Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: cav58d on April 28, 2005, 06:13:45 PM
-
Nation: Germany Manufacturer:
Messerschmitt AGType: 2 Seat Heavy Fighter-BomberYear: 1943
Engine: (2) Daimler Benz DB 603A 12 cylinder liquid cooled inline V, 1,750 hp each
Specifications
Span: 53 ft 8 in (16.3 M)
Length: 40 ft 11.5 in (12.48 M)
Height: 14 ft (4.3 M)
Loaded Weight: 21,276 lb (9650 Kg)
Max Speed: 388 mph at 21,980 ft (625 km/hr at 6.6 Km)
Ceiling: 22,965 ft (7000 M)
Range: 1,050 miles (1689 Km)
Crew: 2
Armament: (2) 20mm cannon, (4) 7.92 mm machine guns, 2,205 lb of bombs
Also saw some info on it on the Military channel's show about the 110.....looks like a pretty sweet plane
-
The 210 and 410 were so plagued with problems, meaning design problems, that they didn't show up in any numbers nor did they have any impact on the war whatsoever. They were too little too late and not that great at the end when they showed up.
The 210 was deemed so poor that the project was scrapped and they went back to the drawing board, and redesigned it, started all over again, and came back with the 410.
-
Still, I think it's a damned ice plane, and I want one badly. (That, among other twin-engine fighter types)
-
Originally posted by Tails
it's a damned ice plane
Well, you certainly nailed it's FM with that description.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
The 210 and 410 were so plagued with problems, meaning design problems, that they didn't show up in any numbers nor did they have any impact on the war whatsoever.
Quite wrong. The early 210A had handling problems. These were corrected, by lenghtening the fuselage and adding leading edge slats to the wings, giving life the 210C, which was produced mainy in Hungary with DB 605A engines. It was fairly well liked with its advanced features. The 410 saw action from early 1943 onwards with DB 603A and E engines.
Right of the top of my head, of the two types there were some 1500-2000 built, but certainly well over 1000.
Oh, and BTW, according to the creator of the Il2 Sturmovik sim, the Russians compared the 210 to the British Mosquito, and overall they preferred the Me 210 over the Mossie. Its wasnt a bad plane, quite the contrary, it had a bad start, but was a very advanced and cool looking plane for its time. Its real speciality was that its rear guns covered a very large defensive arc, making it very hard to attack from blind spots.
-
AFAIK the 210 had a slightly swept back wing but 410 had a straight leading edge making it resemble Mossie pretty much.
-C+
-
Eric Brown called the Me410 a 'knife edger', but I really don't know what he meant by that, Any clues?
-
As a daylight bomber-interceptor the 410 was a failure (this doesn't surprise anyone). However in the ground attack and low-medium altitude fighter-bomber role it was very successful. Perhaps the only LW plane to rival the Mossie in that role.
-
I have never read anything positive about the Me210.
The Me410 would have been very useful if the Germans had still needed an aircraft of that type when they got it in numbers.
I'd like to see the Me410 added.
-
I agree with Karnak. Every source I've ever read has said the 210 was a flop. The wing was redesigned in the 410 to correct design flaws in the 210 design. Off the top of my head it had completely unstable flight characteristics, bad landing gear, might have had engine problems (?), and as for those rear guns -- they were remotely controlled so good luck implementing remote control in AH.
-
I always read they were a disaster.
Looking at the armament and the speeds however, makes one wonder why.
Handling? Being slower than the allied single engined fighters that opposed them?
Then the armament, - rearward facing barbettes, - as other fixed backwards defensive armament just added weight and practically no threat. (Well, the B29 had this mastered)
And climb rates? Roll rates?
Also makes you wonder about the 110's roll rate. Why should the 1940 110 roll better than a 109????
-
Originally posted by Krusty
I agree with Karnak. Every source I've ever read has said the 210 was a flop. The wing was redesigned in the 410 to correct design flaws in the 210 design.
Perhaps you and Karnak should read some serious source on the 210/410, not just the William Green and co. stuff... ie. read Patrick/Mankau, by far the best source. Anyway, as for Karnak every single LW was a 'catasptrope' without exception, with such amount of bias I would not give much weight to his words. He is just playing his usual tunes.
FYI, the original 210A series (354 built, but only 183 was accepted) was indeed troublesome, but was called back, and redesigned, and rebuilt into Me 210A-1(lang) standard with lenghtened fuselage, and leading edge slats. Same airframe as the 410, but with the different engines (DB 601s). There were 182 of the early, troublesome Me 210A-1s accepted by the LW - followed by the 212 redesigned Me 210A-1(lang) which corrected these flaws; 169 of them were rebuilt A-1s. The 'long' 210As were followed by 272 210Ca-1s, 'corrected' airframe but with DB 605As.
So, basically, out of the 838 Me 210s built, only 354 were 'troublesome/catashropic(TM of Karnak)'.. ca 40%, but half of that 40% was re-built and corrected.
Many 210As were then re-engined with DB 603, and along with the newly produced planes, they become the Me 410 A and B, a total of 1010 Me 410s were accepted by the LW.
BTW, the 210/410 was no longer intended to the same multirole heavy fighter ('Zestorer') as the 110. The concept was changed, and the 210/410 was intended as a 'Kampfzestorer', a plane primarly for fast bomber roles, but with mulitrole capabilities.
So, basically, the 110 was a fighter in the 1st place and a bomber only as 2nd, the 210/410 was a bomber in the first place that could also be employed as a heavy fighter. As in the latter role, with it`s heavy armament it was rather successfull and well suited against heavy bombers - that is, until escort fighters appeared which outmatched this larger plane.
-
Ahemm
"So, basically, out of the 838 Me 210s built, only 354 were 'troublesome/catashropic"
That's pretty bad.....
-
Klaus Haberlen had 1 mission in a 410 & suggested it was worthless for bomber interception due to poor powerplant design. He was relieved of his command for this & sent to Italy (not much of a pinishment if you ask me)
-
Don't worry Karnak, every LW a/c to someone here was the ultimate. ;) With bias like that we know someone is wearing heavily tinted rose colored glasses, never mind the tunnel vision. :D
[The fuselage guns of the 210/410 had a vertical range from 80* up to 40* down, with a horizontal arc of ~45*.
-
Well, I have read Petrick&Mankau´s book and I think it is one of the best cures for a disease known as Messerschmitt fans. The book is highly recommended.
As for Brown´s knife edger description, I asked him and he explained that the 410 gave a constant feeling that you were on a knife edge and could fall off any time. In short, a dog as far handling goes.
-
Originally posted by pasoleati
Well, I have read Petrick&Mankau´s book and I think it is one of the best cures for a disease known as Messerschmitt fans. The book is highly recommended.
As for Brown´s knife edger description, I asked him and he explained that the 410 gave a constant feeling that you were on a knife edge and could fall off any time. In short, a dog as far handling goes.
Nice to know you consider me a "disease".
-
Originally posted by pasoleati
Well, I have read Petrick&Mankau´s book and I think it is one of the best cures for a disease known as Messerschmitt fans. The book is highly recommended.
As for Brown´s knife edger description, I asked him and he explained that the 410 gave a constant feeling that you were on a knife edge and could fall off any time. In short, a dog as far handling goes.
Stability is not considered to be a big plus in aerobatic planes. One guy i know who flies aerobatics has a plane with a 6 degree negative dihedral
-
Originally posted by Angus
I always read they were a disaster.
Looking at the armament and the speeds however, makes one wonder why.
Handling? Being slower than the allied single engined fighters that opposed them?
Then the armament, - rearward facing barbettes, - as other fixed backwards defensive armament just added weight and practically no threat. (Well, the B29 had this mastered)
And climb rates? Roll rates?
Also makes you wonder about the 110's roll rate. Why should the 1940 110 roll better than a 109????
I think a 410 nailed one of the P38 aces with it's barbettes...not sure what his name was but probably can google it.
-
Well, perhaps rephasing helps: the disease is the uncritical fandom of Willy M´sconcoctions.
The 410 would have needed more powerful guns for the rear firing installation. One MG 151/20 in dorsal power turret would have been better than the twin installation firing one of the lowest powered ammo in its caliber class.
-
Originally posted by bunch
Stability is not considered to be a big plus in aerobatic planes. One guy i know who flies aerobatics has a plane with a 6 degree negative dihedral
This is also why the germans experimented with negative-sweep (IE Foreward swept) wings on their planes. Very unstable, which means the aircraft WANTS to maneuver. Too bad you need a computer to fly an aircraft with any useful ammount of foreward sweep, with the X-29 and the Su-47 being good examples.
-
Did the Ju287 ever get off the ground?
-
Is that the super Ju87 with the rotating tail fin? No it was a concept plane if I recall. They might have done a mockup (they did lots of those) but I don't recall it ever being made, per se.
-
I know there was a Junkers product with forward swept wings during WW2, jet powered even. They solved the problem of wing flex by the way they mounted the engines. Dont know how controlable it was, if it even flew.
-
That jet idea (I know which one you're talking about) was theory plane. Never made. 90% of those wierd ideas were only on paper at the end of the war.
-
Power to weight ratio is what got to it. It was desgined with to many tasks in mind
-
It 'was' the Ju287. Only the V1 was known to have flown (the V2 possibly in Russia near the end of the war). A Frankenstien aircraft made up of parts from the He177, Ju388, Ju352 and a captured B-24. The forward swept wing (25degrees) was deemed to be an advantage at low speed performance.
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/mmaben/ju287_1.jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/1003/mmaben/ju287_2.jpg)
p
o
p
g
u
n
...a definite precursor eh ?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Nice to know you consider me a "disease".
He is just his usual self. He just registered to butch`s board, just to rotten it down with his flaming.. always the same stuff. The guy who runs the derzeugmaister site recently commented on him :
I post not often on this board, but read it frequently.
When I read something like "As for Willy M, he was an idiot, a hack compared..." I fear that the board goes down to the same low levels of other boards, where agenda driven persons dominate and a serious and rationale discussion about all sources available is prevented..
Familiiar quote, eh? :rolleyes:
Butch neither likes his presence much, said pretty much the same. Sadly, one has to accept that the inet is full of such idiots who spend their time spitting out their hatred in all available forms... but frankyl, I can`t understand WHY is that so much fun to worth the time... :confused:
-
Welll, the initial Me 210 pilots found no troubles with the plane. When Luftwaffe started pushing pilots with little flying experience, the crashes started.
The cure had been suggested before production started, but it had been rejected because it would have slowed down production. As things happened, it all got unbelievable messed up when the production was first cancelled and then orders came from different directions. The cure to the 210's handling was quite simple actually - a bit lenghtened fuselage and some other minor changes, but restarting the production line was a hell because some of the factories had already been ordered to retool for another type, some of the jigs had been destroyed, some fuselages destroyed and so on. It was all a unbelievable mess. The rest of the 210s were modified and used. Hungary built more of the modified Me 210s and used them successfully in the eastern front, pilots well liking the plane. Me 410 was a larger redesign - but came into front lines later, and was not successful anymore as bomber destroyer because the escort fighters, but very good as recon and fast bomber.
Saying "never heard of good things about 210" only shows that you haven't read enough.
-
I guess I was thinking of a different one... It looked sort of the same but only had 1 engine like the He162 and was much smaller. It would have held a single large bomb centerline. I don't think that one ever made it to production.
-
Since Barbarrosa Isegrim (Kurfurst) so typically failed to quote the whole statement, here it is:
"As for Willy M, he was an idiot, a hack compared to Heinkel, Junkers, Dornier, Vogt, Tank, Chadwick, Mitchell. Of the most famous aircraft designers of the era, which other designer managed to design so many aircraft with serious structural design deficiencies?"
As for the rest of his post, the only one with an agenda is Barbarrosa Isegrim who can't accept that his beloved 109, and WW2 Germany, was not perfection personified.
As for spitting out hatred, this is by Barbarrosa Isegrim
Harris himself was very explicit in the Times once about what was he doing, what was his goal : "To kill the boche, to terrorize the Boche". There was no military goal there, just the British military tradition of sadistic cowardice, targeting civillians, women and children after failing on the battlefield. Thank god, that their empire of evil crumbled into the cost. His morals show us exactly why it is so great that WW2 made Britain an arrogant dwarf again in the scene of World politics. The Churchills are gone, the Harris are gone, all the rest of that sick company is gone. Some partisans remain, like JohnB or Hop, apologizing and relatizing this evil of mass murdering civillians."
I have the right to express my opinion about the British Empire, it`s leaders and/or war criminals like everybody else. As gmann said, I have the right of wrath for apologists and relativizers who try to belittle these crimes. And I am very happy this dark evil was flushed down the toilet along with it`s most characteristics goons."
And what a Mod told him after these venomous rants:
" Kurfurst, control yourself. We are having the first decent discussion about this subject that I can remember."
This has not been the first time a Mod on that board has told him to settle down before he "has a heart attack".
Draw your own conclusions about who is doing what.
-
I find it really sad that some of you guys just have to drag your personal broken lovestories and inbed fighting into each and every thread that is posted here.
-
Originally posted by Grendel
I find it really sad that some of you guys just have to drag your personal broken lovestories and inbed fighting into each and every thread that is posted here.
Yes it really said that 'he who tries to portray himself as a sweet innocent person' has to spew venom towards all who rejected his advances > Hop, gmann, LRRP, Angus, Guppy, pasoleati, Naswan, Mike Williams, Crumpp, SkyChimp and many many more..............
This is a good description:
"Kurfurst, the only chest pounding around here is coming from you. For life of me, I simply cannot see why the discussion of 60+ year old airplanes brings out the worst in you. You really ought to reexamine the way you act."
-
They should have used those nice DB-603's for Fw-190C and Doras.:aok
-
Originally posted by Tails
This is also why the germans experimented with negative-sweep (IE Foreward swept) wings on their planes. Very unstable, which means the aircraft WANTS to maneuver. .
Edit: Partially true ( :) ). Rolldamping is probably worse. Hey the ultimative fighter wing desing.
The forward swept wing has a major advantage: the airflow is pushed inside and not outside like on a backward swept wing, so you don´t have sudden crossflow effects due to the fuselage which works like a boundary layer fence. The basic laws of swept wings apply to forward swept wing very much the same like on backward swept ones
The forward swept wing was given up because it was statically much less stable than a backwards swept wing, or let´s say it´s statically instable. Like a flag that turns with the wind and won´t hold it´s position into the wind
niklas
-
If you push the air inwards where it hits the fuselage, I would think it comes with some drag penalty, or?
Anyway, this:
"They should have used those nice DB-603's for Fw-190C and Doras."
How would the DB-603 have been for a 109?
Too heavy like the later Jumo?
(Wasn't that the one they used on the Avia?)
-
Kurfurst,
You know damn well that you're putting words in my mouth. In the very post that Krusty referenced I said the Me410 would have been very useful had they recieved it in numbers when they were on the ofensive.
You can look and look and look at my posts and find very little negative about the German aircraft as I don't focus on them. In all the "discussions" that I've participated in with you it has been you ranting about British aircraft and me defending the British aircraft, not attacking the German aircraft. That is your tactic, not mine.
I have stated on numerous occasions my opinion in brief on the Bf109 (great fighter), Fw190 (exceptional fighter) and others. You are the only one who claims otherwise because, apparently, in your world view if one does not worship on the alter of the Luftwaffe and spit upon their adversaries you are a Luftwaffe hater. That is bull**** and you really need to grow up.
-
The Avia used Jumo 211 (ju87, 88, he111, etc) , which IIRC was very similar to the 213 (Dora, Ta, Ju88, etc..) so I guess it would be possible to mount one 213 in the 109... and if you can mount a 213, you can mount a Db603 (the two were prepared to be compatibles)
-
Does anyone have a link to / reference for the IL-2 Forums discussion mentioned above? I've poked around myself but haven't succeeded in running it down - can't get search function to work.
-
Originally posted by Angus
How would the DB-603 have been for a 109?
Too heavy like the later Jumo?
(Wasn't that the one they used on the Avia?)
Avia used Jumo 211s iirc, that was the main type of engine used in jerry bombers like the he111, ju87, 88 etc.
Now the DB 603, it would be pretty much like Merlin vs. Griffon Spits. Roughly the same weight and dimension differences, too. Mounting it would probably not a problem in place of the 605, the cowling would be a little longer and the plane heavier (given the 900kg odd dry weight of the 603 vs. 730 kg odd of the 605). I remember seeing some calculated performance for DB603 and Jumo 213 for the Bf 109 by Mtt, so they definietely considered it, but declined as at the time the 603s had little to offer about the more developed 605s.. but in the long term, the 603 had great performance reserves - see DB603N. And as Meyer said, the 603/213 were alternative powerplants.
Now as far as forward swept wing goes, somewhere I read that because of the way forces act on it, these can be 30% lighter as they need to be less strong. True or not - dunno.
-
Ok, pretty much what I though. Odd that they never tried it, and sad at the same time, - would have been really interesting to see some test results from it.
BTW, I've looked at a Griffon and a Merlin side by side, - not really much of a difference in size, but the Griffon was a tad wider on the top.
To the forward sweep, - well, baffling. The forces would be very strong on the inner section, so maybe the spars could be somewhat lighter? The skin makes the same weight anyway.
-
Well K, funnily enough, Butch keeps telling me a different story (I won´t go into details here).
As for Willy M, apparently we are reading different Mankau&Petrick book as in my interpretation the M&P has huge amount of coffin nails for both DB and Willy M. Especially the quotes from primary docs are pretty damning. But apparently e.g. the order to have a witness/stenographer present at any meeting with Willy M is just an example how greatly he was respected for integrity.
-
Originally posted by Angus
Ok, pretty much what I though. Odd that they never tried it, and sad at the same time, - would have been really interesting to see some test results from it.
BTW, I've looked at a Griffon and a Merlin side by side, - not really much of a difference in size, but the Griffon was a tad wider on the top.
To the forward sweep, - well, baffling. The forces would be very strong on the inner section, so maybe the spars could be somewhat lighter? The skin makes the same weight anyway.
Unfortunately, using conventional materials, a foreward swept wing would end up being heavier. This is due to having to reinforce the structure to compensate for the wingtips' desire to curl over on themselves.
It can be done with conventional materials, with the mentioned expense in weight, but is only really practical with modern composites, as it keeps the weight down.