Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
What was so woeful about the Me-109T? When they entered service (i.e. 1940) the Me-109T was as good as any other CV based fighter aircraft.
Me-109T1 was only an interim aircraft as it was simply a modified Me-109E.Bf 109 T-1 would have been barely suitable for carrier operations". The reasons he gives apply to the early Seafires too!
Me-109T1 was only an interim aircraft as it was simply a modified Me-109E.
But as stated a little earlier, the DKM didn't really have any experience with CVs and didn't really know what they were looking for...
Had the Kreigsmarine actually built a carrier (or two) AND perhaps consulted with the Japanese who were seasoned operators of CV units well before the war, then perhaps a dedicated naval airframe would have been developed...
The 109T in the wildest imagination was barely a figment, and Germany had no analogue to Val or Kate or even Japan's long range and lethal torpedo's for naval operations.
The Zero in those same years were extremely competitive to the 109 and 190 for land based ops, the Betty was an excellent medium bomber. Having said that, IMO Germany had a better mix of bombers suited to tactical and CAS ops than the Japanese. After 1942, there is no question in my mind that German airpower had a better mix of high performance aircraft to support both land based operations, interception and CAS and sea lane shipping attacks from land than the Japanese.
The He 177 is an aircraft which I wouldn't fancy a long over water flight in! It was also produced in relatively small numbers..
Steve
Has to be Germany. The only Japanese planes that were probably better than their German counterparts would be long-range floatplanese (H8K), and most catapult-launched recon planes. And of course carrier-based planes, duh. All of this makes sense because the Japanese had a real navy.
Much larger numbers than for the Fw 200C. The "Scourge of the Atlantic"