no problem
Best Bomber Killing Aircraft......
- Thread starter lesofprimus
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Erich
the old Sage
best bomber killer was the Fw 190A-8/R8 as noted in my earlier postings of October/November. the Fw was the superior weapons platform to the 109 and the 262 was too fast as noted by earlier posters. Unless the pilot was an experten in the field of high tech avionics and speed he could not set up properly and easily overshot. Walter Schuck told me this when he was in I./JG 7 as he had a very hard time transitioning to the 262 from JG 5 109's.........
♪
♪
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
i'm with you on the 190A............
cheddar cheese
Major General
I, however, am not.
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
what are you going with then??
cheddar cheese
Major General
The 262
I believe the 262 was the best bomber killer if it was armed with folding fin rockets. The rockets were devastating when used against large bomber formations. However if just using its cannons, the Me-262 was too fast to attack the slower bombers, and if it slowed down it was then an easy target for the P-51's and P-47's. So if you are talking about just straight bomber killer with cannons then yes I would go with the Fw-190 also.
cheddar cheese
Major General
I think the Rolls Royce Vulture (were they the ones on the Manchester?) engines were the biggest bomber killer...
The Rolls-Royce Vulture (and the related Peregrine) were aircraft engines, and probably the least successful power units ever produced by Rolls-Royce.
They were part of a program to develop power levels beyond that of the Merlin (1,100 hp, 820 kW in the early production versions) - a program that also resulted in creations like the Napier Sabre.
The Peregrine was a fairly standard design (at first sight) with two cylinder banks arranged in a V form. The Vulture was basically two Peregrines joined at the crankcase and with separate crankshafts geared to a common propeller shaft thus putting the cylinder banks in an X layout.
Both seem to have suffered from a far too short pre-service development period and the reliability was very poor. So much so that production was stopped.
The only type using the Vulture to go into production was the Avro Manchester which had two of them. When the engine reliability issues became clear the Avro team re-designed the aircraft to use four Merlins. This was initially called the Manchester Mark III and then renamed Lancaster.
Like all successful aircraft the Lancaster not only looked good but its flying characteristics matched its appearance. It is all the more ironic therefore that the birth of Avro's mighty machine owed so much to failure, the failure of its immediate predecessor, the twin engine Avro Manchester. The Avro 683 evolved almost accidentally as a result of recurrent failure of the insufficiently developed Rolls Royce Vulture engines installed in the Manchester.
They were part of a program to develop power levels beyond that of the Merlin (1,100 hp, 820 kW in the early production versions) - a program that also resulted in creations like the Napier Sabre.
The Peregrine was a fairly standard design (at first sight) with two cylinder banks arranged in a V form. The Vulture was basically two Peregrines joined at the crankcase and with separate crankshafts geared to a common propeller shaft thus putting the cylinder banks in an X layout.
Both seem to have suffered from a far too short pre-service development period and the reliability was very poor. So much so that production was stopped.
The only type using the Vulture to go into production was the Avro Manchester which had two of them. When the engine reliability issues became clear the Avro team re-designed the aircraft to use four Merlins. This was initially called the Manchester Mark III and then renamed Lancaster.
Like all successful aircraft the Lancaster not only looked good but its flying characteristics matched its appearance. It is all the more ironic therefore that the birth of Avro's mighty machine owed so much to failure, the failure of its immediate predecessor, the twin engine Avro Manchester. The Avro 683 evolved almost accidentally as a result of recurrent failure of the insufficiently developed Rolls Royce Vulture engines installed in the Manchester.
cheddar cheese
Major General
What were the engines called that were used in the Heinkel He-177?
2 Daimler-Benz DB 610A-1/B-1
Origin: Ernst Heinkel AG
Sub Contractor: Arado Flugzeugwerke
Type: Six-Seat Heavy Bomber and Missile carrier
Models: A-0 to A-5
First Flight:
V-1: November 19, 1939
A-0: November 1941
Service Delivery:
A-1: March 1942
A-5: February 1943
Engine: 2 Daimler-Benz DB 610A-1/B-1
Thrust: 2,950lb
Note: Each engine comprised of two V12 liquid cooled engines geared to one propeller.
Dimensions:
Span: 31.44m (103 ft. 1¼ in.)
Length: 22m (72 ft. 2 in.)
Height: 6.4m (21 ft.)
Weights: (A-5)
Empty: 37,038lb. (16,800 kg)
Loaded: 68,343lb (31,000kg)
Performance:
Maximum (at 41,000lb.): 295mph (472km/h)
Initial Climb: 853 ft/min (260m/min)
Service Ceiling: 26,500 ft (7080m)
Range with Fritz or Hs 293 missle: 3,107 miles (5000km)
Armament: A-5/R2:
One 7.92mm MG 81J manually aimed in nose
Ammunition: 2000 rounds
One 20mm MG 151 manually aimed in forward ventral gondola
Ammunition: 300 rounds
Two 13mm MG 131 in remote front dorsal turret
Ammunition: 750 rounds per gun
One 13mm MG 131 in electric aft dorsal turret
Ammunition: 750 rounds
One 20mm MG 151 cannon in in tail position
Ammunition: 300 rounds
Bomb Load: A-5/R2:
Sixteen 110 lb. (50kg) SC 50, four 551 lb. (250-kg) SC 250 or two 1,102 lb. (500 kg) SC 500, or two LMA III parachute sea mines, LT 50 torpedos, or Hs 293 of FX 1400 missiles.
Production:
8 Prototypes
35 He 177A-0 (Mainly Arado built)
130 He 177A-1 (Arado built)
170 He 177A-3 (Heinkel Built)
826 He 177A-5
Comments
Arguably the largest bomber built by the Germans, the He 177 suffered many flaws and turned into one of the Luftwaffe's biggest failures (when compare service use to the amount of resources invested.) A significant problem that plagued the program from the beginning was a ludicrous requirement that this extremely large aircraft be capable of dive bombing. This combined with the attempt to reduce drag by coupling the engines, while theoretically sound, proved to be impossible in practice for no aircraft in history had engines that would so readily burst into flame. 75% of the prototypes crashed and a good percentage of the 35 A-0 pre-production airframes were written off in crashed or in-flight fires.
About 700 served on the eastern front using 50mm and 75mm guns for tank-busting while a few brave aircrews ineffectually bombed England.
The He 177 proved to be such a big problem that Goering forbid Heinkel to develope a four engine version (though Heinkel did anyways, the result being the He 277).
Origin: Ernst Heinkel AG
Sub Contractor: Arado Flugzeugwerke
Type: Six-Seat Heavy Bomber and Missile carrier
Models: A-0 to A-5
First Flight:
V-1: November 19, 1939
A-0: November 1941
Service Delivery:
A-1: March 1942
A-5: February 1943
Engine: 2 Daimler-Benz DB 610A-1/B-1
Thrust: 2,950lb
Note: Each engine comprised of two V12 liquid cooled engines geared to one propeller.
Dimensions:
Span: 31.44m (103 ft. 1¼ in.)
Length: 22m (72 ft. 2 in.)
Height: 6.4m (21 ft.)
Weights: (A-5)
Empty: 37,038lb. (16,800 kg)
Loaded: 68,343lb (31,000kg)
Performance:
Maximum (at 41,000lb.): 295mph (472km/h)
Initial Climb: 853 ft/min (260m/min)
Service Ceiling: 26,500 ft (7080m)
Range with Fritz or Hs 293 missle: 3,107 miles (5000km)
Armament: A-5/R2:
One 7.92mm MG 81J manually aimed in nose
Ammunition: 2000 rounds
One 20mm MG 151 manually aimed in forward ventral gondola
Ammunition: 300 rounds
Two 13mm MG 131 in remote front dorsal turret
Ammunition: 750 rounds per gun
One 13mm MG 131 in electric aft dorsal turret
Ammunition: 750 rounds
One 20mm MG 151 cannon in in tail position
Ammunition: 300 rounds
Bomb Load: A-5/R2:
Sixteen 110 lb. (50kg) SC 50, four 551 lb. (250-kg) SC 250 or two 1,102 lb. (500 kg) SC 500, or two LMA III parachute sea mines, LT 50 torpedos, or Hs 293 of FX 1400 missiles.
Production:
8 Prototypes
35 He 177A-0 (Mainly Arado built)
130 He 177A-1 (Arado built)
170 He 177A-3 (Heinkel Built)
826 He 177A-5
Comments
Arguably the largest bomber built by the Germans, the He 177 suffered many flaws and turned into one of the Luftwaffe's biggest failures (when compare service use to the amount of resources invested.) A significant problem that plagued the program from the beginning was a ludicrous requirement that this extremely large aircraft be capable of dive bombing. This combined with the attempt to reduce drag by coupling the engines, while theoretically sound, proved to be impossible in practice for no aircraft in history had engines that would so readily burst into flame. 75% of the prototypes crashed and a good percentage of the 35 A-0 pre-production airframes were written off in crashed or in-flight fires.
About 700 served on the eastern front using 50mm and 75mm guns for tank-busting while a few brave aircrews ineffectually bombed England.
The He 177 proved to be such a big problem that Goering forbid Heinkel to develope a four engine version (though Heinkel did anyways, the result being the He 277).
Attachments
So arguably this aircraft was the best bomber killer!
wmaxt
Staff Sergeant
I guess the 262 gets my vote 4-30s will ruin your day very quickly. There are to many accounts of one or two flashing througe a formation of bom,bers and 4-6 bombers going down. If construction had not bee delayed by the switch to underground factories and indecision in the manufacturing they would have been quite formidable and worse yet more progress on reliability and range would have made a mojor impact.
cheddar cheese
Major General
Yeah that was a dreadful plane too. But I still like it 
So, my votes for the best bomber killers are the Daimler-Benz DB 610A-1/B-1 and the Rolls-Royce Vulture
So, my votes for the best bomber killers are the Daimler-Benz DB 610A-1/B-1 and the Rolls-Royce Vulture
GermansRGeniuses
Tech Sergeant
Sure, the Vulture sucked, but in concept I think it's a cool idea - an "X" engine!
cheddar cheese
Major General
Yeah its a great concept! Like communism though, it failed.
As said by many though including myself the Me-262 was too fast to really use its cannons on bombers.
GermansRGeniuses
Tech Sergeant
cheddar cheese
Major General
Wow that was pointless
GermansRGeniuses
Tech Sergeant
I know!
A while ago I wanted to explain an inverted 'V" engine, so I did it...
But the photo was a bitmap so it never got posted...
A while ago I wanted to explain an inverted 'V" engine, so I did it...
But the photo was a bitmap so it never got posted...
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
