Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: glock89 on August 15, 2008, 12:30:44 AM
-
I was looking in a book and saw a pic a of 163 with rockets. Any 1 know if it saw any action?
-
i dont think so. I know the Me262 had air to air rockets ( held 24 of them), but i dont think the me163 was strong enough to hold them.
-
I was looking in a book and saw a pic a of 163 with rockets. Any 1 know if it saw any action?
Post it?
-
I was looking in a book and saw a pic a of 163 with rockets. Any 1 know if it saw any action?
You sure it wasn't a Gnatter?
-
I was looking in a book and saw a pic a of 163 with rockets. Any 1 know if it saw any action?
Most probably you saw this one:
(http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/6611/163amn6.jpg)
This is a ME 163A, not a the operational 163B we have in game. It was used for testing purposes only.
As far as I know there were no R4M equipped 163B flying any sorties.
i dont think so. I know the Me262 had air to air rockets ( held 24 of them), but i dont think the me163 was strong enough to hold them.
You didn't need any particular "strong" airframe to scarry 8lbs rockets, or to shoot them. Actually it's one primary advantage of rockets that they, being recoilless, put much less stress on an airframe than guns.
-
dogfights.
:aok
-
You didn't need any particular "strong" airframe to scarry 8lbs rockets, or to shoot them. Actually it's one primary advantage of rockets that they, being recoilless, put much less stress on an airframe than guns.
Yep. Lusche definitely knows his stuff. :aok There's no recoil per se, but a "hold back" load that has to be overcome at launch. Think of it as a very small negative recoil.
Lusche, you and Widewing seem to be the keepers of all the obscure data. Do you have any idea how many allied planes were downed with R4M's?
-
Do you have any idea how many allied planes were downed with R4M's?
Not really.
The number "500" can be frequently encountered in books and on the web, but I have yet to see any reasonable and reliable source for it. Actually they all seem to go back to the same author, Heinz J. Nowarra, who's not exactly one of the most reliable sources on such matters.
Keep in mind that the R4M was build, delivered and, most important, used in the last weeks of the war under very chaotic circumstances, so I would take any numbers with a grain of salt.
But maybe someone has better documents on that matter ;)
-
Naudet, or T. Williams? Ol' Brady might too.
-
Lusche, you and Widewing seem to be the keepers of all the obscure data. Do you have any idea how many allied planes were downed with R4M's?
But the effect of R4M rockets was not only in its immensely destructive power.
A cloud of rockets bursting, damading planes and scattering formations was a powerful side effect.
After a rocket attack the bomber formation could be devastated, planes flying singly, vulnerable to attacking fighters... What if bomber was damaged, lost its place in formation, flew homewards singly, perhaps coming down from the damage. Just forcing the bomber back wounded was a mission kill.
So we can't think of just direct kills by the rockets, their "side effects" were as important as their power to destroy a heavy bomber.
-
Ive never heard of a rocket equipped 163 used in combat either. I had thought only 262s and some 190s were so armed.
The 163s were used under very chaotic conditions as well. Imagine the guts it took to strap into one of those things and take it up against the terrible Allied air forces in the last months of the war? As Germany was disintegrating? Those German boys also showed great courage in that bomber war.
-
There was also a variant of the R4M used for ground attack.
-
Most probably you saw this one:
(http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/6611/163amn6.jpg)
This is a ME 163A, not a the operational 163B we have in game. It was used for testing purposes only.
As far as I know there were no R4M equipped 163B flying any sorties.
You didn't need any particular "strong" airframe to scarry 8lbs rockets, or to shoot them. Actually it's one primary advantage of rockets that they, being recoilless, put much less stress on an airframe than guns.
ya that the 1 i saw
-
the 163 did see action and did shoot down some bombers but the plane was a failure
ch05
-
the 163 did see action and did shoot down some bombers but the plane was a failure
ch05
Not the question asked. :aok
-
the 163 did see action and did shoot down some bombers but the plane was a failure
ch05
:huh
But seriously, to build on your statement... I Like Turtles.
-
Years ago, I remember reading about an upwards firing rocket system on the 163
that was designed to "shadow detect" a bomber as the Komet flew underneath. I have
no idea if this was used, or just one of those "wonder weapons" that was wishful
dreaming in 1945.
-
Years ago, I remember reading about an upwards firing rocket system on the 163
that was designed to "shadow detect" a bomber as the Komet flew underneath. I have
no idea if this was used, or just one of those "wonder weapons" that was wishful
dreaming in 1945.
It was designed, built and tested. Worked about perfectly. Might have been used in a very few operational flights. But it was perfected too late. It wasn't a wonder weapon but a very well working weapon that just arrived too late.
-
Years ago, I remember reading about an upwards firing rocket system on the 163
that was designed to "shadow detect" a bomber as the Komet flew underneath. I have
no idea if this was used, or just one of those "wonder weapons" that was wishful
dreaming in 1945.
The 'Sondergerät 500 Jägerfaust'
On the 10th of April 1945 a rather large formation of No.6 (RCAF) Group Lancasters and Halifaxes carried out a day light raid on the railway centre and marshalling yards at Leipzig. Other than moderate flak being reported the only enemy opposition was in the form of 1 to 3 Me 163s. Several air gunners fired at the rocket interceptor(s) but no hits were confirmed. According to one witness a Me 163 destroyed a Halifax, which "blew up right in front of me".
http://www.xs4all.nl/~robdebie/me163/weapons01.htm
-
Thanks guys, as I said, I read about them years ago. The amazing
thing is that I remembered it at all :D
-
More interesting information on the R4M rocket in WWII.
"The best success was finally achieved with air-to-air missiles that had been specifically developed for attacking aircraft. After I had been almost exclusively employed against four-engine bombers from 1943 until the end of 1944, I was able to activate the first jet fighter wing equipped with the Messerschmitt 262 jet fighter, and we began to arm our aircraft with air-to-air missiles, designated R4M with a caliber of 50 millimeters. Underneath each wing, we mounted 24 of these missiles and fired them in a salvo of 48 missiles from a distance of 1,000 meters. The results were exceptionally good, for when firing at close enemy formations one kill was usually certain. However, these air-to-air missiles were not used by conventional aircraft, but only by jet fighters." Lieutenant General Johannes "Macky" Steinhoff
Inspector General, German Air Force http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cbo-afa/cbo10.htm
http://www.daveswarbirds.com/b-17/tail2.htm - Check this link as it has a great photo of a flying B17 w/Rocket damage
LTARogue
-
wow this is still going. :lol