Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
For the duration of 1944, JG 400 lost 6 Me 163s due to enemy action. I have no idea if those were all air kills or if some were destroyed on the ground. 9 were non-combat losses. I have no data from 1945, but missions were few, so I assume losses were too.It´s actually a bit more complicated with regards to Me-163 kills.
At first, there are only claims. No strict verifications system existed back then.
Second, only a fraction of all AAR exist and we still need to fill the gaps dating to operations in june jule 1944 as well as to the general timeframe mid oct.1944 to mid march 1945.
For the remaining timeframes I filed down 20 claims of this particular A/C, which I´d like to share with those of You who wnat to cross check them with losses.
number---date------pilot--------target-----notes
#1------05-08-44---I/JG-400------P-51------352nd FG
#2------05-08-44---I/JG-400------P-51------352nd FG
#3------05-08-44---I/JG-400------P-51------352nd FG
#4------16-08-44---H.Ryll--------B-17------returned to Enland, written off
#5------16-08-44---S.Schubert----B-17-----------
#6------24-08-44---H.Bott--------four engined bomber
#7------24-08-44---S.Schubert----four engined bomber
#8------24-08-44---S.Schubert----four engined bomber
#9------24-08-44---Strasznicky---four engined bomber
#10-----11-09-44---K.Schiebeler--B-17------oct.?
#11-----11-09-44---I/JG-400------B-17------acc. to ethell, 7 Me-163 attacked
#12-----11-09-44---I/JG-400------B-17------acc. to ethell, 7 Me-163 attacked
#13-----12-09-44---K.Schiebeler--B-17------oct.?
#14-----07-10-44---I/JG-400------B-17-----------
#15-----07-10-44---I/JG-400------B-17-----------
#16-----16-03-45---R.Glogner-----Mosquito NS 795 of No.544 sq, written off after crash landing near Lille, combat near Leipzig with rocket propelled enemy A/C
#17-----10-04-45---R.Glogner-----Mosquito---e/a crew bailed out
#18-----10-04-45---F.Kelb--------Halifax--downed with SG-500 rockets
#19-----22-04-45---II/JG-400-----Lancaster
#20-------05-45----P.Gerth-------Mosquito---II/JG400, n. Germany
P.20 ausf B would be armed with MG213 revolver cannon just like everything else produced from fall 1945 onward.
For the duration of 1944, JG 400 lost 6 Me 163s due to enemy action. I have no idea if those were all air kills or if some were destroyed on the ground. 9 were non-combat losses. I have no data from 1945, but missions were few, so I assume losses were too.
Kris
okFlyboyj you misquoted me. I wrote about Komet losses, not kills. That was another post.
I agree, that tthese are just claims. I read that 16 could be confirmed, but the exact number we will never know.
Kris
There's info about the EF 128 at this link:Are you talking about the EF.128 ?
Kris
The Ju248 was developed from the Me163C and was then renamed Me263.There's info about the EF 128 at this link:
Junkers EF 128 - Wikipedia
For clarification, the EF 128 shared nothing in common with the Me 163; the Me 263 was originally called the Ju 248.
Although it is sometimes claimed that Me 163B V 18 was the first Me 163D prototype, page 281 of the book X-Planes: German Luftwaffe Prototypes 1930-1945 makes clear that Me 163B V13 (VD+EV) was actually earmarked to be the first Me 163D prototype. This helps explain why the Me 163 page at Wikipedia has a photo of the Me 163D model kit with the markings of the Me 163B V18, because V18 flew a few months earlier than Me 163V13.Performance
The production model of the Me163B didn't reach the Luftwaffe until 1944, but when it did it was still a little buggy. Only one Me 163 unit, the I Gruppe of Jagdgeschwader 400, ever was brought to full strength due to shortages of war material (caused by Allied bombing campaigns) and skilled pilots. Of those planes that did get developed, were met with mixed results. Due to short range, many missions were aborted after they failed to find enemy planes. When combat did occur, it was usually too brief and lopsided; groups of a dozen Me163s strafing bomber formations of more than 1000 planes for three minute spates is not the best way to turn the tide of war. Komet pilots tallied a mere 9 kills for their efforts, losing 14 planes in return (about half of those during landing accidents).In all, 400 Messerschmitt Me 163 were built, but only 279 of those actually saw service. And a limited number of those built were of the Me 163S trainer variant.
Specifications:
Type:Single-seat fighter/interceptor
Powerplant:1x Walter 109-509A-2 rocket motor generating 3,798lbs of thrust for 7.5 minutes of powered flight
Ceiling:29,698 ft-Range:50 milesWeight(empty):4206 lb-Weight(loaded):9061 lb-Wingspan:30ft 6in-Length:19ft 4 in
Height:9ft 2inArmament:2x 30mm cannons OR 2x 20mm cannons in wing roots. Experimental armament :2 x SG 500 Jagdfaust "Fighter Fist" vertically-firing tubes in wing roots (five tubes per assembly). Five 1.97 inch shells per tube. This system would replace the cannon configuration listed above if fitted.
Service:1944-1945
In a bid to alleviate the difficulties associated with the skid design, the Komet was additionally reworked. Messerschmitt had ordered the construction of a new model, the Me.163D, from Focke Achgelis GmbH at Delmenhorst at the same time as the Me.163C was in development. The picture here is of the Messerschmitt Me.163D V1, completed in the Summer of 1944. Although this picture is not particularly clear, you can see that the Me.163D is not an extension of the Me.163C, it is a completely different model. Based on an existing Me.163B V18 production Komet, the Me.163D had an extra section added ahead of the engine to lengthen the fuselage. The basic Komet wings were retained, moved rearwards.
The most instantly obvious feature of the "D" model is the new tricycle undercarriage, a definite move towards improving the performance of the aircraft on the airfield. The longer fuselage to accommodate this also adds more space for increased fuel tankage. Built around December 1944/January 1945 this airframe was apparantly used for aerodynamic testing of the new fuselage, and taxying tests of the new undercarriage. It is extremely unlikely that aerodynamic tests were conducted with the Walter motor.
However, Willi Messerschmitt was apparantly not keen on the Lippisch tailless designs, and this, together with all the other committments at the Messerschmitt facility, led the Me.163C developments being turned over to Junkers at Dessau. Once Junkers acquired the project, there was a complete revamp of the airframe and the project acquired the designation the Junkers Ju.248.
Best regards.