Best Bomber Killing Aircraft......

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

That would be "they were hoping to have".
Producing sophisticated fighters in order to attack just a specific kind of enemy planes was, in the country that has 3 major powers shrinking it's territory, one of many mistakes Germans made in WW2.

A more specific case was deleting 2 cannons when they designed Fw-190D-9 vs. most of Anton's four, and hope to attack escorts only.
 
ashiphire said:
just about every aircraft Germany made was at some point transferred to some other role
you can't say that they would have not tried it as a bomber destroyer
Click to expand...

In this case I think it would have. The Ta 152 would have been used to take out the escorts while other aircraft (i.e. Bf 109, Fw 190A, Me 262 etc) would have been used against the bombers.

Of course this all does not matter in the end because well it did not happen...
 
Hi,

for a good reason the Ta152H got a MK108 30mm, which was pretty much useless vs fighters.

btw, earlyer someone wrote that the 1 x 13mm + 2 x 20mm + 2x 30mm of the FW190A8/R8 was better than the 4 x 30mm of the 262. Thats just not true.
And the best bomber destroyer while BoB was the 110C or Bf109E, cannons just do much better vs armored bombers.
Though, specialy cause this reason most RAF Bombers already operated at night while BoB.

Another very good and successfull Bomber destroyer was the He217 at night.

Greetings,

Knegel
 
Last edited:
BF110 is very good, I heard only it's roll rate was below par. P.s. Could the P-38 fight on equal terms with single engined fighters? Or was that only cause of the inferiour training of Axis pilots?

I find it strange to say that an aircraft is to fast. I do understand it was hard for the pilots to adjust to the higher speed. The FW190A-8/R8 is the best destroyer, however it could not hold his own against fighters. It was to heavy with the added armour. The ME-262 is the best interceptor, it's 100/80 30mm rounds are just not enuf to be called a pure destroyer. It could break up a box of heavies with ease. Leaving it open for destruction by other fighters.

I read somethimes the max number of fighter they could send against a formation was 4. Not nearly enough to make a dent.
 
gjs238 said:
P-38
Click to expand...

P-38 for the following reasons:
- available early in the war
- very good firepower: 20mm cannon, (4) 0.50" machine guns
- very good range
- great rate of climb
- very good high altitude performance
(just don't feed it British fuel)
 
Last edited:
The P-38 might be the best US bomber killer, but nowhere near the German 30mm + 20mm or the heavy 37mm or 45mm armed Russian planes. The P-38 is only named cause the US didn't have a propper killer. The ME109 30mm + 2 13mm is better then the 20mm + 4x 0.50" of the P-38.

Why range is so important is beyond me, it's usefull but high climb rate with heavy armament is way more important.
For the defenders it's a succes if the bomber formations break up and therefore miss their target, you need heavy rounds to bring 1 down in 1 pass. And thus make the bombers loose their formation, easier to kill them also when they alone.
 
Last edited:
I would think that any .50 armed fighter would have had problems bringing down bombers. Not to mention the Brittish and US heavies

P.s. I've been reading Osprey about the Sturmjeagers, they where mostly flying FW190 A8 R2, a MK108 with 55 rpg IN the wing. I thought the MK103/108 where mounted in gondolas.
What where thay flying?
 
Tomahawk101 said:
Me 163
Me 262
Bristol Beaufighter
Hawker Hurricane
P-51
P-47
Click to expand...

This is an interesting list, as it seems to be based on several, somewhat unrelated, critera.

The first two (Me262 and Beaufighter) clearly belong based on actual performance in the role and by having the necesssary characteristics such as heavy cannon armament. The 262 also has excellent speed to avoid escorts and make enemy gunnery tracking difficult, and the Beaufighter has good endurance to commend it.

The Hurricane racked up an outstanding record as a bomber interceptor in the Battle of Britain, so from the actual historical performance perspective it could be included as one of the "greatest" if not one of the "best" (there is a difference). However, its .303 calibre MG armameent was not really adequate against larger planes with self-sealing fuel tankls and it is fortunate for Britain that it mostly faced obsolescent twin-engined German bombers (He-111 and Do-17) with laughably poor defensive armament and not B-17s and B-24s.

The two US planes are also an interesting choce, since neither was used extensively in the bomber-killing role. However, it is reasonable to presume that the P-47, with its high altitude capability, ruggedness, and eight .50 cal MGs would do a good job against most bombers. The P-51, though, would not be well suited to the task. Four to six .50 cal MGs might bring down He-111s or Ki-21s pretty well, but against larger four-engined planes they would not be adequate. Plus its Merlin would be much more prone to "fatal" damage from concentrated defensive fire in comparison to the P-47.
 
OK, here is my two cents

The best bomber killer was the FW 190A in just about all configurations. My reasons? Mass produced, long life, heavy firepower, armored, air cooled engine better survivability, radial engine helps protect pilot, can defend itself against escort fighters, did not need an escort when taking off or landing like the 262 and one of the most important aspects, reliability. Do not discount reliability when picking a bomber killer. Looking at the 262's reliability and the down time associated with very short engine life and vulnerability when taking off or landing I just can't choose it as my weapon of choice. But this is only my opinion.
 
About the Me 262: even the FW 190's (sturmbocken) needed protection from fighter they where heavy beasts (400kg heavier than the normal fighters). And the engine from a Me 262 could be changed very fast, at least fast enough not to make a problem.

Allthough I agree the 190 was the best bomber killer, i do not agree with your reasons. The ME-262 was an high speed intereptor, the FW was a slow destroyer. 2 different tasks, 1 to break up the formation the 2nd to kill them.
 
Last edited:
the tasks were the same in comparison if we use the A-8Sturm and the Me 262A-1a, both were developed to tackle the US heavy bomber formations and for Me 262 JG 7 this was it's primary task till wars end.
 
The question 'Which is the Best Bomber Killing aircraft' is basically the same as 'Which is the Best WW2 bomber' There is one run away champion in each Me262 for the Killing aircraft and B29 for the best bomber.

The real question is 'Which is the second best bomber killing aircraft'.

When up to speed the Me262 was almost immune to enemy escorting fighters, could pick and choose when to attack and had a one pass, one kill ability, more with rockets. Nothing else comes close.

So the question is Whats second best?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
Best WW2 Seafire vs. best A6M Zero
Replies
9
Views
1K
Shortround6
S
A
Best Axis four engined bomber?
Replies
9
Views
2K
dedalos
D
S
Request help identifying type of Bomber aircraft
Replies
3
Views
879
SaparotRob
S
"Generations" of fighter aircraft
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
Barrett
B
S
Researching German Aircraft Armor; Actual Use & Accounts
Replies
2
Views
215
sopwith21
S
Menu
Log in
Register