Best Bomber Killing Aircraft...... (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

near the end of the war the germens had a radio controled rocket. thet they would luanch from bombers.
 

Attachments

  • iaf_542.gif
    iaf_542.gif
    109.8 KB · Views: 1,266
You guys are thinking rockets and jets...umm...sounds like a F16. Truth of the matter is that the FW190 was the bomber killer of the skies during wwii. The 262 was never produced in enough numbers or early enough to make a difference, also it's engines could not withstand the kind of abuse the a B17 crew would give them...50 cals hurt turbines pretty bad. The FW190 could knock a bomber out of the sky and even if it took hits while doing so, it would simply laugh and fly away.

If you want rockets and jets, then try an ME163 it was a rocket powered bomber killer, but it didn't work very well.
 
Evan, while it is true that 4 x 30mm will ruin ur day or anyone elses, the concentrated firepower of the 190-A8/R2 was more destructive....

2 x 13mm, 2 x 20mm, 2 x 30mm would cause more damage in a quicker amount of time than 4 x 30mm....

Either way, bomber crews had a rough time of it up there....

But the Fw-190A8/R2 was definatly a better platform for knocking down bombers.... Id rather be surrounded by armor plating and be slower than fast and easy to shoot down....
 
Good point Les. Either one would cause some substantial damage. Quick, short bursts do damage when using hit and run tactics. But I do see your point. Different methods of doing the same job. Either one head on could take out the cockpit and nose crew, which would effectively result in the loss of the bomber. Kind of hard to say which was "better" than the other as they were both effective.

By the way, nice sig!
 
lesofprimus said:
Evan, while it is true that 4 x 30mm will ruin ur day or anyone elses, the concentrated firepower of the 190-A8/R2 was more destructive....

2 x 13mm, 2 x 20mm, 2 x 30mm would cause more damage in a quicker amount of time than 4 x 30mm....

Either way, bomber crews had a rough time of it up there....

But the Fw-190A8/R2 was definatly a better platform for knocking down bombers.... Id rather be surrounded by armor plating and be slower than fast and easy to shoot down....


That makes no sense...


The Me-262's four concentrated cannons will make a lot more damage!

Lets say one burst equals a bullet out of each gun...

One pull on the 262=4 high explosive bullets, all in the nose - VERY CONCENTRATED

One pull on the 190=2 high explosive shells on the outer wings (easy to miss), 2 AP rounds on the inner wings (Ok, but not much damage unless to the fuel tanks or bombs...) and 2 13mm mg bullets (very rare to do anything)...


The Me-262 not only has a better chance of the shots landing together, the shells have a chance of creating damage anywhere.
 
2 AP rounds on the inner wings (Ok, but not much damage unless to the fuel tanks or bombs...)

2x 20mm rounds wont do much damage????? Last time I checked, 20mm rounds do alot of damage, especially to a thin skinned bomber....

The amount of lead that an Fw-109 can spew into a target in 2 seconds is far greater than the amount of lead the -262 can deliver in the same amount of time... Plus the fact that one burst from a -262 and hes flown by the target...
 
Well If its going to spread out, on a thin skinned bomber surely thats better because you are more likely to hit a vital part of the plane, rather than a load of lead hitting a small area which may not be that important?
 
Umm, slicing the wing off a B-24 certainly is important.... All that lead is like a giant chainsaw....

Also remember that the Fw-190 could come up behind a bomber, and just fill that bomber full of lead, while the -262 usually did a high speed head-on attack.... Armor plating is a wonderful thing aint it???
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back