Best Bomber Killing Aircraft......

Erich · 12-21-2006, 10:32 AM

ah I've heard about strange things and people on the SE Texas shore-line

yuk, I'm not going to ask if she has big cannons as a bomber destroyer ....

mkloby · 12-21-2006, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erich

ah I've heard about strange things and people on the SE Texas shore-line

yuk, I'm not going to ask if she has big cannons as a bomber destroyer ....

It was a reference to a line from the movie Borat! MY mother in law wishes death upon at least 24 times a day! I'm not close to being from Texas

Erich · 12-21-2006, 03:23 PM

no but your location says otherwise ........ C.C. humidity city in the summer months according to a good friend that lives there.

in-laws, bah Humbug !

mkloby · 12-21-2006, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erich

no but your location says otherwise ........ C.C. humidity city in the summer months according to a good friend that lives there.

in-laws, bah Humbug !

Just a quick duty station!

Erich · 12-21-2006, 08:18 PM

Roger that !

str8jax · 01-25-2007, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erich

no but your location says otherwise ........ C.C. humidity city in the summer months according to a good friend that lives there.

in-laws, bah Humbug !

High humidity is an understatement, Its a steam bath here in the summer.

And im going with the 190 in any of the 20mm 30mm varients. the 262 was just to fast to accuratly target a slow moving bomber without making multiple passes and leaving itself open to .50 cal fire. Just my opinion.

the lancaster kicks ass · 01-26-2007, 11:20 AM

speed is vital in attacking bombers, unlike sims where we all slow down to get a good shot whilst sitting out of range because we've turned the accurately modeled gunney off in real life speed was everything because it's speed that makes you bloody hard to hit, and with 4x 30mm cannon you only need to get off one or two birsts and even a B-17 will struggle to stay in the air............

riseofnations · 02-02-2007, 12:16 AM

you really cant go past the me-262 for its firepower and speed. As long as the pilots could get a good shot in. I was reading about the me-163 Komet and they also had an amazing speed but there guns had a slow speed or rate? anyway this meant that it was more luck or miracle if they hit their target because of the time that they had available to shoot. However there might have been some development of putting on guns that fire upwards and when the me-163 passed under the bomber some sensor would be triggered off (from the light) and the bomber would get blasted.

lesofprimus · 02-02-2007, 07:20 AM

The sensors did not work well at all, and most projests of the type we abandoned.... U seem enamoured by the 262 in the last couple threads and I think u need to spend some more time educating urself about the facts....

Read this entire thread and get an idea of the other platforms that were used to attack bomber pulks...

the lancaster kicks ass · 02-03-2007, 02:26 AM

In particular he means the Fw-190A series, the only contender to the -262 in this role............

Erich · 02-03-2007, 01:21 PM

Me 163 rocket dud had the same arms as the 262. both the 3cm minimal range but deadly cannons. the Me 163's if confirmed shot down only 12 bombers. Talk about to close for comfort on the closing range to get some hits, well you can see why through videos and veteran accounts whomever is left to tell about them in books. Granted a unique craft but far too deadly to it's pilot than to the US AF in the skies

Civettone · 02-07-2007, 04:02 PM

Erich, even if the Me 163 shot down 9 bombers for the loss of 14 of its own, then that's still better than what could be achieved by Kolbenjäger in the same period.

I have often read that the Komet pilots had a hard time shooting down bombers due to the high speed of their approach. Some thoughts:
After WW2 all jet fighters had a speed similar to that of the Komet and were armed with guns/cannons. I never read about MiG-15 pilots complaining about difficulties of shooting down B-29s in Korea. Talking about Korea, pilots who had just converted to jet aircraft complained that their faster aircraft were unsuited for ground attacks because it all went too fast. After a while they got the hang of it. Ever since air forces have used a fixed wing jet as their main attack aircraft.
The closing speed of the Komet to a B-17 would be something like 500 kmh. This would mean an attack time of 3 seconds. Two MK 108s renown for their high rate of fire would thus throw out 30 shells each (=half of the total ammo in one pass). If just 1/20 of these hit the target the bomber would have been destroyed. The Komet was also a stable gun platform and flew more smoothly than piston engined aircraft.
Finally, let's compare with the earlier head-on passes: these were very difficult though still succesful. Their approach speed was 1100 km/h which means less than half the attack time.

And on the range of the Me 163, consider that it would be possible for the Komet to engage a target at a distance of 50 km only to glide down and touch down at another pre-designated airfield. They didn't need to get back to base. Their excellent gliding abilities would have meant that they could have reached several suitable airfields in a distance of several kilometers.

Kris

Erich · 02-07-2007, 05:41 PM

Kris for the amount of time and energy spent on this little devil they should of put more research and development in perfecting the engines and fuel system in the Me 262A.

the little Komet was too much of a horror story to the pilots and ground crews associated with it and for it's all over war effort it was worthless compared to what was in the Luftwaffe arsenal. have to hand it to the techs though the little bugger was an ingenious piece of equip, but was totally wreckless

riseofnations · 02-08-2007, 02:16 AM

I dont pretend that the Me-262 was perfect but speed is a vital asset to have to take on bomber formations with their fighter escorts. Put it this way how many Me-262s were lost to the gunners from a B-17? They couldnt keep up with it. On the video game secret weapons of normandy there is an interview with a U.S. gunner and he said he tried to aim and keep up with it but couldnt. It wouldnt be a good bomber killing aircraft if it was easy to shoot down.