I think he is referring to Operational status. Trials, testing and so forth are not classified as operational.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Btw, you say the Ju-388 didn't go operational as a night-fighter, but I understand from reading about it that a few were certainly ready and even went on trial with the LW:
I think he is referring to Operational status. Trials, testing and so forth are not classified as operational.
Because these are stats that I have and can quote
Interesting and I didn't know this. Did they quote numbers.
Re 105 squadron they received seven Mossie PR 1.
W4065 lasted 6 months
W4066 lasted 26 months
W4068 lasted 6 months
W4069 lasted 6 months
W4070 lasted 9 months
W4071 lasted 10 months
W4072 lasted 8 months
They then moved on to Bomber MkIV. I do not know how many missions they flew but to last a minimum of 6 months in front line action alone on PR misions is quite an achievement.
I doubt that you have ever flown at night, I could be wrong. No it means that 15 were lost but the cause was unknown, by no means the same thing.
I make it 5 squadrons equipped with Bomber Mossies in mid 1943. One month on average for a plane flying deep into enemy areas is very good. As for mission profiles the mid atlantic wasn't the place for Mossies.
Wrong again. The loss ratio's mentioned are for all losses. No doubt some were caused by fighters and flak. However in the entire war for all types and nations flying at night accidents were a major cause of loss.
Thanks I did. I notice the bit where it states that the West was a far more dangerous place to operate than the East. We are of course talking about the West, over Germany, the most heavily defended area in the world, by day and night, hundreds of miles behind German Lines. Not I suggest the same as the East where there were almost no German long range missions of any kind against a weaker opposition.
I think this is the main difficulty between us. You are looking at it as a technical issue. Plane A goes so fast, its faster than plane B, therefore it can shoot it down.
My position is this only happened on very rare occasions. More than 99 times out of a 100 the Mossie completed the mission without being shot down by a fighter. Such was the cruising speed of the Mossie it was very difficult, almost impossible, for the fighter to get into a position to intercept. If it did then there was every chance that it didn't have the fuel for a long tail chase as the mossie had a much longer range. I try to look at what actually happened instead of what could have happened and the actual experience i.e. loss ratio's prove this beyond any doubt.
This has been addressed. Most of the night missions were in support of the Heavy bombers. Weather was a day and night operation, Target Marking a night operation, spoof raids a night operation. Some such as PR were mainly done in daylight plus of course the precision raids.
The Mossies had the same bombload as a B17 to Berlin from the UK. Re the comment about destroying buildings, well that is what the British Heavy bombers did most of the time so the Mossie followed the same pattern. Factories, enginering works, power stations were buildings as were other major economic targets.
Name one plane that flew on a regular basis over Germany in daylight in 1943 let alone 1942 on PR, Recce, Bombing Missions with such a loss ratio. Or if you prefer a German plane over all parts of the UK
Certainly.
If I can quote Erich earlier in the thread
4./NJGr 10 stationed in Holland during 1944 hoped it could catch Mossies en-route to Germany with their Fw 190A-8's ~ they failed every time...
HS 219B was supposed to be a Mossie catcher. The 410 was tried and the TA154 was inspired by the mossie. Re the High Altitude 109's I know they existed but didn't achieve much or even anythng at all.
with the advent of the Me262A-1a of Kommando Welter, it did not matter, the Mossie always lost.
E ~
One just wonders why it had to operate during the night like the other RAF bombers then... why no regular daylight Mosquito raids on Berlin.
Oh, sorry I forgot, the Mosquito was another 'invincible'.
They do seem to have held a considerable superiority over their German twins however, one example is in Separate little war when two Mossies attacked four Me110G2's downing three, they caused the Germans major problems over Biscay too.
That's a bit silly really,... and then there was this lone Me 110 pilot who was attacked by six(?) Spitfires and he still nailed three of them... so perhaps the RAF should have replaced Spits with Mosquitos for air combat, since the 110 beats the Spit, the Mossie beats the 110? The RAF certainly did not think so this would true for many combats... a few perhaps, yes. But you cannot draw much conclusion from these single combats. 80% of it was/is about who having upper hand in the beginning, who approached enemy without notice for easy shot, who makes mistakes first, who exploits those..
... and then there was this lone Me 110 pilot who was attacked by six(?) Spitfires and he still nailed three of them... so perhaps the RAF should have replaced Spits with Mosquitos for air combat, since the 110 beats the Spit, the Mossie beats the 110? The RAF certainly did not think so this would true for many combats... a few perhaps, yes. But you cannot draw much conclusion from these single combats. 80% of it was/is about who having upper hand in the beginning, who approached enemy without notice for easy shot, who makes mistakes first, who exploits those..
80% of it was/is about who having upper hand in the beginning, who approached enemy without notice for easy shot, who makes mistakes first, who exploits those..
This pretty much agrees with the "Most pilots shot down did not see the enemy coming" thread. Although it is true that some of the best pilots could achieve unexpected performance from their planes against enemy ones, the preferred tactic for success has almost always been "dive from out of the sun at an unsuspecting enemy."