What if the Me210 was operational in 1942?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules


1.The FW 187 A0 is the base with Jumo engines!
As also the Bf 109 B, Bf 110B, Ju87 A, He 112B etc. were the base to all other further developed a/c's with bigger DB engines.
Were the Bf 109 E, F, G; the Bf 110 C, F, G, the Ju 87 B,C , D all paper designs?

The FW 187 V5 was the prove that the FW 187 had not a single problem with the DB 601 engines.

2. I have shown the performance increase and weight increase of the Bf 110 B to G and Bf 110 design was to the same requirements as the FW 187 V4/ A0 design.
Where are your technical arguments against the performance increase of the FW 187?
I have shown the estimations of educated piston aircraft engineers, that worked with this a/c for over 4 years with countless datas and testflights.

Your paper design arguments (The FW 187 wasn't a paper design, 8 were flying) and comparison of the FW 187A0 with the Moussie shows only, that you have no technical arguments against the FW 187, not a single.

It's only babbling and smoke grenades, because for your national biases it is impossible to concede, that the german had a design that could match with the performance of the Moussie and P38.

Provide technical facts as I have provided in all my posts (look at my post 107) and stop the babbling without technical arguments!
 
Last edited:
Without this aircraft being accepted for service and used in meaningful numbers there is no way to know if it was any good or not, what is known is the aircraft was not accepted for service, that's quite telling all by itself!
 
DonL said:
Provide technical facts as I have provided in all my posts (look at my post 107) and stop the babbling without technical arguments!
Click to expand...

I notice you don't now dispute the figures I gave for the A-0. I guess you took the time to look them up for yourself. That was the only version that ever flew in anything approaching a service environment.

I don't give a tinker's cuss for technical arguments and projections of aircraft that never flew.

I don't doubt that Germany could have theoretically produced an aircraft to match the Mosquito.

What you seem to find hard to swallow is the FACT that IT DID NOT until the development of its jet aeroplanes.

Cheers

Steve
 
I think people are often influenced to much by an aircrafts looks and how they sound on paper rather than the reality associated with them, for this reason the British love the Westland Whirlwind and the Germans love the Me410 and FW187.
 
I don't give a tinker's cuss for technical arguments and projections of aircraft that never flew.
Click to expand...

That shows your agenda, the FW 187 wasn't a projection or paperdesign it flew from primary sources from 1937 till 1944 and educated piston aircraft engineers which developed the FW 190, showed the performance of a developed FW 187.
And to be honest I believe them 100 times more then every national biased slasher, that can't provide any technical facts.

I don't doubt that Germany could have theoretically produced an aircraft to match the Mosquito.
Click to expand...

Wrong it was practically developed!
 
DonL said:
Wrong it was practically developed!
Click to expand...

Well it can't be any version of the Fw 187 that actually flew in anything approaching a service environment as I've already show that the A-0 lacked the performance to match the Mosquito.

Answer these three questions if you would please.

Which aircraft was the developed Mosquito killer ?

When did it enter service ?

How many Mosquitos did it shoot down?

Cheers

Steve
 
Last edited:
1.The FW 187 A0 was the base with Jumo engines!
As also the Bf 109 B, Bf 110B, Ju87 A, He 112B etc. were the base to all other further developed a/c's with bigger DB engines.
Were the Bf 109 E, F, G; the Bf 110 C, F, G, the Ju 87 B,C , D all paper designs?

The FW 187 V5 was the prove that the FW 187 had not a single problem with the DB 601 engines.

2. I have shown the performance increase and weight increase of the Bf 110 B to G and Bf 110 design was to the same requirements as the FW 187 V4/ A0 design.
Where are your technical arguments against the performance increase of the FW 187 simular to the Bf 110B to G?
Was the Fw 187 developed from the scratch to the 35Liter advertisement of the RLM after Dietmar Hermanns book yes or no?
I have shown the estimations of educated piston aircraft engineers, that worked with this a/c for over 4 years with countless datas and testflights.
 
Last edited:
stona said:
I don't doubt that Germany could have theoretically produced an aircraft to match the Mosquito.

What you seem to find hard to swallow is the FACT that IT DID NOT until the development of its jet aeroplanes.
Click to expand...

Uhm, there is a Hornet in that ointment which you might find hard to swallow.
 
DonL, you keep repeating yourself but you haven't answered my three simple questions.

Answers please!

Tante Ju said:
Uhm, there is a Hornet in that ointment which you might find hard to swallow.
Click to expand...

And how many Mosquitos did the Me 210/410 shoot down? To compare that aircraft's tale of woe with the Mosquito seems pretty pointless.

Cheers

Steve
 
stona said:
And how many Mosquitos did the Me 210/410 shoot down?
Click to expand...

It is about as relevant as asking how many Me 410 the Mosquitos did the shoot down... not really the measure of performance for light/fast bombers IMHO.

To compare that aircraft's tale of woe with the Mosquito seems pretty pointless.
Click to expand...

What 'tale of woe' did the Me 410 had, if I may ask? Both were capable and well thought out light bombers IMHO, though the Mosquito seems to be waaay overhyped to me.
 


You see it is very easy to answer your question.
 
pattle said:
I think people are often influenced to much by an aircrafts looks and how they sound on paper rather than the reality associated with them, for this reason the British love the Westland Whirlwind and the Germans love the Me410 and FW187.
Click to expand...

a slight difference, if you please. The Whirlwind did stay in service as a combat aircraft for 1 1/2 - 2 years AFTER both it and it's engines went out of production. Granted it only flew with two squadrons but if it was as bad as it's detractors say why keep it flying at all? Surely the pilots (who all loved it) and ground crews could have been better used manning "better" aircraft? Very few air forces were using what were 1940/41 aircraft in 1943 in unmodified form in daylight. This would be like the Germans still using two squadrons of Bf 109E jabos in 1943.

I actually rather like the Fw 187 and think it got a bit of a bum deal, but I also think that too many "paper" airplanes are bandied about and the number of aircraft that actually meet or exceeded their designers "predictions" are equaled or exceeded by the number of aircraft that didn't. This goes FOR ALL COUNTRIES.
 
Don, I believe that the Fw 187 would have made an excellent (although too costly) fighter. But I doubt it would be a suitable night fighter: it could not carry a radar operator plus the required double radar sets.
Of course an enlarged Fw 187 could be designed, and I guess that is what Tank was working on in 1944, but at that point it seems pure conjecture as to what this what-if version derived from another what-if version would have been like.

Kris
 
The answer to question two is incorrect. Fw 187 did not enter service in 1939. None were accepted by the BAL which I would suggest was the criteria for "entering Luftwaffe service".

The answer to question three is ZERO because your hypothetical developments never happened. Your hypothetical speed advantage was never tested.

Cheers

Steve
 
Tante Ju said:
What 'tale of woe' did the Me 410 had, if I may ask? Both were capable and well thought out light bombers IMHO, though the Mosquito seems to be waaay overhyped to me.
Click to expand...

You are kidding aren't you. I know you are well aware of the saga of the Me 210/410 development. You also know that Me 410 was a new designation introduced for the modified Me 210 in an attempt to distance it from the earlier debacle. The Me 210 was ordered in 1938 for heaven's sake and was being described as "a nail in Udet's coffin" by the time of his suicide in November 1941. To describe the project as "well thought out" seems to be stretching the meaning of the phrase somewhat.

The Me 410 might have been a decent light bomber but was developed in a variety of roles and half heartedly for the most part. The late obsession with fitting ever larger calibre cannon in the nose illustrates this well.

If it was such a well thought out bomber why did those in charge of Luftwaffe bombing forces not want it? Pelz expressed this opinion on several occasions and on the record.
I've not seen any evidence of anyone in Bomber Command saying such things about the Mosquito.

Was the Mosquito over hyped? An aircraft that carried out many roles and in Bomber Command service flew 39,795 sorties for 260 losses, a rate of 0.65%. Show me another aircraft on any side that comes close.

If it is over hyped why did the Luftwaffe develop an almost obsessional need to deal with it? The figures show that it never did.

Those Mosquitos flying two sorties a night, delivering 8,000lbs or ordnance with impunity sure as hell got up someone's nose!

Cheers

Steve
 
Last edited:
PBY seaplane was about the easiest possible aerial target yet it survived recon missions most of the time. Seems to me any 300+ mph recon aircraft would be tough to kill using WWII technology. Not impossible but most are going to escape even if interceptors are flying Me-262.
 
The PBY was flying a completely different type of recon mission that a PR Spitfire, or Mosquito.
The PBY was looking to something, anything, over a mostly empty ocean. When it found anything, if it couldn't leave the area, it hopefully could hide in the clouds.
The PR Spitfire and Mosquito was sent over known enemy strongholds, over heavily defended airspace, etc. It's only protection, high or low, was it's speed.
 
I should have stipulated the ETO and not assumed that as understood, my mistake. I don't know what the loss rates were for the PBYs or other Pacific reconnaissance types (I don't know a lot about the PTO period!), but it's not a valid comparison for the rather obvious reasons posted above.

Cheers

Steve
 

I don't think the Whirlwind was a bad aircraft even though it had it's share of problems, but I think the answer why the British didn't develop it further is a similar one to why the Germans shouldn't have developed the Me110 any further, lack of potential and lack of need.
 

Ho w do you want to develop the Bf 110 any further? It was suited with DB 605 engines. You can't get any better performance, the ME 210 was the "further" development.
If you have a typo, the FW 187 was constructed from the scratch to carry the DB engines, the Whirlwind was constructed to the Peregrine engines and died with the engine, because it was not possible to suit Merlins without a major redesign. More or less a new a/c.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
Was the Hispano-Suiza 12Y the worst ≥25L V-12 of WW2?
2 3
Replies
46
Views
3K
ThomasP
T
Questions about B-29 operational range, VVS, VVS intercept capability if Operation Unthinkable happen.
17 18 19
Replies
367
Views
13K
EwenS
E
W
What if the Me109Z instead of Bf110?
Replies
11
Views
1K
Admiral Beez
A
German artillery what-if: going all-in with gun-howitzers past 1935
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
3K
Shortround6
S
B
Was the AT-10 Wichita Used at Kelly Field 1942?
Replies
6
Views
1K
Popeye53
P
Menu
Log in
Register