I love the 410!!!!

[GScholz]

Hi there <S>! Sure we can do that. Just give me a reminder in January when I'm back in the game. Though I'm not sure what it will prove; the 38G is still a better fighter, just not as dominating as the others on Karnak's list.

[Torquila]

Got some Q's about the historical 410:

Was the turret system heavily armoured? (I notice that .303s can knock it out)

Did the slats come out independently of eachother? (This causes quite some unpredictable instability during manouvres)

[Karnak]

The only historical account I have read of the Me410's turrets came from the perspective of a Spitfire Mk IX pilot in Italy.  He and his wingman encountered an Me410, probably a PR version, which dove to the deck to escape them.  The Spitfires pursued but his wingman gave up the chase.  He was slowly closing on the 410 so he kept at the tail chase.  The 410's tail gunner proceeded to empty his guns at the slowly overtaking Spitfire without ever scoring a hit.  The 410 was subsequently shot down by the Spitfire.

As to the slats, I am not aware of any WWII slats that did not deploy independently.

[GScholz]

You really love that little anecdote, don't you Karnak? 

[Karnak]

You really love that little anecdote, don't you Karnak? 

Its the only Me410 anecdote I have.... 

That said, it was kinda relevant to the question of the tail guns.  In reality they seem to have been rather ineffective.

Of course it also could have been that they were miscalibrated on that particular Me410 or that the tail gunner on that Me410 sucked.

[bozon]

Its the only Me410 anecdote I have.... 

That said, it was kinda relevant to the question of the tail guns.  In reality they seem to have been rather ineffective.

Of course it also could have been that they were miscalibrated on that particular Me410 or that the tail gunner on that Me410 sucked.

The ineffectiveness of the gunner seem to be a property shared with the 110s. I recall many stories of allied pilots shooting down 110s and not one case where they mention taking hits from the gunner. Even worse, in several account the allied pilot closed in on an unsuspecting 110 from behind - what the heck was the gunner doing?! watching an inflight movie while eating his Leberkaese?

The rear gunner and guns were clearly not worth their weight and space on board. Were they at least helping with navigation?

[Karnak]

While covering the Dunkirk evacuations Robert Stanford Tuck's Spitfire Mk I got shot up fairly badly by the tailgun of a Bf110C that he subsequently shot down.

[GScholz]

Ineffective defensive weapons is something the 410 shares with every WWII aircraft that had them. A box of B-17s has what? ... 50 to 60 guns that can fire at any one direction. Still the 109s and 190s... and 110s, 410s, and even Ju88s and Do17s got through and slaughtered them when they had no fighter escort.

[mbailey]

Hi there <S>! Sure we can do that. Just give me a reminder in January when I'm back in the game. Though I'm not sure what it will prove; the 38G is still a better fighter, just not as dominating as the others on Karnak's list.

Sounds great, Im just looking to have fun, and watch the 410 be fought......not trying to prove anything.  Worse case, maybe it'll help scrape some rust off my "G" flying      

[Charge]

There was a single seat heavy 410 fighter available at some stage but it was not very popular. The pilots prefferred to have a tailgunner and less performance without GM1. Go figure if the gunner was considered useless...

Also notice that the tail guns in 410 can be considered as a powered turret so their dispersion should be rather small and accuracy very much better since the recoil does not affect the aiming as in Ju88, Do14 He111 rear facing guns.

-C+

[Oldman731]

There was a single seat heavy 410 fighter available at some stage but it was not very popular. The pilots prefferred to have a tailgunner and less performance without GM1. Go figure if the gunner was considered useless...

He may have been useless as a gunner, but I'm sure he was valuable as an enemy aircraft spotter.

- oldman

[GScholz]

A second pair of eyes are very useful. Perhaps not useful enough considering the weight and aerodynamic penalties, but when the aircraft is designed like that the extra eyes are well worth the 150 lbs of the second crew member and his gear. And as long as he's there, why not give him a gun.

[bozon]

Perhaps not useful enough considering the weight and aerodynamic penalties, but when the aircraft is designed like that the extra eyes are well worth the 150 lbs of the second crew member and his gear. And as long as he's there, why not give him a gun.

Ask de-Havilland, he'll tell you.

[Karnak]

A second pair of eyes are very useful. Perhaps not useful enough considering the weight and aerodynamic penalties, but when the aircraft is designed like that the extra eyes are well worth the 150 lbs of the second crew member and his gear. And as long as he's there, why not give him a gun.

A flex mounted gun as on the Bf110, sure.  A ton of remote controlled turret mechanisms, not so much.

[nrshida]

As to the slats, I am not aware of any WWII slats that did not deploy independently.

The Westland Whirlwind's outer slats were manual and linked together.

Sorry if this offends some people's favourite plane, but I think the 410 was a terrible design solution.