« Reply #6 on: November 15, 2004, 04:32:02 PM »
Christopher Shores in "Duel for the Sky", in Chapter Nine "The Daylight Bomber Offensive", states that the 110's could not survive for long in daylight interceptor work in any area where escort fighters were common. (This probably was almost as true for the 410's.)  As Allied daylight fighter range extended, the Zerstorers gradually retreated to southern Germany and Austria, and finally vacated the daylight "arena" altogether.

Offline frank3

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9352
Bf-110G questions.
« Reply #7 on: November 15, 2004, 04:32:28 PM »
In this book about the BoB Im reading, it's described as a 'zerstohrer' (dots on the o) meaning destroyer.

It did very little against fighters (while they thought it would be invincible) and often had to be saves by the Me-109's fighters.

It was mainly used as bomber escort, but a special squadron (staffel) was formed to destroy ground targets.
When the Axis realised it was no good as a fighter, it was restricted to a fighter/bomber.

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Bf-110G questions.
« Reply #8 on: November 15, 2004, 04:54:55 PM »
To add....
At Arnhem, once the allied convoys filled the sky, one German high commander said:
"As usually, none of our fighters were there"
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Bf-110G questions.
« Reply #9 on: November 15, 2004, 05:16:09 PM »
Bf110 bah, what a disaster...

The Fw187 using 600hp Jumos outperformed the Bf110 on roughly 60% the power. It  outdid the Bf109 by 40mph when usinfg the same engines. It was basically a 1938 DH Hornet...

What a monster this could have been if it had 1,100 HP DB601s by 1940. Or even 1450HP DB604 by 1942..





BTW Bf110 was a pretty bad nightfighter by 1944, even late model JU88 nightfighters had better performance and handling...
« Last Edit: November 15, 2004, 05:18:14 PM by GRUNHERZ »

Offline Kurfürst

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 921
      • http://www.kurfurst.org
Bf-110G questions.
« Reply #10 on: November 16, 2004, 11:30:53 AM »
Hmm, I think the 110 is waay to much underestimated. It was not a bad plane at all, just not an equal opponent for single engine fighters. Funny I never seen anybody to kick the Ju 88, the Mossie, Beufighter, Pe-2 etc. for the same, and they lacked that ability just as well ! In it`s own class, the 110 was a good plane, easy to fly, good performance (595 km/h max speed for the 110G was not that bad in 1943). It was suited for MANY roles.. as far as it was a *poor* nightfighter.. hmm, the Ju 88 was more suited for this task, being much larger, could carry more fuel and guns, bomblets for nightly intruder raids over england. But not nearly as fast or manouverable, no. And during the daylight raids, the 110s/410s were a force to be reckoned with, until the escort fighters arrived, as have been said. But is it a surprise? Zerstorers were always few in numbers, even the normal daylight fighters found it nearly impossible to win against those odds, those numbers... but they could run away. Zerstorers couldn`t. But when they fell on the undefended bombers, the results were ugly. It happened once over Wien, early 1944, in one very successfull mission according to Galland. They carried big guns, rockets, and were quite resistant to enemy fire. Another thing some forget that this wasn`t their only task, 110s/210s/410s were the forgotten ground pounders of the Luftwaffe on the Eestern front, and they could carry a lot of warload, far more a normal fighter could. So they had good points, they were jacks of all trades, but masters of none. Like the destroyers of the navy...
The Messerschmitt Bf 109 Performance Resource Site
http://www.kurfurst.org

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Bf-110G questions.
« Reply #11 on: November 16, 2004, 11:54:20 AM »
Easy to handle?
Maybe, but prone to flat spinning so 109 pilots that flew the 110 were warned against taking it to wild maneuvers.
Mölders brother flew the 110, one of his squadmates overdid it and flatspun to his death.
But yet, in many ways underestimated, and perhaps it was initially applied to the wrong role, i.e. daylight air superiority against single engine fighters.
It was a heck of an attacker and proved very well in the nightighter force.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Bf-110G questions.
« Reply #12 on: November 16, 2004, 01:26:32 PM »
Kurfürst,

Most people here seem to compare the Bf110G-2 to the P-38L and it comes up very short in comparison.  Most people seem to consider the Mossie a bomber, even though it isn't, and so no comparison is done at all.

In AH2 the Bf110G-2 and Mosquito Mk VI are pretty close, with the edge, IMO, going to the Mosquito.  Pilot skill will determine most fights.

If the Mossie we had was an NF.Mk XIII, NF.Mk XIX or NF.Mk 30 it wouldn't be nearly as close though.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Bf-110G questions.
« Reply #13 on: November 16, 2004, 05:31:34 PM »
Close....in which ones favour Karnak?
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Bf-110G questions.
« Reply #14 on: November 16, 2004, 06:23:35 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
Easy to handle?
Maybe, but prone to flat spinning so 109 pilots that flew the 110 were warned against taking it to wild maneuvers.
Mölders brother flew the 110, one of his squadmates overdid it and flatspun to his death.


Did the 110 not had wing leading edge slats?