Best Aircraft in Many Different Roles Part II

Wespe · Feb 14, 2007

Hi guy's as you can see I am new on this Forum

and the best multirole aircraft in WWII? off course it could only have been a Me-262, no matter if as a "Blitzbomber" or fighter).

What could deliver a 1000kg bombload, at 800km/h and armed with 4x30mm MK 108 and 24 R4M-rockets?

Yes, a Me-262

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Feb 14, 2007

Okay but how many roles can it perform...

Wespe · Feb 14, 2007

Hey, the Me-262 can "role" around it's own axis as long as there is fuel in it's tanks

The missions it could fullfill are resulting out the numerous derivates. e.g.

Reconnaissance Me 262 A-1a/U3
Fighter Me 262 A-1a
Bomber Interceptor Me 262 A-1a
Night fighter Me 262 B-1a/U1FuG 218
Ground attack (Jabo) Me 262 A-2a
Trainer Me 262 B-1a,

In other words, except swimming = everything

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Feb 14, 2007

Wespe said:
Hey, the Me-262 can "role" around it's own axis as long as there is fuel in it's tanks

Wespe said:
The missions it could fullfill are resulting out the numerous derivates. e.g.

Reconnaissance Me 262 A-1a/U3
Fighter Me 262 A-1a
Bomber Interceptor Me 262 A-1a
Night fighter Me 262 B-1a/U1FuG 218
Ground attack (Jabo) Me 262 A-2a
Trainer Me 262 B-1a,

In other words, except swimming = everything

Yeap but there were other aircraft that could perform those same roles plus more including Torpedo Bomber, Transport, etc....

Just in my opinion the Me-262 was too little too late and could not perform the most roles and do all of them with pretty well.

Denniss · Feb 14, 2007

Me 263 had only 500 kg bombload, either one 500kg or two 250kg. 1000kg were stressing the airframe too much as it got too heavy then.

FLYBOYJ · Feb 14, 2007

Udet said:
fLYBoy hello.

I am simply comparing the performance of bombers that were the workhorses of each air force in specific period of times.

If the kampfgruppen committed to bomb England during 1940/41 could have had heavy bombers -four engine- to fly combat missions then i would be comparing them with the heavy bombers of the USAAF of the 1943/44 period.

Medium bombers were the only kind of bombers the Luftwaffe had to wage aerial war for 1940/41 while the USAAF´s B-17s and B-24s bore the brunt of the battle only a couple of years later.

I do not see how the comparison could be considered void.

Although Germany never really intended to invade much less occupy England, in reality trying to prod the Brits onto the negotiation table to attain peace, the objective of the bomber force of the Luftwaffe over England during 1940/41 was similar to the goals outlined by the USAAF and RAF bomber fleets during 1943/44, so to me it seems the comparison is valid.

Do not forget i am not suggesting bombers could surpass the performance of fighters...also not forgetting the cases of the I-16 and I-153 which were slower than the Ju 88; the I-153 barely surpassing the speed of the He 111. Bouncing could virtually be the only choice for those aging fighters to shoot down the Ju 88.

Where there any periods of the war when German fighters could not catch up with any allied bombers medium or heavy alike? 8)

I agree there were many times when German bombers returning from England had to written off due to bad damage, but exactly the same thing can be told about the USAAF heavies flyboy; how many of the B-17s which survived the Schweinfurt slaughter had to be written off upon return to base?

Look i will have to rescue my papers but i clearly recall the heavy bombers did not shoot down that many German fighters and that the exchange ratio remained -at minimum- 4 bombers destroyed for each German fighter shot down by the defensive guns, if not higher than that figure.

I was once told by some guy that the "actual" ratio remained close to 1 fighter shot down per 1 heavy bomber brought down: crap. My response to the gentleman was that if such a thing had been true, then the doctrine of the heavy bombers would have been proved correct and escort fighters would have never been required. But we know such a thing did not occur and the losses of the USAAF were so horrible that by the end of 1943 the allied air forces could not yet dare to affirm the battle would be won.

Cheers!

Good points Udet, but here is where I disagree...

Medium bombers were the only kind of bombers the Luftwaffe had to wage aerial war for 1940/41 while the USAAF´s B-17s and B-24s bore the brunt of the battle only a couple of years later.

I do not see how the comparison could be considered void.

The entire deployment of bombers from both air arms were entirely different. The Luftwaffe did not employ "the box" to mutually defend the entire bomber formation from attack, their formations were looser and they flew at much lower altitudes. At the same time the Luftwaffe formations were a bit more flexible and yes they did fly aircraft that were way more maneuverable with their full bomb loads although B-17s and B-24 carried more ordnance. With that said, I see the USAAF as a line of Napoleonic or Civil War infantry squaring off point blank with their opposition and firing their muskets in mass. In the case of WW2 you had hundreds of bombers hovering over Germany at 125 mph, lobbing bombs out their bombays while squared off against fighters and flack and as we know the carnage on both side was enormous.

Although I would admit the effectiveness of the Luftwaffe bomber killers cannot be denied, the fact still remains that the allied bomber armada did prevail. You could blame the Luftwaffe failure on lack of gas but still in the long run its apparent that lack of gas and overwhelming numbers did the luftwaffe in...

Civettone · Feb 15, 2007

Perhaps it's the historian in me talking but I simply refuse to take pictures and stories as facts. Like you, I'm a non-BS kind a guy. And I can admit that I'm pro-Luftwaffe. On other boards I'm always the sucker who takes the German side in WW2 discussions. But nevertheless I try to use arguments based on facts though most of the information one comes across is based on opinions or even fiction. Everybody remembers that article by Kit Carson about the Bf 109 and Fw 190, right? I myself have only last week been completely taken off guard when I found out that the German Tiger wasn't as unreliable as I always thought. In fact, figures show that it had a better operational ratio than the other German tanks!
But sure, opinions, pictures and stories from veterans are great information and important pieces to the puzzle. But they are only indications.

What are the facts in this discussion? The German bombers flew short-range missions, were usually escorted by fighters, suffered high losses at the hands of relatively few MG armed British fighters, and the Ju 88 suffered more losses than the other bombers.
The American B-17s flew a thousand miles over enemy airspace, they usually lost 10% on these missions, though being outnumbered against cannon armed fighters, and once they were properly escorted they lost about 3.7% of their bombers.

These are all facts, or at least that's the way I remember them without looking stuff up.

Seeing many German bombers coming back with damage, and knowing stories of Ju 88s outmanoeuvring British fighters, are not to be taken as general facts ... IMHO.

So i guess that when you say the Ju 88 suffered higher losses than any of two other german bombers you are proving "my champion" was a bad plane or something like that. Tell me, do you consider the difference between Ju 88s and say He111s lost in action critical?

I've never called the Ju 88 a bad aircraft. From the top of my head, there were twice as many He 111s in the BoB though not much more or much less He 111s were lost than the Ju 88. In any case, you made a case that the Ju 88 was the best because it had speed and manoeuvrability which you claim were its best weapons against the British fighters. If these best weapons lead to more losses than with an aircraft like the He 111, I question if those weapons were so good.

Kris

Wespe · Feb 15, 2007

Denniss said:
Me 263 had only 500 kg bombload, either one 500kg or two 250kg. 1000kg were stressing the airframe too much as it got too heavy then.

Are "you" trying to put down my beloved Me-262 ? Aaaaarrrrrgghhhhhh.

So: What could deliver a 500 kg bombload, at 800km/h and armed with 4x30mm MK 108 and 24 R4M-rockets?

Yes, only a Me-262

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Feb 15, 2007

Okay and what effect did the Me-262 have on the war? Not a thing...

I would rather have 100 B-17s, Lancasters, B-24s or Ju-88s with more bomb load than a few Me-262s with 500kg.

The Me-262 simply could not perform as many roles as the other aircraft and because of its engine problems was too limited in what it could do. You could only get about 10 hours out of each engine anyhow?

Dont take me wrong I think the Me-262 was far more advanced than any of the other jets to actually see service in WW2 but it was too limited.

Just because you like the Me-262 is so beloved to you, does not make it the best "multi-role" aircraft. That is like me saying the Bf-109 was the best aircraft to see service in WW2 because it is my favorite aircraft. It is simply not the truth...

Where in Germany do you live anyhow Wespe?

Wespe · Feb 15, 2007

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
Okay and what effect did the Me-262 have on the war? Not a thing...

I would rather have 100 B-17s, Lancasters, B-24s or Ju-88s with more bomb load than a few Me-262s with 500kg.

The Me-262 simply could not perform as many roles as the other aircraft and because of its engine problems was too limited in what it could do. You could only get about 10 hours out of each engine anyhow?

Dont take me wrong I think the Me-262 was far more advanced than any of the other jets to actually see service in WW2 but it was too limited.

Just because you like the Me-262 is so beloved to you, does not make it the best "multi-role" aircraft. That is like me saying the Bf-109 was the best aircraft to see service in WW2 because it is my favorite aircraft. It is simply not the truth...

Where in Germany do you live anyhow Wespe?

Why do you forward such grueling words to me? Can't you leave me my dreams?
Don't you posses some feelings?

Okay, the 262 wasn't really ready yet, but it marks a new era in aviation. Therefore I would say that it could have been the most versatile a/c for the Lw, if it would have been recognized as such by 1942. So the most versatile a/c the Lw had during the whole war would have probably been the Ju 88, but producing Ju 88's in 1944 instead of 262's that just hurts.
I am a Augsburger but right now I am making a living in Malaysia.

Have fun
Wespe

Civettone · Feb 15, 2007

Correction, the 004B could operate for 10 hours before being revised (mainly replacing the turbine blades). The Jumo 213 or Russian VK 107 didn't achieve a much better maintainability level either.

And sorry Wespe but we all have dreams and favorites. I love pretty much all German and Italian aircraft but you have to become emotionally unattached if you want to discuss them. Else you'll just state opinions and hopes as facts...

The Me 262 was a very versatile aircraft and had the war dragged on langer, we would have seen large numbers of various variants including ground attack and night fighter versions. Surely the Me 262 design was suited for these modifications.

But IMO it was too advanced. A simpler and/or single engined jet fighter would have been a better option, in combination with the Ar 234 which would have become operational before the Me 262 had it too given the same priority as the Me 262.

See ... that's defending and attacking the Me 262 in the same post!

Kris

Wespe · Feb 15, 2007

Civettone said:
Correction, the 004B could operate for 10 hours before being revised (mainly replacing the turbine blades). The Jumo 213 or Russian VK 107 didn't achieve a much better maintainability level either.

And sorry Wespe but we all have dreams and favorites. I love pretty much all German and Italian aircraft but you have to become emotionally unattached if you want to discuss them. Else you'll just state opinions and hopes as facts...

The Me 262 was a very versatile aircraft and had the war dragged on langer, we would have seen large numbers of various variants including ground attack and night fighter versions. Surely the Me 262 design was suited for these modifications.

But IMO it was too advanced. A simpler and/or single engined jet fighter would have been a better option, in combination with the Ar 234 which would have become operational before the Me 262 had it too given the same priority as the Me 262.

See ... that's defending and attacking the Me 262 in the same post!

Kris

Hi Kris,

mmmmphfffff...

mmmhfff ... Ital...mmmpfff Italian ..

Italian Aircr..mppffff sorry I cant hold myself back.
But on the Ar 234 I would agree ..mmmffhf. Itali...mpfff
that's a good one.

Have fun
Wespe mmffppf...Ital...

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Feb 15, 2007

Wespe said:
Why do you forward such grueling words to me? Can't you leave me my dreams?
Don't you posses some feelings?

Okay, the 262 wasn't really ready yet, but it marks a new era in aviation. Therefore I would say that it could have been the most versatile a/c for the Lw, if it would have been recognized as such by 1942. So the most versatile a/c the Lw had during the whole war would have probably been the Ju 88, but producing Ju 88's in 1944 instead of 262's that just hurts.
I am a Augsburger but right now I am making a living in Malaysia.

Have fun
Wespe

The only reason I disagree with you is because okay the 262 could night fight, fighter, recon and fighter bomber.

Fw-190 could perform more roles than that and so could the Ju-88. Then you also have the Mossie and the B-25.

Wespe · Feb 15, 2007

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
The only reason I disagree with you is because okay the 262 could night fight, fighter, recon and fighter bomber.

Fw-190 could perform more roles than that and so could the Ju-88. Then you also have the Mossie and the B-25.

Bahhhh. the mossie was just good for termites,

I had to say something negative, sorry I can't help it.
But on the B-25 or even the A-26 yep I would agree on those two.
Fantastic versatile machines.
I think we got the winner = A-26 8)

Wespe

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Feb 15, 2007

The A-26 was a wonderful aircraft and beautiful too.

Civettone · Feb 15, 2007

I thought about it, and the Mosquito was more versatile than the Ju 88...

And I don't know if the Fw 190 was more versatile than the Me 262, I just think it had more time to develop into new versions. The Me 262 was in production for less than a year. How many versions were there of the Fw 190 in mid 1942?

Kris

Parmigiano · Feb 16, 2007

Wespe, are you from Augsburg city or from the area (like Ellzee?)

Wespe · Feb 16, 2007

Parmigiano said:
Wespe, are you from Augsburg city or from the area (like Ellzee?)

Hi Parmigiano

(Ellzee?) sorry I don't get that one.

I am from Augsburg-Lettenbach, why? do you have a Ice-cream or Pizza shop there?

Wespe

Parmigiano · Feb 16, 2007

@ Wespe

Just I am married with somebody from that area, and one of her relatives is more or less of your age, lives half the time in Germany and half in Far East (Thailand and Malaysia) and should be back in Germany this summer.
Ellzee is the little village where the family is from, about 30km from Augsburg.
Pretty a coincidence, just wondering if by chance you were 'him'

And hey, if you want to start with old fashioned stereotypes like pizza, mandolin etc. I must give you a fair warning :

I have a 30+ years experience of jokes in University, Military and Bar Sport, so I could go on for 3 months without repeating myself

Understood you little Kraut?

DerAdlerIstGelandet · Feb 16, 2007

And the war has begun...

Best Aircraft in Many Different Roles Part II

Airman 1st Class

Attachments

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Airman 1st Class

Attachments

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Tech Sergeant

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Tech Sergeant

Airman 1st Class

Attachments

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Airman 1st Class

Attachments

Tech Sergeant

Airman 1st Class

Attachments

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Airman 1st Class

Attachments

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Tech Sergeant

Senior Airman

Airman 1st Class

Attachments

Senior Airman

Private Chemtrail Disperser

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads