FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
They don't have to - the final outcome of the BoB is what I rest my case on.
Me-110 Underrated
- Thread starter Zipper730
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
They don't have to - the final outcome of the BoB is what I rest my case on.
The outcome of the war does not prove who was better. The Persians won at Themopylae mate that is not an argument.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Well your opinion - bottom line the Bf 110 did not fulfill its role in the BoB. It did well in a ground support role and when faced with inferior opposition. As a night fighter it excelled, as a day interceptor it was an easy target for P-47s and P-51s.
The allies made 600,000 aircraft and lost almost half. The British alone outnumbered the Germans in all respects. The mustang is overrated as it appeared in vast numbers in the last year of the war against remnants and still they had 2,500 casualties. 17,000 mustangs produced. American industry was not being bombed and there were no shortages of any kind. If you compare the numbers and volumes involved you will probably question the effectiveness of allied weaponry in comparison to German.
Actually more p-47 and p-51 were shot down (5,000) than the Germans had fighters left. Not to count bombers and other aircraft destroyed.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
And in some cases I do but that's not what this discussion is about. The Bf 110 was not a bad aircraft (and probably was a bit underrated) but it was eclipsed.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Now you're grasping at straws and coming across being pretty silly.
There are lies, damned lies, and statistics. An aircraft can be judged a failure if it cannot perform the job for which it was designed. It can be considered a success if it is moved to a job that it is more capable of performing. Despite its range advantages over the 109, the Bf 110 could not protect German bombers from Spitfires and Hurricanes. It could sneak over the coast to drop a bomb or two. Directed by an efficient ground radar system it could destroy night bombers.
Cheers,
Dana
Cheers,
Dana
The LW had 230 by 110 then. It lost 196. These bf 110 shot down 340 spitfires and hurricanes when the RAF had thousands of both. I cannot see how you guys can come to such conclusions
Using the same 'argument' neither could the mustang protect their bombers
Hi Yiannis,
It seems we are questioning your statistics. You mention a great victory ratio when the RAF had thousands of Spitfires and thousands of Hurricanes. At what point in the BoB did Fighter Command have in excess of 2,000 Spits and 2,000 Hurries? If the RAF lost 1,023 aircraft during the Battle of Britain, and the Bf 110 downed 340 of them, you're claiming the Bf 110 was responsible for almost a third of all victories. Does that not make you question your own statistics?
Johnny Johnson wrote about his first encounter with the Bf 110 - the Germans immediately moved into a defensive circle to protect each others tails. Perhaps they scored some victories in these combats, but how well did they defend the bombers they were escorting?
I suspect your statistics, but more importantly I believe even Goering recognized that the 110 was a failure at defending his bombers from the RAF.
Cheers,
Dana
Just saw your Post #51. Did the P-51 force the Luftwaffe to change its tactics? Did Dowding state, "When I saw the Bf 110 over London I knew all was lost?"
It seems we are questioning your statistics. You mention a great victory ratio when the RAF had thousands of Spitfires and thousands of Hurricanes. At what point in the BoB did Fighter Command have in excess of 2,000 Spits and 2,000 Hurries? If the RAF lost 1,023 aircraft during the Battle of Britain, and the Bf 110 downed 340 of them, you're claiming the Bf 110 was responsible for almost a third of all victories. Does that not make you question your own statistics?
Johnny Johnson wrote about his first encounter with the Bf 110 - the Germans immediately moved into a defensive circle to protect each others tails. Perhaps they scored some victories in these combats, but how well did they defend the bombers they were escorting?
I suspect your statistics, but more importantly I believe even Goering recognized that the 110 was a failure at defending his bombers from the RAF.
Cheers,
Dana
Just saw your Post #51. Did the P-51 force the Luftwaffe to change its tactics? Did Dowding state, "When I saw the Bf 110 over London I knew all was lost?"
No, I don't question statistics and they are not my own. 1079 spitfires and hurricanes were lost and 1/3 were shot down by 110s. The rest 2/3s by 109s. How do I question stats. It's simple math.
The RAF had more planes and were also producing at higher rates. What does any of that have to do anything with what Dowding said? You are trying to connect irrelevant things.
The RAF had more planes and were also producing at higher rates. What does any of that have to do anything with what Dowding said? You are trying to connect irrelevant things.
Where do you get the idea that there was " thousands of both" ? During the BoB Fighter command could rarely field more than 700 Hurricanes and Spitfires per day, (usually in the 600's). The Luftwaffe could field that many ME109's plus 275 ME 110's. It was the RAF that had the disadvantage of numbers.
The ME 110 was about 20 mph faster than a Hurricane, was heavily armed, had a large ammo load and was a good diver. Its disadvantages were a poor climb rate, terrible turn rate and poor acceleration. It did have a narrow flight envelope that it could be successful in, but when caught operating outside that envelope , it suffered badly.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
What's irrelevant, is an opinion that flies in the face of solid fact.
The Bf110 could NOT perform in the fighter/escort role as it lacked maneuverability against single engined fighters.
The Bf110 did NOT shoot down scores of hapless British fighters, no matter how hard one wishes (for whatever reason).
The reality is, the Luftwaffe and Aerio Reginautica failed to take control of British airspace...and thus LOST the Bob.
Had the Bf110 been as effective as "some" claim, then the outcome *may* have been different, hmmm?
The Bf110 could NOT perform in the fighter/escort role as it lacked maneuverability against single engined fighters.
The Bf110 did NOT shoot down scores of hapless British fighters, no matter how hard one wishes (for whatever reason).
The reality is, the Luftwaffe and Aerio Reginautica failed to take control of British airspace...and thus LOST the Bob.
Had the Bf110 been as effective as "some" claim, then the outcome *may* have been different, hmmm?
The figures are not per day. They are figures of the period overall. In the period in question the Brits had more aircraft and were producing more and while on the defence. And they didn't stop the bombings. They never stopped the bombings
Ultimately the Luftwaffe and their bombers failed. You are talking in circles with your numbers, any way you want to count it monthly, daily ect the Luftwaffe had more operational aircraft during the BoB than Fighter Command. There was never more than 720 operational Hurricanes and Spitfires during the BoB.
Hi Yiannis,
This is a bit like buying an argument in the Monty Python sketch...
My comment about Dowding was tongue-in-cheek. It was Goering who reportedly stated that the Mustangs over Berlin were a sign that all was lost.
On 15 August 65 He 111s escorted by 34 Bf 110s crossed the North Sea for an attack. A single RAF Spitfire squadron intercepted them - No 72 Sq. The 110s immediately formed defensive circles. The unescorted 111s then broke formation, with several dumping their bomb loads and running for home. That is NOT the performance of a successful escort.
That same day a single Hurricane pilot (No 213 Sq) tangled with four Bf 110s, downing three of them and claiming the fourth as a probable. That is NOT the performance of a successful escort.
That same day the Luftwaffe realized that the Bf 110 was NOT a successful escort, but would be required to continue to fly in that role for some time. When possible, the Luftwaffe advised that 109s should be assigned to escort the 110s, though that was apparently not possible. (See Narrow Margin pages 206-208)
I appreciate that your statistics are not your own, but whose are they? I've been an archivist and historical writer/researcher for over 40 years, so please forgive my doubts about the statistics you've been provided. If you can't help us understand claims that would otherwise seem totally ludicrous, you'll have to understand that we simply can't accept your points.
Cheers,
Dana
This is a bit like buying an argument in the Monty Python sketch...
My comment about Dowding was tongue-in-cheek. It was Goering who reportedly stated that the Mustangs over Berlin were a sign that all was lost.
On 15 August 65 He 111s escorted by 34 Bf 110s crossed the North Sea for an attack. A single RAF Spitfire squadron intercepted them - No 72 Sq. The 110s immediately formed defensive circles. The unescorted 111s then broke formation, with several dumping their bomb loads and running for home. That is NOT the performance of a successful escort.
That same day a single Hurricane pilot (No 213 Sq) tangled with four Bf 110s, downing three of them and claiming the fourth as a probable. That is NOT the performance of a successful escort.
That same day the Luftwaffe realized that the Bf 110 was NOT a successful escort, but would be required to continue to fly in that role for some time. When possible, the Luftwaffe advised that 109s should be assigned to escort the 110s, though that was apparently not possible. (See Narrow Margin pages 206-208)
I appreciate that your statistics are not your own, but whose are they? I've been an archivist and historical writer/researcher for over 40 years, so please forgive my doubts about the statistics you've been provided. If you can't help us understand claims that would otherwise seem totally ludicrous, you'll have to understand that we simply can't accept your points.
Cheers,
Dana
