# Best Nightfighter of WW2



## Andrew (Mar 9, 2004)

In your opinion what was the best Nightfigher of WW2 .


----------



## bronzewhaler82 (Mar 9, 2004)

There is no doubt in my mind (or the mind of anyone who knows what they're talking about - except Kiwi cos he always argues with me out of principle) that by far the best night fighter of WW2 was the DH Mosquito


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 9, 2004)

> or the mind of anyone who knows what they're talking about



yu missed my mind, im thick 8) i voted for the ju-88


----------



## Huckebein (Mar 9, 2004)

Mosquito all the way, but what I want to know is how on Earth the Corsair is in there (used as a nightfighter mainly during the Korean War), and the Heinkel He 219 'Uhu' has been left out???


----------



## Archer (Mar 9, 2004)

F4U-2 was a dedicated night fighter variant, the first night fighters in the Solomons and other parts of the Pacific, also operated from carriers along with F6F-3Es IIRC.


----------



## Huckebein (Mar 9, 2004)

really - ok, well maybe it participated more than I thought, but surely the He 219 would still beat it in a _best_ nightfighter list!?!


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Mar 9, 2004)

i vote for He219 as well but it isnt up there so *sigh* i guess i have to vote for the mossie (damn)

Reichsmarschall Batista


----------



## Hot Space (Mar 9, 2004)

The Mossie of course 8) 

Hot Space


----------



## kiwimac (Mar 9, 2004)

The He219 was an excellent night fighter that came almost too late in the war to make much difference. I voted JU88, unlike the Mosquito, the Junkers began life as a bomber and it was developed into perhaps the best multi-role aircraft of WW2.

The Me110 was also a very good nightfighter, for all the reasons that made it a BAD day fighter, it was stable, easy to fly and largely without vices. As for the Corsair, no thank you!, I would never fly a single-engined night fighter.

FVS Kiwimac


----------



## Huckebein (Mar 10, 2004)

Actually, the He 219 made it in time to start operations on the night of June 11th/12th 194_3_, when the first operational 'Uhu' destroyed five British Lancasters in the one sortie. I personally wouldnt call mid-1943 'too late to make a difference'... It was the fact that Erhard Milch insisted on cancelling the project in favour of the less-than-promising Ju 388 and Ta 154 projects that only a few were built - and for _that_ reason the Uhu was unable to make a big impact on the war.



kiwimac said:


> unlike the Mosquito, the Junkers began life as a bomber and it was developed into perhaps the best multi-role aircraft of WW2.



Which one of these criteria are you referring to when you say 'unlike the Mosquito'? _All_ of these apply just as well to the Mosquito as the Ju 88. It began life/ was designed and built as a high-speed unarmed bomber, but was found to handle so well, be so manoeuvrable and so fast that it was soon adapted to fulfill any number of other roles. During it's operational career the Mossie served as a bomber (you could even say 'heavy' bomber - late Mosquitoes could carry heavier loads than a B-17, but with 1/5 the crew at almost twice the speed and the same range), PR bird (the best available to the allies 'til jets turned up), fighter, fighter-bomber, night-fighter, intruder, heavy strike/ anti-shipping fighter (Fb XVIII 'Tsetse'), target-tug, trainer, glider-tug, VIP transport, BOAC airliner (flying the _very_ dangerous runs to Sweden to pick up loads which included escaped airmen and political prisoners etc.), and I'm sure I've missed a few as well. Christ, it was even cleared for _carrier operations_(!), and a special squadron of 'Highball' Mosquitoes was preparing to ship to the Far East for carrier operations against the IJN when Germany surrendered and it was deemed unnecessary, now that the British Atlantic and Mediterranean Fleets were free to take part in the Pacific campaign. What's more, it excelled in _all_ of these roles, whereas the Ju 88 never really did make the grade as a day fighter...

In short, I challenge you to think up a role which the Ju 88 took up, but the Mosquito did/ could not. (Please, God, don't let him think of one I've missed...!   )

I fully agree with your assessment of the Bf 110G and Corsair night-fighters though...


----------



## kiwimac (Mar 10, 2004)

Ju88 was also used as a dive-bomber!

<smiles smugly>

Just question though was Milch still alive in 1943. I thought he died in a plane crash in 41?

FVS Kiwimac


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 10, 2004)

right, who voted for the beaufighter?


----------



## Huckebein (Mar 10, 2004)

Damn! Git! You had to go think of something didn't you?! I dunno though - Mosquitoes from 105 Sqn did develop a technique for releasing bombs in a medium dive...  

I'm pretty sure Milch was still alive, yes, because he was one of the people who's arrogance caused Ernst Udet to commit suicide on November 17th 1941. Are you thinking of Werner Molders, who was killed in a flying accident on the way to Udet's funeral?

PS. the Beaufighter was a damn fine nightfighter - even though it was totally overshadowed by the best of them all ('ave a guess!  ), it was still, in my opinion, superior to the Bf 110.


----------



## Viper (Mar 10, 2004)

i would say black widow,a plane that was made for night fighting,the aprearance is even offensive,big, but fast


----------



## Viper (Mar 10, 2004)

but the mossie was awsome as well


----------



## kiwimac (Mar 10, 2004)

Udet was such a fine pilot and a damn fine head of the Luftwaffe.

Kiwimac


----------



## Hot Space (Mar 12, 2004)

He had a nice Left Arm as well   

Hot Space


----------



## Rafe35 (Mar 12, 2004)

Also there's F6F-6N Night fighter


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 13, 2004)

the he-219 was pig ugly, no wonder they only flew it at night, the pilots wouldn't be seen dead flying it in the daytime, but i vote the mosquito.............


----------



## MP-Willow (Mar 13, 2004)

Yes the Mossie was nice, I would like the Ju-88, but the P-61, Black Widdow, that was created for the night and the needs of the Pacific theature. Speed, Range, Power, it was just great!


----------



## Huckebein (Mar 13, 2004)

I never learned too much about the P-61, did it perform much better than the dH.98? I know it was marginally better armed (the difference between four .303" and four .50" Brownings).


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 13, 2004)

still think it was the mosquito................


----------



## MP-Willow (Mar 13, 2004)

Huckebein- P-61 had 4 0.50 machine guns and 4 20mm cannons, fast, range and bomb load. Was created for night operations from the start and was just great!! I think that one must look at the theature of operations (TO) when you look at the two planes. They were not in the same, save for the beginning P-61As then they moved to the PTO. 

That said, I still like the Black Widow. It might not have the looks of the moswuito, but who cares it is night!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 14, 2004)

ive always like the P-61 8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 14, 2004)

gotta be the mosquito


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 21, 2004)

weve established you like the mosquito, lanc 8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 21, 2004)

dam right it's better than yours, i'll teach you, but i'll have to charge..........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 22, 2004)

> dam right it's better than yours, i'll teach you, but i'll have to charge..........



if i said "mine" was the lancaster then it would make you look pretty stupid 8)[


----------



## MP-Willow (Mar 23, 2004)

Well now we need a multiplayer fight sim to duel this out proper!
If only the P-61 could have come into production sooner. It couldhave been ready maybe a year sooner if not for engine issues! The "Black widow" was nice. A few great websites about the units, crews and planes!


----------



## Piaggio108 (Mar 23, 2004)

On the He 219, I have heard that the pilots thought it was over rated, and could't reach it's speeds acording to the Operating handbook. It probibly would have been better if it had been fully developed, but it was cut off too early. And there are still 4x 30mm cannons and 2x 20mm cannons.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 25, 2004)

> Piaggio108



who are you  plane stealer  only jokig mate, see guys! im not so stupid now! 8)


----------



## kiwimac (Mar 26, 2004)

Hmm, 

what about everyone's pick for the most unusual nightfighter?

Kiwimac


----------



## Gemhorse (Mar 26, 2004)

Hi Team , I'm the new kid on the block , quietly watching - But this topic's got me going ! The Mossie came in abit later than the others apart from the He 219 the BlkWidow - the Beau did alotta work initially, but wasn't fast enough , especially against the Ju88's , which if it came to a vote for German Nightfighters , I'd vote for - The Uhu was grossly underpowered , unfortunately and was specifically developed to counter-act the Mosquito, and would have been awesome but they dicked around too long putting suitable power-plants in . The Me110 was good and like the Beau did alot of the early work but wasn't fast enough either . So , the Mossie being indeed 'THE Wooden Wonder' for what it was, and did in all the roles it was used in , was the supreme Nightfighter , breaking in the Radar developments the Beau started with - Furthermore it could take punishment the others couldn't , being wooden. On the Pacific side , you have to respect the Corsair , single-seater , did what was asked , as did the Beau in that ballpark , the Black Widow was obviously a specific design based on everything already achieved by the others and may well have been the best , but it didn't do the hard work to earn the distinction .In a way the Ju88 and the Mossie were the best ' Jack of all trades' , many allied pilots underestimated the 88's , the 'T' model was apparently the fastest , like the Mossie PR's .-But my money's definately on the wooden Mosquito guys-[ P.S.- I'm a N.Z.'er too...]


----------



## kiwimac (Mar 27, 2004)

The development of aircraft specifically for the nightfighter role came quite late in the war. A large number of bomber-types were used on both UK and German sides as early night fighters (and some fighter types that were past their "best before" dates) 

Even the Mosquito was not originally developed for the nightfighter role, it simply turned out to be excellent at it as did the JU88 /188 /388.

Kiwimac


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 27, 2004)

> most unusual nightfighter?



no idea


----------



## duggi4 (Mar 27, 2004)

Andrew said:


> In your opinion what was the best Nightfigher of WW2 .


*  

the best nightfighter is not on the list: he 219
they shot down more mosquitoes we would know about 
mostly because the british crews in mosquitoes never expected to be intercepted.just as fast and maneouvrable but too few too late.  *


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 27, 2004)

interesting


----------



## Gemhorse (Mar 27, 2004)

As previously stated , the He219 had a successful ' debut' after Kammhuber got onto it and it's production got under way - But it wasn't the 'Mossie-slayer' it was designed to be. It was very innovative punchy but it was woefully under-powered and if it caught out the odd Mossie, it was by chance more than design. I would say more He219's got wasted by Mosquitos than the other way around- It was designed more as a Nightfighter, and they thought it would make a good torpedo-bomber too, but it was on the drawing-board from 1940 until Kammhuber heard about it on a chance visit to Marienehe a year or so later when he was General der Nachtjagd, and got it rolling- it was supposed to have Daimler-Benz DB603G engines[1900hp for take-off], but ended up with DB603A's [1750 hp for take-off] but even this wasn't really grunty enough-It did some damage, yeah, but I feel the Mosquito was the best , both in top-scores and performance. I actually like the He219, very 'vulture'-looking, and purpose-built, but probably better with jet engines maybe....


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Mar 27, 2004)

> The Uhu was grossly underpowered


yea and im an albino pigmy monkey!
the thing was bloody faster than a Fw-190!!!!! how is it underpowered!??!! Two Engines=DRAG! TWO BIG ENGINES=MORE DRAG! Skinny Body=LITTLE DRAG! Skinny Body+2 1,900HP(!!!) Engines=Less Drag Than Mossie's smei-fat body+less powerful engines=FAST! even with 8(!!!!!) cannons of differing sizes, it hauled more ass than the mossie (and looked better too) dont mess with my Uhu M8! Two Mk108s(30mm) firing ahead from the wingroots, two of the same firing upwards ala Schrage Muzik, and two Mg151/20s(20mm) and two Mk103s(30mm) in the ventral tray firing forward! and it did 416mph! how can you call that underpowered?!?!??!?!? neither in gunpower NOR engine power!!

Reichsmarschall Batista


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Mar 27, 2004)

> It did some damage


do you know why it only did SOME?!?!?! THE BLOODY LEADERS OF THE RLM DIDNT LIKE IT!! they preffered the slower and worse Junkers design so they delayed the bloody thing if they hadnt been stupid and reluctant many more lancs would have gone down! like i said, DONT MESS WIHT MY UHU!!!!

Reichsmarschall Batista


----------



## bronzewhaler82 (Mar 29, 2004)

Yep - the Blackwidow was good (blimey Viper we actually agreed on something! shame you've left now!  )


----------



## Crazy (Mar 29, 2004)

GermansRGeniuses said:


> > The Uhu was grossly underpowered
> 
> 
> yea and im an albino pigmy monkey!
> ...





> > It did some damage
> 
> 
> do you know why it only did SOME?!?!?! THE BLOODY LEADERS OF THE RLM DIDNT LIKE IT!! they preffered the slower and worse Junkers design so they delayed the bloody thing if they hadnt been stupid and reluctant many more lancs would have gone down! like i said, DONT MESS WIHT MY UHU!!!!
> ...



Bit touchy, eh mate


----------



## MP-Willow (Mar 29, 2004)

thanks Piaggio108- I have liked the Pe.108 and thought it was not loved by the Italians or Germans, but that is for another post. As for Lanc, I think any RAF plane would be his favorite!

Just remember the black widow was the first USAAF design night figher! Most of the others we are talking about were daylight bombers that could not make it as daybombers any more!


----------



## Gemhorse (Mar 30, 2004)

The Mosquito was the most successful. It was first used operationally as a Nightfighter the night of 27 April 1942. It may not have had 30mm's poking out everywhere but it ground-down Luftwaffe Night Defence, both as NF and Bomber. After the War, Ernst Heinkel himself stated he wished he could have designed the Mosquito, and had a picture in his Boardroom of it. - To answer Kiwimac's suggestion of the most unusual Nightfighter, I feel the Fw189 was unique - UNDERpowered , and fitted with a light version of 'Schrage Muzik' , it did service in this role.


----------



## kiwimac (Mar 30, 2004)

The HE 219 was almost the quintessential nightfighter, its big problem was that the RLM didn't like it! But then again they also didn't like the FW187 and HE280. At least they were consistent, I suppose.

FW189, fascinating machine!













> (Germany)
> 
> This was an twin-boom tactical reconnaissance aircraft with an extensively glazed nacelle. The Fw 189 was a very effective aircraft, maneuverable and sturdy. A few were used as nightfighters. There was also a Fw 189C five-seat trainer (few built), and a Fw 189B anti-tank aircraft with a small armored nacelle (The Hs 129 was preferred). Total production was 864.
> 
> ...



Source:http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/gustin_military/db/ger/FW189UHU.html

Just one of those machines I really like. Sturdy as heck, could take a LOT of damage including Russian ram attacks, pleasure to fly, what more could you ask?

Kiwimac


----------



## Gemhorse (Mar 30, 2004)

Yeah , they were popular with their aircrew and nice and stable to fly- Out of so few made, there's a group I wrote to who are presently restoring one, their Secretary's email address is [email protected] - It was also called 'Owl', or ' Eule' as Kurt Tank christened it, but became 'Uhu' by it's crews. As a Nightfighter, it served with NJG 100, but it was basically 'the eye in the sky' reconnaissance work that it was designed for...


----------



## Crazy (Mar 30, 2004)

I agree, kiwimac, the FW-189 is a fascinating machine, very interesting to look at and to fly


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 31, 2004)

by interesting, i hope you mean ugly


----------



## Crazy (Mar 31, 2004)

In my opinion there are very few planes from that era that are ugly. Some are rather amusing to look at, and some are downright outlandish, but hardly ever ugly. 


That Heinkel biplane is the only one that comes to mind in the 'ugly' category


----------



## kiwimac (Mar 31, 2004)

Try one of the B&V assymetrical aircraft for unusual looking!

BV 141













> Technical Details
> 
> Type: Tactical Reconnaissance / Light Bomber
> 
> ...



And apparently it was a delight to fly! Go figure

Kiwimac


----------



## ahanswurst (Apr 1, 2004)

The P-61 Black Widow was the most under rated night fighter in WW-2. It had onboard radar and the firepower that the P-61 could deliver to it's target makes it the best night fighter hands down. The P-61 was a hard plane to handle and thats the reason most of them were destroyed after WW2 was over.


----------



## kiwimac (Apr 1, 2004)

Actually, I consider the HE 219 Uhu to be the most under-rated Nightfighter. The P-61 was far too late to have much impact.

Kiwimac


----------



## MP-Willow (Apr 1, 2004)

Nice info on the Fw189. I must say that I really like the twin boom designed aircraft. But as for the fighter, still the Black Widow. But it is hard to compair aircraft because they came into survice at different times.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Apr 1, 2004)

i still think ju-88 8)


----------



## plan_D (Apr 2, 2004)

I can't decide on best nightfighter, but that Fw189 was a rugged machine. They'd be rammed by those crazy Russians and carry on flying with only one boom and half the tail missing.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Apr 2, 2004)

wow


----------



## ahanswurst (Apr 4, 2004)

The HE 219 A7 model with the (6) 30 mm canons and (2) 20 mm canons was a very good night fighter But there were only 300 of the HE 219 series aircraft built during the entire war . There were 200 P-61 Black Widows built in 1944 followed by 450 more of the P-61 B models. After WW2 was over the leftover P-61's were modified into the F-15A series and flown until 1952. This was a outstanding aircraft and very few were sold to civilians.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 10, 2004)

i still like the mosquito................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Apr 16, 2004)

ie changed my mind to the beau


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 16, 2004)

i prefer that as a naval figter..............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Apr 20, 2004)

you would, i like the beau


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 24, 2004)

i don't recall saying, i didn't...............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Apr 29, 2004)

neither do i actually  ah well, the beau gets my vote for best nightfighter  or the night fighter version of the p-38


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 1, 2004)

the beau was the best brittish night fighter easily.............


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 2, 2004)

apart from the mossie it was pretty much the only one werent it?


----------



## kiwimac (May 2, 2004)

Nope the Brits used the Bolton-Paul Defiant as a NF and some marques of the Hurri. Still prefer the JU88 / He 219 / DO 335.

Kiwimac


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 2, 2004)

> JU88 / He 219 / DO 335


all as one plane 

but the 335 was pretty cool................


----------



## kiwimac (May 3, 2004)

** Blows Lanc a Raspberry**

kiwimac


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 3, 2004)

The Hurricane was never equipped with radar. I think to qualify as a night fighter a plane should have some means of locating a target at night other than the pilot's eyes. The Hurricane was a virtually stock dayfighter simply being flown at night.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 3, 2004)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> > JU88 / He 219 / DO 335
> 
> 
> all as one plane
> ...



sure was 8)


----------



## plan_D (May 4, 2004)

The Hurricane was still a night fighter, it flew at night, it was a fighter..therefore it was a night fighter


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 4, 2004)

does that mean planes that fly at twilight are called twilight fighters?


----------



## plan_D (May 4, 2004)

Damn straight...


----------



## kiwimac (May 4, 2004)

And of course those that fly at dawn are dawn fighters!

Kiwimac


----------



## plan_D (May 4, 2004)

Of course..now you're all getting it....


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 4, 2004)

and all those planes that are french are called crap fighters


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 4, 2004)

Well anything that didn't carry radar was hardly going to be an effective night fighter. The P-38M would have been a fine nightfighter if it had seen action (aopparenlty a few enter service just before the war ended but I don't know of any interceptions). There were some field modified P-38s that got into service down in the South Pacific. Two of the machine guns were moved forward and a radar set was squeezed in between the cockpit and the guns. Again, I don't know of any interceptions they actually made.


----------



## plan_D (May 5, 2004)

I don't know about the French planes being crap, they did shoot down quite a few Ju52 and Ju-87s, plus the fact the Germans used a few after the capture of France. Maybe it was just the pilots.


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 5, 2004)

Most of the French planes that were captured were passed off to other Axis nations like Romania.


----------



## plan_D (May 5, 2004)

Yes, but the Germans did apparently use a few, just like they did with the French tanks. If not only for a short time before passing them on.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 5, 2004)

plan_D said:


> I don't know about the French planes being crap, they did shoot down quite a few Ju52 and Ju-87s, plus the fact the Germans used a few after the capture of France. Maybe it was just the pilots.



52s and 87s are hardly the most challenging of planes to shoot down though


----------



## plan_D (May 5, 2004)

They are when escorted by 109s. Plus the French planes did get some 109 kills.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 7, 2004)

wow  i dont think it was their planes that were crap, just the people flying them 8)


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 7, 2004)

The French had some decent pilots, but, in general no one in Europe could match the Luftwaffe for pilot skill (not at the start of the war anyway).


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 7, 2004)

only because they had experience from the spanish civil war


----------



## plan_D (May 7, 2004)

And because they were well trained. The British matched, and beat them in BoB though.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 8, 2004)

so what if it was deigned to fly in a light fog, at 30,000ft in the tranistion between night and day?


----------



## plan_D (May 8, 2004)

A fighter.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 9, 2004)

but it's a very specail one, it can't fly in any other conditions.........


----------



## plan_D (May 9, 2004)

A Fighter with little or no military value, a waste of time, technology and money.


----------



## kiwimac (May 10, 2004)

Bolton-Paul Defiant!

Kiwimac


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 10, 2004)

hope you aint serious


----------



## plan_D (May 10, 2004)

Just in the mood to say the Defiant, as was said in the ugliest plane thread...


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 11, 2004)

probably


----------



## plan_D (May 11, 2004)

All right, chaps, this is your grave. Well not only your grave, but also your friends, we are too cheap to give you one each


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 12, 2004)

Hey, the Defiant was the best nightfighter the Brits had until the Beau came along.


----------



## plan_D (May 12, 2004)

It wasn't the best though, was it? No...so...shhh  






This is a new grave Blackburn have kindly designed for you lads.


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 12, 2004)

I was just saying it was better as a night fighter than as a day fighter. And a lot prettier than those Rocs you posted.


----------



## plan_D (May 12, 2004)

I'll agree with that.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 13, 2004)

that was good  8)


----------



## plan_D (May 13, 2004)

What was good?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 14, 2004)

what happened to the canopie of the 1st Roc?


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 14, 2004)

the blackburn roc thing, made me laugh


----------



## plan_D (May 14, 2004)

I don't know Lanc.


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 15, 2004)

The Roc had fairings immediately before and behind the turret for streamlining purposes (streamlining a Roc HA!). Anyway, for combat they were retracted to all the turret a more complete field of fire. The Defiant had the same fairings.


----------



## plan_D (May 15, 2004)

And the other two in the pic didn't?


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 15, 2004)

They are equipped with the same fairings. If you look closely the 3rd Roc has just the rear fairing lowered. In that sense it is a very cool pic in that it gives you a look at three different positions.


----------



## plan_D (May 15, 2004)

I would call you a nerd, but I'm like that with tanks. It's not a cool pic though because why would you want three different views on a CRAP PLANE!?!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 15, 2004)

t'aint nothing wrong with being called a nerd, i get called that all the time...........


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 15, 2004)

When it comes to WWII planes I am definitely a nerd. When it comes to WWII ships I am arguably a nerd. But the pic is neat in that it does show how the fairings worked.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 16, 2004)

compared to our friends, me and C.C. are deafinatly nerds..............


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 16, 2004)

oh yeah thanks  aha, but i retain a high image in that i only contain my nerdness to school work, you on the other hand, you get threatened by kerry because of you flaunting your nerdness


----------



## Crazy (May 16, 2004)

cheddar cheese said:


> oh yeah thanks  aha, but i retain a high image in that i only contain my nerdness to school work, you on the other hand, you get threatened by kerry because of you flaunting your nerdness



I'm going to assume you don't mean John Kerry, the presidential nominee  He's far too busy being an idiot here in america to concern himself with nerds in GB


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2004)

That'd be funny if he did though.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 22, 2004)

nah this's a girl in our class called Kerrie, i'm always giving answers and she get's really annoyed when i do..................


----------



## Erich (May 22, 2004)

intersting where the threads pop up.

Ok new guy speaking from interviews with the vets. for the US it would have to be the P-61 which in my opinion needed a good through going over. the top turret was not needed and the radar operator instead of the position in the rear of the a/c needed to be put in the cockpit with the pilot. In the ETO this was accomplished. It also needed a rear defensive armament which it did not have and it was shot down even by Bf 110G-4 outdated German a/c. The AI on the P-61's in the ETO also failed numerable times as I have the microfische of the 422nd and 425th nfs. Three of the members-pilots of the 425th I have personally interviewd as 2 live in my home state, one of the guys was CO of the 425th and lives about 150 miles to my north. the best thing said about the P-61 is that it was an excellent heavy weapons platform and could achieve excellent results as a night ground attack fighter.
For the British it had to be the Beau fiorst and then the later marks of the Mossie such as the nf 30. A fantastic a/c. Still should of had a rear gunner though ~

U know my opinions on the He 219.............. yuk !

Bf 110G-4 the standard performed well but was underpowered and too slow, not manueverable.

the Ju 88G-6 the best of the German craft for reasons I have mentioned or maybe I haven't ? Rear warning radar, 4 crewmen, good defensive arms. plenty of firepower with the high phosphorus and M shells. Schrag-musik in oblique guns, powerful engines and on more than one occassion the crew brought the machine back with one engine shot out. had all the latest apparatus like radar and radio receiver's including the bring back of the infra-red homing device. Telecode printers to follow RAF bomber stream the last two months of the war. first use of German AI radar but not enough craft with sets to go around............and on it goes. German pilots perferred the G-6 over any German nf. 

no mention of the Me 262A-1a ? the best at night. Not one was shot down in night combat.......... at least 20 Moskito's shot down but probably more as I do not have my listing in front of me. 

Erich ~


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 23, 2004)

> For the British it had to be the Beau fiorst and then the later marks of the Mossie such as the nf 30. A fantastic a/c. Still should of had a rear gunner though ~



just asking, how would you fit a gun facing to the rear in a mossie??

or were you refering to the beau?


----------



## kiwimac (May 23, 2004)

Erich,

I disagree the HE219 was seriously under-utilised and political infighting prevented it from being in place as early as it could have been. But for all of that it was both a beautiful aircraft to look at and a fine night-fighter.

Kiwimac


----------



## Erich (May 23, 2004)

I was referring to both...............that is not my problem on how to figure it out but the point is that the RAF a/c were both shot out of the skies usally not knowing what hit them.

As to the Heinkel you propose a what-if then...........the a/c never proved itself as a remarkable night fighter or the best that the Germans had to offer. If anything it was an a/c that was designed for the reasons of night fighting alone and nothing else and that is the only thing going for it that is postiive in my estimation. Had it not been withdarwn and not so many bougus protoyypes then just possibly it would of reamined in high numbers through the ranks of the NJG's but it wasn't, so lets just deal with what really happened..............

thumbs up ~E


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 23, 2004)

Erich you should open your eyes to the power of smilies.............


----------



## Erich (May 23, 2004)

purpose ? I use them on a militaira site that I moderate. Usually smilies indicate non-sensitivity. I see that nearly 8/10ths of the posters on this forum pad the threads and the web-master needs to seriously consider deleteing many of them............

how about you for one add some good logical sense instead of one-liners. Ask questions instead of bizarre remarks. this will build trust especially for ones as myself which are older in years. I don't mind at all giving freely of my time here to educate the younger generation but I also expect respect in return.

verstehen sie ?


----------



## kiwimac (May 24, 2004)

Erich,

Perhaps ... but as well as the aircraft themselves I personally find the 'what-if' questions very interesting. They are the questions that enable folk to put flesh on the bones of bare facts.

Like you I've spent a large number of years studying both WW2 German and Italian aircraft and as fascinating as I find them I still come back to the 'what-ifs'.

kiwimac


----------



## kiwimac (May 24, 2004)

As for the one-liners, Erich, I believe that they have their place too. The building of community is as important as the running of an 'efficient' site, IMO.

Kiwimac


----------



## plan_D (May 24, 2004)

I think the site is working well as it is, the one liners and even sometimes smilies make for entertainment. Anyway, kiwimac is it me, or has your sig got bigger?


----------



## Erich (May 24, 2004)

Gentlemen I am the new guy and I am not here to change your ideas, just giving my opinions. I have just found the past 4-5 years that I have been moderating on 4-5 forums that what-ifs are good for argumentation that never ends that's all...........what-if's generally have the tendancy to dilute a serious thread to the base and the thread then flops. If we are going to start a thread of serious nature then let's not enter the what-if realm but state facts and back them up with solid references please.......

As for smilies yes they can be cute but also very distracting. Asnwering a comment from another poster with-out a line or two of text but with smilie only constitutes padding and that is quite unnecessary but childish.

v/r

Erich ~


----------



## kiwimac (May 24, 2004)

Plan_D

You know, I think my sig HAS got bigger. I'll have to look into that. 

Erich,

A number of the posters on this site have off-site friendships, as well the average age is on the young side. 

Kiwimac


----------



## MP-Willow (May 24, 2004)

Ok if we want a true fact based discussion and to come back to the topic athand, I do like this one, why not take the tp two in the poll, the P-61 and the Moss and compair them by the numbers and action reports.

I like the P-61 in that is was designed, but it entered the war latter so it had less targets in the air. But it did do a good job with night interdictions. I will post more if we wish to have a discussion that we can focus.

Smiles are just that a smile


----------



## Erich (May 24, 2004)

kiwimac, I am begining to understand that. Would like to point out that many lurkers that I am aware of will not join any type of forums when things clearly get off of topic and become a personal vendetta, whether kidding or not. Again this is something to ponder.

MP-Willow I am a former member of the US night fighters association flying the P-61 A and B and have much to offer, but would like to see your materials on the P-61. intersting that several med units flying the Beau and later the Mossie NF compared their'old' Mossie mounts to the newer P-61's. Some intersting comparative calculations that were rendered. My feelings especially for the ETO 422nd and 425th nfs during the Ardenne battles is that the crews were still quite unfamiliar with night fighter vs enemy night fighter identification and on more than one mission the two units unfortunately shot down 1-2 Mossie intruders in their area of involvement..............the P-61 AI although an excellent radar apparatus failed on two many an occassion and following along the micro-fische reports of missions involved the P-61 crews radar seemed to have been confused with the haze and smoke plus weather elements during the month of December 1944. As many and ending to a mission was remarked "No-Joy". Jets in fact were claimed to have been foloowed, Me 262 as well as the Rocket Me 163 Komet but we know this was not possible as the Me 262 of Kommando Welter was in the starting phaswe and was in the area of Berlin to counter the Mossie LSNF threat to Berlin.

so with that please share what you have with us.............


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 24, 2004)

I have received mixed reviews about the P-61. For example, when the P-38M was tested against the P-61 it was shown to be superior in virtually every category. On the other hand, I have read an article that suggested that more P-61s MIGHT have been able to stem the tide of the Bulge sooner since the Germans could move relatively freely at night.


----------



## Erich (May 24, 2004)

probably not, although the German night fighter forces lost more nf's in December 1944 that other months in the war. 142 a/c by all causes. Mossies and P-61's also added to this overall score plus the result of RAF bombe return fire and night landing accidents and other bizarre occurances.
Ju 87's of the night ground attack force were encountered quite a bit but with mixed results as the p-61's had to drop their landing gear to take on the slow night movers. The Widows just simply overshot their targets and when coming around for another attack the Ju 87D's had already begun their decents/dives to attack Allied troops and road crossings then staying low concealed their get-a ways in the low ground haze and fog.....

~E


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 24, 2004)

Well, I was referring to the P-61's skill in a ground attack role. The article I read suggested that had their been more P-61s on hand the Germans would have lost more tanks, fuel, and supplies simply getting into position to mount their attack.


----------



## Erich (May 24, 2004)

well the P-61 was an excellent weapons platform as I mentioned earlier and the night ground attack role it excelled. impressive stats for the two ETO squadrons of MT destroyed and bridges and road crossings wiped out including many loco's.............this was all in 1945 in the interior of the Reich


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 25, 2004)

And if there could have been a couple of more sqaudrons (or at least enough spares to keep the two existing ones at full strength) the Bulge might not have made it as far as it did.


----------



## plan_D (May 25, 2004)

I don't think so, the opening stages of the Bulge were in bad weather conditions, grounding aircraft day and night. When the weather cleared the Germans had already made it most of the way, but were then restricted to moving at night. Moving by day was suicide.


----------



## Erich (May 25, 2004)

the three squadrons in the ETO at the time of the Bulge were up to strength. the problem was their outdated equipment


----------



## brad (May 25, 2004)

cant remember what i voted for


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 25, 2004)

i went for the 88, then later changed my decision to the beaufighter


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 26, 2004)

Plan_D, I was refering to the P-61 being able to attack units moving into position before the actual attack was launched.


----------



## plan_D (May 26, 2004)

The Allies didn't know the attack was coming, so they wouldn't have had the thought to use them on the enemy forces there. Mostly they didn't even know a lot of them were there.


----------



## Erich (May 26, 2004)

the P-61 units in question were delegated to the defence and attack of German night fighters as well as German night bombers. They were not to be used as ground attack a/c as first priority. The unit's were designated to fly at night as intruder's whether the Ardenne battles came about or not.........A-20's of the units were used in the night ground attack roles during the Ardenne


----------



## MP-Willow (May 26, 2004)

Erich, I have been reading about the P-61 mostly in the CBI and Pacific Theatures. So I might need a little time reading up on the ETO. But I will say that from what I found for the Pacific the P-61 did not find a lot of Japanese planes but did get its share. You are right about the night intruder ops and the locos. From what I read the P-61 was very good at busting up the marshelling yards, trussels, and trains in China and Burma. I will send you or post the souces I have. Most are from different units. Some i am still trying to read. I am waiting to get a good book or two but for now my reading is elts where. 

It is interesting that the Black Widow had to drop her wheels to engage the Ju-87s. I had never thought of that. Also the P-61C I think would have helped fix some of its problums the radar for one looks like a better unit.


----------



## Erich (May 26, 2004)

fire away Willow !! The squadron signal small booklet is a good start as well as Gary Papes two excellent volumes............on the Widow


----------



## brad (May 27, 2004)

i think i voted for the mossie


----------



## plan_D (May 28, 2004)

I voted for the Mosquito although I am disapointed in the lack of votes for the Bf-110 it was a great night interceptor. I think it was a great bomber destroyer in general, as long as the bomber formation wasn't escorted.


----------



## Erich (May 28, 2004)

the Bf 110G was the standard equipment for the Nachtjagd until the Ju 88G came along and then there was not much to compare between the two. I have made those points clear earlier. Every crewman I have interviewed wished they had the Ju 88G at their disposal earlier in the war.

too bad for them......


----------



## plan_D (May 28, 2004)

The Bf-110G was outclassed by the JU88G but still it wasn't completely useless, and it did have some success against bombers early war.


----------



## Erich (May 28, 2004)

obviously not as II, III, and IV./NJG 1 kept the unit


----------



## plan_D (May 28, 2004)

Obviously not what? That the Ju88G wasn't better than the Bf-110G? Or that the Bf-110 didn't have success against bombers?


----------



## Erich (May 28, 2004)

obviously all units in 1945 did not fly the Ju 88G-6. they should have though. NJG 1 since based to the northern coast could meet the RAF on the way in and before reaching the coast on the way back to England so a long distnce night fighter was not needed. the Bf 110G-4 served the purpose for this NJG just fine. the Bf 110 was in mix with the Ju 88 in south with NJG 6.

E ~ this is what I meant. Verstehen ?


----------



## plan_D (May 28, 2004)

I never said the Bf-110 was replaced though. So, how could you say obviously not? I said it was outclassed, not replaced.


----------



## Erich (May 28, 2004)

c'mon think about it ! NJG 1 did not want to trade in their 110's like most of the NJG's had. The Bf 110G-4 was an outdated unit and they knew it but they did not want to change over as they had scored some 2,000 plus kills and why change with something that had provided sufficient flying and armament power.........


----------



## plan_D (May 29, 2004)

You think about it. You're arguing with yourself, I never said the Bf-110 was poor. I said it was good. 

You said the people you interviewed would have wanted a JU88 early war, to me this means they were better. So, I said the Ju-88G was better than the Bf-110G. And now you're saying some people didn't want to swap, you're arguing with yourself man, calm down.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 29, 2004)

i always the thought the 110 wasn't that bad..........


----------



## Erich (May 29, 2004)

arguing with myself.........never ! just giving my opinion and trying to answer your question(s).


----------



## brad (May 29, 2004)

the 110 is good


----------



## MP-Willow (May 29, 2004)

The Bf-110 was in bad need to be phased out! It sould have been by the Bf-210, but that design was a bust. So two years latter the 410 was out and what the 210 should have been while the poor old 110 was cannon fodder, or better put .50 cal fodder. 

Now in all this talk of night fighters I have a question about the rader. The RAF was ahead of the USAAC in design, but from what I have read, it seems that the US did not get the British desgins. What do you all think.

Eric, ok I will look at the books you said. I have been looking for information on the Gumman F7F this last week. That was a great aircraft! Sad that it came to late. Grumman Cats were just fun.

LG- you have any info on the two seat P-38M or L night Lightning? I have only found a few referances to it. 
I am reading about twin engin nightfighters this week


----------



## Erich (May 29, 2004)

although some errors can be found Willow may I suggest Gebhard Aders, German night fighter Force 1914-1945. Maybe an OOP title but a must have for your research if you are serious about Germany's contirbutions in the war effort.........


----------



## plan_D (May 30, 2004)

The Bf-110G was a good plane, and a great bomber destroy if the bomber stream had no escort. Late war it was getting a beating but it still served.


----------



## Lightning Guy (May 31, 2004)

The P-38M was a direct conversion from the P-38L-5. A grand total of 75 conversions were made (it was clear the war was winding down). Its performance was very similar to the L (a little slower due to the weight and drag of the radar but still fast enough). The radar was the same APS-4 used on the nightfighting Hellcats and Corsairs in the Pacific. In an emergency, it could be jetisoned from the aircraft. I've not seen any clear cut info on the service record of the P-38M. It appears that a few made it to the Pacific before VJ day but I am unaware of any action they may have seen. Several were a part of the post-war occupation force.


----------



## MP-Willow (May 31, 2004)

Thanks all. I have again been educated


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 1, 2004)

as have i


----------



## Erich (Jun 1, 2004)

from my files............a nice little comparision for all of you between the Bf 110G-4 and the Ju 88G-6.

time frame is April of 45 when the staffeln of the nf force was consolidated.

Bf 110G-4:

Stab, 1 ,4 and 7./NJG 1
Stab./NJG 4
Stab, 4 and 7./NJG 5, mixed.........
Stab and 7./NJG 6

Ju 88G-6:

Stab, I, II, and III./NJG 2
Stab, I. 7 and 10./NJG 3
Stab, I., 4 and 7./NJG 4
Stab, I., 4, 7, and 10./NJG 5
Stab, I., 4, and 10./NJG 6
I. and II./NJG 100
Nachtjagdstaffel Norwegen

tottles

E ~


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 1, 2004)

cool 8)


----------



## rcristi (Jun 1, 2004)

I cannot vote in this poll, where's the He 219??? Just my opinion...

Cheers


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 1, 2004)

ive just realised that. or even the Hs129?


----------



## Erich (Jun 1, 2004)

rchristi why the Uhu ? given the reasons on other pages why this a/c was insufficient as a nf.

CC the Hs 129 was a ground attack a/c not a nf


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 1, 2004)

my mistake 8)


----------



## rcristi (Jun 1, 2004)

cheddar cheese said:


> ive just realised that. or even the Hs129?



You're kiddin' right? Hs 129?


----------



## rcristi (Jun 1, 2004)

cheddar cheese said:


> ive just realised that. or even the Hs129?



You're kiddin' right? Hs 129?


----------



## Erich (Jun 1, 2004)

why the UHU please........ ? or do you know ?


----------



## rcristi (Jun 1, 2004)

Hmm, lets try to make a point. He 219 was a capable night fighter who suffered from misjudgments by senior members of the government and the Luftwaffe high command (Generalfeldmarschall Erhard Milch). Josef Kammhuber (General of the Night Fighters) was so impressed after he saw the prototype that he immediately ordered it into production over Milch's objections. On its very first use in combat Werner Streib flew the V9 and shot down five bombers in a single mission. On top of that it was the first aircraft equiped with an ejection seat, it was also the first aircraft with tricycle landing gear to achieve operational status with the Luftwaffe.
Maybe it wasn't the best but had the potential to become the best.

Cheers


----------



## rcristi (Jun 1, 2004)

As a side story, Milch repeatedly tried to have the He 219 program killed (for no reason I must say), and in the process Kammhuber was shoved from his office. He actualy stopped the production for a time, but luckly Milch was sacked and Albert Speer put he thing back into prodcution. Anyway it was already too late, till the end only 268 were produced.

Best regards


----------



## Erich (Jun 1, 2004)

again like another poster you are stating what-ifs. maybe you and others need to seriously look as to what was built in numbers and used in succeding operations. True the poor little or should say too big Uhu was shoved into the trash, but it already had a crappy track record. There is some serious doubt that Werner shot down as many RAF a/c as is claimed. It was a poor choice to begin with as I stated without sufficient engine power, weak linings along the wing spars, no rear armament and no rear warning radar. Most crews in I./NJg 1 operating the machine were scared to death of the ejection seat config.......yes in another 1-2 years maybe the a/c could of been something but it would of been still in the trashbin as the Me 262 and variants plus new AR 234 nf's would of taken to the scene to chase-down all Allied bombers, fighters and you name it..........

two cents


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Jun 1, 2004)

GermansRGeniuses said:


> > The Uhu was grossly underpowered
> 
> 
> yea and im an albino pigmy monkey!
> ...



There's my old rant about the Uhu and I still stand by it.


----------



## Erich (Jun 1, 2004)

where the heck are you guyz getting some of this info from ? Suggest that all of you update your German a/c data as you are quoting old bloody news. I've got a lot of data over the last 35 years. The a/c was a slow mover off the landing field and was not as fast as hoped. The armament of the Shrag waffen was sometimes the 2cm and also not even fitted to many a/c. The wing guns were 2cm and the under tray was either 2cm and Mk 108 3cm. The 103's were never fitted.


----------



## Erich (Jun 1, 2004)

416 mph ! nice try but wrong............


----------



## rcristi (Jun 1, 2004)

He 219 underpowered? With two DB 603G (1900hp) He 219 was underpowered and Ju 88 G with 2 Jumo 212 (1880hp) was not... considering that these two planes had almost the same weights empty or loaded. And were not talking about "what if's" Uhu was first flown in '42. I agree that Ju 88 was the best multirole aircraft of WW2 and very succesufull as a nightfighter but I think it was a mistake on RLM behalf for not producing a dedicated nightfighter (be it He 219, Me 262 or Arado 234 - you choose) and leave the Ju 88 on his fast bomber role. Also I tend to agree that Me 262 could've been the perfect nightfighter but it appeared to late to count.

Best regards


----------



## rcristi (Jun 1, 2004)

Regarding the speed of Uhu, I have too many contradicting sources starting with the lowest of 585 km/h to the fastest of 670 km/h. Maybe the truth lies as usual in the middle, probably 620 km/h? Even so, more than enough for nightfighting.

Cheers


----------



## Erich (Jun 1, 2004)

I will gladly accept your last statement. One thing is that the nose of the He 219 would have had to be thouroughly redisinged to take on the room for the AI as well as a larger compartment for the radar operator since there would of been the addtion of the tele-type printer used in spring of 45. A third crew-member would of been standard but the prototype of the version with the 3rd crewmemeber in the back of the fuselage stayed on the drawing board. The jets would of taken over for all the prop driven a/c in 1946, but we will rightly never know what may have been ........


----------



## Erich (Jun 1, 2004)

what references rcristi ?

The Ju 88G-6 topped out at 400mph on occassion. this was as a result of a flat out 'get away' from the Mossie intruder.


----------



## rcristi (Jun 1, 2004)

I agree with your last statement too.  You're right about jets, but a dedicated prop-driven nightfighter in full production in '42 would've made a great diference.

Best regards
Chris


----------



## Erich (Jun 1, 2004)

if the Luftwaffe could have perfected a twin prop ac/ with AI in 1942 things would have changed in the night skies over the Reich, or at least be on par with the Mossie XIX and XXX. The P-61 still had too many bugs to work out of it.....


----------



## rcristi (Jun 1, 2004)

P61? I cannot consider this ugly beast a good nightfighter for european skies... maybe it was good in Pacific. I cannot compare these two theaters because in Europe the nighfighting was more intense.

Cheers


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 1, 2004)

The P-61s had a fair amount of success in Europe. It would have had even greater success if its development and initial deployment could have gone smoother. And while the 'intensity' might have been different between the ETO and the PTO, the techniques and equipment needed for night fighting were basically the same, weren't they?


----------



## brad (Jun 2, 2004)

> from my files............a nice little comparision for all of you between the Bf 110G-4 and the Ju 88G-6.
> 
> time frame is April of 45 when the staffeln of the nf force was consolidated.
> 
> ...


sweet where did you get them


----------



## Erich (Jun 3, 2004)

you know Brad I am not really sure..........have had it since 1966.


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 4, 2004)

Thank all for the great reading. I have enjoyed reading about the German a/c and am glad to see others them RAF and USAAC fans.

AS for the Black Widow being ugly it might not have the grace of the P-38 or F7F, but it was a night fighter and one that truely did do its job. As for not proforming in the ETO maybe because the RAF did have good n/f units already and more combat under them.


----------



## Erich (Jun 4, 2004)

P-61's // not quite, it was due to the lack of experience in the night air war and problems of identifying friend from foe. As I said earlier the P-61 units are responsible for at least 2 RAF Mossie shoot-downs due to the forementioned problems. many times the radar AI shut down prematurily. There were plenty of targets in December of 44 as the German nf force lost over 114 twin engine fighters at night........

if anything that was done consistantly for the 418th, 422nd and 425th nfs was their night ground attack follies and they were quite accomplished at this task.....


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 5, 2004)

Follies?
I agree that we were "Green" in night combat and I have not found good information as to any USAAC pilots going over to fly and get practical experiance, any help on that? But I still think that as the P-61 got that combat experance it worked out a lot of the problums. But yes the night intruder missions were bery good.


----------



## plan_D (Jun 5, 2004)

Willow, he means missions by the follies, I do believe. A light hearted approach to such a devestating act. 

The P-61 certainly showed some impact on the ground during the night, but they were really not suitable for the fighter role. The pilots being green did not serve well for the RAF pilots. The Mosquito had the gap filled, after all, the reputation it got, and the attention payed to it by the Luftwaffe certainly shows its worth.


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 5, 2004)

But the Mosqito's succes didn't eliminate the need for a USAAF night fighter. And the P-61 project was begun way back in '42 when no one was really sure how successful the Mossie would be.


----------



## Erich (Jun 6, 2004)

yes plan_D had it correct the P-61 was much better suited to night ground attack in the ETO than regular night fighter duties. I have reports of German night fighter crews easily avoiding the big heavy a/c by simply banking sharply and diving away. Encounter reports via the 422nd and 425th nfs microfische in my possession say the same thing. Once the radar operator had the fix and before the pilot could get a positive visula the German a/c would bank away and dive steeply, the contact being lost.

Truthfully as said the Mosquito sqadrons could not be everywhere and there were of course limits in areas covered, so the P-61 squadrons would then be available to protect Pattons army sector. this for operations in fall of 44 through till war's end.

As for the PTO I am not usue of the real effectiveness of the fighter but obviously there were many kills against Japanese a/c.


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 7, 2004)

I'm not sure about this but I believe the top two Black Widow squadrons were in the ETO with number 3 being in the PTO. That should be expected since pilots in the ETO would have had a greater number of targets. I believe I read something about P-61 crews using night-vision equipment which should have helped the P-61 established visual contact at a greater distance but I don't have the article with me to check that.


----------



## Erich (Jun 7, 2004)

here's some stats for all of you on the P-61 units....

6th nfs in the PTO had 23 kills, 5 of them by the P-38.
414th in the ETO had 13 kills
415th in the MED had 11 all by the Beaufighter although the unit had the P-61.
416th had 5 kills by the Mossie and Beaufighter in the MED
417th had 9 kills in the MED by the Beaufighter
418th had 20 in the PTO
419th in the PTO had 6
421st had 13 in the PTO
422nd had 43 plus 5 V-1's in the ETO
423 in the ETO had 0, flew A-20's
425th in the ETO had 10 plus 4 V-1's. unit may have had another 5 German a/c to their list but unconfirmed.
426th in the PTO had 5
427th in the PTO had 0
547th in the PTO had 7 kills, 1 from a P-38
548th in the PTO had 5
549th in the PTO had 1 kill
550th in the PTO had 0.

E ~


----------



## luca servitto (Jun 7, 2004)

now thats a list


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 7, 2004)

So the top P-61 unit was in the ETO and the second was in the PTO. I was pretty close on that. Erich, do you have any info on if those P-38 kills were scored by the field modified nightfighters or simply by conventional P-38s flying at night? I know at least a hand full were field modified to carry radar but have not seen anything on their success.


----------



## Erich (Jun 7, 2004)

I am going to have to look on that. do have a pic though somewhere of an all black P-38 with the under the nose radar section. whether this flew ops I cannot be certain....................give me just a little time to check. It appears though that the P-38 was the first nf used by the PTO groups until the P-61 became available. And of note as I have mentioned earlier the PTO groups kept the upward forward firing .50's turret as well as the lower fuselgae 20mm's. Dvastating firepower ! 

E ~


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 7, 2004)

Erich, the P-38s with the chin radar I think are factory Ls, but as I write this fast and not double checking I could be wrong. Also the PTO saw the use of navy F6F night fighters and even coursairs and the P-70 was an adaptation of the A-20 to fill the gap until the P-61. If it did not have as meny problums or of the USAAC would have been on the ball with night fighter development we might have seen it sooner!!


----------



## Erich (Jun 7, 2004)

MP, the PTO is not my theater so to speak so cannot comment except to say that :

6th nfs flew the P-36A, P-40B, P-38, P-47D, P-70 and P-61.
418th flew the P-70, P-38 and P-61
419th and 421st the same three a/c types.

426th, 427th, 548th, 549th and 550th flew the P-61 only.

547th flew the P-38 and then P-61.

that's it and also the P-61 was used as a daytime ground attack a/c against Japanaese harbors and shipping besides against Mt's on roads.


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 7, 2004)

Erich thanks. So if we stay with the ETO for now, I still think the P-61 had it's place. I am still trying to understand how the Mossie with all that wood frame survived so well. But that I hope to find out as I read more on it, maybe this weekend after my Hurricane reading.


----------



## Stuka-99 (Jun 7, 2004)

100% The mossie


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 7, 2004)

The black P-38 with the radar under the chin is a P-38M, a direct conversion from a P-38L-5. I have read of two P-38s in the PTO having radar installed in a modified drop tank and seen a picture of another P-38 with a radar fitted in the nose with YAGI-style antenas projecting from the sides. The P-70 was junk which is why the mechanics in the PTO started field modifying P-38s in the first place.


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 8, 2004)

LG thanks. I did not think the P-70 junk but it was a stop gap thing. The PTO also saw the F6F as a very good night fighter as I have been reading.

I am still bothered with why the US was so far off the pace in addopting and developing nightfighters?


----------



## Erich (Jun 8, 2004)

MP-Willow, there were not enough Mossies and Beu's to go round even in the Med in 1943. When the assault on fortress Europe evolved the US forces had to do something quick and that was get as many P-61's into flight. although tested somewhat against the approacing V-1's the crews and a/c had not had the chance to prove themselves over Europe and in the ensuing battles it was proven that the P-61 in the ETO could not handle the multi-night missions perfoprmed by units like the 422nd and 425th nfs that had abundant crews. in fact in late 44 and into 45 there were sometimes 3-4 different crews flying the same P-61 on nightie-missions. The poor P-61A's were almost flown to a wreck before some B's variants came on board. this was always a complaint of the 3 ETO squadrons that there was never enough equipment to do the job.......


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 9, 2004)

The F6Fs did very well and so did the F4Us. They Army actually asked that they be assigned control of some of the Navy night-fighter squadrons since they were having more success that the P-61s.


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 9, 2004)

Thanks all. LG I really like that Picture of the Lighting!

With the poor P-61 in great need of help was there any reason why the production could not be amped up? Say slow production of the P-40 and get the Black Widow into the numbers it needs. But please remember the P-61 was the first try at a night fighter from the start. Now the F7F was much better, shame it was on the carrier sailing to fight when the war ended.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 9, 2004)

the F7F, that was the tigercat yes?

that would've been good, any info on it?


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 10, 2004)

Grumman F7F-3 Tigercat 

Type: Fighter
Crew: 1, Pilot
Armament: four 20mm cannon, four .50 cal machine guns, optional torpedo, 1000 lbs. bombs

Specifications
Length: 45' 4" (13.82 m)
Height: 16' 7" (5.5 m)
Wingspan: 51' 6" (1.68 m)
Wing area: 455 sq. ft (42.27 sq. m)
Empty Weight: 16270 lbs (7378 kg)
Gross Weight: 25720 lbs

Propulsion
No. of Engines: 2
Powerplant: Pratt Whitney R-2800-34W
Horsepower: 2100 hp each

Performance
Range: 1200 miles (1932 km)
Cruise Speed: 222 mph (357 km/hr)
Max Speed: 435 mph (700 km/hr)
Climb: 4530 ft/min (1380.68 m/min)
Ceiling: 40700 ft (12405 m)


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 10, 2004)

ta 8)


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 10, 2004)

LG I thought the Tigercat could carry 2,000lbs of bombs? I will look it back up.

It was a good plane used in Korea, but it would have been a great help in the Marine landings in 1956 on Japan. 8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 12, 2004)

i wouldn't be suprised if a plane like the tigercat could take more than 1000lbs, perhaps that was just the normal payload??


----------



## Stuka-99 (Jun 12, 2004)

Mossie Mossie Mossie Mossie!!!!!


----------



## Erich (Jun 12, 2004)

why, why, why the Mossie and whcih varaint ? you are not giving reasons and it would be nice to know for all the forum members.........

E ♪


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 13, 2004)

The Tigercat could carry considerable more. I believe that is supposed to be 1000lbs bombs not 1,000 lbs of bombs. 

Reasons for the Mossie would include it performance, its availabity in numbers, and its success.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 13, 2004)

durability, ease of manufacture...............


----------



## Erich (Jun 13, 2004)

ah this was suppose to be fired at Stuka gents ! Durability ? ah not in a dog fight it wasn't. when hit it splintered to pieces when hit in the tail area.

have accts. of Me 262's hitting the Mossie at night and they just vaporized....... Eeeeeeeeeeeeek .................


----------



## plan_D (Jun 13, 2004)

Erich, I don't think any aircraft could withstand four 30mm being fired into their rear. The Mosquito was durable, and it's even more amazing because it was wood.


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 14, 2004)

I would agree that the German cannon and HE rounds seemed to play a big part in downing allied aircraft. If only US fighters used more cannon early


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 14, 2004)

Ok I did not clear up the F7F question it is 2x1,000lbs bombs one under each wing. It could aternitly carry one torpeado on the centerline.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 20, 2004)

> If only US fighters used more cannon early



the only cannon they were interested in early on was the 37mm, nod great for dogfighting as we've established somewhere......................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 20, 2004)

37mm was horrid for dogfighting but no one in the US had any interest in developing anything better. There is some really good info on that in Warren Boddie's P-38 book.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 21, 2004)

they really needed a good 20mm........................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 21, 2004)

Well they eventually had a good one and virtually every P-38 built used a 20mm weapon.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 22, 2004)

i meant to say they needed a better one earlier.........................


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 22, 2004)

LG- yes but what I was brooding over is that the good 20mm used on the P-38 was not but in to other fighters. I know some F6F's has two 20mm and 4 .50s. That sounds like a good combo. But aI have not found much on that.


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 22, 2004)

That particular load was used exclussively (as far as I know) on the night-fighting Hellcats. 

Lanc, the P-38Es seeing service in early 1942 were carrying a 20mm weapon, how much earlier would you have wanted it?


----------



## cls12vg30 (Jun 23, 2004)

Lightning Guy is correct, only the earliest Lightnings carried the 37mm.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 23, 2004)

i was fefering to the use of 20mm on other american fighters....................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 23, 2004)

Well that's mostly an opinion thing. Check the other threads for the info on the .50cal v. 20mm issue. The American reliance on the .50cal was more than adequate for WWII. It did cause some problems in Korea but that's a different matter.


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 24, 2004)

The .50s were good and well tested. But the use of 20mm guns could have atlest been tested more. But as said elts where the USAAC was not in the bomber killing role that much. The Helcat as a nightfighter did do well. But if th F7F were to have been in that was great  But the Midway class Carriers were to late in service as was the Tigercat.


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 24, 2004)

I believe the Tigercat was ready. I think so were begining to deploy with the Marines but they just didn't make it to action in time.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 24, 2004)

am i correct in believing that the tigercat was the first successful twin engined carrier plane??


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 24, 2004)

To the best of my knowledge, the Tigercats were never deployed to carriers. The USMC was the only service to ever use them.


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 25, 2004)

Ok yes the F7F was in service with the Marines in the close of the war, but did not see combat until Korea. The F7F-4 was the first ship operated model. The Tigercats were he first multi-engine tricical landing gear for a carrier. It proformed well and could have stayed in Korea longer but was pushed out by the new jets.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 25, 2004)

well korea was the war that saw the end of piston engined aircraft as front line fighters....................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 25, 2004)

I think the Tigercats mostly did night work in Korea didn't they?


----------



## plan_D (Jun 25, 2004)

Piston-engines were completely out-dated even the Mustangs were given Rolls-Royce Dart Turboprops making them the Cavalier which I believe went on to serve in Vietnam for a little while.


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 25, 2004)

The Cavalier used an uprated Merlin engine. It was tested in 1967 but was never accepted by the air force. An even later version was developed using an Avco-Lycoming turboprop (in the 80's) but it wasn't accepted either. Piston-engined aircraft gave good service over Korea. The Corsairs were extremely valuable for air-to-ground and the Sea Furys actually shot down more enemy aircraft than any non-American aircraft.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 26, 2004)

but the sea fury was absolutly amazing for a piston engined fighter, one of the last to see servise with the FAA...............


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 26, 2004)

It was, and if it could have been produced a little faster would have provided the FAA with a fighter that would have been excellent for both fleet defense and offensive duties. Probably one of my favorite planes.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 27, 2004)

don't forget ground attack, especially during the Suez Crisis....................


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 27, 2004)

don't forget ground attack, especially during the Suez Crisis....................


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 28, 2004)

F7F-3N most say the Ultimate Tigercat! They were used at night for lots of different missions. Were also used as photorecon.


----------



## paulyb102 (Jun 28, 2004)

The Mosquito was definetley the best night fighter for me, it was at least 100 mph faster than the Me-110 for example, and compared to the looks of the Me-110, Ju-88 and others it was a thing of beauty!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 28, 2004)

it was a thing of beauty compared to anything.......................


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Jun 28, 2004)

Nah.... (Going for a quadruple)


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Jun 28, 2004)

DAMN! Didn't work!


----------



## Dan (Jun 28, 2004)

the mosquito was a pretty good night fighter because the bottom part of the fuselage in one variant was painted black which would make it hard for enemy ack-ack to spot the planes
and the bf109 probably was the worst because it was paintes TOO black


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 29, 2004)

So Dan you like the PTO? The night fighters were very good there as well. I still like the P-61 and yes Erich it was not the best but was on its way. But why are looks so important at night? 


Why not the "Wispering Death."


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 29, 2004)

> the mosquito was a pretty good night fighter because the bottom part of the fuselage in one variant was painted black which would make it hard for enemy ack-ack to spot the planes



wow, painting a plane that flew at night black, if only they did that on all planes that flew at night...........................


----------



## Erich (Jun 29, 2004)

It was found that any night fighter with black undersides could be seen from underneath at altitude. Stealth technology was not invented quite yet guyz.

the night sky was never purely balck as there was always some blue in it, the reason German nf's had an all blue underdies till 1945 when the German nf's were poised to do night ground attack. Then some a/c had a black undersides. The Bf 109 at first was painted black in 1941 as all 110's and Ju 88's, Do 17's and 217's were until a blue-grey base camo came into effect. Having an a/c at extrememly low altitude in black was not a bad idea as it could not be picked out at the horizon except for it's sound of the engines, and as I have said in a couple past threads the Bf 109G's did quite well agasint the Mossie LSNF and intruders, more so than the He 219 with only 12 kills, a couple of them debateable.......

Erich ~


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 30, 2004)

> Stealth technology was not invented quite yet guyz



not quite true, i take it you know about the british radar jamming?? the Piperack radar jaming system which was carried in a lead aircraft could hide an entire bomber stream in a "radar proof cone" behind it


----------



## MP-Willow (Jun 30, 2004)

Lanc, are you talking about Window?


----------



## Erich (Jun 30, 2004)

The RAF and the Germans both window or Düppel. This did not totally keep the RAF halibags and Lancs from the german nf systems as the expereicned Bordfünkers on the German nf's could see through the Window and concentrate on the heaviest area of window which would indicate numerous bombers to intercept.

E ~


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jun 30, 2004)

Not to mention that the Germans could simply home in on H2S, Monica, and the J-switch.


----------



## Erich (Jun 30, 2004)

guys can you find the work by English author Alfred Price...... Instruments of Darkness.

it is a classic work although pretty old on the night air-war of the German RAF. have written Alfred several times but his inspiring ego prevents him from writing peons like me any word. and although I feel the man is a jerk his book on the radar systems is one of the best yet.........he should re-publish this.

>the night air war was of one blockage of radar to another and the steps to overcome them. The Germans never totally caught up with the Americans or RAF with the AI radar systems till much too late in the spring of 1945 with the Berlin 1a dish systems<

♪


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 1, 2004)

> the Piperack radar jaming system which was carried in a lead aircraft could hide an entire bomber stream in a "radar proof cone" behind it





> Lanc, are you talking about Window?



no i wasn't, Piperack was a system in which a lead aircraft carried a unit which blocked the garman radar getting into a "cone" behind it, window was a system in which lenghs of tin foil were dropped to confuse german radar...........................


----------



## Erich (Jul 1, 2004)

yes I understand what you are saying but it did not work........the system you mention was not effective as wilde sau-seen with the eyes- was used from July 43 till war's end and when there was an overcomplication of window dropped even the younger more inexpereicned nf pilots could home onto the bomber stream. the best tactical advantage the RAF posed was the useage of the Mossie intruders especially over the German nf's airfields. have talked with many German nf aces and they were not that concerned with running into a Mossie nf in combat while dealing the death blows to the RAF 4 enigne jobs. in fact many aces have told me that they never ran into Mossies on any mission. so much for the myth that the Mossie was everywhere controlling the skies over the Reich !

weird eh ?

E ~


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 2, 2004)

i never claimed they were everywhere....................


----------



## MP-Willow (Jul 2, 2004)

So Germany owned the night?


----------



## plan_D (Jul 3, 2004)

How could Germany have owned the night when bombers were still bombing Germany into submission.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 3, 2004)

just because the mossies weren't everywhere doesn't mean we didn't rule the night......................


----------



## Huckebein (Jul 4, 2004)

My Grandad met a German night pilot after the war, and the guy said that during the course of his career he'd grown not to fear the bombers' defensive guns or British flak near the coast of England (where he occasionally ventured). The only thing that sent him into a cold sweat and hyperventilation, he said, was two words, invariably shrieked at him by his observer: "_Achtung Moskito!_"
He said that counter-Mosquito tactics took up more of his unit's mess discussions than anti-bomber techniques, and that 'merely hearing the word "Moskito" would send any German Night fighter pilot into a cold sweat.

Allowing for a little exaggeration here, the Mosquito, just by the very _possibilty_ of its presence in the vicinity of German nightfighter fields, caused severe delays in getting large numbers of fighters airborne. This, combined with its _actual_ combat stats meant that, although it was impossible to dominate the night skies in the way the daylight sky was, the British bmobing campaign was never threatened, and German night bombing ops became prohibitively costly from 1942 onwards.

I cannot understand the enormous number of people voting for the P-61. The most effective nightfighter, as shown above, was the Mosquito, without a shadow of doubt. The _best_ nightfighter was undoubtedly the He 219A-7 'Uhu', but for various reasons it was prevented from achieveing it's full, formidable potential.


----------



## Erich (Jul 5, 2004)

your understanding of German nf operations is a bit warped friend. The Germans flew missions regardless of whether Mossies were in the area or not and when they were it was usally after a mission when it was easy enough to dampenall airfield lights. German crews were sufficient enough in lbind landings so there was not a problem.

the words Achtung Moskito was not heard that often and did not create the fear you are trying to confirm. this is old news that is being updated in new published works.......


----------



## MP-Willow (Jul 5, 2004)

Ok so I could be wrong about the night. But as an American the whole night fighting operations are somthing not talked that much and one area that I am still horridly uneducated on. But the P-61 just had great up side. 

As I understand it the He 219 was a victome of politics and crazzy proformance demands?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 5, 2004)

which is true of most of germany's later designs....................


----------



## MP-Willow (Jul 6, 2004)

but tht ust sucs


----------



## Erich (Jul 6, 2004)

Baloney ~ The P-61 was too bloody big and the US crews were not good nf chaps to id German nf a/c let alone Allied a/c.

The He 219 had it's own teething troubles as can be seen in best night fighter thread. True, politics destroyed what may have become a leading German a/c design, but upon employment in the skies propaganda surrounded the great mossie hunter.............yeah right. it was too big, too heavy, poor engines and wing support system, not enough crew members, ejection seats did not operate correctly all the time. no rearward firing defensive arms, no tail warning radar for most of the a/c on ops........

at leat you know my feelings of this German Uhu


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 6, 2004)

> no rearward firing defensive arms



you can't really use that in the argument against the mossie as the mossie didn't have any either.......................


----------



## Erich (Jul 6, 2004)

that was also a defect in the Mossie nf. sitting duck for the Me 262A-1a, and yes I can use that as a legitimate argument.........as it happened more than the fingers on your hands


----------



## kiwimac (Jul 6, 2004)

Erich,

Your comments would make the Me 210 / 410 leading candidates for best nf then, _nicht wahr?_

Kiwimac


----------



## Erich (Jul 6, 2004)

Nein ! Worthless as a nachtjager. About the only good the 410 did was be a better day bomber destroyer than the Bf 110G-2.

Ju 88G-6 superior to anything except the Me 262A-1a

Erich ~


----------



## MP-Willow (Jul 8, 2004)

If the German Jet was so good why was it so late in comming to full production? Was it pol;itics that came into play?


----------



## Erich (Jul 8, 2004)

Of course it was ! Göring only at the last accepted the idea from Kurt Welter who could see the future of the nf force. In almost daily plea's from Welter, Göring finally gave in and Kurt was able to start up an independent Kommando. He had tested the Ar 234 but with all the frontal glass and the cramed exit door he felt that he would not be protected against the debris of a downed RAF bomber, besides being blinded by searchlights and fires from burning cities below. The Me 262 single seater was used to good effect and it was the standard for the 10./NJG 11 staffel even with the addition of 6 B-1a two seaters with only one of these scoring a victory.


----------



## plan_D (Jul 9, 2004)

The P-61 was only good enough as a ground attack aircraft, and it did it brilliantly in Korea. 

You can't really use the rear-armament against the Mosquito, because it was jumped by '262s'. What is a rear gunner going to do about that when four 30mm cannons are spitting lead at him. You aren't going to stop it.


----------



## Erich (Jul 9, 2004)

remember though that the 3cm kanon was a short range weapon and the Me 262 had to get in pretty close.

also the Mossie nf and the bomber versions were both shot down by the Bf 110G-4 and Ju 88G's, so yes a rearward gun would of been handy.....


----------



## Huckebein (Jul 9, 2004)

Erich, my dear friend, you are _severely_ overestimating the advantages of carrying rearward firing defences. Mosquitoes were tested with a four gun Boulton Paul turret, but the performance decrease due to weight and drag _far_ outweighed the advantages. Neither the Mosquito nor the '219 had any need for defensive armament, as they both sported sparkling performance and a good turn of manoeuvrability. Nothing could have been added to the Mosquito to make it stand up better to a '262 on its tail than it already did. The only Mossies shot down by jets were the same as those shot down by '110s and '88s - they were taken by surprise. For a Mosquito to evade Gaerman machines (except perhaps the Uhu), it could either outrun them ('110/ Ju 88 ) or out manoeuvre them (262). Once an enemy pilot has lost sight of you at night do not underestimate the difficulty he will have relocating you... Read the stories on www.mossie.org about recce Mosquitoes meeting '262s; not _once_ do the pilots express a wish for rear-firing guns. The Ju 88 was a very good nightfighter, but if they came up against a Mosquito, without taking it by surprise, it would be the Junkers that would be forced to fly defensively. This was conclusively proven over the Bay of Biscay where German long-range Ju 88C fighters had to be _extremely_ wary of Mosquitoes on strike patrols in the area. The only 'advantage' the Ju 88G had over the Mosquito nighfighters was slightly heavier armament and rear-firing guns, none of which were decisive. The Mosquito's four machine guns and four 20mms were more than enough to down any German machine, and the lack of defensive guns actually made the Mossie _more_ able to evade the Ju 88 through speed and manoeuvrability.

Oh, and I never said the Germans _didn't fly_ missions when Mosquitoes were about (God you're frustrating), I said that they 'caused severe delays'. Now if you're prepared to argue that the Germans took no notice whatsoever of marauding Mosquito Intruders, because the Mosquito was so harmless, then kindly take yourself away from a forum where discussion of the _real life_ WWII airwar is preferred.



Erich said:


> the words Achtung Moskito was not heard that often and did not create the fear you are trying to confirm.



As for this, this is laughable. How on earth do you pretend to know _how bloody often_ this phrase was heard?  =D> 

I also acknowledged the presence of some exaggeration in the opinion expressed in my post, but don't try and pretend that _any_ nightfighter wouldn't be scared to hear there was a Mosquito right up his ar$e - that's like saying a Mustang pilot wouldnt be afraid to hear there was a '109 right behind him because ' 109s weren't that good anyway'. 

I admire your sense of humour though Erich.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 9, 2004)

he wont like that........................


----------



## Erich (Jul 9, 2004)

u guys are such the experten aren't U ?

When you get to read my books I think you will have another awakening. My personal interviews with the Luftwaffe/RAF and Autralian/US vets tell another story. Don't give me that outmanuever crap anyway friend there was not one Mossie at night lost due to out manuevering agasint a Me 262 at night. They were all shot down. You have not given reagrd at all to the Bf 109G-6/AS whcih was also not outmanuevered in flight during August through November of 44. Your Ju 88C at Biscay line is not the same as a Ju 88G-6 in night flight. I have given you the response I have had from interviews with Luftwaffe NF crews. should I discount everything they say as bunk during the last 37 years of inteviews. ... ? have I not said repeatedly that much of what has been written the past years is being revised with the Truth ? Better wake up friends..........your quoting all old rubbish. Screw the UHU as well. Why are all of U guys so stuck on a would be a/c anyway ? See here is a prime example of wishful thinking. Get back to your records at PRO or the national archiv in the eastern US of A or Freiburg/Berlin in Germany and come up with the true stats. have we all been reading too much of William Greens tales from his outdated Thrid Reich a/c book ?

I believe wholeheartedly that the Mossie XXX was the finest NF during the war bar none, but the German machine put up a stout defence to try and counter as well as it's record of attrition against the RAF is true. The Me 262A-1a gave it to the Mossie right up the butt -- you'll read this in my book(s), but it was also self evident that it was the RAF heavy 4-engine bombers that were of the major concern over what was left of the war torn cities; reason enough for Kurt Welter to advise the ministry of taking the two seat trainer and adapting it for nf use, seondary cockpit for radar operator and Neptun 218 to be supplied as well as auxiallry drop tanks so the jet could compete in hopeful longer running battles which the A-1a could not. the problem with the counter move of the first two seaters was the reduction of some 150 mph in speed, only 1 Mossie was downed with a two seater, but the B-2a when and if it would have surfaced would of given any RAF a/c including the Mossie nf's and bombers of the LSNF a run for it's moneis.

laughing yet ?

you see guys I've been doing this much longer than many of you have been alive. Big deal you say, yeah that's what I thought so too until I got access to official German and Allied records and found what I had in my research data base of over 5,000 pages of work was true.

The Mossie needed a single rearward firing weapon in my opinion and the Me 262A-1a had to be countered. since the RAF as you say it did not feel that their wooden machine could not be caught and the losses were acceptable, the RAF cried that the known Kommando Welter base at Burg should be oblitereated and that is exactly what happened in March of 45 and while many of the jets got creamed many also took off during the bomb run to fly to norhern German to fight another day off the autobahn.........had not this base been touched you would of easily seen the RAF mossie losses double or triple. There was a keen priority to keep this 10./NJG 11 alive and also if possible enlarged as some of the more well known aces of the nachtjagd were being transferred over to familiarize them with the handlings of the Schwalbe.

A couple of examples before I close my rant. All of you do more research before you come up and explode with materials you cannot defend. I've done it enough and will continue to do so............as I nor any of you have all the information.

Second two examples to counter Huckebeins theory of catching the Mossie by surprise only. A bf 109G-6/AS pilot flying from a mission during the eve landed and took off again for his base during the early morning. Attacked from behind and above by a Mossie fighter bomber with cannon and 4 forward mg's. The expereinced German pilot banked hard after several rounds hit his right wing and the Mossie overshot, Tried to bank up to the right and was caught in the tail and fuselage by the 109's forward 3cm prop weapon and shredded as the German pilot closed in behind. Scratch 1 Mossie.

Ace and friend heinz Rökker on his last mission of the war was attacked from behind by a Mossie nf as Heinz was flying near the airfield of St. Trond. Heinz had already downed 4 Lancasters this night. The Mossie overshot while Heinz did a ducking manuever and came up and behind the Mossie and shot it down with his four forward 2cm weapons. Scratch another Mossie. 

so what am I getting at guys ? Research, research, research..........

cheers, and Lanc I would really appreciate it if you would close down the smart-ass comments and wait for my or someone elses replies before you try your best to counter............it ain't workin man

Erich ~


----------



## Huckebein (Jul 9, 2004)

Ok mate, In can accept what you say there, except for the line 'they were all shot down'. You can't claim to know the outcome of _every_ incident when a '262 intercepted a Mosquito, no matter how much research you've done. In some cases when the Mosquito escaped the '262 pilot won't even have known it was a Mosquito he was attacking and vice-versa.


----------



## Erich (Jul 9, 2004)

ok almost done. Huckebein what delays when Mossies were about.... ? maybe this is in regard to landing ? My understanding is that this was so as it was frustrating for the pilots to drop into the landing mode when the Mossies scored over the airfields. Evenn so other couter measures were evolved like increase in Fla positions as the Mossies engine noise revealed. Even a/c armament was removed to makeshift devices to shoot back at the unknown. Also the German ac/ would order the landing lights to go blackout so it then depended on the pilots skill to land dead stick in the black.........

your quote about the German's never flew when Mossies were present ? what are you talking about, as I never said jack diddly about this. Of course they did the Germans full knowing that their were Mossie nf escorts with the Lancs and Halibags, also what is your purpose of stating take yourself away from the forum where (real life) discussion on WW 2 is preferred.

Do you have any clue what you just stated ? Go through this site and you can visually attest to the silliness of many postings on what-if's and the spam that goes on here. give me a break man. I've tried my best here to bring real life scenarios and interviews and my shared data base (gosh why do I do this ?) to you guys..........I'm now going to have to think this seriously through now whether to stay on or not.

suggest you go to the LEMB board or the Night fighter forum to find out if I am full of BS like you say I am. Maybe check my moderator statements at Marcus Wendals axis forums site or maybe my moderator postings on www.militariacollecting.com as well.

I wish you all well.............

v/r

der Alt ~


----------



## Erich (Jul 9, 2004)

ah a response ! yes every Mossie attacked by Kommando Welter was shot down. Not one Moosie that was attacked got away. It is in the log-books that we have copies of straight from Germany as well as pilot interviews and we have been able to check the RAF losses in Pro and elsewhere to prove it. Both the nf versions and the LNsF bombers were shot down. the LNSF attacked or made their runs on Berlain in one of 6 routes and these were all known to the Luftwaffe crews..............yes more research is needed, as we are not quite finsihed yet with the 750 pages collected so far.


----------



## Erich (Jul 9, 2004)

last call I hope on this. Let me make myself very clear on this. The Me 262A-1a's of the Kommando when flown at night could fire eiother two or four 3cm weapons. It was found that while intercepting a Mossie that few M rounds were needed as so explosive they were nearly every victory over a Mossie resulted in the Me 262 flying through debris. this of course pissed off Kurt Welter as he flet his pilots were not taking a more angled line to the rear of the RAF bomber and closing in too fast. The 3cm Mk 108 was a short range weapon and the closing jet to Mossie was so fast that the jet pilot had to reduce speed to accept the challenge of placing a few rounds to the Mosquito or he would overshoot. also since the me 262 did not have radar in the single seater versions a postivie ID had to be done before opening up fire. this was radioed to the ground station Döberitz close to Berlin as this station was always associated with 10./NJG 11. the station was powerful enough that it could track single Mossies if need be that had left Berlin after bombing as many times they got seperated from the Mossie mainstream back to England...........

something new eh ?

E ~


----------



## Huckebein (Jul 9, 2004)

Well in the absence of actual hard evidence to the contrary I'll have to take your word on that, even though it does seem very unlikely. As for my quote regarding the Germans never flying, you said that 'the Germans still flew when Mossies were about', whereas I had merely stated that te Mosquitoes caused delays, and nothing about whether or not operations continued.

Oh, and I didn't mean any offense with that comment - I was frustrated, sorry.


----------



## Erich (Jul 9, 2004)

friend, the only hard eveidence I can give you is what will be in my book. Even the new book by martin Bowman through Pen/Sword publications called Mosquitopanic will not cover all the missions on the end of the Luftwaffe. martin is obviously much more well known than I as a publisher but I wonder if he has soley concerned himslef with Mossie/luftwaffe missions for the past 35 years as I ? most probably not. i do know for a fact that he has totally left out the prime anti-Moskito stffel 10.(N)/Jg 300 oput of his book because he knows nothing about it and has not inteview the veterans as we have. there is probably room on this thread for me to add another 7 pages of full on text but I want everyone to enjoy our work. go to www.eagle-editions.com
from the site find the books lin. go here and find the text on the 2 volumes of JG 300. My English friend neil page translated them for the Crandall's. i mention these two books because it will be s super lead in towards our book on the Moskito-jagd whether they the Crandall's and everyone know it or not. also there are two other friend/authors on my little kwest of adventure.

Horrido !


----------



## Huckebein (Jul 9, 2004)

Very nice - I will take a look. 8)


----------



## MP-Willow (Jul 12, 2004)

Eric, thanks for the information. You as always are educating me on NFs.  I have a question about the Me 262A-1 as a night fighter. You said that it was very good and from what I have found I will agree. What I want to ask is the time it took to train on the jet, for new pilots and the aces transfering?


----------



## Erich (Jul 12, 2004)

actually this will be covered in some length in our book. When I visited Chino arifield in October some years ago and after the show Luftwaffe vet hans Busch who flew a 262 in KG 51 in 1945 went through a flight check all in Deutsch before he "would take off" It was something like 7-8 minutes long although I am sure he was taking his time with us Americans.........

Kurt Welter in his Kommando would take a real breif time with the pilots and then sit on the wing yelling instructions as the new pilot would casually wander along the tarmac, Welter jumping off as the jet attained some speed. A scary propostion for both Kommandeur and of course pilot with Welter watching closely the whole scenario and giving his critique when the pilot landed. A little bizaree don;t you think ?


----------



## Donnervogel (Jul 12, 2004)

have you already heard something of the german nightfighter
Heinkel 219 Uhu?

have you heard something of the german nightfighter Heinkel 219 Uhu? This aircraft had shot 4 Lancasters in one night!


----------



## Erich (Jul 12, 2004)

go back and read all the pages in this thread........The UHU was a dog ! 

my opinion which I know is not agreed by many of the fine members of this board. Ah 4 Lancs in one night is nothing. 

How about Martin Becker and crew shooting down 9 Lanc's and a B-17 with their Ju 88G-6 in March of 1945 ! I have the fuyll interview..........

Grüß

Erich ♪


----------



## plan_D (Jul 12, 2004)

He did that in the whole month of March or just in one night/day. I mean that amount of bombers on one ammo load, that's some good going.


----------



## Erich (Jul 12, 2004)

thought that might get someone to respond  

On the Night of march 14/15, 1945 Martin and his three man crew successfully penetrated the bomber stream. The Bordfünker karl Johannsen closed in on the heaviest amount of window and there they were. they readioed in other NJg 6 a/c to no avial and went on a Frei-jagd and Martin shot down 6 lancasters with his forward firing 2cm weapons. the Ju 88G-6 was not equipped with Schräge Musik 2cm weapons. As martin ran out of ammo the Bordfünker took over the rear gunners position annd shot down 1 lanc with the rearward 13mm mg 131 and then a radio fire ensued causing the other two members of the crew to put it out, Karl then shot down another Lanc and finally a B-17 from the RAF sepcial 100th group with the 13mm weapon. An incredible night it was,

Another crew from 5./NJG 2 shot down 8 RAF a/c with their Ju 88G-6 using SM weapons and forward 2cm weapons. The rear gunner shot down 1 lanc with his 13mm fire though the pilot Erich Jung was a bit hesistant. This was also in march the 16/17th 1945 to be exact. have the full story on this incident as well as a full on story of the B-17 downing by one of the RAF crewmen........

E ~


----------



## Erich (Jul 12, 2004)

a couple more examples used with SM and forward 2cm weapons. Both pilots/crews flying Ju 88G-6's. 

Heinz Rökker of 2./NJG 2 got claims for 6 lancasters on the night of February 21, 1945 

Gerhard Raht of I./NJG 2 got claims for 5 RAF 4-eninge bombers on the night of 15 March 1945. Evidetnly a dark night the RAF bombers could not be postively ID'd

Erich ▼


----------



## plan_D (Jul 12, 2004)

He must have been a brilliant shot, I mean the Lancaster and B-17 could take some damage. Either the Ju-88 had a large ammo count or he was supernaturally good. 
I'm getting your book, just for that story.


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jul 12, 2004)

Shnaufer once downed 9 in a single 24hr period in his Bf-110. He shot down 2 after midnight in the early hours of Feb. 21, 1945. He returned to base, rested, took off and shot down a further 7 before midnight came around again.


----------



## Erich (Jul 12, 2004)

yes he did but I was posting the case when the crews were just on one mission, non-stop. there were others too that scored as many as four on many an occassion. Quite a feat.

E ♪


----------



## plan_D (Jul 13, 2004)

What was the ammo count on the Bf-110. I mean, I feel really stupid for saying this but on Sturmovik (about as real as it'll get, for me) I managed to down four He-111s with a Lagg-3 but I still had to ram the fourth to bring it down. I got home alright but they were only twin engined, how did they down four-engined ones and more of!?


----------



## dead parrot (Jul 13, 2004)

Attacking from the front, assuming your aim is good enough, requires a lot less ammunition I would imagine. Hitting the front of the engines works a lot better than the back of them.

Spealing of Il-2, I once blew the wing off a B-17 with about 3 bullets from a Hurricane, in a lucky shot from the front... Whether this has anything to do with real world, I have no idea...


----------



## Erich (Jul 13, 2004)

let's not stray too off topic shall we ? remember nf's not what-if's

a Fantasy video game is nothing like the real world. The Luftwaffe frontal attacks were aimed at the cockpit and because of the possibility of collisions which there were some, the attacks were moved to the sides and especially the rear by the summer of 1944 where only the tail gunner had to be contended with until the German a/c had run through the bomber stream then it would take the full force of the other bombers fire. But in the usual case after going past 1-2 other bombers the German a/c would bank either down and away or up to the right or left to get out of harms way. A single 109 or Fw going through a bomber pulk was usually suicidal..........


----------



## dead parrot (Jul 13, 2004)

Erich said:


> let's not stray too off topic shall we ? remember nf's not what-if's
> 
> a Fantasy video game is nothing like the real world. The Luftwaffe frontal attacks were aimed at the cockpit and because of the possibility of collisions which there were some, the attacks were moved to the sides and especially the rear by the summer of 1944 where only the tail gunner had to be contended with...(snip)



I really don't know much about the tactics, but coming from the rear, wouldn't the attacker also come under ventral and/or dorsal turret fire, depending on his angle of attack? I understand that bombers were usually attacked from the rear not because it was safer, but because the attacker had a lot longer to line up a shot. If a plane is unprotected in the rear, an attacker can sit there and fire away until his ammo runs out. So bomber builders would be interested in protecting the rear with armaments and armor, non?

This was the point I was speculatively making about attacking from the front. Less guns and less armor there, and therefore, perhaps, less bullets needed for a kill?? And so 10 bombers in one ammo load...


----------



## plan_D (Jul 13, 2004)

The point I was trying to get at was, how? The amount of damage a bomber could take before dropping out of the sky was a lot, so that person must have been hitting them in the perfect spots, like engines or maybe a fuel line. 

My 'experience' on the game was trying to point out that these weaker armoured planes used up my ammo, and I only did four over. It's supposed to be realistic so, I can only assume that, that man had brilliant aim to hit the right spots. Admittedly, I was plugging away at one the '111s' fuselages...which is dumb.  
They have no tail gun though so I couldn't resist. 

Anyway, what was the ammo count on Ju-88G-6?


----------



## Erich (Jul 13, 2004)

the tail was not armored or at least not as we would hope it was DP. The tail attack was extrememly effective if the German pilot could knock this position out then quickly hit the fusleage and inboard enignes or both engines on one side of the bomber. If these were then knocked out the flying properties would then be such that the big 4 eninge boy would flip over one side. Fw 190 Sturm pilots would actually attack slightly above and dive porposie like, hit the tail and sit on the prop so to speak and blow the belly posisiton away and then take advantage of the wing struts and engines beofre flying through the formation and away.


E ~


----------



## Erich (Jul 13, 2004)

Ok plan_D maybe this will help you determine future air-air battles.......  , by the spring of 1944 the 3cm MK 108 cannon was appearing on the Fw 190A-7 through A-8's and it was a close in weapon, meaning that in US terms to be really effective the German a/c had to be within 100 yds to really score. The 2cm and 3cm wepaons were armed with Mine Geschoss or HE and HE-I shells that actaully caused the aluminum skin of US bombers to flare up and start a fire. U then can imagine from a rearward attack if one round placed itself in a fuel cell in a wing what the carnage would be ! yes and I have Luftw. interviews that simply explain this. " Fired at a B-17, hit the wing and the a/c blew up in a fire-ball " pretty graphic yes ?

Ju 88G-6 had four 2cm guns forward with 200 rpg 
two 2cm weapons in the SChräge Musik installation with 200 rpg
one single MG 131 13mm gun with 500 rounds

The night fighter pilots had the HE with phosphorous content and the use of glimmspur which was a faint tracer. this was mandatory in the SM guns so the nf would not be seen under the RAF bombers as well as fitted to some 13mm's but this was up to the crews/mechanics-armorer.

E


----------



## plan_D (Jul 13, 2004)

That's still impressive. Yes, hitting the fuel line would do an enourmous amount of damage but it's hitting the fuel line on every aircraft, with a tail gunner firing away at you. 
With the rear gunner, did he hang the plane down and under the bomber to let him destroy it. I'm still a little confused as to how the rear gun got its kills on the bombers. I imagine he just hung under the belly of the Lancaster since they had no protection.


----------



## Erich (Jul 13, 2004)

ok to the RAF night involvement. The Ju 88G-6 as an example would trail out of sight the Lancaster (as an example), pick up the RAF on radar and then close in with visual. once seen would dive down about 1000 feet below the bomber with the other three German crew watching as the German pilot pulled up and level underneath the RAF Lanc. flying at the same speed roughly would get into posisiton so the rear gunner or the SM installation could do it's work between the engines or at the wing spars. Once a fire was started the German a/c would bank away to the left/right and above to watch the bomber......

make sense ?


----------



## plan_D (Jul 13, 2004)

Yes, it did. Thank you. How did he do the B-17 over then? He couldn't have done that with the B-17, it had protection under there.


----------



## Erich (Jul 13, 2004)

Plan evidently the belly turret was removed on the 100th group B-17's and the belly was fitted with jamming equipment if I understand this correctly. 100th group lost something like 7-8 B-17's due to Luftw. nf's during the latter part of the war.

interesting that in late 1943 and early 1944 Ju 88C's and especially the Bf 110G-4's of the nachtjagd were ued in conjuction with existing Luftwaffe day fighter forces to counter the B-17's and B-24's of the US AF's. what a huge mistake as the Luftwaffe 110's would come underneath to attack and the belly turrets would blow the night fighters out of the sky. In february/march of 44 they were removed and sent back to fight at night...............good idea


----------



## plan_D (Jul 13, 2004)

Well, that explains the belly attack on the B-17s then.


----------



## dead parrot (Jul 14, 2004)

This all reminds of the thinking behind the specification that led to the development of the Defiant. The Air Ministry figured that modern bombers were so fast, fighters could only attack when the relative speeds between the two were about zero, and the fixed, forward-firing guns of standard fighters meant this could only be achieved by squatting on the tail of the bomber. Hence, the Defiant, which in the minds of the Air Ministry folk, could chose exactly what angle to attack the bomber. I guess they were proven wrong...

Oh, this also reminds me that some Japanese intercepters had fuselage-mounted cannon that fired obliquely, presumambly so they could attack from below/above their target while flying alongside. I think this was inspired by a Luftwaffe innovation??? Was this common?


----------



## dead parrot (Jul 14, 2004)

Right, here's a couple: The intercepter version of the Nakajima C6N Saiun had 2 obliquely mounted cannon, and later nightfighter versions of the J1N had 4 cannon, 2 firing down and 2 up. Again, does anyone--Erich maybe--know if this was something that the Luftwaffe did too, and if it was effective?


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jul 14, 2004)

The Defiant had some noteworthy success as a nightfighter, but I don't know anything of it's tactics. I imagine it would have been able to attack a bomber from a number of angles. 

The Japanese use oblique-firing machine guns and cannons on a number of fighters including the Ki-45 Toryu and A6M Zero. This was developed, as I understand, completely independently of the German Shrage Musik installations. The Japanese used these weapons on day fighters as well as night fighters, although with somewhat different tactics. I believe the Zero's upward-firing 20mm weapon was intended for use in head-on attacks against US bombers. The Zero would attack head on with its normal armament and then pass under the target squeezing off a few more rounds.


----------



## dead parrot (Jul 14, 2004)

Huh, didn't know the Zero had them too. There is a good picture of the Toryu here that shows the twin cannon sticking out of the top of the fuselage:

http://www.tayyareci.com/digerucaklar/japonya/ww2/ki45.asp

The Nakajima J1N1-S nighfighter ONLY had oblique guns, 2 firing up and 2 firing down. The latter were removed, however, because they were found to be ineffective (I would imagine it would be rather hard to aim them...)

I am still curious about the tactics involved. I wonder how effective this kind of weaponry was...


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jul 14, 2004)

For the Germans it was very effective. I think the head-on tactics employed by the Zero would have limited its effectiveness. For the Japanese night fighters, it was the lack of radar and not the aramament that limited their effectiveness.


----------



## dead parrot (Jul 15, 2004)

I just realized you guys were talking about the angled guns of the Luftwaffe up above... Sorry for missing that.

What kind of angle were the Shrage Musik set up at? From some of my reading, I get the impression that they pointed up at 90 degrees(?), but is that right?


----------



## Erich (Jul 15, 2004)

usually between 60 and 70 degrees


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 15, 2004)

i doubt it would have been 90 as they would literally have to get under the part of the plane they wanted to hit...................


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jul 15, 2004)

60-70 degrees was a good angle. It allowed for a very easy shot but at the same time kept the fighter low enough that the tail gunner would have a tough time spotting him.


----------



## Huckebein (Jul 16, 2004)

Blimey Erich, how many 13mm rounds did Nachjagd 110s carry!?! Bringing down two Lancasters _and_ a B-17 with two 13mm guins is some feat!


----------



## MP-Willow (Jul 17, 2004)

WEll Erich thanks for your interviews. When is your book going to be out?


----------



## trackend (Jul 18, 2004)

In my opinion the mosquito was the most successful night fighter of the war if this means it was the best then so be it. it was not until the advent of radar that night fighters really worked as an interceptor .
Cats eye Cunningham didnt become an ace night fighter pilot by eating carrots as was aspoused during the war but it was radar that helped him. That is not to say he was not a fine pilot and at the end of the day the guy behind the stick is the most important component in any aircraft.
As for tail gunners i believe that on any bombers that had them the life expectancy was shorter than any other position in the aircraft . i can only deduce from this that an attack from the tail was believed to be the most effective and indeed proved to be. If it had been possible to fit the mosquito with a rear turret the loss of perfomance would have produced a very poor aircraft. To me the most amazing thing about the mosquito is the construction. To produce a sandwich glued wooden aircraft with many of the components being able to be made by furniture makers at a time when the industrial power of the UK was under a huge strain was a work of genius.And to end up with a plane that performed as well as it did,amazing. Indeed the use of sandwich construction is still widely used in the yacht building world and if you have ever made a model kit the fusilage construction is exactly the same as the mosquitos with the bulk heads being fitted in then the two halves fitted together.


----------



## Erich (Jul 21, 2004)

Huck it was actually a single 13mm-.50 gun in the Ju 88G-6.

the Bf 110G-4 had the MG 81 7.92 and yes even the rear gunner did succeed in shooting down a Mossie or two that was following. A real rarity I must say. ammo for the MG 81 Zwilling was ?, not actually sure really...... anyone else have an idea ?

E ~ and yes I have to agree for the Allies the Mossie was truely the finest night fighter. Of course I won;t mention this in front of my P-61 pilot friends ....


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jul 22, 2004)

I believe the Stuka carried 900 rpg for its rear-firing MG 81Z. I don't know if the same load would have been carried in the 110 or not.


----------



## MP-Willow (Jul 23, 2004)

Erich mention away, we all will pull for a plane that we fly.

Question would you even think a PBY Black Cat a fighter? OK the not wpuld be a good start, but it did do a good job in the night, an with our raidar the Japanese jighters had a harder time with them.


----------



## MK108 (Jul 23, 2004)

Hello, the biggest
Behind you in the dark,
Enormous and Dangerous ..  
http://www.histavia21.net/MAN217/206.jpg 
Best regards, dan


----------



## Karaya_1 (Dec 1, 2004)

There's no doubt, the best one is the "Venus of Rostock", the invincible He 219 !!!!!!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 1, 2004)

I say the P-61 8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 3, 2004)

Mossie NF.XXX...................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 3, 2004)

Sounds like some kind of insect porn film...

P-61's are amazing 8)


----------



## Adolf Galland (Dec 3, 2004)

i say either the widow or the speical vison of the me-110, and the special me-110 ahve 4 20mm fixed 30degrees upward and so the 110 could sneak under the bomber and attck it w/out the crew knowing wuts going on


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 4, 2004)

nemerous night fighters were fitted with something similar, i would say it's name but i can't spell it, it was baisically a upward firing cannon for raking the belly of bombers with led.................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 4, 2004)

Schrage Musik?


----------



## MP-Willow (Dec 4, 2004)

The P-61 was very good, but it came into the war late and until the P-61B and C had some problums, and lacked night air targets in the PTO.

But this question needs to be asked that time in the war? The me-110 is a good bet if not the Black Widow.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 5, 2004)

Until recently I had no idea the Me-110 was successfully used as a nightfighter.
If it was up there I would vote P-38, as although the P-38M saw little service at the end of the war, P-38J's and L's were regularly converted to NF's. 
There is even a recorded instance of a pilot going up at night in a regular P-38 (F model I think) and taking out 2 Jap Nightfighters!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 5, 2004)

funny, there's also a story of a lanc going up and the tail gunner got 3 confimed kills and a possible shared in one night, doesn't make it a good fighter...................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 5, 2004)

Thats because the guy who shot it wasnt flying the plane as well, he only had to focus on shooting the target, let alone kepping the plane flying. And the Lancaster was designed to fly at night and I take it the gunners were trained to shoot in the dark too.

A guy going up in a dayfighter with no radar or matt black paint or whatever those things are that are put on the guns to stop the flash blinding the pilot, and taking out 2 planes that did have that equipment is damn good...

And the P-38 _was_ a fighter lanc...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 5, 2004)

i never said it wasn't...............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 5, 2004)

You was implying otherwise though...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 6, 2004)

no i wasn't............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 6, 2004)

Its the impression I got...


----------



## MP-Willow (Dec 6, 2004)

C.C, you are corect that a P-38 got kills over two Jap planes. They were used as such some times because of need. Night fighting in the Pacific was a little differet then in Europe.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 7, 2004)

It is reckoned that the P-38M would have been a better nightfighter than the P-61 Black Widow, as it was more manoeverable, faster and had better firepower. The only problem was for the radar operator, as it was a little cramped back there. But the again it was originally a single seat fighter so you can complain too much.


----------



## Karaya_1 (Dec 8, 2004)

A better firepower ? 4 MG and 1 20mm-cannon (Lightning) against 4 MG and 4 20mm-cannons (P-61)......there's no question about firepower.......and thats nothing against 4 30mm-cannons of the Me 262 B


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 8, 2004)

4x30mm of the -262, that's nothing, the He-219 carried 4x30mm Mk108, 2x30mm Mk103 and 2x20mm MG151/20.............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 8, 2004)

Jeez...

Id have a 190A-8 for the firepower department anyday though.


----------



## Karaya_1 (Dec 8, 2004)

Yes, but the 2 MK 103 fired upward ("Jazz Music")....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 8, 2004)

But the 190 was faster and more manoeverable


----------



## The Jug Rules! (Dec 15, 2004)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> the he-219 was pig ugly, no wonder they only flew it at night, the pilots wouldn't be seen dead flying it in the daytime, but i vote the mosquito.............



Nope, I read about a P-51 pilot who ran into one. I t went 20 feet over his head going like hell.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 15, 2004)

> Yes, but the 2 MK 103 fired upward



it still carried them.................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 15, 2004)

He was championing that point...


----------



## Tigger (Dec 18, 2004)

Mosquito NF XIX or XXX - i.e. later builds with AI MkX radar and new airframes. The XXXs had the more powerful two-stage Merlines, but the XIXs had more effective exhaust flame damping (harder to see).

I read accounts in Martin Bowman's Mosquito books about Heinkel 219 Uhu's fitted with rocket motors to get aloft quickly. Does anyone know anything about these?

My understanding is that Mosquito NF vs Heinkel 219 was about even - 14 or so shoot-downs confirmed by each side. At least one shoot-down was when a Mosquito crew tracked a Uhu's rocket-type assisted take-off, watched it fire some rockets at egressing bombers (they thought it was an Me-163 Komet at first) and then intercepted and shot it down. The account also makes reference to the Uhu's ejection seats!

Does anyone have info about the jet/rocket-assisted takeoff gear used by the Uhu?


----------



## Erich (Dec 18, 2004)

the rocket assisted a/c was experimental only, none were shot down.


----------



## Tigger (Dec 18, 2004)

The RAF accounts differ from that. It posssibly might have been a Heinkel He-162 owing to the twin-tails which were similar in rear aspect to a He-219, but the crew's description was very specific...
They had enough time to ID the Bandit as He-219 and watched it go up, then down.
There were HE-219s with rocket-pods (similar to 1950s JATO). the Rocket was under, not over, the fuselage.
Maybe German records say "lost in experimental test flight"!
Sounds good to me!


----------



## Erich (Dec 18, 2004)

there are no German records of lost jet powered assisted Uhu's. No He 162's flew at night and none of the Me 163's either that have cropped up in Allied acct.s. I have dealt with this for over 25 years and can find nothing in written texts from the German archivs............

will agree tha the Mossie XXX was the top dog for the RAF and the Ju 88G-6 was the top dog for the Luftwaffe. The Bf 110G-4 did it's work for most of the war, but it was too cramped, no rear warning radar for most models and the a/c needed anotehr pair of eyes to watch for the Mossie intruders. The JU 88G-6 filled that role and the Schragwaffen installation was mounted along the fuselage outdie of the cockpit where the noise in the 110 from firing the weapon was horrendous. The Ju 88 G's had a longer range which was well suited for interior of the Reich defence units, as NJG 1 gruppen still equipped in 1945 were based close to the Dutch/German border


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 18, 2004)

the mossie has no opposistion for the title of greatest allied NF really..........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 18, 2004)

Not really, the P-61 gave it a close run for its money but didnt really see the action of the Mossie to prove it better.

If only the P-38M had seen more service, then we might be singing a different song...


----------



## Tigger (Dec 18, 2004)

My Dad flew NF Mosquitoes with 600 Sqn.

Over Italy

After flying Beaufighter VI.f's with AI MkVIII radar in North Africa with 153 and 46 Sqns. 

Of many intercepts he conducted he said that the EAC that was "impossible" to shoot down was the Ju-87 because even with wheels-down they could not fly slow enough "to get a bead on it"

Many intercepts involved Me-410s which they were instructed strictly "not to shoot down" because the Luftwaffe were dropping secret agents and the Allies wanted to know where they were parachuting so that they could be picked up for interrogation!

They once had a B-24 in their sights but backed-off thinking it was an "American party airplane" going somewhere. Maybe is was something else?!

Martin Bowman's reference to Uhu's with jet-pack described the "JATO" system as being under the fuselage, not over it as would be the case with a He-162 - though maybe the He-162 was flying inverted?!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 18, 2004)

Interesting 8) Welcome to the site 

The He-162 was a bit - no wait a lot of a disaster


----------



## Nonskimmer (Dec 18, 2004)

cheddar cheese said:


> The He-162 was a bit - no wait a lot of a disaster



I _will_ say it was an interesting concept, there's no denying that!
The idea being to make a jet fighter that almost anyone could fly. Of course, it didn't actually work out that way, but it's a fascinating idea. 

Welcome, Tigger!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 18, 2004)

It was the location of the engine that really killed it...


----------



## Nonskimmer (Dec 18, 2004)

The location was chosen for speed of production, I think. So that the aircraft fuselage and engine could be manufactured at the same time in different plants, and then assembled later. That way, fuselage construction could "theoretically" carry on uninterrupted. 
Of course, I'm not exactly sure what good an engineless fuselage is.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 18, 2004)

A glider maybe


----------



## Erich (Dec 18, 2004)

Tigger, how many missions did your father fly in the Mossie ? did he score any kills ??

thank you

Erich ~


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 19, 2004)

> It was the location of the engine that really killed it...



and often the pilot 

tigger, how much more information do you have on your father, is he still alive??


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 19, 2004)

> and often the pilot



Yup, they were probably too busy wondering why all that hair had suddenly appeared where it shouldnt do and forgot about flying the thing


----------



## Tigger (Dec 19, 2004)

My Dad was assigned as a Rad/Nav as he could understand the radar even though he was pilot-qualified in Canada. He stayed in the RAF until 1967 and even had 800 hours on the Berlin Airlift humantiarian missions on DC3s/C-47s in 1948.

I set up a reunion with his wartime pilot xxxxx and they just talked about the parties, which was good.

I have a (potentially) fantastic photo of "A Flight", 600 Sqn in front of a Mosquito NF but the pictures have become stuck after being kept in a cellar for 50 years and I am thinking of ways to put the picture back together - bits have been ripped off by the separation but still are there.

My father is alive - not many more years, maybe months, maybe - and this is why he talks with me at long last about these things. 

I have the address of his pilot xxxx and hope he will lend me his album so I scan it. 

By the way, 600 Sqn Mosquitoes did NOT carry BQ---- fuselage codes; they carried the code 6 - RAF roundel - aircraft letter. E.g G-for-George would be 6 -RAF roundel - G.

Kind regards

Anthony T


----------



## Erich (Dec 19, 2004)

Anthony I would be very interested to hear more of his career and his squadron if at all possible. If you can share or send me a private I would be most grateful

[email protected]

thank you''

Erich ~


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (Dec 19, 2004)

Tigger said:


> My Dad was assigned as a Rad/Nav as he could understand the radar even though he was pilot-qualified in Canada. He stayed in the RAF until 1967 and even had 800 hours on the Berlin Airlift humantiarian missions on DC3s/C-47s in 1948.
> 
> I set up a reunion with his wartime pilot xxxxx and they just talked about the parties, which was good.
> 
> ...





Hmmm...


Anthony T...


Might this be TonyT in disguise?


----------



## Nonskimmer (Dec 19, 2004)

Regardless, his dad sounds to have had a hell of a career.
Very interesting, Tigger!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 20, 2004)

can't wait to find out more..............


----------



## Tigger (Dec 20, 2004)

Nothing to do with the Vulcan project, though I think that's a worthy cause.

Am appalled to see the one at Duxford turfed out into the open to fester the way the Victor et al have. Used to have its own indoor hangar area with training WE-177 nukes on show. The rust and rot is already setting in - aagh!

On the Beau, the attach may be of interest - very few pictures of No46 Beaus wearing the sand, brown and nlack scheme have ever appeared anywhere. These were repainted during 1944, and a mix of schemes ensued for most of that year. 

Anthony T


----------



## Tigger (Dec 20, 2004)

Sorry guys, the system wouldn't let me upload!!!

Anthony T


----------



## Tigger (Dec 20, 2004)

Success!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 20, 2004)

Nice picture 8)


----------



## Erich (Dec 23, 2004)

Great lookin Beu Anthony, please give my best to you and your familie and Merry Christmas.

guys here's a very rare pic of a Ju 88G-6 from friend and ace Peter Spoden, viewed in December 1944 at the base at Schwäbisch Hall. He and his crew were shot down by accidnet by German Fla-2cm guns and Peter was wounded but received another Ju 88G-6 later as he healed up.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 23, 2004)

very festive.........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 23, 2004)

I take it thats snow on the wings and runway?


----------



## Erich (Dec 23, 2004)

needs a red bow around the tail correct ?  

yes snow indeed whcih was a total pain to take off on at night when the snow turn to iced over crud........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 24, 2004)

Didnt some planes have skis to overcome this though? Ive seen some pictures of P-38's equipped with skis.


----------



## lesofprimus (Dec 24, 2004)

Ive have seen many different aircraft with skiis on them.....


----------



## Tigger (Dec 24, 2004)

War is a horrible thing, though sometimes fascinating because of technology and sheer perverse aesthetic viscera

We must all be friends now, and either accept each other or attempt to be historians in an effort to understand and record important things for the sake of history. 

The time has come to keep ideals to sport and to "fight" for a better world - that's what all the fighting was about in the first place; a degree of homogenisation that we all can accept.

Within our own ranks, please let us just accept received wisdom, which I think goes along the lines of:
"Try to understand what you can't change, work hard at what you can, and have the wisdom to understand the difference".

My XMas message across the World


----------



## Erich (Dec 24, 2004)

no the work crews just tried to shovel off the snow as much as possible.

All the best for Christmas guys !  

E ~ Munchen-Riem, 1945


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 24, 2004)

here's a shot of Waddington under snow, it's not that festive and the planes have been "de-iced" but worth posting..............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 29, 2004)

Heres my contribution to the "Festive war spirit" 

Anyone with winter scences involving Russian a/c?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 29, 2004)

dude that's not festive at all, perhaps if it had a santa hat, or antlers and a red nose, that would be funny....................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Dec 29, 2004)

Its got snow in it, therefore is festive


----------



## Erich (Dec 30, 2004)

well it's snowing around our little Berg of 23,000 right now. I luv it ! funny the shots of the RAF a/c in the snow remind me of the 60 anniversary of Bodenplatte where the Luftwaffe gave one of it's last ditch efforts on attacking Allied airfields over Europe on 1-1-45. what a mess for both sides......

Ju 88G-1 with NJG 4 crewmen by the tail ....... "Hans take the pic quick !"
Brrrrrrrrrrrrrr ...............


----------



## Nonskimmer (Dec 30, 2004)

Aww, but they look so close!  

Nice pic, Erich.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 30, 2004)

does the one on the left look like a poofta to anyone else??


----------



## Erich (Dec 30, 2004)

heres a neat pic, signed by a well known Bf 110G ace and RK winner Gunther Bahr upon his receiving of the award, to his right is my good friend and DK winner Peter Spoden-pilot of a Ju 88G-6..........


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Dec 31, 2004)

not very festive??


----------



## lesofprimus (Dec 31, 2004)

But a great pic none the less....


----------



## Erich (Dec 31, 2004)

even in the spring of 45 the NJG 6 boys could get festive. this was a time to celebrate with too many njg vets being killed. Propaganda useage of course as noted in the pic but even the troops lined up in the background needed a boost during the time of loosing a war.....

Erich ~


----------



## Yeomanz (Dec 31, 2004)

i forget if i ever voted in this , but no He-219 option , how could you


----------



## Erich (Dec 31, 2004)

it's record is pretty bleak compared to the Bf 110G-4 and Ju 88 variants


----------



## Yeomanz (Dec 31, 2004)

well i'd woun'd call it a night fighter , more of a night'blastabomberrightouttheskyer' it had 6 30mm 8)


----------



## Erich (Dec 31, 2004)

try your referecnes again friend. some times two 3cm mostly all 2cm. with 6 cannon it was too much and I./NJG 1 reduced the cannon to four 2cm weapaons as it was plenty to bring down any bomber........


----------



## Yeomanz (Dec 31, 2004)

what the hell im 14 and barely know a thing , thats what it said my book ..........


----------



## Erich (Dec 31, 2004)

it's best to site your reference first so we all can double check it.

Happy new year in 45 minutes I believe in your part of the world ?

Erich ~


----------



## Yeomanz (Dec 31, 2004)

now it 41 mins


----------



## lesofprimus (Dec 31, 2004)

HAPPY FREAKIN NEW YEAR!!!!!!!


----------



## Erich (Dec 31, 2004)

anyone find any late War Mossie XIX or XXX pics to post ?


----------



## Yeomanz (Dec 31, 2004)

http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?i...tart=6&prev=/images?q=Mosquito++XIX&hl=en&lr=


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 1, 2005)

one mighty fine lookin' bird..............


----------



## Yeomanz (Jan 1, 2005)

i can sea one out my window right now


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 2, 2005)

you shot it yet??


----------



## MP-Willow (Jan 26, 2005)

Hi all, and I write now from the snowy streets of Philadelphia  I justwish this city could understand snow like Maine 

Tiger, could you please if you would talk about your father's hours in the Burlin Airlift. 800 would have been two rips a day or so. Was he flying for the whole operation?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 26, 2005)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> one mighty fine lookin' bird..............



Not as good looking as this... P-38M that isnt black for some reason...


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 26, 2005)

It would look great if it didn't have the large radar sticking out the nose, must of produced a hell of a lot of drag


----------



## Erich (Jan 26, 2005)

Ju 88G-6 please.............whre's those RAF bombers ?


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 26, 2005)

CC, that is the prototype for the P-38M. It was basically just intended to prove the feasibility of the concept and so didn't have all of the "finishing touches" the combat models would.

The drag from the radar pod wasn't as bad as you would think. The P-38M could make 406mph @ 15,000ft which isn't too far behind a P-38L at the same alititude.


----------



## Erich (Jan 26, 2005)

ok Mossies where are U ?


----------



## plan_D (Jan 26, 2005)

We'll do the hunting, thanks. 8)


----------



## Erich (Jan 27, 2005)

Wachs auf kleine Mossie ......I'll be waiting ..............


----------



## plan_D (Jan 27, 2005)

Oh yeah!?! You'll run when you see this...


----------



## evangilder (Jan 27, 2005)

LOL!


----------



## plan_D (Jan 27, 2005)

What? You know he will.


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 27, 2005)

More than a match for anything the Germans can give


----------



## plan_D (Jan 27, 2005)

Have you just stated that the Beau was superior to the Me-262B-1a (Is that the right designation for the NF-262, Erich?)?

The Mosquito was the best, by combat record, Night-Fighter of the war. The Me-262 was, most likely, the best by ability. The Mosquito could still fight up there.


----------



## mosquitoman (Jan 27, 2005)

Hadn't seen the Me262, note to self: read previous posts.
The Blenheim, Defiant and Beaufighter were the only aircraft ready for the blitz though. Out of those I'd take the Beau


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jan 27, 2005)

A lousy warplane, but a good pic. Thanks, plan_D.


----------



## plan_D (Jan 27, 2005)

First time someone has ever complimented me on my picture showing.  (Tears of Joy)  

It did....oh...k for about 2 days in World War 2 when 109s mistook it for a Hurricane.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jan 27, 2005)

Oh God, I've made him cry!


----------



## plan_D (Jan 27, 2005)

A few tears shred here and there...more here, than there...well...more none at all...then here....and not nearly any than there. Sorry...what were we talking about?


----------



## Erich (Jan 28, 2005)

Was ist das ? 

a prototype in similiarity to the one that ace Kurt Welter tested for his commando. he was blinded by searchlights and suggested the front and bottom of the glass pannels be covered with steel plate to protect from debris and the obvious blinding from lower lights and fires in the cities. the project crawled so slow that Kurt shoved the type in the trash and went with the Me 262A-1a.


----------



## evangilder (Jan 28, 2005)

Looks like radar antennae to me.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 28, 2005)




----------



## Erich (Jan 28, 2005)

yes it's radar and the precussor of the FuG 218 set later used in the Me 262 B-1a/U1. Guess I need to include some more stats on the nf version of the Ar 234 ?

E ♪♪


----------



## evangilder (Jan 28, 2005)

Sorry, I guess I am not sure what you are asking. Are you talking about the antenna, or nose structure? Or was that what you were asking? Oy, I am so confused now....


----------



## Erich (Jan 28, 2005)

Evan originally my thought was to recognize the aircraft only. yes obvious it is radar but I went ahead and let the cat out of the bag.....


----------



## evangilder (Jan 28, 2005)

Ah, okay. Now that makes sense. I thought maybe you had tossed out an easy one for us. You usually have some pretty good stumpers! That one would have been as well, as my German aircraft knowledge is kind of lean, but I am learning.


----------



## Lightning Guy (Jan 28, 2005)

The glass nose on the Ar-234 is pretty much a dead give away.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 29, 2005)

> *Arado Ar 234P Blitz:
> Another projected version that was never worked on was the 234P, a two-seat night-fighter, with a lengthened nose to accomodate a centrimetric air-to-air radar *


----------



## MP-Willow (Jan 29, 2005)

Plan_D, I hapen to like your BP Diffiant pic. Yes I do even if spelled that poor, like it. It got some bad press, was rushed to produce, but it did do a fair job for its self. Mostly a training aircraft though Yes?

I am on the hunt for a new sig pic. any sugestions on topic


----------



## Viper (Jan 29, 2005)

P-61s are beautiful


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 29, 2005)

something british, there's not enough british a/c pics.............


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jan 29, 2005)

I'm using one, lanc. Only I used a prettier one, with Canadian roundels.  (It's just really hard to see.  )


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 29, 2005)

don't worry i can see they're canadian roundels, but there's still not enough!! british planes that is, not canadain roundels..................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 29, 2005)

Have A P-61 MP, that would be good.


----------



## lesofprimus (Jan 29, 2005)

Welcome back Viper......


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 30, 2005)

God knows where hes been the last year


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 30, 2005)

my god is it really that long ago??

shows how long i've been here................


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 30, 2005)

Yep...we should really be recognised on veterans day :Wink:


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 31, 2005)

well i should, you're still a young whippersnapper............


----------



## MP-Willow (Feb 2, 2005)

I will think about the P-61, I do like that black airframe.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 3, 2005)

what, you don't like the ones in green??


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 4, 2005)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> well i should, you're still a young whippersnapper............



To hell with that, youve only been here 20 days longer than me...

P-61's look best in black  Like 'that black airframe' eh MP? How about a nice P-38 M...


----------



## MP-Willow (Feb 6, 2005)

Yes the M was nice if you like that. I like the L the two seat set, but that is just me. Radar needs two sets of eyes and at night that is all the better.

If you read up on the P-38 the proposed K might make you smile.
But this is or should be for the Black Widow!! And here firepower was better then the Lightening!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 6, 2005)

However it was slower and less manoeverable.

Yes, the P-38K  .........


----------



## plan_D (Feb 6, 2005)

The P-38J was more versatile than the -38K, it had better low altitude performance. The -38K would never take over, it was a more refined High Altitude Interceptor but it wasn't better, actually worse, at doing the other tasks a J could do.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 7, 2005)

The L was the best P-38...


----------



## Erich (Feb 7, 2005)

P-38 as the best nf ? 7 kills in the Pacific hardly contributes.

sorry guys look for another a/c like the Beufighter/Mossie/P-61 combinations for Allied a/c


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 7, 2005)

mossie has to be the choice for the allies.............


----------



## mosquitoman (Feb 7, 2005)

or the Beau, it was the first good aircraft used as a nightfighter


----------



## plan_D (Feb 7, 2005)

The Mosquito NF had a better combat record and was better in ability than the Beau. The Mosquito had the best combat record out of any NF, but the -262 was a better nightfighter in ability.


----------



## Erich (Feb 7, 2005)

best combat record (Mosquito) Allied correct ? The Bf 110G-4 probably did more combat operations than any other night fighter in the war even though by fall of 1944 the aircraft was derilict..............most successfull the ever present IV./NJG 1 with NJG 1 the overall leader with 2173 night kills and 145 day kill, few with the Ju 88G and maybe 40 with the He 219.

E ~


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 7, 2005)

Woah, never knew the Me-110 was that successful...


----------



## Medvedya (Feb 7, 2005)

With fixed upwards firing 20mm cannons for the Schräge-Musik and a Lichtenstein set? A Me-110 kitted out like that is bad news indeed....


----------



## plan_D (Feb 7, 2005)

The Mosquito was definately the best Allied NightFighter off record and ability.


----------



## MP-Willow (Feb 15, 2005)

Ok, so the -38k might not have been the best alreound 38, but I like the gun set it had and as an intercepter that would have been great, yes?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 15, 2005)

wow one 20mm and 4 .50cal, it's no 4x20mm............


----------



## MP-Willow (Feb 15, 2005)

No true, for that then look at the P-61  But the P-38 held up it own for the war, yes?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 15, 2005)

not as a nf...............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 16, 2005)

For the short time it was around (I think it was as little as a week) I scored about a dozen kills...one guy became an nf ace in one...it wasnt bad...

Yeah, 4x20mm, big deal, how many rounds could it carry? And when all your guns are the same, they all fire at once. With 2 different types, you can fire either the .50 cals or the 20mm...so in effect you have a lot more firing time...


----------



## Erich (Feb 16, 2005)

there much more power in 20mm rounds, fewer to knock down your opponent.

P-38's scored 12 kills in the Pacific and there were no aces flying the machine. the P-38M came into service in the Pacific with the nfs in January/February 1946.

the best nf was the P-61 for the US and the Mossie XIX and XXX for the RAF

E ~


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 17, 2005)

> P-38's scored 12 kills in the Pacific and there were no aces flying the machine.


 This is something I know I can prove wrong...


----------



## plan_D (Feb 17, 2005)

You know he's refering to the P-38M...and I think I put 19 somewhere, oh well...it's 12...


----------



## Erich (Feb 17, 2005)

sorry but the figures I quoted stick. The M's scored no victories at night as I already mentioned on another thread that the M came in January/February 1946 in the Pacific.

My figures come from several sources but namely materials from the US night fighter association of which I was a member for 7 years until they closed down about 5 years ago

v/r ▼


----------



## plan_D (Feb 17, 2005)

Since I have clue on the subject of the P-38M, I'm going to say...Erich is right...  Good luck, CC


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 17, 2005)

You better wish me luck...I know ive seen some where that in WW2, a pilot scored 4 kills in the P-61, and the went on to score 3 kills in the P-38M. All at night...

76 (Or is it 72?) P-38M's saw service in WW2, all in the pacific/ I found a great site a while back with their serial numbers...


----------



## evangilder (Feb 17, 2005)

Joe Baugher has a write up on the P-38M, including serials at:
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p38_16.html


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 17, 2005)

Thanks, thats exactly the site I found a while back! 8)


----------



## Erich (Feb 17, 2005)

I just checked the records of the Pacific US nfs and NO P-38M's scored kills. the P-38 victories were early on in the war and the rest till war's end were in P-61's. sorry guys to spoil the fun, but the web is incorrect.

not surprising though as the web is bogus on many occassions.....

E ♪


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 17, 2005)

Sure about this? Ive seen many places that say otherwise...


----------



## Erich (Feb 17, 2005)

show me the many places please..............again I have quoted from official US documentation as well as the nfs histories. Myths abound CC.

True P-38's scored the first Pacfic kills and then they were replaced by the P-61 A and B. Granted a few P-38's were kept for whatever reasons.

Just as a side light and off topic but to show the myths. It has been reported back in the late 1960's in William Grrens book on German warplanes that FAGr 5 Ju 290/390's flew to within 15 miles of New York undetected. the point I am making is that many have the book and many web-sites publish this nonsense as truth. The fact in the FAGr 5 logs is that the unit never carried out this mission as they were strictly concerned with providing recon for U-boots and anti shipping strikes.

E ~


----------



## evangilder (Feb 17, 2005)

Good point, Erich. I have said before that while some good infor can be gleaned from sites such as Joe Baugher's, the information should also be second sourced. 

I don't remember where, But I do recall that there were some kills by P-38s flying at night, but not the P-38M. These were done before the M came out. I will have to see if I can remember where I read it. I did not get a second source on that info, so I did not include it when I presented about the P-38 back in September. I only mentioned that a P-38 nightfighter was developed and left it at that.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 17, 2005)

Im still trying to find those sites....as you can see from the link evan posted P-38M's did see limited service...Im sure I saw a source showing P-38M kills though which I am still trying to find...


----------



## Erich (Feb 17, 2005)

read my last post in Aviation under P-61 Black Widow.

E ♪


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 18, 2005)

I have...im still in doubt though. Im having a bit of trouble finding the site again, but I think once I have the name of the pilot it quotes as getting kills with the P-38M you will be able to settle this.


----------



## Erich (Feb 18, 2005)

what makes you think the web-master of the site will know more than US documentation and the US veterans that flew the P-38/P-61 in combat in the Pacific. As I said before and I will say it again, there is so much bogus crap on the net it makes it all the worthwhile and much more enjoyable to deleve into a good read or better yet hunt down info via National archivs and PRO, etc for the details........... 8)


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 18, 2005)

The guy must have got his information from somewhere...Im not doubting your sorces at all, im believing them now, but I just want to make 100% certain....


----------



## Erich (Feb 18, 2005)

the problem is CC where does he get his victory confirmations ? they have to be from US archiv-night fighter association sources or they are doubtful and worthless. you knows the guy could have goofy info and just place a bogus claim on a bogus date. you see what I am talking about of course as so many believe the net info without question.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 18, 2005)

so the P-38M never actually scored a kill at night during the war??


----------



## mosquitoman (Feb 18, 2005)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> so the P-38M never actually scored a kill at night during the war??



Bad luck CC


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 19, 2005)

I know...im still trying to find this damn website though


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 19, 2005)

not looking very good for your argument is it??


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 19, 2005)

I know, if you go back a page youll see I conceded it...Im still looking for that damn site though so Erich can verify it...


----------



## Medvedya (Feb 26, 2005)

MP-Willow said:


> I am on the hunt for a new sig pic. any sugestions on topic



Is that you in the existing one?


----------



## MP-Willow (Feb 26, 2005)

No, this picture in my sig is not me. But what do you think of it?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 26, 2005)

Its great 8)


----------



## MP-Willow (Feb 28, 2005)

Thanks. I am still looking for more info on the bomber.
Your P-108 is not that bad. Sad the plane was dumped


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 28, 2005)

Yep, sure is  I wish there were some better pictures of the 102mm cannon equipped on the P.108A, but only 1 was built and pictures are very hard to come by.


----------



## MP-Willow (Mar 1, 2005)

but that cannon was not that great for the P-108. But that can be discussed on the bombers topic not "nightfighter", yes ?)


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 1, 2005)

Yeah, occasionally the Cannon ripped out the fuselage 

Hmmm...any other debate for nfs?

How about Soviet nightfighters?


----------



## Erich (Mar 1, 2005)

no Soviet nf's sorry. Yes I know about the ill attempt at using the lend lease Hurricane. there was several modifications to the Po-7 but nothing successful. the Soviets did not use aerail radar systems and the German nf's had a crap of a time intercepting the usual slow moving bi-planes and twin engine bombers over Russia. The lend lease B-25 though was a bear to catch, especially with an overloaded Do 217

E ~


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 2, 2005)

Was the Pe-2 not used in the role?


----------



## MP-Willow (Mar 3, 2005)

CC, that was a good question, so I will look it up, but I have never found any referances for Russian NFs.

CC, question is that an Italian fighter? Looks like the Re2000?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 3, 2005)

Yes it is an Italian fighter, but no, it is not the Re-2000, the Re-2000 had a radial. It is the MC.202


----------



## MP-Willow (Mar 4, 2005)

Opps 
I should have picked that up. the MC. 202 was a nice plane, even ome fought with the south when Italy fell out of the war, yes?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 4, 2005)

Most likely, but by the time Italy signed the Armistice they were just introducing the Series 5 fighters into service (MC.205, Re-2005, G.55) and they were used in preference over the older MC.202.


----------



## Erich (Mar 4, 2005)

back to topic

Ju 88G-6 the best !


----------



## mosquitoman (Mar 5, 2005)

nice pic, you can see the Schrage Musik. Why didn't the Allies use someting like that?


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 5, 2005)

Nice pic! 8) Cant see the Schrage Musik though...


----------



## mosquitoman (Mar 5, 2005)

They're on the top of the fuselage- look for a pair of "sticks" pointing upwards


----------



## MP-Willow (Mar 5, 2005)

So the Ju-88? But that small tight cockpit, how did the tall pilot stand it? And the gu sights outside the plane?

As for the Allied useing the up angled guns I thought it was tried as an experiment but latter dropped? Any help?


----------



## Erich (Mar 5, 2005)

it wasn't that tight since it could handle four crewmembers in 1945.

none of the sights were outsdie the cockpit. A reflex visor was installed and upward director to fire the Schräge-Musik installation of 1-2 guns.


----------



## mosquitoman (Mar 6, 2005)

Then again, our nightfighters did more than okay against german bombers and nightfighters


----------



## BombTaxi (Mar 6, 2005)

One problem with Allied aircraft using Schrage-Musik was that German bombers likt the He111 and Ju88 had ventral guns, which rendered the attack profile suicidal. Oddly, Bomber Command never caught on and never fitted ventral guns to its heavies


----------



## mosquitoman (Mar 6, 2005)

There was a ventral turret on the Lanc but it was removed to accomodate a larger bombload


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 6, 2005)

nice pic erich............

and as for why we didn't use any weapons similar to Schrage Musik, well what would we use them on?? 

and as for the ventral guns on bomber command aircraft?? our bombers didn't depend on heavy armourment, we used allot of evasive manouvers, the fitting of the ventral turret was heavy, caused a dramatic reduction on manouverability and performance, reduced the payload carrying ability of the lanc, would have prevented the fitting of H2S and well, was really quite ugly.........


----------



## BombTaxi (Mar 6, 2005)

Good points Lanc, but a simple flexible mount with two .303s would have made Schrage Musik unworkable, as the nightfighter need to formate on the Lanc before firing. It seems that Bomber Command iugnored a very simple solution. And a two-gun flex mount near the wing roots (which is where the SM system was usually aimed would not have interfered with payload, maneuverability of H2S to any significant degree.


----------



## Erich (Mar 7, 2005)

lanc remember when I quoted on German nf vets message about the Sm installation and attack ?

He would wait for the lancaster in this cast to stop the corkscrew as he was below looking up and followed the lanc through manuvers till the lanc came out of the screw into a flat pattern and then blasted with his 2cm upward guns between the wing root and inboard engine or between two of the engines on one wing with glimmspur-faint tracer and phosphor shells


----------



## MP-Willow (Mar 7, 2005)

Thanks Eric and all.
I would agree that bomber Comand did remove venteral guns from Lancs and Halifax in favor of he H2S. Also they would have been very helpful I think.


----------



## mosquitoman (Mar 7, 2005)

Definitely, why not get the bombers bak for another raid. Incidentally some Hallibags had a ventral .303 late in the war


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 8, 2005)

Instead of a manually aimed gun, why not just have a couple of fixed .303's pointing down at an angle? Surely this would have saved space?


----------



## BombTaxi (Mar 8, 2005)

Fixed guns would have been ineffective as the nf could simply stay outside thier arc of fire. But if the flexible mount had been (for eample, just foward of the bombay (i.e under the cockpit), it would have covered most angles. In fact, it would have made more sense to remove the nose turret (of little use on a nightbomber) and fit a rearward-firing chin mount like the one on the Blenheim IV/V.


----------



## KraziKanuK (Mar 8, 2005)

BT, the bomb bay ended at the front of the cockpit on the Lanc. Also the turret was above the bomb aimers postion.


----------



## BombTaxi (Mar 8, 2005)

I'll get me coat...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 8, 2005)

yeah there's no way you'll get a ventral position in the nose of the lanc, there's only just enough space as it is.............


----------



## mosquitoman (Mar 8, 2005)

Don't worry BT, you make more sense than the Lanc does normally


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 8, 2005)

as much as i want to argue that point, i can't......


----------



## mosquitoman (Mar 8, 2005)

Sorry Lanc, I was a bit harsh


----------



## kiwimac (Mar 8, 2005)

This thread is locked and continued in a new, non-polling thread.

Kiwimac


----------

