bf110 exchange ratio

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

Valid question. My original answer was probably more based on how the weapons system was used rather than what it was originally specified to accomplish. Given the age and evolutionary nature of the Beaufighter design, I suppose the MGs were there to provide longer firing duration - the use of them for aiming was a beneficial side effect for a specific mission (rocket attacks). The other mission specific useful side effect was suppression of crew in anti-shipping sorties - the 303s kept the sailors' heads (craniums not toilets!) down while the cannons did the more serious damage.
 
As a strike aircraft the retention of 6 x mg had a number of advantages namely increasing the firepower and the spread of the firepower. Infantry and soft vehicles are vulnerable and it helps keep the heads down of the AA gunners. In reality the mg's were often removed and replaced by additional fuel tanks or the installation of rockets.

It's also worth remembering that the first Beaufighters had drum fed cannon and the poor observer had to reload the guns. In a combat that could take time or be physically impossible, and the mg's were a useful backup.
 
Hello
Glider is right and to return the thread subject, same goes to Bf 110, also in it, at least in B and C models, one of the duties of the WO/AG was reloading the MG FF/FF M cannon, there were 2 spare 60 rounds drums per cannon. 110G-2 got belt-fed MG 151/20s, but I cannot remember were ever those MG FF Ms in Es and Fs beltfed. IMH0 at least 3 crew F-4 nightfighters should have had some other system than manual reloading.

Juha
 
davebender said:
That explains why you might have a single machinegun loaded with tracer ammunition in each wing. But why 3 machineguns in each wing?
Click to expand...

It wasnt 3 in each wing iirc correctly it was 4 in the right wing and 2 in the left wing. Originally there was to be 4 in each wing but 2 were replaced by what looks like large navigation lights

.
 
Probably not to the standard you would be happy with, but i didnt just make that stuff up. Plus ther are plenty of people her who know heaps more than I about the technical specs. To me the sets are a means to an end....a "black box" aimed at detection and to assist in achieving good interceptions.

Main information source for me is Bill Gunstons Night Fighters - A development combat history Stephens Cambridge 1976

The contemporary to the first operational German AI sets were the centimetric AI Mk VIII which first entered service in May 1941, and were in mass production by about October 1941.

Gunston gives a detailed account of their development, and quite a few of the technical specs for the unit. Operationally however, he gives a very clear account of their capabilities...."The biggest advance with the new set was that it could be used at low level: previously all AIs were almost useless below 5000 ft. The new fine beam settings scanned the whole sky ahead of the fighter, and possessed the best angular resolution of any airborne set available in the world at that time. Resolution was excellent, and error margin less than 1%. The limiting factor was no longer the equipment, it was the crew proficincy.......Maximum range varied with target speed, and size, as well as the weather (like any radar) but was never less than 6 miles even against fighter sized aircraft, and more generally in the range of fifteen miles. ninimum range was a mere 100 yards. Beam width was an impressive 45 degree arc".

Regarding German efforts in radar technology, Gunston comments"German prowess in ground based radars was thus unquestioned, but what about AI? Work in this field started years later than in Britain, and was generally not inspired, compared to the pioneering work done by TRE with their magnetron. It was in December 1940 that Kammhuber ordered Telefunken to begin work on an AI radar, and their answer was an intersting compromise. They chose a wavelength of 62cm (compared to less than 10cm in the AI Mk VIII) and a power output of 490MHz, and used a bulky and draggy aerial system comprisingfour double pairs of dipoles, in an array carried on struts, on the fighters nose. Under ideal conditions (and the installation was found to give unpredictable and variable results) the two display scopes gave useful readings at ranges out to 2-3.5 miles, and down to 250 yards. Similar to the wearlier AI MkIV, the new radar gave frequent spurious blips, and high degree of distortion. Serviceability rates were also very low. Unlike the RAF Night Fighter Crews, most Luftwaffe NJG pilots at this time scorned their new equipment, and frequntly showed an attitude of outright hostility toward it. This was in stqark contrast to the meticulous acceptance program undertaken by TRE for the MkVIII installation, which was enthusiastically accepted and used by the RAF crews.

(The original) FUG 200 sets began pre-production installation in July 1941"....


I cant find Gunstons assessment of the search beam width, but it was narrow....perhaps no more than 25 degrees
 
Good stuff! Thanks!

I remember reading something about phase controlled(?) radar of the 110s, what was said about it is that was in principle a forerunner of the system used on the F-16.. I know very little about the soul of actual radar stuff, but to me it seems that the primary difference of operation - apart from frequency - was that the German radar scanned the whole horizont all the time, while the British sweeped the radar head in circles with an electric motor.
 
tail end charlie said:
Detailed research showed that pilots instinctively pulled to the left when firing so the right side was loaded more heavily for the recoil to balance it out.
Click to expand...

I wold love to think that was the reason but would tend to go with the 'where do we have the room' theory. A plane the size and weight of the Beaufighter isn't going to be that impacted by a couple of machine guns in particular when the 20mm's are blazing away.
 
I cant see 9 tons of Beaufighter being disturbed by anything short of a 57mm firing. Its a big old lump of aircraft I havent seen a 110 and a Beau side by side in a museum but having seen them both the Beau is about 20% bigger and heavier. The 110 looks like a fighter the Beau looks like a light bomber.

Both good aircraft that seemed to be loaded heavier and heavier throughout there life and never quite having enough power to become a great aircraft. The Beau coul have used the more powerful Centaurus or Gryphon engines to give it a bit more zip.
 

I was of course joking, but the thought for the joke came from reading it was upset whhen firing the cannon, the plane would dip with the recoil and the shells fell short of the target. So far as I know it was as someone else said planned to have 8 machine guns but took two out for other things. As with the spitfire the machine guns were so the plane wasnt defenceless when the cannon drums emptied.
 
In 'HP per kilo' category, Beaufighter was not in disadvantage vs. contemporaries (Ju-88, A-20, B-25, Pe-2). And it was a great aircraft.
 

According to Gebhard Aders the search angle of the FuG 202 Lichtenstein BC was 70°, Frequency 490 MHz, range 3,500 metres (11,480 ft) with a minimum resolution range of 200 m (656 ft). Where German equipment scored was in its modular construction ( way ahead of the British) and weight- 24 kg (53 lb).

The later FuG 220 Lichtenstein SN-2, which wasn't jammed by Window until after July 1944, had a search angle of 120°, Frequency range 73/82 or 91 MHz, later expanded to a range of 37.5 to 118 MHz. Range = 4 km to 300 or 500 m (2.5 miles to 984 or 1,640 ft) weight =70 kg (154lb)

Ader's comments on the later 110 night fighters are interesting "With the G-4 series the Bf 110 had reached the zenith of its development...The standard armament of Bf 110 night fighters delivered from June 1944 onwards consisted of 2 x MK108 in the upper and 2 x MG151 in the lower nose section and an oblique armament of 2 x MG/FF. On account of the powerful explosive effect of its ammunition - as a rule a burst of only 15 rounds sufficed to bring down a four-engined bomber...On the other hand...Its low muzzle velocity (the MK 108 ) meant that the pilot had to approach the enemy aircraft very closely and accept the risk of damage to his own aircraft from debris...some pilots asked for the MK 108 cannon to be removed from their aircraft..."
"The Bf 110 may have been classed as obsolete, but in the hands of good pilots this aircraft remained a deadly weapon right up to the end of the war. This is particularly noticeable when the victory claims submitted by I./NJG 1 (He 219) and II./NJG 1 (Bf 110) from June 1944 onwards are compared. Operating at the same time and under the same conditions the pilots of II./NJG 1 regularly shot down more bombers than the He 219 crews."

On the He 219: "In June [1944] a few He 219As were flown operationally by II./NJG 1, but the pilots - all old Bf 110 hands- were not at ease with the Uhu. They found that its performance was not significantly better than that of their usual mounts...After the high altitude performance of the He 219A-2 and A-5 series had proved inadequate for intercepting Mosquitoes in June and July Heinkel delivered the A-6...Basically a He 219A-5 minus 50 kg (110 lb) of armour plating and with armament reduced to 4 x MG 151 guns this lightened version was powered by DB 603L engines...and were fitted with GM-1 nitrous oxide injection system. These measures promised a straight and level maximum speed of 615 km/h at 10,000 m (382 mph at 32,810 ft) altitude. In practice tests revealed that the He 219A-6...was extremely unstable at such altitudes, and had to be banked very carefully in a wide turn to avoid a stall...in any case: the He 219A-6 was never used as a "Mosquito hunter".
 
Last edited:

I posted a very good link to German a/c production awhile back, so why don't you use instead of Wiki?
Aircraft Industry Report Exhibits

http://www.ordersofbattle.darkscape.net/site/sturmvogel/images/ussbs/exiii-cpt1.gif
http://www.ordersofbattle.darkscape.net/site/sturmvogel/images/ussbs/exiii-cpt2.gif
 
Hello
I asked from those who know more than me on FC a/c and yes, the only Hurricane, which was written off on 15 Aug 1940 according to BoB Then and Now Mk V, F/O Passy's P3827, following combat against KG 26 and I./ZG 76 off the NE coast of England, was after all later repaired and subsequently served in 4 different units before it was SOC 18 Dec 44.So the total losses in combat off NE England on 15 Aug 40 were LW: 7 Bf 110s plus 8 He 111s vs RAF 0. 2 FC Hurricanes were substantially damaged (Cat. 2) after forced-landings outside their base. 2 Bf 110s returned to Norway with wounded but were repairable.

Juha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

W
What if the Me109Z instead of Bf110?
Replies
11
Views
1K
Admiral Beez
A
K
Highest Power/Weight ratio engine
Replies
6
Views
4K
GregP
S
What if the Bf110 only have one pilot?
4 5 6
Replies
101
Views
7K
GrauGeist
S
Wing-aspect-ratio
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
GregP
G
Schnaufer Bf110 G-4
Replies
9
Views
2K
Crimea_River
Menu
Log in
Register