Best Fighter III

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi Burador,

welcome to the forum, Like I said in an earlier thread, if a plane gets hit by 30mm the fellow is a gonner anyway. Theoreticaly you might be right, but if you check on YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. - M2-262 against B17 you can see how these 30mm projectiles make mincemeat out of a target being hit.

Wespe
 

Attachments

  • Signat.forum.bmp
    132 KB · Views: 118

Most of the time it takes more than one 30-mm shell to down even a light enemy fighter. With the low-velocity MK-108 cannon the Lw pilot has a problem of pursuing in order to close the distance and knocking out an opposing fighter. Having an MK-108 cannon against the B-17's is alright but it is a different matter when dealing with opposing fighters in a dogfight. By the way, I think Rheinmetall-Borsig came out with a high-velocity 30-mm cannon with a different designation. But I also think it was reported that the cannon produced unacceptable vibrations in a Bf-109. Was this cannon successful in an Me-262?
 
A single 30mm minen geschoss would easily rip the wing off any single engined fighter, even the P-47.

Here's what a hit from a 30mm Minen Geschoss looks like:
 
Burador, one hit from a HE/AP 30mm round from the Mk108 was indeed enough to take down any single engine aircraft, and most of the 2 engined jobs as well... Documented proof...
Click to expand...

One hit from a .303 was enough to take down any fighter or bomber, too. However, you need a lot more on average.

A single 30mm could bring down any aircraft if it hit in the right place, but a glancing blow, a hit in a wing tip, an explosion in an elevator or rudder, detonation on the surface, a faulty fuse, hit on the wheel well, etc, etc, could all enable a fighter to survive a hit from a 30mm.

The average number of 30 mm hits to down even a single engined fighter is certainly greater than 1.0, probably more in the order of 2.
 
A single 9mm Parabellum round will also bring down any single seat fighter or bomber, oh yes..

Hop, you've got to be kidding me !

A 30mm HE(M) shot would normally rip a fighter to pieces and severely damage any bomber, and a 20mm HE(M) shot would usually severely cripple a fighter and leave damage like this on a bomber:

A rifle bullet can't be compared to this...
 
I can see a big bomber survive one or even two MK 108 impacts but a fighter? No matter where, the damage would be sufficient to bring it down. The difference between the two is that a B-17 (for instance) has more non-essential areas. But a fighter or even a Shturmovik is dead meat when hit by a MK 108 greeting card.

Kris
 
A single 9mm Parabellum round will also bring down any single seat fighter or bomber, oh yes..

Hop, you've got to be kidding me !
Click to expand...

No, not at all.

A single round of rifle calibre or above can bring down an aircraft. Passing through the pilot's head would be a good example.

That doesn't mean a single round will always bring down an aircraft, or even usually do so.

This statement is ambiguous:
Burador, one hit from a HE/AP 30mm round from the Mk108 was indeed enough to take down any single engine aircraft,
Click to expand...

Does it mean a single round of 30mm can bring down a fighter? Well, the same is true of .303

Does it mean a single round will usually bring down a fighter? That's certainly not true of .303, but no evidence is offered it's true of 30mm, either.

Does it mean a single round will always bring down a fighter? That's patently untrue for any round, even an 88.

A 30mm HE(M) shot would normally rip a fighter to pieces
Click to expand...

In the right place, it's certainly true. In the wrong place, it's not true. On average, your are going to need more than 1 hit for a kill.
 
Hop, a bomber is usually controlled by more than one pilot, so unless the rifle bullet passes through both pilot's heads its not going to bring down the aircraft. I think we can agree this is not a possibility ?

In the right place, it's certainly true. In the wrong place, it's not true. On average, your are going to need more than 1 hit for a kill
Click to expand...

Exactly which spot on any WW2 fighter is the wrong place for a 30mm HE(M) projectile ? A hit to the fuselage and it breaks in two, a hit to the wing and it tears right off, a hit to the center of the fighter and the pilot is either dead or in such bad shape he can't fly the a/c anymore or the a/c is rendered a flying brick.

Its highly likely, for the 30mm HE(M) round atleast, that each hit obtained by ths weapon on an enemy fighter spelled the emediate doom of it.
 
While I agree that a 30mm was eneogh to bring down most aircraft. I also agree that technically a single 9mm or even a .303 was eneogh to if it is a lucky shot.

Granted this is off topic but I have seen a single 7.62mm round bring down an aircraft.
 
No technically a single small round can jam flight controls and render the aircraft un controllable. I have actually scene a spent casing jam flight controls and bring an aircraft down and kill people.

Again this is all highly unlikely but it is possible.
 
Trust me you would be surprised. Just the smallest fragments of anything can get stuck in flight controls, flight control rods, servos, and anything else you can think of and jam controls.

We call it FOD in the aviation world. Foreign Object Damage.
 
Soren said:
I seriously doubt a .303 can jam the controls of a bomber.
Click to expand...
A misplaced pulley guide pin caused the entire failure of a P-3 elevator trim system - the aircraft pitched up about 60 degrees before the crew got it under control. I seen this when I was working at Lockheed Burbank back in 1980. Adler is right on the money - you'd be surprised what the smallest or seeming insignificant FOD could do to an aircraft.
 
So the best fighter?

Still the Me-262 ??? "Unstoppable King of the Air" ???
Or what is the "contribution" criteria for this question ?
Wespe
 

Attachments

  • Signat.forum.bmp
    132 KB · Views: 125
No I dont think the Me-262 was the best fighter. Especially not because you keep hounding on it so much.

In order for an aircraft to even be considered the best it needs to have engines that are not only good for 10 to 50 (on the upper most top side) hours before they need to be replaced or componants replaced in it. The construction has to use similiar metals.

Was it a great fighter yes! But it was too little too late and it would have been better suited to put all that material into Fw-190s, Ta-152s and Bf-109s with which you could fight the war and make more of.

I go with the Ta-152.
 

Barley 70 produced planes (less than 20 in action) how can this support a claim to being the best aircraft ?
 

Attachments

  • Signat.forum.bmp
    132 KB · Views: 123
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

L
  • Locked
What Criteria should be used for determining the best land based piston fighter
9 10 11
Replies
218
Views
24K
Lighthunmust
L
N
Best Aircrafts
Replies
4
Views
2K
TheMustangRider
O
Poor Aircraft, Best Pilot
Replies
4
Views
2K
net_sailor
  • Locked
Best Piston Engined Fighter Ever
8 9 10
Replies
187
Views
27K
lesofprimus
  • Locked
The Person Below Me (TPBM) Pt. III
118 119 120
Replies
2K
Views
119K
Soren
Menu
Log in
Register