Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Karnak on July 22, 2004, 05:08:31 PM
-
Comparison of the Bf110G-2 and Mosquito Mk VI as employed in a fighter role in AH2.
Comparative stats for the Bf110G-2 and Mosquito Mk VI in Tour 54 as of 14:00 PST, July 22nd:
The Bf 110G-2 has 4499 kills and has been killed 5642 times.
The Mosquito Mk VI has 1684 kills and has been killed 2134 times.
It seems that the Bf110G-2 sees approximately three times the usage of the Mosquito Mk VI and is somewhat more survivable.
I did some testing of the two aircraft last night. It was not comprehensive, but it was enough to make me wonder.
Loadouts:
Bf110G-2: 50% fuel, external gunpack
Mosquito Mk VI: 50% fuel, overload ammunition
Sustained climb rate from SL using WEP:
Bf110G-2: 3,050fpm
Mosquito Mk VI: 3,500fpm
The Mosquito climbed at a distinctly higher rate. As altitude increases, particularly above 15,000ft the Bf110G-2 should be superior, but for low altitude work the Mosquito has notably better performance in terms of climb.
Fuel range on internal at WEP:
Bf110G-2: 18 minutes
Mosquito Mk VI: 25 minutes
The Mosquito seems to be less fuel effcient, but carries so much more fuel that it's operational range is significantly better than the Bf110G-2's.
Level speed using WEP at SL:
Bf110G-2: 323mph
Mosquito Mk VI: 337mph
I didn't test this last night. It is recalled from old tests. The Bf110G-2 may not have had the external gun pack for this test.
At SL the Mosquito is faster on MIL power than the Bf110G-2 is on WEP. Neither aircraft is nearly fast enough to escape the two most common fighters in AH, the La-7 and P-51D.
Acceleration:
I did not specifically test this, but the climb rate results would seem to indicate that the Mosquito will out accelerate the Bf110G-2.
Roll rate:
This is a subjetive test as I did not have a stop watch. Neither aircraft displayed impressive roll rates, but the Mosquito felt 1/3 to 1/2 again as fast. The Bf110G-2's roll rate could only be described as poor. The Mosquito's little better. The only single engined fighter that both would out roll would be an A6M above ~300mph. The Mosquito will probably out roll the Typhoon.
Turn rate:
There seemed to be little difference, but this is harder to see by flying solo. I would give the edge to the Bf110G-2. It may be a substantial edge.
Manueverability:
At low speeds both aircraft wallow. They are unstable and respond slowly and sloppily to control imput. At higher speeds the Mosquito seems to respond in a much crisper fashion than does the Bf110G-2.
Firepower:
The Bf110G-2 clearly has the more destructive gun package. Four 20mm MG151/20s with more than 1,100 rounds and two 30mm MK108 cannon gives the Bf110G-2 the single most destructive gun package in AH. The Bf110G-2 also mounts dual 7.92mm MG81z machine guns in a hand aimed mount from the back of the cockpit. These guns are mostly useless and attemting to use them to defend the aircraft from rear attacts is generally futile.
Still, the Mosquito is no slouch, carrying four 20mm Hispano Mk II cannon with 700 rounds in the belly and four .303 machine guns (which could be happily ommited) with more ammo than it is possible to use. This gives the Mosquito one of the deadliest gun packages in AH and owing to the higher muzzle velocity of the Hispano cannon may be better for killing fighters than the Bf110G-2's gun package.
Both aircraft mount all of their fixed guns in the nose/lower fuselage giving them tremendously leathal focused fire.
Durability:
There is little I have to go on here.
One is a test in AH1 (so it may not be valid any longer) with J_A_B where using the single Hispano M2 cannon in the P-38's nose we shot, from close range, the tails off of various aircraft. It took two Hispano hits to take off the Bf110G-2's tail and three Hispano hits to take off the Mosquito's tail. As a comparison it took seventeen Hispano hits to take off the B-17's tail and fourteen Hispano hits to take off the Lancaster's tail.
The other things I can note are very subjective and I can only note them for the Mosquito as I have not spent significant time using the Bf110G-2 in combat. The first is that the Mosquito is very prone to pilot wounds when hit from the front quadrant. GV pintle guns seem particularly prone to causing pilot wounds. The second is that the Mosquito seems to catch fire significantly more often than any other aircraft, even the A6M2.
After having flown them a bit last night I cannot understand why people generally hold that the Bf110G-2 is the better fighter. It seems clearly outclassed by the Mosquito and yet it is far more common in the MA (a fact which is probably due to its payload) and is routinely put as being a better fighter than the Mosquito on the BB. I would like to know why the Bf110G-2 is held in higher regard as a fighter than is the Mosquito. It is to the point that people looking for a new ride have posted lists of aircraft they have tried, including the Bf110G-2 but ommiting the Mosquito. They sometimes even express surprise when I suggest the Mosquito be tried as well, claiming that they thought it to be just a bomber. The difference doesn't make sense to me given their relative perfromances.
I will edit this post later today/tonight after running some more tests, including a look at the Bf110G-2 without the gunpack.
NOTE: I did not compare ordinance capability as I am only concerned with air-to-air capability in this post.
NOTE: I did not compare the P-38L as it is obviously vastly superior to both the Bf110G-2 and Mosquito Mk VI.
Comments?
-
I think you're a little delusional here, especially on the climb rate:
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/mossie6speed.gif)(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/110g2speed.gif)
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/mossie6climb.gif)(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/110g2climb.gif)
This is the determining factor: Both planes have similar engine power available however the Mossie weighs 22,221 lbs clean with 100% fuel, the Bf110 weighs 17,500 lbs clean with 100% fuel.
Your earlier argument that the Mosquito was heralded as a success while the Bf110 was a failure is a mismatch of contexts. Yes the Bf110 was a failure as a day fighter, but the Mosquito never was a day fighter. Both planes served well as night-fighters, and the Mosquito also was a successful light bomber/ground attack plane (its designed role) and recon plane. The Bf110 was designed as a fighter, and is much better than any bomber in a dogfight.
-
due to the fact that the help file AH1 says that the bf110 is 17500 pounds and the Mosquto is 22000 some thing
i would think the BF110 would not lose speed as slow in tight fighting as the Moss
by the way the most destructive gun package is held by the ME262 4 30mms and alot of ammo for them
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I think you're a little delusional here, especially on the climb rate:
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/mossie6speed.gif)(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/110g2speed.gif)
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/mossie6climb.gif)(http://www.hitechcreations.com/ahhelp/models/charts/110g2climb.gif)
This is the determining factor: Both planes have similar engine power available however the Mossie weighs 22,221 lbs clean with 100% fuel, the Bf110 weighs 17,500 lbs clean with 100% fuel.
Your earlier argument that the Mosquito was heralded as a success while the Bf110 was a failure is a mismatch of contexts. Yes the Bf110 was a failure as a day fighter, but the Mosquito never was a day fighter. Both planes served well as night-fighters, and the Mosquito also was a successful light bomber/ground attack plane (its designed role) and recon plane. The Bf110 was designed as a fighter, and is much better than any bomber in a dogfight.
the flight model on the Moss has been redone so those mean almost nothing
it climbs as well if not better now try it out
-
It also means nothing because I was not testing a Mosquito with 100% fuel and 2,000lbs of bombs. Remember that the 22,221lb weight includes 3,400lbs of fuel and 2,000lbs of ordinance. In my tests I eliminated 3,700lbs from that total.
Also keep in mind that, IIRC, the Mosquito's engines are each producing about 200hp more than the Bf110G-2's engines are.
Read the loadouts.
The fact is that the climb indicators say the Mosquito handily outclimbs the Bf110G-2 in the configurations I tested. I will test the Bf110G-2 without the external gunpack when I get home, but I doubt it will gain 500fpm from it.
-
Just did. With 100% fuel they are virtually identical in climb up to 5k where the Mossie drops off and the 110 gains a slight advantage (which increase with alt).
With 50% fuel the Mossie holds a slight climb advantage (100-150 fpm) up to 5k where the 110 starts to catch up end eventually gains the advantage.
(Btw. no self-respecting 110 bus driver takes the extra guns)
Now unless this is just a fluke in the Mossie's FM, the two planes are now better matched than ever before. The 110 seems to have a marked acceleration advantage at low speeds, so I wonder about the accuracy of the Mossie's new climb rate.
-
simshell,
No, the Mossie always climbed at 3,500fpm in the configuration I tested. Trust me on this one. I know the Mossie's performance in AH1.
Also, the Bf110G-2's total destructive capability with it's guns exceeds the Me262 by a good bit. It carries nearly as much 30mm ammo for it's two 30m cannon as the Me262 does for it's four and then it has four 20mm cannon with insane ammounts of ammo.
-
Frankly, I fly the 110 over the Moss because
- it can turn without stalling/flipping so damn much
- cannon are better than .303 MGs... 30mm are just nice to boot
- can load underwing rockets (if anybody has ANY info on how to properly USE the damn things, help!)
- drop tanks
- 2x500lb bombs
- rear twin MG (well.. I got kills with it in AH1... I think AH2 porked all defensive gunnery, but that's me)
Whereas the Moss may be faster, and/or lighter in a climb or at higher alt, getting its nose on target is MUCH harder than the 110. It stalls very easy, and at higher speeds, and is a bear to fly. Whereas I have good control of the 110G2 (and the WEP gives the 110 great acceleration when it's slow) at slow speeds, I have never to date had good handling experience in a Moss at slow speeds, where most of the kills happen.
I've gotten a few AH1 kills in it. Not many. Nothing earth-shatteringly wonderful. All were BnZ and on distracted targets.
P.S. the Moss sucks for taking damage, as well.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Read the loadouts.
Where?
-
The Mossie's FM has some odd quirks in it, like the flat "fall" rather than spin if you abuse her in a right hand turn. I have my doubts about this.
-
GScholz,
The Mossie hasn't changed in any good way other than fuel endurance in AH2. It has only gained a more vicious stall and lost 1mph off its SL speed.
Also note that the 22,221lb weight is it's fully laden take off weight. Bombs and 100% fuel. No Mossie driver planning on air-to-air combat takes 100% fuel.
The loadouts I meant were listed in my opening post. I listed the test aircraft:
Bf110G-2: external gunpack, 50% fuel.
Mosquito Mk VI: overload ammo, 50% fuel
Krusty,
Take another look at the loadouts for each aircraft. You'll find the Mossie wins the underwing rocket's test and has far better teeth than .303 caliber machine guns. You'll also find that the Bf110G-2 carries 1,100lb bombs, not 500lb bombs.
As I said, durability seems iffy. I've had them hold together through tremendous poundinsg and all had them just ignite on the slightest hit.
-
According to my books the Mossie Mk IV had an empty weight of 14,100 lbs and a max load of 22,500 lbs. The 110G-2 had an empy weight of 9,920 lbs and a loaded weight of 15,430 lbs (no bombs I gather ... different books). The Mossie Mk IV had two 1,230 hp Merlins 21s (early IV) or two 1,680 hp Merlin 72s (FB.IV). The 110G-2 had two 1,475 hp DB605Bs.
A loaded 110G-2 weighs just over 1,000 lbs more than an empty Mossie.
-
I just realized something about the AH Mossie performance charts. They were introduced at the same time the Mossie was, and when the Mossie was introduced it was in the bomber section. So far as I know all the bomber charts are for performance with ordinance. After all it isn't very usefull to know how a Lancaster climbs without bombs. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if those charts are for a fully laden Mossie.
The Mosquito Mk VI we have is powered by two Merlin 25s, each at 1625hp or 1640hp depending on your source.
A small number of early Mk VIs were powerd by 1,230hp Merlin 21s or 23s.
The Mosquito B.Mk XVI was powered by a Merlin 72 and Merlin 73 with counter rotating props.
-
Ah, yes I misread. Merlin 25s it is (1,635 hp in my book)
-
The Mossie AH2 speeds, climbs etc. are all pretty accurate for (saxophone exhaust / flame damper equipped) Merlin 25 aircraft, but the EB6 (?) is slightly off.
Intermediate 1-hr limit (i.e. 100%) is + 9 boost, but WEP (5 min limit) is +18lbs, not the +14 in AH2. The +9 / +14 is a Merlin 23, not a Merlin 25.
Small point.
Oh, and mossie with a little e advantage can spank the 110, but don't try to turn a mossie with a co-e 110, as I found out (again) to my cost last night. Stoopid stoopid stooooooopid.
Cheers,
Scherf
PS - Can we get the dampers removed, now that there's no more night in AH? Please? Pretty please?
-
Scherf,
The fuel consumption is based on the Merlin 21. Pyro said it was out of synch. He also said he'd fix it when they redo the Mossie.
-
Works for me.
Anyway, the whole boost number thing is a bit anal anyway, aircraft performs the way the tests say it should, so what the hey.
Shoot, if Pyro's got any mossie stuff on his to-do list, perhaps he could remove the flame dampers after all...(can provide references / charts re: the slower exhausts if such are needed...)
Cheers,
Scherf
-
Karnak--
want to do more testing in the DA sometime? I sort of have fun doing that type of stuff.
"These guns are mostly useless and attemting to use them to defend the aircraft from rear attacts is generally futile. " (regarding the 110 tail guns)
Those guns become quite useful when you have a dedicated gunner on board. I'd agree they're useless if all you have is a pilot.
J_A_B
-
Originally posted by GScholz
(Btw. no self-respecting 110 bus driver takes the extra guns)
I sometimes do. Granted, I use the 110 most as a Jabo and so I'm taking the 2x500kg loadout instead, but once in a while I bring along the pod.
The deflection shooting possible in the 110 with 2 or 4 of those 20mm is amazing, and they reach so far out that enemy planes often start they evasive too late. The Mossie does an even better job at that, but it lacks the punch of the 30mm in the snapshot or against bombers. I'm not calling 4xHispano weak and most of the time they do just fine, but there is just that little edge to the 110.
-
110 lights on fire at the drop of a hat in my experience... I'd say at least 75% of the kills I've had of 110s or deaths I've had in 110s were by fire.
Of course the Mosquito used to do that to, don't know if it still does.
I'd take 4 Hispanos over 4 MG-151s and 2 Mk108s to be honest.. both gun packages will kill with a burst, and the Hispanos are longer ranged and easier to hit with.
The Mk-108 doesn't usually kill with one hit in AH2 now, although I imagine firing 2 would still give you the insta-kill effect. On the other hand, I've killed at least 2 planes so far with single Hispano hits to the tail, the the Hispano can still kill in one hit if you hit the tail anyway. I hit a P-51 in the wing with 1 Hispano round and the whole thing came off, that has never happened before so I assume he was already damaged.
The 110 actually used to be a pretty decent "dogfighter".. in AH1 I would have rated the 110G over the P-47's and the 190A's in that category.. I haven't flown it to much in AH2 so I couldn't tell you. In AH1 it turned considerably better than the 190's did, although it didn't accelerate as fast.
-
Didn't have the impression the old mossie was forever bursting into flames, but then again I didn't have much to compare it to.
Last night was bad for fire though - caught fire a lot, much more often than I'm used to. Not sure if that was just the luck of the draw or some kind of change - suspect the former.
Almost whined online until I realised most of the shots which set my Mossie on fire were my own damn fault - failed to prepare correctly in some way or another, gave away a chance to the other guy, etc.
Cheers,
Scherf
-
I would give the firepower to the mossie. I can make 600 yd deflections shots in the mossie, i don't think i could do the same with the 110. I fire off the .303s on takeoff- they're useless. Why keep them when you have 700 rounds off hispano. :)
I wonder if any pilots would have removed the .303s if given a choice. How much mph the mossie would have gained if they removed the .303s? the protuding guns barrels must have caused a bit of drag.
I've not had many fights against 110's but from my experience the mossie out-turns the 110 at high speed but the reverse is true at low speed. The 110 handles much better at low speed too, the mossie is just begging the pilot to go into a horrible stall.
The mossie is sexier though.:)
(http://www.angelfire.com/fm/compass/Mosquito.jpg)
-
The Bf110 is simply a better town killer than the Mosquito and seeing towns are bigger in AH2 I imagine that's why they're being used more than the Mossie.
-
That is the point, G2 is simply far better attack plane than mosquito. In fact, G2 is the best jabo of entire AH planeset.
-
J_A_B,
We could do that sometime. Thanks.
Replicant, MANDOBLE,
I specifically wasn't talking about ground attack. It is clear that the Bf110G-2 is better at that, if only because of the gamey way that cannons blow up buildings.
MANDOBLE,
The Bf110G-2 is not the best jabo aircraft. When all things ar considered, the P-38L is superior. It does a bit less damage, but gets there faster and is far, far more survivable than the Bf110G-2. The Bf110G-2 is only the best if it has complete air superiority to work in and that is rare.
I have only lost one Mosquito to the Bf110G-2, and that was because I overspeeded and tore my control surfaces off. It never touched me. I have never lost a Mosquito to a 110G-2, even if the 110G-2 had the altitude on me.
So far as I can tell, in the group of four easily killed aircraft, both of the Bf110s are at the bottom while the P-38L is clearly the most survivable of the lot.
-
For what it’s worth, here’s my thoughts on the 110 VS the Mosquito as it pertains to AH. None of this is related to real life data, just impressions of why people fly it more.
First off the cockpit views: The 110 has a great advantage in AH, especially for someone who knows how to properly set their views. I don’t believe there is a blind spot at all with the views I have set up. In my opinion your views are your life in AH.
Second, WEP: the 110 has a significant advantage here also. The WEP on the 110 lasts almost as long as a 109. I can load 75% fuel, 2 500kg bombs, and 4 50kg bombs; then climb on WEP to 17-20k from sea level before the WEP starts to wear out. If you choose to save the WEP for later, it is extremely helpful when powering over the top in a dogfight. When attacking in a dive, you can pull out somewhere in the vicinity of 400mph, level off and hit WEP, and extend away from even a pony for a while (unless he dove on you from above during the attack). You can also hit WEP and be back up to 10k + in a very short time.
You can also use the WEP to escape from a dogfight. I have found the acceleration to be quite good in the 110, enough so that if you set up a good escape and get 1.5k separation, you can even get away from a spitfire (at least until you are in a position to reverse and fight 1-1).
Third, load out: the 110 has to have one of the top loadouts in AH. 2 500kg (equaling over 2200lbs), 4 50kg (equaling over 440lbs), and the 20 + 30mm cannon package. In AH 1 I could dispatch an entire town alone in approximately 2-3 minutes, again alone. I would also still have enough ammo for 3-4 kills in dogfights, maybe 5-6 kills vulching if I was not fighting for the vulches (wasting ammo on a plane someone else is shooting at).
In strict dog fighting mode, the 110 ammo load has got to be the biggest, and most lethal in the game. Flown well, not wasting ammo, I can easily see someone getting over 20 kills without coming close to running out of ammo. You’d certainly run out of gas before ammo just dog fighting.
Also in dog fighting, even the most brazen n1k2 or La7 pilot will think twice or thrice before attempting an HO. They most likely have been hit by the 110 HO before, and know it will beat them 9 out of 10 times easily. Personally, I will take a 110 into a fight where I have been HO’d a few times, just to get the enemy to stop doing it LOL.
Fourth, maneuverability: yes both the planes tend to wing over and flop about, but I think the 110 is easier to get a handle on. Part of this I think can be attributed to the views. The more of the sky and horizon you can see, the more aware you are of what the plane is doing. Another thought is the turning radius. I think the 110 holds an advantage there also. Not just flat turning, but high and low yo-yo’s too. I find it easy to sucker a plane into a high yo-yo semi-vertical fight, and get the snapshot on them first. A couple of 20mm or 30mm cannons to their canopy, and boom they’re dead.
I think the 110 can definitely hold it’s own in a 1-1 fight better than the mosquito, based on my observations.
Oh well these are just the ramblings of a fool who likes LW planes LOL. Hope they help understand a 110 pilots thinking Karnak.
<> sir, and good fight last night in the typhoon, I was in an A5.
-
Originally posted by JB73
<> sir, and good fight last night in the typhoon, I was in an A5.
I was goon hunting. That was my first flight in the Tiffie in a long, long time.
I'd gotten sick of the 4+ to 1 fights I was getting. Got gangbanged in a Mossie (took out one N1K2 before the other five aircraft got me) and had a 4 on 1 that ended with a frontal shot my an N1K2 that took off my Spitfire Mk I's wing with one hit.
So I decided to try to frusterate you guys by killing you goons. Couldn't make myself take an La-7 though.
-
Karnak, believe it or not, 110G2 is a formidable air opponent. Good point is that most people think it is an easy to kill target, that is, seconds before going down in pieces in their uberrides. G2 is Mr single snapshot and you are dead. And G2 can do more than twice ground damage than P38L (2.5 hangars vs 1). About range, a 100% fuel + DTs G2 can cross side to side any small map on military power. BTW, It is normal that G2 usage exceeds clearly that of the Mosquito.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I was goon hunting. That was my first flight in the Tiffie in a long, long time.
yeah, thats what i expected, i saw a typh low and knew it was a goon hunter, did you see me comming to intercept early on?
after i got you i was like WHA?!?!?! Karnak in a typh?!?1 lol
did not expect that al all.
-
So it seems the general consensus is that the Bf110G-2 is superior to the Mosquito.
Now, why did the Mosquito have anything like a good reputation in reality? If the performance in AH is at all accurate I would think that canceling the Mosquito would have been very high on the list of things to do. Yet it continued production after the war was over. Why? It is clearly inferior not only to the P-38, but also to the earlier Bf110 despite having significantly more powerful engines.
This seems like a recipe for a failure of an aircraft, yet history records it as one of the most successful and usefull aircraft of WWII.
Why would anybody have ever picked it over the P-38 for any role as the US did when we tried to procure enough Mosquito F-8 photo recon aircraft to replace the F-5 (P-38) photo recon aircraft.
MANDOBLE,
I tested it some time ago, using the three and IIRC the Bf110G-2 got three hangars, the P-38L got two and the Mosquito got one and damaged another.
In my experience the Bf110G-2 is an easy kill, and I'm not flying La-7s or anything. I think you are overstating the Bf110G-2's air-to-air capabilities.
JB73,
Yeah, I saw you before you had an icon. I have been having a lot of trouble judging E states of late and didn't think you'd be able to follow my zoom up. Once you did I was left trying to rudder slide and barrel roll to avoid your fire.
I have also been seeing way, way too many P-51s, Typhoons, Fw190D-9s and especially La-7s. I'm not very fond of this 1945 ultra fast MA.
I switched to flying the Ki61 at another base after losing the Tiffie and even though there was heavy action in the sector I ran low on fuel before I could expend the Ki61's paltry ammo load. I only got 1 kill before landing. Everybody was simply going too fast.
-
I've flown both, but not extensively.. I'd prefer the Mosquito for Bore n Zoom, but the 110 for fighting.
Probably take the 110 for blowing up towns and the Mossie for killing GVs though.
-
I don not overestimate anything, I fly 110G2 on a regular basis.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
In my experience the Bf110G-2 is an easy kill, and I'm not flying La-7s or anything. I think you are overstating the Bf110G-2's air-to-air capabilities.
it is an easy kill, if you know what you are doing.... but make a single mistake, and all it takes is 1 super quick shot by the 110... you are dead. thats kinda what i was trying to say.
the biggest danger to a 110 is a spit V with E. la7's seem to have an especially hard time hitting my 110 at least .. they are usualyl too fast, and i fight them on the stall edge with 2 notches of flaps (about 160 IAS).
Originally posted by Karnak
I have also been seeing way, way too many P-51s, Typhoons, Fw190D-9s and especially La-7s. I'm not very fond of this 1945 ultra fast MA.
i usualyl fly the dora myself, but i love sneaking someont into a fight with the A5.
the other plane im flying a TON of is the 109F, flown as an E fighter, wow its good.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Now, why did the Mosquito have anything like a good reputation in reality? If the performance in AH is at all accurate I would think that canceling the Mosquito would have been very high on the list of things to do. Yet it continued production after the war was over. Why? It is clearly inferior not only to the P-38, but also to the earlier Bf110 despite having significantly more powerful engines.
This seems like a recipe for a failure of an aircraft, yet history records it as one of the most successful and usefull aircraft of WWII.
I've already answered that:
Originally posted by GScholz
Your earlier argument that the Mosquito was heralded as a success while the Bf110 was a failure is a mismatch of contexts. Yes the Bf110 was a failure as a day fighter, but the Mosquito never was a day fighter. Both planes served well as night-fighters, and the Mosquito also was a successful light bomber/ground attack plane (its designed role) and recon plane. The Bf110 was designed as a fighter, and is much better than any bomber in a dogfight.
The Mosquito never was a day fighter. It was a very succesful light bomber and night figther. The Bf110 also was a succesful night fighter.
-
Don't give ALL the secrets away 73. ;)
Remember Streng Geheim!
-
For GScholtz only (I don't want to piss too many people :D)
Twin engined planes are for people not confident enought to fly single engine fighter
gniark gniark gniark gniark :p
-
Look at my avatard you jumping frog! (now look at yours ;)) :D
-
GScholz, i'm pretty sure mossie raids were sometimes themselves escorted by mossies.
The mossie also used to go on rhubarbs to LW airfields hoping to bounce a/c landing or taking off. Not exactly dogfighting though hehe.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I've already answered that:
I don't think that you have really. Not when you look at the actuall use which is far more varied than you seem to indicate.
Originally posted by GScholz
The Mosquito never was a day fighter. It was a very succesful light bomber and night figther. The Bf110 also was a succesful night fighter.
Actually it was employed as a day fighter as well, although it was not ideal in that role. For example I recall one time when a squadron of FB VIs engaged a number of Fw190s. They got two of the 190s, but lost four Mosquitos.
In AH the Mosquito is a dismal failure as a strike aircraft. It has neither hitting power nor survivability. In reality it had both those things when compared with other aircraft.
We don't have a light or medium bomber version of the Mosquito, so that is irrelevant. It is the FB.Mk VI that we do have that the RAF ordered in greater numbers than any other due to it's versatility.
The Mosquito was a better night fighter than the Bf110, but not in the form of the FB.Mk VI, which was not a night fighter and has engines tuned too low to be really effective in that role, even when it was equipped with "Serrate" and used as a NF.
FB.Mk VIs ranged over Europe in all weather and at all hours. The Beaufighter was not cleared for Intruder operations during the day, the Mosquito was. Day Ranger missions were flown, very successfully, by Mosquito FB.Mk VIs (the color scheme on AH's Mossie is that of a Day Ranger) from late '43 to late '44.
None of these things seem suited to the Mosquito in AH. As has been pointed out, the Bf110G-2 is actually better at all of them.
Why were the German envious enough of it to try to copy the concept and to try to get Finland to make a literal copy?
-
Again apples and oranges. The Bf110 and Mosquito are two different planes designed for different roles. The Mosquito was VERY versatile, and that more than anything made it a great aircraft. The Germans did indeed want a Mosquito of their own, but not because it was a fighter. They were impressed with its ability to make fast low-level attacks in France and get away with it. Any comparison between the MA and real life is a falacy. The MA is a gamy environment in which the Mossie has little chance of finding a role for itself. The real Mossies never flew in such an environment and never faced that kind of opposition.
That the Mosquito engaged German fighters on a few occasions does not make it a fighter. That the Mosquito's were forced to escort themselves on deep penetration missions because no British fighter had the range to escort them does not make the Mosquito a fighter.
That the Mosquito was a better night fighter than the Bf110 is arguable. I think the Ju88G was the most successful night fighter of the war.
-
If it were just the MA I'd agree. The Mossie never had to operate in that hostile an environment. It never had to deal with Typhoons, P-51s and La-7s, and only rarely with Bf109G-10/K-4s or Fw190D-9s.
However, it is no more useful in the CT or scenarios. It is incapable of doing fast, low level attacks and getting away with it.
(BTW, they did those all over occupied Europe, not just France)
As to the NF capabilities, well, the Mossie was going after other night fighters, not ponderous bombers in huge streams of hundreds of aircraft.
Pure shoot down numbers don't really tell the whole story.
-
Other gamy environments. Turn off the flashing of bases and then tell me that the Mossie is incapable of attacking a strat target flying on the deck, making one attack and then immediately leaving the area. 10 minutes later the opposing force gets a message that the strat target was hit, and only then can respond. Tell me that the Mossie is incapable of doing that in AH.
-
Shooting down bombers is the main objective of any night-fighter. The Mossie was used as a "anti-night fighter" because most of the German night-fighters were converted bombers themselves.
-
You seem to be claiming that the accounts of Mosquito crews that they were intercepted by Fw190s or Bf109s and simply flat outran them are incorrect.
There are many such accounts.
In AH any 1943 109 or 190 will simply run the Mossie down. You have to go back to the Bf109F-4 to find a German single engined fighter in AH that the Mossie can outrun.
Nightfighters I've seen Mossie claims on:
Bf109
Bf110
Fw190
Ju88
Me410
He219
None of those, not even the Ju88, are as cumbersome as a Lancaster or Halifax.
Now, admittedly, night fighters are ambush killers. However, the smaller size, higher speed and propensity to make unexpected and dramatic course changes does make them much more elusive targets even when they are aware that they are being hunted.
And no, the goal of night fighters is not to shoot down the bombers. It is to accoumplish the mission they are tasked with. That may be shooting down the bombers, but it also may be escorting the bombers and protecting the bomber stream. It might also be shooting up ground targets. Night fighters did all of these missions.
-
The Mossie is fully capable of outrunning 109F-G6 and Fw190A5, as long as the fighters don't dive on you, and/or if the Mossie has alt that can be converted into speed.
You seem to think that the Mossie was some kind of super speed daemon. It wasn't. It used surprise and its high low-alt speed to avoid combat. If caught it could run with a decent chance of getting away in REAL LIFE. In the MA it is an easy kill because the fighters will run it down regardless of their own safety, in real life fighters weren't flying on mil-power all the time, and the English Channel isn't that wide.
-
Here's a quiz for you: What was the fastest fighter in the BoB?
Answer: The Bf110.
It didn't help the 110, and it don't help the Mossie as a fighter either.
-
No, but the more common crossing of the North Sea is fairly wide.
BTW, I assure you, the Bf109G-2, Bf109G-6 and Fw190A-5 will all handily run a Mossie down. No dive required.
I don't think it was a super speed demon. I think that it could do about 350mph on the deck. Enough to run in the flat, but not enough if attacked from above or if surprised.
337mph just doesn't get it done.
And that isn't considering the obvious short commings against the likes of the La-7.
EDIT:
Bf110C-4?
That, as I understood it, topped out at 340mph. The Bf109E and Spitfire Mk I both topped out at about 355mph.
In AH I consider the Bf110C-4 to be the best of the 1940 fighters. The Spit I and 109E roll too poorly and are too fragile and the Hurri I is too slow.
-
The Mosquito FB.IV had a top speed of 380 mph at altitude, and our Mossie got those blasted flame dampeners. On the deck a speed of about 340 mph sounds reasonable without the dampeners.
The Bf110C-4 had a top speed close to that of the Spit I of about 355 mph at altitude, but on the deck the 110 was much faster than both the Spit and 109 at 300 mph.
And no. The 1942-43 German plane set will not "handily run a Mossie down" if they fly at cruise speeds and don't have an alt advantage when they spot the Mossie. In real life it was the exception that the Mossies were intercepted, and then it was the exception that the Mossies got away unscaved. Any fighter can catch a low Mossie if they have alt.
-
I've chased Mossies around in a 109G-6 and never caught up, I think the Mossie is a little faster on the deck. The G-10 can catch it easy though.
Yea, looking on the charts at http://www.jannousiainen.net/online_sims/jg_4/index.htm (http://www.jannousiainen.net/online_sims/jg_4/index.htm)
the Mosquito is faster than the 109F-4, G-2, and G-6 on the deck. Only like 5 mph faster though, the A5 is a little faster on the deck, and the A8 is about 10 mph faster.
-
"Now, why did the Mosquito have anything like a good reputation in reality?"
Performance alone doesn't deterine how good or bad an airplane is. It's ability to fill a needed role is what counts. For a long time the Mosquito was the only plane available that could do the jobs tasked to it.
Plus, if I'm not mistaken, some later versions were faster than the one we have in AH.
When are you usually on Karnak? I'll look you up.
J_A_B
-
thinking about this thread on the way home.. Karnak, you originally wanted to know whay in the MA the 110 was used more.
i think i covered that in my post... it was all about MA "gameplay"
i'll alos add i think the 110 (in AH1) was (a huge WAS) better at knocking out GVs. in AHII the guns just dont work the same, but i used to be able to kill 2 panzers with the big bombs, disable 2 with salvo 2 on the 50kg's., and strafe out the turret on 3-4 more before damage or reloading.
another point....
IRL the 110 never faced any of the PAC fighters, or other LW planes.
in the game a 110 vs 109g10 is a great fight, co-E, i'd say 2/3 the time or more against an equal pilot i would win that one in the 110 easy.
stuff like that (what it faced and in what situation) makes a huge difference in the MA i believe. the 190d is my ride of choice because it is soo cool looking, but alos because i can chase a pony, run from a zeke, dive with a p47.. and so on.
my 190 almost never fights a pony @ 23,000 feet like IRL, but i do get in scraps with spitV's on the deck. if i want to extend and reset i can in the dora.
its hard to explain what im trying to say, but i think the 110 is better suited to the EXTREME diversity in the MA compared to the mossie, which was better suited to its role IRL.
does that make sence?
-
Yup.
-
Without the flame dampers the FB.VI with Merlin 25 engines would do a little better than 350mph.
The charts put the it at 337mph or 338mph with the flame dampers.
If you like I can link some charts for the flame dampered FB.VI when I get home.
Urchin,
In the CT I have been run down by both the Bf109G-2 and Fw190A-5. It is a long, long chase, but they will do it eventually. Particularly after the Mossie's WEP runs out and they still have five minutes left.
J_A_B,
It is kinda random nowadays. I go for days or weeks without logging on, then I fly for three or four hours for a few days straight.
We'd have to agree to a time really.
I'm available Sunday afternoon, PST.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Particularly after the Mossie's WEP runs out and they still have five minutes left.
more like 10+ minutes left if it was full.
-
Originally posted by JB73
more like 10+ minutes left if it was full.
If the Bf109G-2 or Fw190A-5 do not use their WEP the Mossie will rapidly pull away. They start with 10 minutes of WEP, the Mossie starts with 5 minutes. When the Mossie runs out, they have 5 minutes left.
-
There was a series on Discovery Europe some time ago that focused on the air war in Europe. One of the episodes was about the night-fighters, night-bombers, and flak. One Bf110G-4 pilot was interviewed and his stories was very interesting. One was over Berlin when a piece of debris from a Lancaster he had just shot down hit his 110 and he and his radar operator had to bail. He got stuck as he tried to get out and (he looked embarrassed as he said this) cried for his mother as he fought himself free of the plane.
His other story has more relevance to this thread however; he was hunting a Mosquito one night (he identified it by it's speed) and tried to intercept it. He pulled the handle releasing his drop tanks and turned on WEP. After a long chase he realized he could not gain on the Mossie, only keep up with it, and fearing his engines would blow he broke off the pursuit and returned to base. On the ground he found out the drop tanks never dropped and chewed out the ground crew really good (he smiled saying that).
-
Here are the charts I promised:
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/MosquitoVI.JPG)
And, less usefull, but still interesting:
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/Mosquito6.jpg)
-
The Mk.33 was a 1944 carrier version, and the Mk.35 is a 1948 post-war model.
330-340 mph on the deck seems accurate for a Mk.VI
Edit: We have a Mk.VI
-
The Mk 33 (particularly that Mk 33) is an FB.Mk VI with naval equipment and four bladded props.
I have a reference that says what effect the four bladded prop had, but it is at work. I won't have access to it until monday. De Haviland tested the four bladed prop in '42 or '43 and was not impressed with it. IIRC, the Mk 33 had it for the boosted accelration at low speed so that it could take off of a carrier.
The Mk 33 is a Mk VI in all but name.
-
The Mk.33 had folding wings, a four bladed prop, different exhaust stack, and the engines ran on 1944 boost levels. Our Mk.VI is a 1943 version I believe.
-
AH has a Mk.VI and your chart shows the Mk.VI speed is very similar if not identical to AH's.
-
The different exhaust stack is the difference between flame dampers and no flame dampers. Some Mk VIs had each kind.
The Merlin 25 was rated for +18lbs boost. There is no difference for 1943 or 1947. They are both powered by Merlin 25s.
The first TR.33s were converted Mk VIs. The one tested is, IIRC, one of those converted Mk VIs.
As to the prop, the main effect that had, IIRC, was low speed acceration. De Haviland didn't go with four bladed props on the Mossie after testing them in 1942 as the effect was not significant.
The navalized equpment would only add weight and make the TR.33 slower.
Yes, that is a FB.Mk VI with Merlin 25s and flame dampers, just as in AH.
An example of a different aircraft is the A6M3 and A6M5. Same exact engine, but the A6M5 had ejector stacks and the A6M3 did not. The A6M5 did 353mph, the A6M3 did 332mph. Now, the A6M was a light aircraft so it will have more effect, but to claim there is no effect when there are many documents saying otherwise is silly. De Haviland claimed the flame dampers reduced the top speed of the Mossie by 10mph or so.
-
you got to remember that in AH the planes are nothing like the real things.. the mossy was a fatastic plane loved by its aircrew who have written articals about it, that I have loved to read over the years... the 110 on the other hand was like a posting to the eastern front for its crews, who have gone into great detail why they hated the aircraft for anything other than night fighter..
i think a lot of people look at things through rose tinted glasses, but if you read some of the testimonials that both aircraft have you will come some ways to understanding what it must have been like to go into battle in a plane you had confidence in, or not..
as for what karnak is doing in trying to get some stats on the aircraft, i thank you for the trouble you are taking..
-
Originally posted by Karnak
MANDOBLE,
The Bf110G-2 is not the best jabo aircraft. When all things ar considered, the P-38L is superior. It does a bit less damage, but gets there faster and is far, far more survivable than the Bf110G-2. The Bf110G-2 is only the best if it has complete air superiority to work in and that is rare.
Well, the P-38 is very good (2,000 lbs bombs, ten rockets), as is the F4U-1D (2,000 lbs bombs, 8 rockets). But, the King of Jabos is the P-47D-40 at 2,500 lbs bombs and 10 rockets with a whopping 3,400 rounds of .50 cal ammo. Add to that far better outward vision. As to defending itself, when light, the P-47D-40 is remarkably agile, with a terrific rate of climb. It's good enough to threaten anything it meets Co-alt, and downright lethal with some E in the bank.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Karnak, if you can find a speed/climb chart of a Mk.VI with the multiple ejector exhaust and some reference to that it was common on the Mk.IV I think Pyro would be more inclined to remodel it. A navalized version with different props and other equipment won't do it I think.
Edit: However, I'm more inclined to leave the Mk.IV as it is/was, and ask for a new model of a later Mossie with better performance. It would probably have to be a bomber though, since I can't find any later FB mark except the Costal Command XVIII with the 57mm cannon. most likely it was the high-blown bomber and recon marks that were the most successful in evading the LW since they were considerably faster than the FB.
-
GScholz,
The different version of the FB.VI using the Merlin 25 aren't a matter of later or earlier. They both entered service in 1943. The FB.Mk XVIII that you mentioned was a regunned, uparmored FB.Mk VI using Merlin 25s with ejector stacks and those entered service in 1943 as well.
Oh, how I have tried to find a chart of the FB.Mk VI with the ejector stacks. All I have been able to come up with is what I have posted and some remarks from de Haviland about the odd one out not doing 370mph at SL as some pilots claimed, but that those claims were based on a known issue with some airspeed indicators.
I'll keep looking.
You are correct that the B.Mk XVI and PR.Mk XVI were the hardest to intercept due to their speed and the fact that they were usually at 25,000+ft. NF.Mk 30s weren't very easy to get either.
-
Hi Karnak,
>Oh, how I have tried to find a chart of the FB.Mk VI with the ejector stacks.
I'd say the Mk 33 data probably can be applied to the FB 6, too.
Everything else identical, it would indicate that each Merlin 25 gained about 400 N thrust at maximum power, which seems quite plausible for that engine type.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
henning is that you I've seen flying yesterday ?