Me-110 Underrated

[wuzak]

I don't mean literally they never hit a single target, but I don't think they were able to inflict significant damage on the German aircraft industry until they had escorts flying with them into the heart of Central Europe and back in 1944, and then it still took a while to show results, they were still making German planes in large numbers to the very end of 1944, and production didn't end completely until the very end of the war. They did make over 30,000 Bf 109s right? Even 1,200+ Me 262s. How many V-1s and V-2s did they make? German industry seemed to be making a lot of stuff in spite of all those tons of huge bombs being dropped all over the place.

Maybe, just maybe, German industry wasn't working at full capacity before the bombs started falling on the factories. Which meant that there was a lot of spare capacity that could be used after bombing started.

The other question is: how many aircraft could they have produced without interference from bombing?

The first big Strategic problem the Germans started having was with oil. The biggest hit from Strategic bombing was against oil refineries but that was again, mostly low-level missions and very costly, ala the Ploesti raids. The biggest effect of the Strategic bombing was one of attrition, but I think the Soviets also had a role in that as did the war in the Med.

It wasn't until mid 1943 that 8th AF numbers were big enough for a big raid into Germany. The #1 priority was ball bearing production, #2 was aircraft production.

In August the 8th AF launched the double strike mission to Schweinfurt (bearings) and Regensburg (Messerschmitt factory). Though the mission was, in many ways, a disaster, enough damage was done by the raid that production was slowed significantly. But the Germans had a stockpile of ball bearings and many applications could be redesigned to use plain bearings. Even so, German representatives were sent to Sweden to secure supply of bearings (as were the British).

A more significant effect could have been obtained had the 8th AF the numbers to mount a follow up raid within a week or two. Or if RAF Bomber Command could have hit the factories the night after (off bombing Peenumunde).

Bombing against oil facilities was not "mostly low level". The Ploesti raid in 1943 was an outlier in that regard.

Much of the Allied effort against oil targets was directed at the synthetic fuel plants. These not only produced fuels, but side products such as fertiliser and the building blocks for explosive compounds. Bombing these plants had the side effect that by the end of 1944 German munitions would sometimes be partly filled with cement dust because not enough explosive was available.

 

[Schweik]

Well production did fall off in 1945. And there was an oil shortage certainly by 1943, bad one by 1944

 

[Schweik]

Also problems with using slave labor which has a lot of downsides

 

[Shortround6]

Well that's not precisely what were discussing is it? The question was, could the Germans have built a "good" long range fighter in the early or mid-war, which you pushed into meaning the BoB. Ok!

The 1000 mile+ range of the Zero, among others I mentioned, proves that it could have been done, even though you & others suggested it was impossible.

that was suggested there were no 1000 mile range fighters and I pointed out that there were several.

It was possible. Now was it practical?
and where you are flying does make a big difference. Not many AA guns in the China Sea between Formosa and the Philippines.
Germans lost 109s and 110s due to bullet holes in the radiators. What would the losses have been for planes without self sealing fuel tanks, the heck with fires, just have 20 or more gallons leak out on the several hundred mile trip home. How many German pilots were saved by back armor?
The British, at least in the BoB, knew when the Germans were coming and were often already at 25,000ft or higher when they arrived. Likewise the Germans often had lots of warning about High altitude allied raids.
Would either the British or Germans have purchased a plane with the strength factor of the Zero?
Max dive speed of the early ones was about 390mph . They had to put thicker, heavier wing skin plating on the later ones to increase the dive speed. Would any european country have built a plane with a such a restriction in order to get range?
Aerodynamic loads go up with the square of the speed. A faster plane has to be built heavier, everything else being equal, which it seldom is.

Part of the Zero's success was it took a while to figure out what it could not do. Once the allies figured that out the successes of the Zero started to taper off.

listing bombers with built in guns as possible fighters just means, yes they have range, but can they really fight single seat fighters or are they in much more trouble than the historic 110s? An escort fighter has to be able to at least hold it's own and not just be a slightly more difficult target than the bombers for the defenders.

 

[Milosh]

A good site on Mosquito production, DH home

 

[Milosh]

The attack on oil, http://www.usaaf.net/surveys/eto/ebs11.htm

Further Dividends From the Oil Attack, http://www.usaaf.net/surveys/eto/ebs12.htm

 

[Milosh]

Oil campaign chronology of World War II

Oil campaign chronology of World War II - Wikipedia

 

[wuzak]

The attack on oil, http://www.usaaf.net/surveys/eto/ebs11.htm

Further Dividends From the Oil Attack, http://www.usaaf.net/surveys/eto/ebs12.htm

I got an error with those links.

 

[Milosh]

I got an error with those links.

Damn!!! Does this work? United States Strategic Bombing Survey: Summary Report (European War)

 

[wuzak]

Damn!!! Does this work? United States Strategic Bombing Survey: Summary Report (European War)

Yes, thankyou.

 

[Schweik]

Thanks I'll read through that.

 

[Schweik]

It was possible. Now was it practical?
and where you are flying does make a big difference. Not many AA guns in the China Sea between Formosa and the Philippines.
Germans lost 109s and 110s due to bullet holes in the radiators. What would the losses have been for planes without self sealing fuel tanks, the heck with fires, just have 20 or more gallons leak out on the several hundred mile trip home. How many German pilots were saved by back armor?
The British, at least in the BoB, knew when the Germans were coming and were often already at 25,000ft or higher when they arrived. Likewise the Germans often had lots of warning about High altitude allied raids.
Would either the British or Germans have purchased a plane with the strength factor of the Zero?
Max dive speed of the early ones was about 390mph . They had to put thicker, heavier wing skin plating on the later ones to increase the dive speed. Would any european country have built a plane with a such a restriction in order to get range?
Aerodynamic loads go up with the square of the speed. A faster plane has to be built heavier, everything else being equal, which it seldom is.

Part of the Zero's success was it took a while to figure out what it could not do. Once the allies figured that out the successes of the Zero started to taper off.

listing bombers with built in guns as possible fighters just means, yes they have range, but can they really fight single seat fighters or are they in much more trouble than the historic 110s? An escort fighter has to be able to at least hold it's own and not just be a slightly more difficult target than the bombers for the defenders.

First, lets remember the context. I was not suggesting, or even implying, that Japan should have literally sent all their A6Ms to Hamburg via a fleet of submarines.

The original context of the discussion was the failings of the Bf 110. Some people still apparently are stuck on whether the Bf 110 was actually successful or not. I say as a day fighter it was unsuccessful.

And I also say, the Luftwaffe had a need for a long range day fighter which could hold it's own with Allied fighters.

This has been compressed into just the BoB as with so many aviation discussions of WW2, but I think the a long range escort fighter of some type could have really helped their war effort probably through 1942, and maybe halfway into 1943. After that it was definitely too late.

Luckily for us they didn't.

Since the debate got redirected into a BoB discussion, and people claimed that fighters with a 1,000 mile range didn't exist, or that bombers with a 1,000 mile range didn't exist, or that bombers that could fly 1,000 miles couldn't do any harm... I provided examples demonstrating those claims to be false. I also showed multiple examples of long range fighters from the early and late war, as well as immediately postwar since most of the truly late war designs didn't make it into combat in time to see action.

For the early war period, the Zero is one of the prime examples. Of course the airframe had some limitations, but I think those tend to be exaggerated. So to that.

Re: Armor. My understanding is that early in the BoB, fighters on both sides lacked armor, and I also know that some of the fuel tanks on the British fighters weren't fully protected until years later. Like the one between the engine and the pilot. Am I wrong about that?

Regarding flaws or how quickly the Zero was defeated. This tends to be exaggerated a lot too. I believe A6M2s were still posing a challenge to Spitfires in 1943.

Yes by mid 1942 certain pilots and certain units had figured out methods to contend with the Zero so that an encounter wasn't tantamount to certain doom, but that didn't mean the threat went away or that the A6M (or the Ki-43 for that matter) had become a pushover by then. Nor did faster planes like P-38s, F6Fs and F4Us guarantee victory. The A6M was certainly an aged design by 43, especially since the A6M3 model wasn't much of an improvement over the -2, but it was still a dangerous opponent. Greg Boyington was shot down by a Zero in 1944 and he was not the only Ace shot down late in the war by early model Japanese fighters.

For the BoB scenario, the question would be how fast the other side could adapt itself to the extraordinary capabilites of the A6M, including it's astonishing range.

The biggest difference with Japanese fighters in general by 1943 or 44 was actually the pilots, and the lack of trained aircrew in general which was certainly telling by that point. The Germans were facing a similar problem though not quite as desperately.

None of this changes the fact that it was clearly possible to make an effective long range fighter even in 1940. Certainly by 1942 it was comfortably within the realm of possibility IF priorities and politics didn't get in the way and IF the designers were up to the challenge. Aircraft like the A6M show us it was possible as early as 1940. Fighters like the Ki-84, P-47, P-51, F4U, P-38, and so on show us clearly that it was plausible by the mid-war (whether they got their designs into action and up to speed in time was another matter).

Of course, it's very tricky to get sorted out in time to be useful, and it also meant engines had to be improved which was probably the most technologically challenging part of the whole thing. And that is part of why it didn't happen during the war, why the Bf 110 fell behind as a design in 1940 (despite the great bravery of their crews Pbehn) and never caught up. The other reasons were more due to politics (Messerschmitt's cozy relationship with Hitler for example), bureaucracy, bad design decisions, bad luck, and mistakes.

 

[GrauGeist]

Just a reminder about the 1,000 mile range: this was not nessecarily a combat radius.

The IJN's G4M had a range of over 1,000 miles (and a ferry range close to 3,000 miles) but this dropped considerably depending on it"s loadout.

The IJN's A6M type also had a range of aboit 1,100 miles, but that is under optimum conditions and should not be considered it's combat radius.

The USN's SBD had a range in excess of 1,100 miles but that range is determined by it's mission. For example: if the SBD was scouting ahead of the fleet, it was in optimal range loadout, if it was carrying it's max. loadout of 2,250 pounds of bombs, it's combat radius was greatly reduced.

 

[Schweik]

Agreed. The operational history examples I cited are mostly about 500-600 miles away depending on type.

1000 mile range is just a benchmark so as to compare like with like. Many of these same aircraft had a ferry range of 1500 to 2000 miles or more. Combat radius depends on so many factors but could be from 170 to 600 miles for a fighter with a 1000 mile range, depending on the aircraft & the nature of the mission.

 

[wuzak]

Re: Armor. My understanding is that early in the BoB, fighters on both sides lacked armor, and I also know that some of the fuel tanks on the British fighters weren't fully protected until years later. Like the one between the engine and the pilot. Am I wrong about that?

Yes, they did.

As delivered, this aeroplane was fitted with a bullet proof windscreen, armour plating over the fuel tank, and a domed top on the sliding hood to allow of more headroom for the pilot.

Spitfire Mk I N.3171 Trials Report

The report was dated March 1940.

 

[Schweik]

Is that armor plating over the fuel tank aluminum?

 

[Schweik]

From the wiki:

"To improve protection for the pilot and fuel tanks a thick laminated glass bulletproof plate was fitted to the curved, one piece windscreen and a 3 mm thick cover of light alloy, capable of deflecting small calibre rounds, was fitted over the top of the two fuel tanks. From about mid-1940, 73 pounds (33 kg) of armoured steel plating was provided in the form of head and back protection on the seat bulkhead and covering the forward face of the glycol header tank.[28] In addition, the lower petrol tank was fitted with a fire-resistant covering called "Linatex", which was later replaced with a layer of self-sealing rubber. "

3mm of "light alloy" (Duralumin or equivalent I presume) being able to deflect rifle caliber bullets is highly debatable. In fact (and I know we debated this before on here) I would say extremely unlikely even at an oblique angle, unless you were quite far away (probably 800 meters or more). A regular .30 caliber bullet can penetrate up to 6mm of steel, more with AP bullets.

From the above I assume that I was correct in that early Spitfires didn't have armor (aside from the 3mm aluminum), and it sounds like only the bottom tank had self-sealing protection even after armor was added. Spitfires didn't always have bullet proof windscreens as late as 1942. Seems to have been a matter of unit or pilot preference, as it had a cost in drag (until they made it integral).

 

[Glider]

First, lets remember the context. I was not suggesting, or even implying, that Japan should have literally sent all their A6Ms to Hamburg via a fleet of submarines.

The original context of the discussion was the failings of the Bf 110. Some people still apparently are stuck on whether the Bf 110 was actually successful or not. I say as a day fighter it was unsuccessful.

And I also say, the Luftwaffe had a need for a long range day fighter which could hold it's own with Allied fighters.

This has been compressed into just the BoB as with so many aviation discussions of WW2, but I think the a long range escort fighter of some type could have really helped their war effort probably through 1942, and maybe halfway into 1943. After that it was definitely too late.

Luckily for us they didn't.

Since the debate got redirected into a BoB discussion, and people claimed that fighters with a 1,000 mile range didn't exist, or that bombers with a 1,000 mile range didn't exist, or that bombers that could fly 1,000 miles couldn't do any harm... I provided examples demonstrating those claims to be false. I also showed multiple examples of long range fighters from the early and late war, as well as immediately postwar since most of the truly late war designs didn't make it into combat in time to see action.

For the early war period, the Zero is one of the prime examples. Of course the airframe had some limitations, but I think those tend to be exaggerated. So to that.

Re: Armor. My understanding is that early in the BoB, fighters on both sides lacked armor, and I also know that some of the fuel tanks on the British fighters weren't fully protected until years later. Like the one between the engine and the pilot. Am I wrong about that?

Regarding flaws or how quickly the Zero was defeated. This tends to be exaggerated a lot too. I believe A6M2s were still posing a challenge to Spitfires in 1943.

Yes by mid 1942 certain pilots and certain units had figured out methods to contend with the Zero so that an encounter wasn't tantamount to certain doom, but that didn't mean the threat went away or that the A6M (or the Ki-43 for that matter) had become a pushover by then. Nor did faster planes like P-38s, F6Fs and F4Us guarantee victory. The A6M was certainly an aged design by 43, especially since the A6M3 model wasn't much of an improvement over the -2, but it was still a dangerous opponent. Greg Boyington was shot down by a Zero in 1944 and he was not the only Ace shot down late in the war by early model Japanese fighters.

For the BoB scenario, the question would be how fast the other side could adapt itself to the extraordinary capabilites of the A6M, including it's astonishing range.

The biggest difference with Japanese fighters in general by 1943 or 44 was actually the pilots, and the lack of trained aircrew in general which was certainly telling by that point. The Germans were facing a similar problem though not quite as desperately.

None of this changes the fact that it was clearly possible to make an effective long range fighter even in 1940. Certainly by 1942 it was comfortably within the realm of possibility IF priorities and politics didn't get in the way and IF the designers were up to the challenge. Aircraft like the A6M show us it was possible as early as 1940. Fighters like the Ki-84, P-47, P-51, F4U, P-38, and so on show us clearly that it was plausible by the mid-war (whether they got their designs into action and up to speed in time was another matter).

Of course, it's very tricky to get sorted out in time to be useful, and it also meant engines had to be improved which was probably the most technologically challenging part of the whole thing. And that is part of why it didn't happen during the war, why the Bf 110 fell behind as a design in 1940 (despite the great bravery of their crews Pbehn) and never caught up. The other reasons were more due to politics (Messerschmitt's cozy relationship with Hitler for example), bureaucracy, bad design decisions, bad luck, and mistakes.

 

[Glider]

For those getting excited about the impact of the Zero in the BOB I think I am right in saying that the only Zero's that existed in mid 1940 were a few which were sent to China in May/June 1940, about a dozen. I don't know the production details but when Japan attacked the USA they were still equiping some fighter units with the Zero so the number 15 months earlier would have been very limited.

 

[Schweik]

And as a reminder, I did not suggest Japan send every Zero they had to the Germans to fight the BoB, the Zero is brought up chiefly to provide an example of an effective long range fighter, to show that it was possible to put one into production (and into action) as early as 1940.