What do you consider a Beast! ?

[Wiley]

nice..I will 
in a turn fight yup...but when most in the MA want to play the HO game.....

I am done....tired of it actually....so screw it...

let the HO games begin.

If you haven't tried it, the 110 serves excellently in that role, and handles quite a bit better.

Wiley.

[LCADolby]

I consider any plane piloted by a beast, a beast.

[ink]

If you haven't tried it, the 110 serves excellently in that role, and handles quite a bit better.

Wiley.

ya I have flown the 110 but then I tried out turning everything...


its the whole 6..20mm....devastating gun package...

hell I flew the Hurri2 with the 4 20's for years and always considered that the best gun package or close to the best....

6 20.....oh baby I just got wood

[Charge]

The 410 was a let down, "then again it kinda was in real life too".

Oh? And where did you get that kind of idea? The problem with 410 was that bomber pilots did not want it. It was fast all right but it made no sense to fly a long way and drop such a small load.
As a fighter it was effective unless hampered by rockets or Bk5. Once the MK103 was tested operationally Galland recommeded ordering all the fighters with MK103 rather than Bk5. The single seater with GM-1 was not popular as the stock version had better than anticipated performance up high and the tail gunner was more valuable than extended operating time.

"Yeah, I won't HO an Me410.  I don't like HOing and if I can kill something as easy as I can an Me410 without HOing it, why do so?"

Indeed, it turned out much different what I anticipated, didn't it. Can't turn a crap due to weight and falls to pieces like a lightweight balsa plane. Interesting combination. I'd say its a bug but what do I know.

-C+

[Rich46yo]

Oh? And where did you get that kind of idea? The problem with 410 was that bomber pilots did not want it. It was fast all right but it made no sense to fly a long way and drop such a small load.
As a fighter it was effective unless hampered by rockets or Bk5. Once the MK103 was tested operationally Galland recommeded ordering all the fighters with MK103 rather than Bk5. The single seater with GM-1 was not popular as the stock version had better than anticipated performance up high and the tail gunner was more valuable than extended operating time.

I dont think anyone wanted it. It was effective as a fighter unless other "fighters" were around. Which tended to happen quite a bit by the time it was operational. Which is probably why they ceased production of the 410 after a little over 1,000 air frames were produced. It ended up as a recce plane. Sounds like a let down to me.

[Charge]

"I dont think anyone wanted it. It was effective as a fighter unless other "fighters" were around. Which tended to happen quite a bit by the time it was operational."

Agreed, its survivability was not as good as that of, say, FW190A8 "Sturmbock" and while it was a jack of all trades it was not the best choice for anything considering the strategic situation.

"Which is probably why they ceased production of the 410 after a little over 1,000 air frames were produced.  It ended up as a recce plane. Sounds like a let down to me."

Yes and no. It was cancelled because the bomber (and NF) roles were much better covered by Ju88 and its later models and the problem with survivability against single engine fighters at that stage of war (which eventually became a problem for single engine fighters as well). Add to that that German HC had to cut down the production of different variants due to growing difficulties in production and lack of materials. The remaining 410s were used for recce and maritime operations where the attrition was not as great as in front line units and due to 410's survivability and speed. Another excellent fighter that was also facing the termination was He219 despite its qualities.

As a heavy fighter the 410 was much better than Bf110 in terms of speed, survivability and armament, both offensive and defensive. The replacement for 410 was considered to be Do335 which performance was considered better. To me it tells quite a bit of the qualities of 410.

-C+

[Karnak]

Indeed, it turned out much different what I anticipated, didn't it. Can't turn a crap due to weight and falls to pieces like a lightweight balsa plane. Interesting combination. I'd say its a bug but what do I know.

-C+

Heh.  It handles almost exactly like I expected it to, though it is a bit more fragile than I thought it would be.  The Me410's wing loading is very high so I never had any doubts that it would be an easy kill.  The Mosquito is simply a superior aircraft compared to the Me410.

[save]

I take a 410 any day against unescorted 4-engined bombers,compared with the Mossie, also the 410 can out-dive quite a few of its enemies, the Mossie should probably be one of them.

The Mossie seems unprotected against defensive 13mms from front, giving the pilot a PW very easy. whereas you normally get oiled or lose guns in the 410.


Its the only plane I know of in the plane-set that a Fw190A8/F8 can out-turn.
The TU2, for example, seems like its jet-powered compared with the 410,in its manoeuvres, how the difference can be this big I do not know.

[TheCrazyOrange]

Heh.  It handles almost exactly like I expected it to, though it is a bit more fragile than I thought it would be.  The Me410's wing loading is very high so I never had any doubts that it would be an easy kill.  The Mosquito is simply a superior aircraft compared to the Me410.

I don't see how the mosquito being better or worse factors into the 410 being a beast. The F4U-4 is the best prop fighter in the game, but I don't see you comparing every other fighter to it.

[save]

to be a beast, you can have different assets that make it best in its category.
Try to attack 10 b-17s flying in a group, the F4u4 and compare it with a ME410 doing the same and the results would be reversed.

[Karnak]

I don't see how the mosquito being better or worse factors into the 410 being a beast. The F4U-4 is the best prop fighter in the game, but I don't see you comparing every other fighter to it.

I was responding to Save's observations about the Me410, not the thread title.

I take a 410 any day against unescorted 4-engined bombers,compared with the Mossie, also the 410 can out-dive quite a few of its enemies, the Mossie should probably be one of them.

I'd be comfortable in either, but those MK103s are so very nice.  I've done well in the Mossie as such, but they both suck at high altitude.  Mossie 30 would be nice for that.

The Mossie seems unprotected against defensive 13mms from front, giving the pilot a PW very easy. whereas you normally get oiled or lose guns in the 410.

It is armored, but it sometimes doesn't feel like it. It is better than the original released Mossie, but still seems to take excessive pilot wounds.  I've noticed the same effect in the P-38s and Bf110s.  I haven't spend enough time in the A-20s or Me410, but it seems like something perhaps caused by not having an engine in front of you in the damage model.

Its the only plane I know of in the plane-set that a Fw190A8/F8 can out-turn.
The TU2, for example, seems like its jet-powered compared with the 410,in its manoeuvres, how the difference can be this big I do not know.

Both of these come back to wing loading.  So far as I know the only plane in AH that has higher wingloading than the Me410 is the B-29A.  The often requested A-26 will also have similarly high wing loading so that will be interesting to see the outcome of.