A Pudknockers Review - The Me410

[Hajo]

Me210 had DB601's. The early models made 1100-1200 hp. The Me410 had DB603's with nearly 1800 hp.

It was about 40mph slower and climbed worse but this lack of horsepower also was a major killer at slow speeds -- considering the 210 had no leading edge slots.


So, yes. It's a massive difference between the 210 and 410.

It made about as much difference as the P40 with the Merlin did to its' performance.
Very little.  The 410 was pulled from Bomber interception.  The 110 wasn't.
The aerodynamic design has a great influence on performance.
It reminds me of the westland whirlwind which the RAF abandoned altogether.

[Babalonian]

Wasn't claiming it was vastly better, just saying the 210 was considered the failure, not the 410, historically.

IDK, I got half a dozen squadies who this week discovered if you pull back too hard when going too fast in the 410, the wings don't merely fold upon the aircraft but cause an imediate implosion (tower).

[warhed]

IDK, I got half a dozen squadies who this week discovered if you pull back too hard when going too fast in the 410, the wings don't merely fold upon the aircraft but cause an imediate implosion (tower).

"HISTORICALLY"

Historically, as in history stuff, the 210 was considered a failure as an aircraft.  Historically, as in old stuff, the 410 was considered an improvement, and even loved by it's aircrews.  
Which I was simply replying to this:

Only surprise I have is the damage model. Boy is it fragile. But as for the airplane itself? Theres a reason history remembers it as a failed design.

History as far as I have read, does not consider the 410 a failed design, that would be the 210 he is thinking of.

[Hajo]

"HISTORICALLY"

Historically, as in history stuff, the 210 was considered a failure as an aircraft.  Historically, as in old stuff, the 410 was considered an improvement, and even loved by it's aircrews.  
Which I was simply replying to this:
History as far as I have read, does not consider the 410 a failed design, that would be the 210 he is thinking of.

Being manufactured as a bomber Interceptor (which they greatly needed) and pulled from OPS...is a failure.

It was relegated to low level attack.  When enemy fighters were around it was relegated to the air strip.
It simply could not defend itself.  The LW trying to make it a jack of all trades was responsible for its' failure.
At least the IL2 could maneuver and bring guns to bear....the 410 couldn't unless it was a stationary target.

[Krusty]

It made about as much difference as the P40 with the Merlin did to its' performance.
Very little.  The 410 was pulled from Bomber interception.  The 110 wasn't.
The aerodynamic design has a great influence on performance.
It reminds me of the westland whirlwind which the RAF abandoned altogether.

You're wrong there. All of the political squabbling about the Me210 was rectified in the 410, and MOST of it was rectified with the nearly doubling of the available horsepower. You put WAY too much emphasis on the fact that 110s were still flying -- because they were in the same boat. The issues surrounding the 410 were far more political in nature. It was decimated by american escort fighters, yes... But show me one German fighter that wasn't decimated with 50,000-to-1 odds in late 1944?


P.S. Just for those not listening... The 210 and the 410 were worlds apart in terms of performance, manueverability, stability, and safety. See my above comment. 40mph difference between the two.