Which was the best night fighter?

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

What is the AFDS? The only modification I've read about so far the P-61 in these competitions was the screwing down of the propellers. As far as weight changing anything on the Black Widow, the planes that had no upper turrets were only three mph faster than the planes that had turrets and the turret assembly weighed over 1K lbs.
 
Hi,

i think the He219 was the best night fighter, not cause its flight performence, but cause the different radars, which indicated also enemy radar and cause it had the most devastating guns, shooting strait forward and fort/upward. A also very important thing was that the guns was placed in a position where the pilot dont saw the mussle flash and it could stay in the air for incredible long time.

Iam pretty sure, with the extreme wingload it got to be very fast in a shallow dive, although the early engines wasnt strong enough for this heavy plane.

At real night the plain flight performence is not as important as the radar and weapon technique and how the plane is flyable(easy or not).

Greetings,

Knegel
 
go back to the beginning of this thread and read my reasoning behind the He 219 and see why the Ju 88G-6 was he better crate

in 1944-45 NJG 1 crews reduced the arms on the Uhu
 
Say Erich,

Are you the "422nd NFS Historian" I see mentioned on the web from time to time?

Cheers,

Mark
 
what sites have you visited Mark that makes mention of me ? no not the historian knowing former vets of the squadron that would be yes .........

E ~
 
Hiyas E,

There's a couple of references out there in the ether which refer to the P-61 in the flyoff as having been tweaked, giving the "422nd NFS historian" as a reference.

You're the only one of those I know.

Cheers,

Mark
 

The ADFS stand for Air Fighting Development Squadron. They were used to develop tactics for aircraft that were joining the RAF and develop tactics against the latest enemy aircraft. This included flying enemy aircraft in simulated combat against current RAF aircraft.

The paper didn't go into detail as to what the problems were with the P61 given to them for testing but they must have been significant.
 
Mark not sure who the 422nd historian is now but I interviewed him at length back in the 90's a very kind gracious man, he was a ground crew tech but in his very late 80's back then. even now do not even think the nfs widow guys even meet after they dissolved the US nf association a sad fall day some eyars ago of which I was a member........... if anything a few guys and gals meet for dinner and a drink recalling the usal missions and their buddies of course.
 

Not sure if this is the same report, but here's some notes I made a number of years back at the PRO, when I was Important and Travelled The World.

"AVIA 18/1110

Original reference: 2nd part of A&AEE/821

Test of P-61 at Boscombe Down 6.5.44 - 6.9.44

20 October 1944

"Interesting engineering features"
The spoilers are light and reasonably effective at all speeds from the limiting speed of 380 mph down to the stall. At speeds up to approx. 200 mph the first 30' (approx) of wheel movement from neutral in either direction with very little response. Control is therefore not good in rough air at crusing conditions due to coarseness of the movements necessary. It was felt the spoilers did not produce more response than a normal aileron, with less "feel".

3rd part of A&AEE/821 Brief Handling Trials: P61-A

Combined commentary of a number of civil and military pilots who tested the aircraft.

Bad: Cockpit layout, view, lack of harmonisation of controls, excessive changes of trim over-sensitive trimmers.
Good: Spoilers effective even when aircraft stalled, but large control movements were required, especially at slow speed. The stalling and single-engine flying qualities are notably good but the aircraft is not considered a suitable type for night-fighter duties.

Sent to the A&AEE primarily for armament tests.

Layout: Complicated and confusing. Seat too far from controls, uncomfortable due to being too far from the controls. No fore aft adjustment of the seat is possible.
View: Fairly good
Spoilers: Gearing too low - need 160'-180' movement to get full displacement
Trimmers: Too close together
Exit: Pilot emergency exit is upward, but there are no hand-holds!
Controls: Lack of harmonisation in level flight. Elevator extremely heavy, rudders moderate, lateral control light
Rudder: At high speeds, "snaking" occurred if the rudder was displaced
Trim: One of the worst features of this aircraft was the excessive change of trim with speed, power, or position of the aircraft, flaps oil cooler flaps
Good on one engine
Stall at 80-82 mph."
 

Hi Erich,

Yes, I can imagine the ranks are thinning. The Mosquito Aircrew Association also disbanded just after their 60th anniversary.

Time is a bastard.
 
Honestly I think there's not much to debate about the best night fighter of WW2. The Mosquito has that trophy even without entering the competition.

Vote goes for it.

Mention of honor goes for the Me262B. Reason why I bring it here is because it was the fastest NF of the whole war and superior in any regard to propeller driven fighters for the night fighter role.
Reason why it can't be winner is because it still relied on decimetric wavelenght radars, and , of course, limited serviciabily rate and suspect reliability due to the imperfect Jumo004Bs. And of course, too, because of very limited numbers in service by war's end.

all the best.
 
99 % of the night flying goes to the Me 262A-1a of Kommando Welter, the B version too late to make any compromise in the air, maybe in 1944 but not in Feb-March of 45.
 
Reason why it can't be winner is because it still relied on decimetric wavelenght radars,
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced that decimetric wavelength AI radar was a bad thing for WWII era night fighters. The external radar aerials provide a small drag penalty. But the radar set is much lighter and consumes less electrical power. At typical WWII night fighter speeds of 350 mph or less decimetric radar may actually be more efficient.

A technical discussion of WWII era radar capability.
Axis History Forum • View topic - German vs Allied radar and electronic warfare equipment
 


For AI purposes, centimetric was always better. Better resolutions allowed for better discrimination of contacts sooner. Drag considerations of the radar aerials was secondary on the 262: the plane was fast enough that the imposed drag penalty and associated speed loss really didn't hurt it at all (of course a whole different story was in the standard prop-driven german NFs of the time, but we're discussing the 262 here)
 
Do we have historical evidence that Mosquito AI radar could discriminate between aerial targets at a further distance then Ju-88G6 AI radar when operating under similiar combat conditions?
 
sorry but the drag penalty was obvious in the B of the 262 Welter had concerns about this though he never flew the two seater with any R/O he did know the handwriting was on the wall that BC heavies were the craft to shoot down not LSNF Mossies. It will be covere in my book ..........

the LW was working on the AI for summer of 45 obviously this did not happen there were at least 20 AI sets installed to operational Ju 88G-6's
 
I expect so as the Me-262 had a top speed over 500 mph. The faster you go the more important streamlining becomes.

The vast majority of WWII era night fighter aircraft flew at speeds of less then 350 mph. Under those circumstances the drag from external radar antennas is offset by the radar sets being relatively lightweight and having relatively low power consumption (i.e. less engine power needed to generate electricity).
 
some of the Ju 88G-6 crews in 1945 had their aerials removed as SN-2d was jammed and relied upon eyesight as well as their FuG 350 Naxos to engage BC bombers. they did double duty anyhow with night ground attacks upon Allied/Soviets advancements
 
Erich said:
P-61 was too bulky and could not turn and was popped on occassion by Bf 110G-4 and 88G-6's.
Click to expand...

I know this comment is 4 years old, but interesting nonetheless. I cannot find a record of any P-61 having been lost to an enemy fighter. Can you elaborate as to what "popped" mean? Presumably you mean the P-61 was shot down, but given that there are no documented losses to enemy fighters, perhap you mean something else?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

W
The scarcity of fighter to fighter FW-190A pilot combat accounts...
2 3
Replies
52
Views
3K
GrauGeist
A
Was the Hispano-Suiza 12Y the worst ≥25L V-12 of WW2?
2 3
Replies
46
Views
3K
ThomasP
T
A
Best WW2 Seafire vs. best A6M Zero
Replies
9
Views
1K
Shortround6
S
S
"Generations" of fighter aircraft
2
Replies
21
Views
487
GTX
The best fighter of the 1930s
4 5 6
Replies
104
Views
11K
bf109xxl
Menu
Log in
Register