Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
And so was the Fw57 and Hs124.It was the first of it's kind...
The fuselage was at Duxford last time i saw it about 3 years agoThat's not saying much, the Avro Lancaster had a higher cruise and maximum speed than the Stuka.
This is true, it was an excellent and adaptable design built to a flawed requirement. Not surprisingly the Zerstorergruppen didn't last much longer after the BoB and the units were repurposed as night fighters, although the Pulk-Zerstorer (formation breaker) concept of disrupting USAAF bomber formations had merit, the Bf 110 was outclassed by the escort fighters. It is worth mentioning that its continued use, exemplary as it was, was because its intended replacement did not manifest into a good fighting machine. Goring once quipped that his headstone should read "he would have lived longer but for the Me 210!"
Bf 110 survivors:
View attachment 562750Europe 270
The Deutsches Technic Museum, Berlin.
View attachment 562751Bf 110
RAF Museum, Hendon.
View attachment 562752Bf 110 Schnaufer
Australian War Memorial.
View attachment 562753Bf 110 Hess
And this engine not mentioned on the page you linked to, the other engine from Hess's Bf 110 is at Scotland's National Museum of Flight at East Fortune.
These are all my own images. Somewhere I have a 35mm print I took of Hess' Bf 110 fuselage at IWM Lambeth, but its hidden itself away somewhere.
I mentioned a 4% loss rate as it was around tha maximum BC could withstand long term for bomber missions, dunno how it got woven into the Bf110 story.I don't care who you are, that is not a 4% loss rate, and that is NOT the way losses in a battle or campaign are calculated. .
I think I assumed an understanding that wasn't there.Hi pbehn,
Definitely not aimed in your direction. Just sort of thinking on the keyboard ...
It was the first of its kind, a twin engined destroyer with heavy armament and long range.
Not in service, not operational, zero kills..same for other prototypes
It was NOT the first of it's kind as shown by several earlier posts.
I also mentioned that the Potez 630 flew one month before the Bf 110. If you want to disregard the much older airplanes.
View attachment 562772
Engines were around 580-700hp each (110 used Jimo 210s of about the same power) and the French Aircraft used two 20mm cannon in the bottom of the fuselage (or in gondolas)
Since the 20mm guns it used were considerably more powerful than the 20mm guns in the 110 perhaps it can be forgiven not having any machine guns in the nose.
Some later versions got four 7.5mm machine guns add under the wings but since they never fitted better engines than the small radials performance was lacking by 1939/40.
The twin engine multi seat fighter (or ???) combat plane was a concept that was written about fairly often in the period between the wars. It was much loved by theorists. But few, if any, air forces had the experience to show that the concept was flawed.
Right. They're prototypes of a nation not at war. They weren't produced because they weren't considered useful enough to justify the expenditure. Rather obviously, an aircraft in service in a peacetime air force isn't going to get kills.Not in service, not operational, zero kills..same for other prototypes
When the "Battle of Britain" was joined, the Germans embarked upon that campaign with 237 serviceable Bf 110s. In the course of the battle (generally September through October/November), they lost 223. Also, they produced a few during the months of the campaign, so the total available was always inching up by a bit at a time.
I don't care who you are, that is not a 4% loss rate, and that is NOT the way losses in a battle or campaign are calculated. They are calculated based on the number of aircraft available as a percent of force, and as the number of losses divided by the number of sorties if you really want a picture of the campaign. Aircraft lost to enemy aircraft are air-to-air losses in combat. Aircraft lost to flak are lost to AAC (anti-aircraft). Losses due to mechanical issues, running out of fuel, test flights, etc are operational losses.