Me 410 data

[BaDkaRmA158Th]

I say give it the option to have them removed, i would have the .30 and .50 removed from the A20G if i could do so. =]

[Krusty]

It's not that simple. It's a rather big modification. Look at Yellow 7 in that last pic. They reshaped the rear canopy and the fuselage joining point as well. The rear seat, the rear guns, the rear motor for the guns, etc.... It's a big change. they didn't just chuck the gun and leave the plane intact.

If HTC adds it as an option, it would be interesting (I agree!), but I wouldn't really hold my breath because of the small numbers and limited service this configuration saw.

When you think of B-17F, you think "no chin gun" -- even though some late -Fs had it.

When you think of P-40N you think of the cut-down rear deck -- even though the early models looked like normal P-40s.

When you think of 110s you think of a plane with a rear gunner -- and IMO that's kind of how I think of the 410.

[moot]

The problem isn't number produced & used but how to model it.  HTC needs enough data to model it accurately rather than just guessing at it.  Even if we know what was removed, what was added (GM1, ballast etc) can't be unknown.

[Krusty]

That's a good point. Was it primarily to save weight or to save weight because something else was added?

Were these planes usually loaded with a light gun loadout?

[Debrody]

Also would be nice know whats the operation history for those modifyed planes. Simply a heavy fighter, night bomber-killer, close-support destroyer, recon, or (it isnt possible tho) a schnell-bomber? Getting curious.

[moot]

2x 151 and 2x 103 was IIRC the most common if not only gun config mentioned for the single seater. 

Ballast was added for balance but overall the weight loss is something like 1800 kg. GM1 was supposed to be added, but we'd need something more concrete than enthusiasts/historians' books as evidence.

Off the top of my head, the sorties were mostly if not only destroyer.  One of the best pilots in the squadron died picking a fight with P-38s after a few kills.  IIRC those P-38 kills were logged during the period the squadron used single seaters.

[Krusty]

Since the data has been pretty much covered I want to add a few notes to help inform whoever at HTC is building the 3D model (Waffle or whomever).

There are certain areas on the plane that would be nice to model correctly, as far as externa visuals go. I know when I see an otherwise perfect 3D model in-game but I see that one glaring error it bugs me, so this is purely to prevent that in the case of the Me410.

1) The Canopy

The canopy is divided into: windscreen, pilot hatch, middle frame, gunner hatch, and rear glass. My own terms, naturally.

The windscreen somewhat matches the slope of the fuselage on the way up. The front edge of the pilot's hatch matches this. The curve from front edge to rear edge of the pilot's hatch leaves us with a more vertical rear edge, but no outward bulge. The middle frame (between the 2 hatches) is where the noticable ourward bulge begins. Once we get to the gunner's hatch we find that there is a slight outward curve on the leading edge, and a noticable bulge on the rear edge. The rear glass has a remarkable outward bulge and it gets even wider (though it narrows vertically) until you get "wings" left and right looking backwards.

It's hard to find precise images, but here are a few to help:

Windscreen and rear glass shapes:


Shows the change from front edge to rear edge on pilot's hatch:


Special note: The rear glass meets the fuselage at almost a flat edge. The fuselage here is rather flat and squared off, and after the canopy quickly transitions into a rounded shape. This is hard to find a clear photo of to prove my point so I'll just reference a couple of scale model photos. Note however, it appears this way on the real craft, too.

Angle 1:


Angle 2:


2) Bomb Bay Doors Pivot Point

The bomb bay doors don't just swing open. They are hinged on arms that swing them upward, inward, and they actually begin curving BEHIND the guns or the bombs mounted on the center rack. I showed this in one of the diagrams I posted near page 1 or 2 of this thread, but just to show you how the majority of the doors don't stick out, here's an image:



Another angle showing rear edge is more recessed:


The rear edge is almost flush with the fuselage, whereas the forward edge protrudes a little more (due to the curve of the fuselage nose)

3) Turret Orientation and Fuselage Shape

The turrets mount on the fuselage. The fuselage should be mostly flat where they sit. There is only the slightest of curves, just a bit at the bottom and top. This is because the "plug" (the round part) and the entire drum rotate with the gun. NOTE: Make sure the skin rotates with it, or it just won't look right!  This is just to point out the proper shape of the aft fuselage and how the guns should look. You can only really see the seam "break" when the gun is rotated up or down significantly.

Example of the gun and fuselage, note the letters have almost no curve, being painted on a flat fuselage:


Here we see the seams "break" just barely as the gun is rotated up:


Also note the shape of the trailing edge wing fillet in that photo... It swings UP to meet the fuselage rather than points straight backwards. ALSO note, that photo turns out to be helpful with regards to the canopy shape: It shows all the frames relative to each other!

4) Landing Gear angle

While the struts are mostly vertical, the tires themselves are angled inward noticably. This is due to the way the tire rotates backwards and sits inside the flat wing whe fully retracted. Similar to a P-40 but not quite.




The point of this post is to ensure we get the best possible 3D shape we can, right off the bat.