DonL
Banned
The Bf 109 was designed to fight other fighters to take air supremacy. The Me 110 was the heavy fighter and equiped with the heavy guns to shoot down the bombers. This was the concept.
Battle of Britain: Zeros instead of Me-109s
- Thread starter bowfin
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The Bf 109 was designed to fight other fighters to take air supremacy. The Me 110 was the heavy fighter and equiped with the heavy guns to shoot down the bombers. This was the concept.
Despite the conspeed advantage of "western" fighters the zero possessed a superior climb. A climb advantage can be used to both escape/disengage as well as to gain an agressive combat advantage. Latter Zeroes did gain armour. The Zero is more the contemporary of the Me 109F, Spitifre V and perhaps late model Hurricanes and P-40's.
Shortround6
Major General
A lot of things leap frogged each other in the late 30s and early 40s. The Bf 109 WAS designed to intercept bombers, as were all single engine fighters of the mid 30s. the fact that many countries only had rifle caliber machine guns available and were mounting them in pairs (or in fours) doesn't mean the plane was NOTintended to shoot down bombers. The Germans may have intended to use a single cannon through the propeller like the French but their first two tries didn't work very well and with only 700 hp avaialbe from the Jumo 210 mounting multiple cannon wasn't really an option. The French went through several models of cannon over a number of years before getting the Hispano 404. The Americans were mounting ONE .50cal and One .30cal.
The "concept" of the Me 110 as close to the "battle plane" concept. A plane that could penetrate enemy airspace (interceptors take care of bombers trying to intrude on friendly airspace) and bring the battle to them. One requirement for the 110 was to carry the standard Luftwaffe long range radio. Just as many other things changed so did radios. a 1945 radio was almost as far ahead of a 1938 radio as a 2012 computer is ahead of a 2006 computer (OK, an exaggeration) but the the radio (same as fitted to the He 111 bombers) needed a dedicated operator. at the time the usable range of radio telegraphy ( Morse code) was 2-3 times that of voice radio using the same power transmitter. having your pilots trying to use a Morse key with one hand while flying with the other wasn't to practical. The rear seat man was also part of the loading system for the 20mm cannon that gave them 3 times the RPG of the ammo capacity of the 109. An extra set of eyes was also very useful for recon or observation work. The rear seat man could also fool with cameras better than the pilot ( and recon cameras were also evolving). Since he was back there already, giving him a single 7.9mm MG wasn't that big a deal.
The Me 110 was designed when 1000-1100 hp engines were on the horizon. to perform the mission specified required more power than a single engine could offer at the time ( same with the P-38, the big difference between the initial requirement fo the P-38 and the P-39 was that the P-38 should have 2 hours endurance at the required patrol speed and the P-39 only one hour, the extra fuel needed required two engines to get the required performance, two 1000 hp engines being figured as being equal to a single 1400-1500hp engine of which NONE were available at the initial project stage.) The Germans, despite several years (4-5?) of trying, take until 1941 with the 109F to get a successful through the prop hub gun installation. That is one of the differences between concept and reality. Bombers had grown in size and durability during those 4-5 years to where what would have been an excellent armament in 1935-36-37 was inadequate in 1941-42.
The "concept" of the Me 110 as close to the "battle plane" concept. A plane that could penetrate enemy airspace (interceptors take care of bombers trying to intrude on friendly airspace) and bring the battle to them. One requirement for the 110 was to carry the standard Luftwaffe long range radio. Just as many other things changed so did radios. a 1945 radio was almost as far ahead of a 1938 radio as a 2012 computer is ahead of a 2006 computer (OK, an exaggeration) but the the radio (same as fitted to the He 111 bombers) needed a dedicated operator. at the time the usable range of radio telegraphy ( Morse code) was 2-3 times that of voice radio using the same power transmitter. having your pilots trying to use a Morse key with one hand while flying with the other wasn't to practical. The rear seat man was also part of the loading system for the 20mm cannon that gave them 3 times the RPG of the ammo capacity of the 109. An extra set of eyes was also very useful for recon or observation work. The rear seat man could also fool with cameras better than the pilot ( and recon cameras were also evolving). Since he was back there already, giving him a single 7.9mm MG wasn't that big a deal.
The Me 110 was designed when 1000-1100 hp engines were on the horizon. to perform the mission specified required more power than a single engine could offer at the time ( same with the P-38, the big difference between the initial requirement fo the P-38 and the P-39 was that the P-38 should have 2 hours endurance at the required patrol speed and the P-39 only one hour, the extra fuel needed required two engines to get the required performance, two 1000 hp engines being figured as being equal to a single 1400-1500hp engine of which NONE were available at the initial project stage.) The Germans, despite several years (4-5?) of trying, take until 1941 with the 109F to get a successful through the prop hub gun installation. That is one of the differences between concept and reality. Bombers had grown in size and durability during those 4-5 years to where what would have been an excellent armament in 1935-36-37 was inadequate in 1941-42.
DonL
Banned
@ Shortround6
I disagree.
The main design requirement of the Bf 109 wasn't to intercept or fight bombers, the main requirement was to fight enemy fighters to reach/take air supremacy. Of course the Bf 109 could intercept bombers and fighters as she was designed but the design project was offensive not defensive.
At the Spanish War the Bf 109 was mainly tested against the enemy fighters (for example Polikarpow I-16) also the He 112 and not mainly to intercept bombers.
I disagree.
The main design requirement of the Bf 109 wasn't to intercept or fight bombers, the main requirement was to fight enemy fighters to reach/take air supremacy. Of course the Bf 109 could intercept bombers and fighters as she was designed but the design project was offensive not defensive.
At the Spanish War the Bf 109 was mainly tested against the enemy fighters (for example Polikarpow I-16) also the He 112 and not mainly to intercept bombers.
Shortround6
Major General
I am sorry for the confusion. I believe the 109 was designed as a general purpose fighter whose duties would include bomber interception. This is no different than most other fighter projects of the time. The I-16 was designed as a general purpose fighter ans was the Pz 11, the Fiat Cr 32 and Cr 42 and so on. Very few countries built specialized bomber interceptors, at least beyond prototypes.
AS I stated "The Bf 109 WAS designed to intercept bombers, as were all single engine fighters of the mid 30s". It was part of their job but not their ONLY job, as you said, it was not the "main design requirement" but it was part of the requirement. The interception of bombers was not assigned to another type of aircraft because at the time there were no other types of aircraft (bomber interceptors/destroyers) in most air forces.
AS I stated "The Bf 109 WAS designed to intercept bombers, as were all single engine fighters of the mid 30s". It was part of their job but not their ONLY job, as you said, it was not the "main design requirement" but it was part of the requirement. The interception of bombers was not assigned to another type of aircraft because at the time there were no other types of aircraft (bomber interceptors/destroyers) in most air forces.
DonL
Banned
I agree!
The discusion about interception as main requirement was about this statement from The Basket:
And to my opinion the first sentence of the second quote is wrong or partly wrong, because that was not the main requirement as I stated.
And as general purpose fighter a drop tank could be very essential to get more time to fight enemy fighters especially if you have a longer flight to get to the enemy territory.
The discusion about interception as main requirement was about this statement from The Basket:
And to my opinion the first sentence of the second quote is wrong or partly wrong, because that was not the main requirement as I stated.
And as general purpose fighter a drop tank could be very essential to get more time to fight enemy fighters especially if you have a longer flight to get to the enemy territory.
In the early '30 some bombers had a speed well in advance of that of the biplame fighters of that day so, after many world speed records achieved, a Stormo of S. 79 was named "Sorci verdi", ( Green rats) from a colloquial Italian expression to name wonderful things....
So the need for Air Forces to have dedicated interceptors.
When the first monoplanes wento into service, things changed, expecially after Spanish Civil war.....
After a G. 50 succesfully intercepted a flight of the "Sorci verdi" over Rome
the Pilot, after landing, conclusively exclaimed
"At last, the "Sorci verdi" have found their cat".
So the need for Air Forces to have dedicated interceptors.
When the first monoplanes wento into service, things changed, expecially after Spanish Civil war.....
After a G. 50 succesfully intercepted a flight of the "Sorci verdi" over Rome
the Pilot, after landing, conclusively exclaimed
"At last, the "Sorci verdi" have found their cat".
Last edited:
Willy Messerschmitt argued forcefully for an fighter that emphasised speed over manouverabillity. This is the time the Germans were toying with high speed bombers and the thing on fighters stilol empahsised manouverabillity.. He quiped, rhetorically to Goering, "just say the manouveverable fighter meets the high speed bomber?". The point of course being that speed was essential to get an interception; a whole generation of Japanese Army and Navy fighters were a failure in that they could barely intercept the B-29.
The only flaw I see in the Me 110 is that it didn't quite have enough range; something rectified in the Me 210/410 whuch should have been in service by mid 1941.
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
