Author Topic: Messerschmitt Me 410  (Read 2540 times)

Offline Duedel

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1787
Messerschmitt Me 410
« Reply #45 on: April 28, 2003, 02:27:32 PM »
Very interesting read LLv34_Snefens ... thx
:)

Offline devious

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 703
      • http://www.jg301-wildesau.de
Messerschmitt Me 410
« Reply #46 on: April 28, 2003, 03:12:35 PM »
Of course, me R want 410.

Duedel, kannste Ergebnisse ins Web stellen ?

Offline Duedel

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1787
Messerschmitt Me 410
« Reply #47 on: April 28, 2003, 03:56:07 PM »
alles was du willst (was meinste mit Ergebnissen?)

Offline davidpt40

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1053
Messerschmitt Me 410
« Reply #48 on: April 28, 2003, 05:19:34 PM »
Quote
David your anecdotal evidence is about as credible as bouncing 50 cals off the ground to kill tanks...In other words its bs.


You call it anecdotal, I call it a first hand account.  

Quote
At 28,000 feet, the Me 410 was only just about flying. It could not manouver much. Even at full throttle, we would be overtaking the enemy bombers at only about thirty miles per hour.
 

See?  The 410 was a poorly maneuvering, slow, relatively large aircarft.  Now if ever an easy target presented itself to tail and ball turret gunners, this was it.

Quote
We had a guy in the squad whos dad was a tail gunner. He stated that it was dam near impossible to get hits.


What year did he serve his tour of duty, and what kind of plane?  By 1944 B17s were using the all metal Cheyenne tail gun turret, not the old canvas type.  Maybe Tony Williams can comment on this.

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
Messerschmitt Me 410
« Reply #49 on: April 28, 2003, 10:43:43 PM »
Hi David,

>You call it anecdotal, I call it a first hand account.  

The "silver, no camouflage" bit is definitely suspect. Luftwaffe pilots thought the USAAF were downright foolish to fly bare metal aircraft. If you could find a photograph of a couple of Luftwaffe planes in squadron service that lacked paint, the credibility of your story would be considerably improved.

>See?  The 410 was a poorly maneuvering, slow, relatively large aircarft.  Now if ever an easy target presented itself to tail and ball turret gunners, this was it.

If you look at the B-17, you'll see that it isn't exactly fast or nimble either :-)

>By 1944 B17s were using the all metal Cheyenne tail gun turret, not the old canvas type.  

The chin turret which was used similar technology as the Cheyenne turret still gave a dispersion of 12 mil (as did the top turret). The Me 410 had nose-mounted armament which gave a dispersion of 2 mil. That means considerably greater accuracy, combined with considerably greater firepower as the Me 410 was armed with a couple of 20 mm or 30 mm cannon. ("If the enemy is in range, so are you" ;-)

Destroyers were a proven weapon against bomber formations by the time the Me 410 came out, whch was a quite a bit faster than the Me 110 which had previously showed it was quite capable of catching the bombers. Accordingly, the Luftwaffe actually was quite reluctant to withdraw the destroyers from interception service as they were so effective - it was only the USAAF fighter cover that forced them to switch to single-engined aircraft.


Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Offline Batz

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3470
      • http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/o/wotans/4JG53/
Messerschmitt Me 410
« Reply #50 on: April 28, 2003, 11:27:21 PM »
Quote
You call it anecdotal, I call it a first hand account.


I take it you still believe in Santa Clause...........


Quote
See? The 410 was a poorly maneuvering, slow, relatively large aircarft. Now if ever an easy target presented itself to tail and ball turret gunners, this was it.


How do you think a 190a8 performs at 28k..........?

Tell ya what take up to 28k in ah and try a flat turn and see what happens.........

Do you really think that b17 cruising in formation is only 30mph faster then a 410?


Quote
" My Staffel was in position about 1,000yd behind 'its' squadron of bombers.The Staffel leader ordered his aircraft into line abreast and, still in close formation, we advanced on the bombers. We were to advance like Frederick the Great's infantrymen, holding our fire until we could see 'the whites of the enemy's eyes'.''


Quote
" like the armoured knights in the Middle Ages, we were well protected . A Staffel might lose one or two aircraft during the advance, but the rest continued relentlessly on ."

 Positioned now about 100yd behind the bombers  the Staffel leader barked out the order to open fire

' Pauke ! Pauke ! ..'.

From such a range the Staffel could hardly miss, and the 3cm explosive rounds struck home . Just 2 rounds could take the tail off a B-17 , and a B-24's fuselage structure was not as sturdy.  The enemy bombers literally fell apart in front of the Sturmgruppe.


Quote
The main enemy concentration from Magdeburg plus reinforcements from Southwest Germany, as many as 175 single engine and 125 twins in all, unleashed their attacks against the center of the column. Although one squadron of the leading 389th Group moving into Halle lost three bombers to enemy fighters when it strayed from the parent force, and the 489th lost one over Aschersleben, the majority of the attacks were hammered against the 14th Wing attacking Bernberg. As noted earlier the 44th Group was flying direct-ly behind the 392nd at a three minute interval. At the IP (the 44th noted in its mission report) "FOUR GROUPS OF B-24'S CAME IN FROM THE EAST AND IT BECAME NECESSARY TO SWING TO THE RIGHT... FIGHTER SUPPORT WAS EXCELLENT." In other words, the 492nd was now exposed to attack from the rear, and all local escort had gone with the 44th. Thus was the fate of the 492nd again sealed.


Quote
The Luftwaffe, in fact, was well organized on 7 July 1944. Liberators especially equipped to monitor enemy fighter frequencies actually heard the attacking ZG 26 pilots ordered to hit the "third formation" (i.e., the 14th Wing) as the "first formation" had too many escorting fighters protecting it.


Any guesses what happened to the 492nd on 7 july 1944?

Heres a hint........

Quote
From six o'clock the enemy fighters fell on the Group's low left squadron like a sledgehammer


In 80 days they got pounded so hard they were pulled from daylight bombing missions.

They must not a have had those "skilled" snipers......err gunners....

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
Messerschmitt Me 410
« Reply #51 on: April 29, 2003, 01:43:47 AM »
Wotan..  do you mean to tell me .....   Santa Claus doesn't really exist!!!  NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:p

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6865
Messerschmitt Me 410
« Reply #52 on: April 29, 2003, 12:22:52 PM »
posted on Ubi IL2 forum by roachclip.


Testing done by the USAAF found that the bullet pattern from a B-17 during ground testing had the following results for 12 rounds to 600yds:

ball turret > dia. 15' - 8.3mils
upper turret > dia. 21' - 11.7mils
chin turret > dia. 23' - 12.6 mils
waist(closed) dia. 26' - 14.3mils
side nose > dia. 34' - 18.7mils
tail turret > dia 45' - 25mils

For the B-24 it was:

ball turret > dia. 15' - 8.3mils
upper turret > dia. 20' - 11.2mils
nose turret > dia. 23' - 12.9mils (Emerson)
nose turret > dia. 35' - 19.3mils (Motor Prod.)
waist(closed) dia. 23' - 12.9mils
waist(open) dia. 63' - 35.6mils
tail turret > dia 35' - 19.3mils


Attacks in reference to azimuth direction only.

B-17 - 3585 attacks, 441 hits (12.3%)

clock position - % of # of attacks - % hits

1 - 12.5 - 9.3
2 - 5.9 - 6.7
3 - 4.5 - 3.9
4 - 5.7 - 4.0
5 - 9.0 - 9.1
6 - 20.7 - 15.6
7 - 8.9 - 6.6
8 - 3.8 - 2.7
9 - 3.9 - 2.9
10 - 3.7 - 3.9
11 - 10.4 - 10.3
12 - 20.2 - 15.6


B-24 - 1042 attacks, 102 hits (9.8%)

clock position - % of # of attacks - % hits

1 - 12.7 - 8.7
2 - 3.9 - 5.2
3 - 2.9 - 5.4
4 - 3.0 - 3.6
5 - 7.8 - 7.7
6 - 19.6 - 20.6
7 - 11.0 - 6.9
8 - 3.1 - 2.0
9 - 2.8 - 3.9
10 - 6.9 - 3.4
11 - 11.9 - 7.8
12 - 21.6 - 17.6

taken from: "Gunner" ISBN 1-55046-332-2

Offline Batz

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3470
      • http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/o/wotans/4JG53/
Messerschmitt Me 410
« Reply #53 on: April 30, 2003, 06:53:31 PM »
hmm david where ya at bud????

:p

Offline VO101_Isegrim

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 577
Messerschmitt Me 410
« Reply #54 on: May 01, 2003, 06:12:47 AM »
As for the bomber gunners claims... there`s the famous case of the Ploesti bombing runs. Bombers went in alone, w/o escort, and they were attacked by fighters, both Rumanian and German. The bomber gunners claimed something like 50 kills as certain.

In fact the Ger+Rum losses were like... 1.