Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: SKurj on October 22, 2000, 01:11:00 AM
-
Wouldn't this thing make a nice addition to the Luftwabble stable?
419 mph at 19,680ft, ceiling 34.5k, range 1162 miles
Armaments ranged from 4 81's and 2 17's
4 151 cannon
night fighter 6 cannon
light bomber, 2 151 cannon and 4000lb bombs
SKurj
-
i cant find any mention of this plane...only 234 blitz...got me looking now (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
hazed
-
The Arado 240c,pressurized cabin, remote controlled gun turrets, two DB 603A engines, max speed of 647km/h, the 240c2night fighter had radar and four mg151 20mm's, an upper and a lower turrret with dual mg131 13mm's. A contract for 40 planes had been made but was canceled in 1942 when it was decided that the me110, I beleive, was better suited for the part . The ar240 never saw service . I used to have a scale model of one .
-
240s fought but not in any really big numbers. Good looking plane tho.
-
I doubt it was much of a turn and burn ac, given the wing loading of 40-60 lbf/sf empty/full. Consider the 410 as a comp at more like 37 on the empty side - itself no yank and bank bird. OTOH, given the armament, it'd probably be a nice bomber hunter. It's also possible, given this Arado "traveling flap" thingie, that you could significantly improve your low speed turn performance by deploying the thing. Apparently, they were shooting for low profile drag at the expense of having to use a higher CL (and consequently induced drag - goes like CL^2/AR).
Still, a cool bird - and one that saw service.
<snip from wiki>
Technical specifications were first published in October 1938, followed by detailed plans later that year. In May 1939, the RLM ordered a batch of six prototypes. The first Ar 240 V1 prototype, DD+QL, took to the air on 25 June 1940, and immediately proved to have poor handling in all axes, and it also tended to overheat during taxiing.
The handling was thought to be the result of the ailerons being too small given the thick wing, so the second prototype was modified to have larger ones, as well as additional vertical fin area on the dive brakes to reduce yaw. In addition small radiators were added to the gear legs to improve cooling at low speeds, when the gear would normally be opened. Ar 240 V2, KK+CD, first flew on 6 April 1941, and spent most of its life at the factory as a test plane.
Ar 240 V3 followed, the first to be equipped with the FA 9 rear-firing armament system, developed jointly by Arado and DVL, armed with a 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 81Z machine gun. Ar 240 V4 was the first to include an operational dive brake, and flew on 19 June 1941. Ar 240 V5 and V6 followed in December and January, including the upgraded FA 13 system using two 13 mm (.51 in) MG 131 machine guns in place of the MG 81Z for a considerable boost in firepower.
The Ar 240's excellent performance quickly led to the V3, V5 and V6 being stripped of their armament, including the defensive guns, and used as reconnaissance aircraft over England, where no other two-seater could venture by 1942.
-
PJ_Godzilla,
Check the post dates on threads you find through a search. In this case the last post before yours was on October 23, 2000, almost nine years ago.
-
:rolleyes:
-
240s fought but not in any really big numbers. Good looking plane tho.
None of the Ar 240s ever fired a shot an enemy plane. The only Ar 240s ever to see any action were the few recce versions (stripped of all guns) that flew over England during the BoB.
ack-ack
-
Testing and evaluation
Technical specifications were first published in October 1938, followed by detailed plans later that year. In May 1939, the RLM ordered a batch of six prototypes. The first Ar 240 V1 prototype, DD+QL, took to the air on 25 June 1940, and immediately proved to have poor handling in all axes, and it also tended to overheat during taxiing.
The handling was thought to be the result of the ailerons being too small given the thick wing, so the second prototype was modified to have larger ones, as well as additional vertical fin area on the dive brakes to reduce yaw. In addition small radiators were added to the gear legs to improve cooling at low speeds, when the gear would normally be opened. Ar 240 V2, KK+CD, first flew on 6 April 1941, and spent most of its life at the factory as a test plane.
Ar 240 V3 followed, the first to be equipped with the FA 9 rear-firing armament system, developed jointly by Arado and DVL, armed with a 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 81Z machine gun. Ar 240 V4 was the first to include an operational dive brake, and flew on 19 June 1941. Ar 240 V5 and V6 followed in December and January, including the upgraded FA 13 system using two 13 mm (.51 in) MG 131 machine guns in place of the MG 81Z for a considerable boost in firepower.
The Ar 240's excellent performance quickly led to the V3, V5 and V6 being stripped of their armament, including the defensive guns, and used as reconnaissance aircraft over England, where no other two-seater could venture by 1942.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arado_Ar_240
-
(http://img505.imageshack.us/img505/2237/04199.jpg)
-
A contract for 40 planes had been made but was canceled in 1942 when it was decided that the me110, I beleive, was better suited for the part.
Almost anything would have been better than the Me110. Messerschmitt was just getting his way with the politicians and bureaucrats. I believe the FW187 Falke would have outperformed both the Me110 and Ar240. It did during trials, and it did in operational flying too. Messerschmitt just copied some of the features of these two aircraft into his own design later on, the Me210/410. I'd argue that the 410 was never as good as the FW187 potentially could have been.
-
Politics rears it's ugly head. Messerschmitt was a favorite of the procurement office, depending on who was in office. I guess Milch had it in for Ernst Heinkel - an issue that did not obtain after Milch's death.
I'm not sure of Arado's status.
As for the rest, YES, I'm aware this post originated in 2000. That didn't matter to me, nor does it appear to matter to those who responded.
Also, the comment about recon only is correct, according to my sources, but in no way negates my statement, "some of them saw service". For, last I checked, reconnaissance is still service.
The line between being keen and being pedantic is a fine one.
All that aside, this thing looks, as do both the 410 and 219, like a badassed twin.
Not to hijack the thread, but has there ever been any talk of a night arena? The topic is relevant to this thread, given the type and likelihood that it and many of the other wishlist twins (P-61, 217, 388, 219, etc) would thrive in a night arena but be hangar queens in the daylight MA's.
-
The aircraft that wiped the floor with Messerschmitt's 110, yet it never saw production. A 1938 design of Kurt Tank at Focke Wulf. The 110 was a toad in comparison, both visually and aerodynamically.
(http://www.aviastar.org/pictures/germany/fw-187.jpg)
(http://www.military-quotes.com/media/data/536/medium/Foke_Wulf_FW187_Falke.jpg)
-
Speaking of hijacked threads, this looks like none other than the 187.
All that talent and they consistently picked the wrong horse...
I always wondered about the contention that the mixed-phase cooling system developed by Ernst Heinkel for the HE100 was "unsuitable for combat". This was purportedly due to the fact that steam tubes were run just behind the wing leading edge in order to provide cooling to the steam portion of the coolant. How is such a thing any more vulnerable than the radiator it replaced? Less draggy, certainly, but any more or less susceptible to the golden BB? I think not.
Otherwise, it's like I always say (and, in at least a couple of cases, have made use of here at Ford) - if you want to find an interesting approach to the solution of an engineering problem, do some research on Nazi weaponry.
-
You are absolutely right. These two aircraft, the He100 & FW187, if procured and fielded by 1939 instead of the 109/110 combo, would have been more damaging to the allied war effort than all the late-war super wapons combined ever could be. Due to high level corruption it was never to be.
-
33Vortex, the Fw 187 was not the miracle plane you seem to think it was. Tank and Fw made the classic schoolboy mistake of writing an excellent paper, but on the wrong subject. The original Fw 187 did not fulfil the RLM requirements for a zerstörer heavy fighter. By the time Fw had modified the 187 with a second crew member (whom they could not find space to fit any defensive armament for, so he basically served no purpose) the Bf 110 was already in production, and the modified 187's performance did not warrant replacing the Bf 110. The Fw 187 program was also beset with problems; when they mounted DB 600 engines on it it did indeed set a speed record, but it came back wrinkled and bent, and the landing gear collapsed on landing. No doubt it was fast, but it was hardly a serviceable war plane.
The Fw 187 A-0 that went into limited production in the summer of 1939 had a top speed of 329 mph. The Bf 110C-1 already in production at the time had a top speed of 336 mph.
-
Speaking of hijacked threads, this looks like none other than the 187.
All that talent and they consistently picked the wrong horse...
I always wondered about the contention that the mixed-phase cooling system developed by Ernst Heinkel for the HE100 was "unsuitable for combat". This was purportedly due to the fact that steam tubes were run just behind the wing leading edge in order to provide cooling to the steam portion of the coolant. How is such a thing any more vulnerable than the radiator it replaced? Less draggy, certainly, but any more or less susceptible to the golden BB? I think not.
Otherwise, it's like I always say (and, in at least a couple of cases, have made use of here at Ford) - if you want to find an interesting approach to the solution of an engineering problem, do some research on Nazi weaponry.
Heinkel couldn't get the surface evaporation cooling system working properly before the war. By that time he had fallen out of favour with the Nazis.
-
From what I've read about the He 100, it sounds like it was a superb propaganda aircraft, but it's probably a good thing that it never had to be operated on the front lines (especially in Russia!).
-
From what I've read about the He 100, it sounds like it was a superb propaganda aircraft, but it's probably a good thing that it never had to be operated on the front lines (especially in Russia!).
What really killed it was politics (Messerschmidt to produce fighter & Heinkel to produce bombers) and lack of DB-601 engines (used by 109s & 110s), the Jumo-211 engine was just to weak in its early versions; not until the "D" series was the DB-601 available & installed on the He-100(iirc) & then the He-100 mostly lived up to its potential. Another important factor was the elimination of the surface cooling system in the "D" series for a standard radiator system; the original system was to complex & prone to malfunctions. It may be logically proposed that he He-100 would have changed some aspects of the early air war if it replaced the 109 &/or 110. Longer range over the 109 (about 1/2 again as much, think BoB); better maneuverability & rate of production over the 110.
All in all it was evolutionarily ahead of the 109, but was not revolutionary enough to supplant the 109.
-
Where do you get that it was more maneuverable than the 109? High wing loading was one of the reasons test pilots didn't like it, due to high landing speeds. This is a problem that not even the Fw 190 had, which is one of the worst turning fighters in the game...
What killed the Luftwaffe in the BoB was poor tactical and strategic decisions, lack of fighters and the short range of Luftwaffe aircraft. The He 100 would have only helped one of these areas, and would have made the lack of fighters even worse, as even if the He 100 could have been produced as fast as the 109 (which I doubt), one of the ingenious points of the Bf 109 and other Messerschmitt designs was that they were easily serviced in the field, whereas the He 100 was the opposite of this.
I think the He 100 would have probably have been like the MiG 1/3; sleek, sexy and fast, a good propaganda tool, but a dog of a fighter, and I doubt it would have been able to make any positive difference over the 109, which proved to be a very versatile design, considering it was still one of the best propeller fighters in the world on May 9th 1945, which was WELL passed the point where it was supposed to be phased out.
-
33Vortex, the Fw 187 was not the miracle plane you seem to think it was. Tank and Fw made the classic schoolboy mistake of writing an excellent paper, but on the wrong subject. The original Fw 187 did not fulfil the RLM requirements for a zerstörer heavy fighter. By the time Fw had modified the 187 with a second crew member (whom they could not find space to fit any defensive armament for, so he basically served no purpose) the Bf 110 was already in production, and the modified 187's performance did not warrant replacing the Bf 110. The Fw 187 program was also beset with problems; when they mounted DB 600 engines on it it did indeed set a speed record, but it came back wrinkled and bent, and the landing gear collapsed on landing. No doubt it was fast, but it was hardly a serviceable war plane.
The Fw 187 A-0 that went into limited production in the summer of 1939 had a top speed of 329 mph. The Bf 110C-1 already in production at the time had a top speed of 336 mph.
No plane is a miracle plane, it is a matter of development. Sure the 110 had matured as a design, the 187 had not. That 7 mph difference you're pointing at does not prove the 187 as a design was inferior to the 110. I wonder what engines the 329 mph 187 had and, what was used in the 110C-1 again? What I'm getting at is that the potential of the 187 for the role the 110 was intended far surpassed the 110, but nobody realized or acknowledged that. How useful was that rear gunner on the 110, really? The 110 was a failure as a fighter and the records from 1940 prove it. The 187 was a design that did not meet the official requirements true but it would have fared better than the 110 in combat I would dare say. Serviceability is indeed a big factor but a bigger factor is whether a/c return home from a combat sortie or not.
-
No plane is a miracle plane, it is a matter of development. Sure the 110 had matured as a design, the 187 had not. That 7 mph difference you're pointing at does not prove the 187 as a design was inferior to the 110. I wonder what engines the 329 mph 187 had and, what was used in the 110C-1 again? What I'm getting at is that the potential of the 187 for the role the 110 was intended far surpassed the 110, but nobody realized or acknowledged that. How useful was that rear gunner on the 110, really? The 110 was a failure as a fighter and the records from 1940 prove it. The 187 was a design that did not meet the official requirements true but it would have fared better than the 110 in combat I would dare say. Serviceability is indeed a big factor but a bigger factor is whether a/c return home from a combat sortie or not.
The Fw 187 had already exceeded its potential by 1939, it struggled to take the power of its new engines, there was no room to spare in the cockpit, the landing gear could not handle the increase in weight. The Fw 187 was engineered right on the edge of what 1937 technology could do, but in doing so it had no development potential. It had no internal space to grow in therms of armament and equipment. The structure had little or nothing to go on when adding bigger, heavier engines and more equipment. The skin of the aircraft was so thin that it wrinkled at high speed, and the structure deformed. The Fw 187 was designed like a racing plane, not a military aircraft.
The Bf 110 got its arse haded to it in the Battle of Britain. However that did not make it a failure as a fighter, no matter how much TV historians like to think so. The Bf 110 served admirably on the eastern front, Mediterranean, North Africa and the Middle-East. And even in the Battle of Britain the 110 didn't fare as badly as many likes to think. It was clearly inferior to the Spitfire, but also superior to the Hurricane. During August and September 1940 the 110C Gruppen claimed 213 enemy aircraft destroyed (9 of those are night claims) for the loss of 199 Bf-110C to enemy action (+10 losses in non operational flights and 12 in landing accidents). Remember that for the most part the 110C was ordered to fly close escort during the Battle of Britain; in such a situation the 110 was robbed of its advantages and heavily exposed to all its weaknesses, most notably the low acceleration and large target size. The Fw 187 would not have fared any better.
-
Where do you get that it was more maneuverable than the 109? High wing loading was one of the reasons test pilots didn't like it, due to high landing speeds. This is a problem that not even the Fw 190 had, which is one of the worst turning fighters in the game...
I'm not flaunting rules 3 & 4 in this reply (which will be the last I say of the He-100). I never said if was a better turner than the 109. The use of a ";" clearly delineates two separate thoughts in the sentace where you thought you read such a statement from me. Yes it had a high landing speed, a fact I am fully aware; a problem that further development could compensate for readily.
What killed the Luftwaffe in the BoB was poor tactical and strategic decisions, lack of fighters and the short range of Luftwaffe aircraft. The He 100 would have only helped one of these areas, and would have made the lack of fighters even worse, as even if the He 100 could have been produced as fast as the 109 (which I doubt), one of the ingenious points of the Bf 109 and other Messerschmidt designs was that they were easily serviced in the field, whereas the He 100 was the opposite of this.
It was only the last point of your 1st sentence to which I was speaking. i thought it would be intuitive to most that greater endurance would equate to more dogfights amongst the fighters. A possible benefit to the LW as the RAF was hampered by lack of pilots in the BoB. I apologize if anyone thought I meant that the He 100 could have changed the outcome of the BoB on its own. Your last sentence is poignant in that the ease of service was was a fantastic hallmark of the 109 series, possible it was a contributing factor in changing the He 100 from a surface cooling system to a simple radiator system.
I think the He 100 would have probably have been like the MiG 1/3; sleek, sexy and fast, a good propaganda tool, but a dog of a fighter, and I doubt it would have been able to make any positive difference over the 109, which proved to be a very versatile design, considering it was still one of the best propeller fighters in the world on May 9th 1945, which was WELL passed the point where it was supposed to be phased out.
The design of the He 100 dates to the late '30s, same as the 109; just as the 109 series evolved from the toddler 109e to the hottie 109k, I'm sure the He 100 could have adapted just as readily and maintained a standard compareable to opposition aircraft.
-
Von Krimm, you need to check your facts better. The He 100 was Heinkel's attempt at designing a fighter that was a generation after the 109. The 109's future replacement if you will. He started designing the 100 after the 109 had been chosen by the RLM its next single-seat fighter over the He 112. The 109 is an early-1930s design, and was in production in 1936.
-
Von Krimm, you need to check your facts better. The He 100 was Heinkel's attempt at designing a fighter that was a generation after the 109. The 109's future replacement if you will. He started designing the 100 after the 109 had been chosen by the RLM its next single-seat fighter over the He 112. The 109 is an early-1930s design, and was in production in 1936.
My facts are fine; the 109 was designed to meet RLM specification Rustungsfluzueg-IV issued by T-Amt in 1933 asking for 3 prototypes for evaluation in late 1934. Thus, the 109 is a mid-30's design, not an early-30's design ('30-'32 = early; '33-'35 = mid; '36-'39 =late), since you seem inclined to split hairs. Yes, Ernst Heinkel did see the 100 as a replacement for the 109, the 'D' models. The He 100 was superior to the 'D' models, but the 109 continued to be an exceptional platform for development; so the He 100 never attained the revolution over the 109 that the Heinkel brothers were aiming for but instead were evolutionary superior to the 109. Which is what I said in my 1st post regarding the He 100.
Had your tone not been so confrontatonal, I would have been able to keep to the part in my last post about it being the last I would say on the matter; since you felt the need to be summarily derogatory towards me, "...check your facts better." If you feel the need to "educate" myself & others, post a link to a source and add some helpful words to guide us to the materials. Book titles & authors are also great ways to help people out; ISBN numbers are even better.
-
No, I'm not going to argue semantics with you. The T-Amt's R-IV request was distributed in May 1934, and the test flights were made in 1935. Please, at least get something right. You could even wiki this information and get it right.
Messerschmitt on the other hand started designing the 108 and 109 in 1931 based on an earlier single engine trainer design and incorporated Messerschmitt's new lightweight construction principle. The 108 racer and the 109 fighter were developed simultaneously with emphasis on the 108 of course since in 1933 the Luftwaffe asked the Bayerische Flugzeugwerke and other aircraft manufacturers to design a racer to take part in the 4th Challenge de Tourisme Internationale air race. The 108 flew in 1934, and the next year, in May 1935, the Bf 109V-1 first flew.
In 1936 Ernst Heikel started designing the He 100, and in 1938 it first flew.
-
Your post reminded me of something, despite its boorish nature; aircraft evolve from concept to prototype to initial production. After all, the original 109 plans (iirc) called for only two 7.9mm MGs and a 700HP-ish Jumo 210 engine (infact, I seem to recall the 1st prototype had a British engine in it); obviously changes were made from the "early/mid" '30s plans.
Which brings me to my newest point and the topic of this thread, the Ar240: Just as Kurt Tank created interest by designing/redesigning the 190 (also the LW had concerns about the 109 series keeping pace w/ enemy a/c) with a radial engine, might the LW have expressed a serious interest in the Ar 240 if it had used a engine that did not compete with 110 production needs? The same could be espoused for the FW 187. Intersting how Willie kept those a/c that he viewed as a threat to his firm's a/c from maturing. [the preceeding is entirely speculative and no facts were consulted. wiki or otherwise.]
-
Intersting how Willie kept those a/c that he viewed as a threat to his firm's a/c from maturing.
Yes it's very interesting. How exactly did he do that pray tell?
-
Interesting discussion but I think you should leave your egos out of it.
In late '43 Focke-Wulf had the Ta152 A and B on the table, ready to hit production. The RLM was looking for a replacement fighter for the ageing zerstörer (Bf110) fleet and the 110 was planned to be retired in 1944. The Ta152 A and B would fit the bill as both types could carry a maximum armament of no less than 9 cannons of which up to 7 could be of 30 mm caliber. A heavy hitter for sure and although single engine, could replace the Bf110 in the zerstörer role as it was significantly faster and carried heavier armament. The A was intended as a pure fighter while the B would be the one intended for the zerstörer role, although the types were virtually much the same aircraft.
Nonetheless, the RLM did not grant the Ta152 A/B production status despite the types being fully developed ready to be put in production. Instead they had eyes set on Messerschmitt's 209, which was in early development. The 209 program however was troubled with delays and ultimately cancelled because of problems unknown to me. As a result of all this the Bf110 was retired without a replacement. At that point it was already mid-44 and the RLM started looking for a emergency solution to the acute need for daytime fighters, and so the 190D-9 was put in production as a stop-gap measure before the Ta152 H and C models could enter production. We all know that by now it was too late, and only the H saw limited service before the end of hostilities and despite many claims of the C having entered production, there is seemingly no hard evidence to be found to support those claims.
This is all from the book 'Focke-Wulf Ta152' a 4+ publication by Malcolm V. Lowe published in 2008. ISBN 978-80-86637-07-5
What I'm getting at here is that the RLM favoritism towards Willie Messerschmitt cost the Luftwaffe dearly, and consequently the german arms industry suffered as well. To me Willie Messerschmitt was just another overthunk, who only cared for making money on this war. He was certainly not the only one.
Edit: for readability, english is not my first language
-
You still haven't explained how Willy Messerschmitt "kept those a/c that he viewed as a threat to his firm's a/c from maturing." You're making character assassinations based on faulty or non-existent data.
Btw. The replacement for the Bf 110 was the Me 210/410. Entered service in 1942 and remained in production until the summer of 1944 and the implementation of the "emergency fighter program." It did not replace the 110 in the night-fighter role however as the 110's performance was considered sufficient for that role.
-
Vortex - Didn't Stampf say he'd found evidence of a couple of 152Cs serving with JG11?
-
The book states that there are indication of at least one example that were issued to JG11. This particular aircraft was also equipped with the EZ42 gyrostabilized sight. It would have supposedly been in JG11 for the last couple weeks but without official papers (everything was chaos at this point) it is very difficult to prove with hard evidence which can't be found. Also there are photographs of what some claim to be 152C fuselages, and witness reports of 152C airframes being scrapped but again, no hard evidence. The timeline is right for one of the planned production plants to have started production just a few weeks before end of hostilities, I do not recall which one off the top of my head, so there may have been a batch of 152Cs that saw service after all. Nobody has been able to find compelling evidence of that actually being the case so the official stance remain that, probably not.
At the time the allies often failed to distinguish between the different langnase doras, they all looked very similar and the priority was to get rid of all the "nazi junk". It seems the allies failed to recognize the 152C at all, and they picked a few 190D and 152H models to be shipped to the states for evaluation. This would explain why there are no allied findings of the type post-war.
Edit: Also any combat encounters with the Ta152C or 190D would be classed as 'longnose doras' or 'longnose 190s' as there was virtually no visual difference between the two. Heck the 152H was identified as 109s by a 3-ship Tempest formation in one encounter. So it's all very sketchy.
-
You still haven't explained how Willy Messerschmitt "kept those a/c that he viewed as a threat to his firm's a/c from maturing." You're making character assassinations based on faulty or non-existent data.
I am? I did not make this accusation, it seems you are confusing me with someone else.
Btw. The replacement for the Bf 110 was the Me 210/410. Entered service in 1942 and remained in production until the summer of 1944 and the implementation of the "emergency fighter program." It did not replace the 110 in the night-fighter role however as the 110's performance was considered sufficient for that role.
Yes but some put the 210/410 in the same folder as the 110, in this book it's actually referred to as the '110' simply. I'm familiar with the development that the 110 went through and the 410 was a very capable aircraft. However the Ta152A/B would have been something else. The A/B types used the Jumo 213, same engine as the 190D, while the C type used the DB603.
The DB603 was labeled to be produced for the 109 exclusively. This could be one such instance where Messerschmitt used his influence to block the competition from using this sought after fighter engine. Certainly the 190 programme at Focke-Wulf suffered from not having access to the DB600 line engines. Kurt Tank always wanted this engine in his 190 but was only given access to it in '44, and even then it was a older engine type than the ones used for the 109K model so he still had to settle for less than what Messerschmitt was granted. The Ta152C was the aircraft that Kurt Tank always had wanted to build, the 190 with a Daimler-Benz pure high performance fighter engine.
-
Vortex IIRC Stampf said he had made his investigation starting from the pilots' end, not the airplane records.
-
Yeah, I have no reason not to believe that to be true. There are numerous claims of Ta152Cs having been in service, but without hard evidence. It's down to how much credibility you give certain individuals. Some dismiss it as bs, but I think those who do are biased. Of course there's the other end of the spectrum too, but as I said, I have no reason not to believe these claims to be true. Still there exist no hard evidence of it. :(
For all I know the Ta152C could have been in service in equal or even greater numbers than the H model. Photographs, official records and such could easily have been destroyed in the chaos (if there even were any). We know that a lot of the german research work and official papers perished in the last few weeks of the war. Sometimes because of German engineers who did not want to let the allies have their work, sometimes because bombs burnt their work to the ground, sometimes because angry allied soldiers destroyed everything german made with a passion. I think we all know how chaotic the last few weeks were.
-
In reference to my post above about the 190 with a DB600 line engine. The 190 outperformed the 109 in many regards (most) when it was introduced with a radial engine. So it does not require a lot of imagination for you to think how it may have performed with a in-line DB601 engine as the one used in the 109 at the time. The Daimler-Benz fighter engine production was always exclusive for Messerschmitt's production of 109s. It can be argued that this hampered development of other fighter types. Personally I do believe it did, as we see in the case of the 190.
-
The DB603 was labeled to be produced for the 109 exclusively.
DB603?
-
The 603 was used in the Ta152, the 605 in the Bf109K. The whole line was always exclusive to the 109 save for a few cases. Such as the Bf410 apparently also using the DB603.
-
I am? I did not make this accusation, it seems you are confusing me with someone else.
Quite right. I'm sorry about that.
However, you did say this: "To me Willie Messerschmitt was just another overthunk, who only cared for making money on this war." That is also a character assassination that has no foundation in facts.
Yes but some put the 210/410 in the same folder as the 110, in this book it's actually referred to as the '110' simply.
Then you really shouldn't use this book as a reference for anything.
-
Then you really shouldn't use this book as a reference for anything.
Really? Interesting point of view. It is all about the Ta152, all versions and covering some of the 190D development and 190 development in general. So whether it's 100% correct about other aircraft is really quite irrelevant. If I wanted that info I'd read a book on the Me110/210/410 instead.
-
The 603 was used in the Ta152, the 605 in the Bf109K. The whole line was always exclusive to the 109 save for a few cases. Such as the Bf410 apparently also using the DB603.
No DB 603 powered Ta 152 flew operationally to my knowledge. The few Ta's that saw service had Jumo 213E engines. Also, it's Me 410, not Bf.
-
Really? Interesting point of view. It is all about the Ta152, all versions and covering some of the 190D development and 190 development in general. So whether it's 100% correct about other aircraft is really quite irrelevant. If I wanted that info I'd read a book on the Me110/210/410 instead.
How do you know that what he writes about the 190/Ta is correct when he writes such obvious mistakes/falsities in his book?
-
How do I know you are correct when you're being such a jerk?
Seriously, get off my back. I don't care who you are or what you do but if you don't know how to behave I give less than a ****.
-
So I'm being a jerk by pointing out your errors? Be prepared to meet a lot of jerks in this forum then.
-
Okay, drama queens, calm down.
I've seen the wiki quotes but have been unable to verify a claim by Angelucci/Matricardi (they published a little Rand McNally aircraft guide) that the AR240 could be, under some circumstances "a dangerous aircraft" to fly.
I'm finding very little on the 'net regarding the handling - other than the early insufficient roll an yaw control.
It looks as though development went on from '40 -'42 but only 15 units were built. I've also seen claims that it was used on the eastern front as recon and Mistel one-way tripper...
Also, what's with the ducted spinners? These are not the pitch control spinners seen on the FW189 but instead seem to be used for some type of air management.
-
Looks like that's part of the ventilation system.. Radiator or something.
-
So I'm being a jerk by pointing out your errors? Be prepared to meet a lot of jerks in this forum then.
This really is not the best forum for these discussions. This community is known to have a few... bad apples, if you will.
-
Vortex, that's funny and coincidental because I was just taking a little break here and reading a thread from '04 about the Reggiane 2005 Sagittario. WMaker was attempting to argue fact with Krusty and Krusty couldn't avoid going all "ad hominem", if you follow.
They used to say in Rome that you can't debate dispassionately with the plebians. In any case, I always commit to playing the ball, not the man. It's pretty evident, typically, who follows that rule and who doesn't.
I will add this about the 110... I'm a relative noob (though my aero engineering background and history give me a flying start) and find it entirely possible to look pretty heroic bomber hunting with the 110g. Indeed, in my time with JV44 I'm ashamed to say that I got my bellybutton handed me once by a well-flown 110. I, and I hate to admit this, was flying a papagei-colored D-9 at the time.
Remind me to never, ever try to HO a 110 with a fragile Jumo-nosed Dora. I'd say the same about the Sturmovik as well - but that was a different day/different embarassment.
OTOH, despite my earlier comment about the HE-100, I take a pretty favorable view of the 109K-4, save for that little compressibility issue, and have had surprising luck against Runstangs with the little K-Whopper. Clearly, though, the range would be a problem in the real world (and why, oh why could they not chop that razorback and put a decent bubble on it? - the six view is fine but the l/r frame sucks).
-
This really is not the best forum for these discussions. This community is known to have a few... bad apples, if you will.
Really? Known to whom?
-
Vortex, that's funny and coincidental because I was just taking a little break here and reading a thread from '04 about the Reggiane 2005 Sagittario. WMaker was attempting to argue fact with Krusty and Krusty couldn't avoid going all "ad hominem", if you follow.
They used to say in Rome that you can't debate dispassionately with the plebians. In any case, I always commit to playing the ball, not the man. It's pretty evident, typically, who follows that rule and who doesn't.
I will add this about the 110... I'm a relative noob (though my aero engineering background and history give me a flying start) and find it entirely possible to look pretty heroic bomber hunting with the 110g. Indeed, in my time with JV44 I'm ashamed to say that I got my bellybutton handed me once by a well-flown 110. I, and I hate to admit this, was flying a papagei-colored D-9 at the time.
Remind me to never, ever try to HO a 110 with a fragile Jumo-nosed Dora. I'd say the same about the Sturmovik as well - but that was a different day/different embarassment.
OTOH, despite my earlier comment about the HE-100, I take a pretty favorable view of the 109K-4, save for that little compressibility issue, and have had surprising luck against Runstangs with the little K-Whopper. Clearly, though, the range would be a problem in the real world (and why, oh why could they not chop that razorback and put a decent bubble on it? - the six view is fine but the l/r frame sucks).
The 190 is not a "dogfighter", it just does not turn well enough. If you want to excel in the 190 series you need to learn how to master the vertical. Dogfighters tend to just see a target and turn towards him, with no thought of angles, relative speeds and timing, all of which are critical in a vertical fight. Some seem to think that the fight begin when you're on someone's six, I consider that the end of a fight. Some consider the beginning of a fight being when you merge, I consider the beginning of a fight is when you first become aware of the enemy.
There are almost as many opinions on this as there are players/pilots. Just don't let anyone ever tell you how to play the game but remember this... if you got shot down, you did something wrong somewhere along the line of decisions that you made from the moment you rotated and tucked your legs in. If you want to build on your skills the best thing you can do is to identify where along the chain of decisions you made the critical mistake that took you beyond the "point of no return".
-
Vortex, I agree and disagree on your assessment of the d-9. It is NOT a flat-turner, certainly, and it does excel in the vertical. Indeed, the first time I figured that out was against a 109 who came looping at me like a circus clown. I got into a vertical scissor with him on my tail. As I kicked over the top, I realized that my excellent roll rate enabled me to pick any compass heading quickly. I thus reversed on him and killed him in the ensuing HO.
Where I would disagree: the D-9 can dogfight - just not in the same plane as a Spit, for example. I'd say, as long as kept fast and turned either flat through no more than 90 degrees or vertically by means of an Immelmann or Split S, it is entirely possible to furball a D-9 - or any other FW.
-
Where I would disagree: the D-9 can dogfight - just not in the same plane as a Spit, for example. I'd say, as long as kept fast and turned either flat through no more than 90 degrees or vertically by means of an Immelmann or Split S, it is entirely possible to furball a D-9 - or any other FW.
All descriptions of Air Combat Maneuvers are generalizations. Each maneuver have endless variations of it depending on speeds and angles. So I find it hard to describe a fight strictly by naming maneuvers in sequence, there is so much more to a fight than that.
It is possible to furball a D-9 but... it not only depends on your own skill, but also that of your opponent and your ability to assess him correctly. Knowing when to push it in a Dora (or any a/c for that matter) is a skill in itself.
Also, any fight is really all about energy management regardless whether it's a dogfight or BnZ fight. Correct use of available power is also something many people take a long time to figure out.
"...came looping at me like a circus clown." :rofl :aok
-
Vortex - Didn't Stampf say he'd found evidence of a couple of 152Cs serving with JG11?
"H's" Moot.
Stab JG11 mounts from the Cottbus build record:
150 009
150 010 - second operational with wooden tail equipped. (currently in storage and previously mis identified as a JG301 ride. True it began with the 301st but finished the war in Stab JG11. It is good to remember that the birds that went to JG11 were there due more to the pilots procurement skills rather than official orders to equip the unit with the TA. Most credit Hptm. Bruno Stolle for getting his past stabmates in the 11th the few TA's thay had in the final month's of the conflict. He pulled double duty leading the 11th and the Rechlin TA's for a time).
150 011 - probable - as well first to have GM1 installed.
150 012
150 028 and 150 031 were shot down by British Spitfires during ferry flight from Tarniwitz to Rechlin. 150 056 is believed to be the one that made it, but crash landed (ditched) at Rechlin.
One probable C made it in, but no operational flight record - as well as 150 027 which was a converted test bed for the C -3 and equipped with the Mk 103 and Db603 engine, test flown on 5 Jan. 1945.
-
Isn't it amazing what can still be dug up after all this time...
-
Thanks Stampf. Yep Vortex, really cool.
-
Speaking of which, I've been working on some maneuvers in the D-9 that seem difficult to pull off. First, it seems that the hammerhead OR wingover tend to get lost in roll torque as the airplane loses airspeed. I hate to chop throttle when I'm vertical and running out of airspeed but the roll authority runs out. I can't quite seem to get either of those maneuvers in the d-9. The 109k seems to have better rudder authority.
The other thing I've been having difficulty with is trying to replicate something I saw on TV in the DogFight series. It was the episode called "The Last Gunfighter" and one of the more memorable parts featured a case in which an F-8 Crusader was being lead-pursued in the flat by a Mig-17. The Mig was a bit higher than the Crusader so the Crusader was banked in a flat turn sort of vary low in the Mig's field of view - almost obscured by the Mig's nose. The Crusader pilot (he's famous at this point since this particular dogfight is widely known and taught) broke from his flat left bank with a kick of the rudder, resulting in a gravity-assisted yaw to diving vertically downward. He virtually disappeared from the Mig's field of view. I've been trying to replicate this maneuver in the D-9 and almost always find myself near red-out just after I kick the rudder. The rudder kick seems to induce a negative alpha - I guess you'd call it a yaw in bank. Pulling back to counter this typically seems to cause a sort of half-assed snap roll into a dive - not what I'm after.