 | Best Bomber Killing Aircraft......| Aviation Discuss Best Bomber Killing Aircraft...... in the World War II - Aviation forums; Originally Posted by xavier
the 163 may not shot down many aircraft but it did hav solar panals so once ... |
|
10-01-2007, 03:11 PM
|
#886 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Campospinoso (PV), Italy
Posts: 643
| Quote:
Originally Posted by xavier the 163 may not shot down many aircraft but it did hav solar panals so once it flew under a plane it detroyed it. | It was not exactly like that, but there was something similar for the 'fly under' part.
Some Me163 were fitted with a special weapon, the '500 Jaegerfaust'
It was a row of 5x50mm launching barrells per wing firing upwards and controlled by an optical device.
The idea was to fly below the bomber from behind, the optical device was in charge to detect the shadow of the big airplane and fire automatically the guns. I think that whitin some limits it was also compensating the quote difference.
The same weapon was tested on a Fw190 but I don't think it was used operationally, while it seems that a Me163 downed a 4 engine bomber in this way.
__________________ He hoped and prayed that there wasn't an afterlife. Then he realized there was a contradiction involved here and merely hoped that there wasn't an afterlife. - Douglas Adams
In those days spirits were brave, the stakes were high, men were real men, women were real women and small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were real small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri. - Douglas Adams |
| |
10-03-2007, 12:25 AM
|
#887 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Limburg
Posts: 871
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by Glider You have got to be kidding. | No.
Kris
__________________ |
| |
10-03-2007, 07:17 AM
|
#888 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London
Posts: 2,794
| If a 163 is a safe, reliable aircraft, can I ask what your definition is of an unsafe aircraft? |
| |
10-03-2007, 02:44 PM
|
#889 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Limburg
Posts: 871
Country: | Few Me 163 were lost either to enemy actions or to accidents. No pilots were incinerated, no planes blowing up on take off or landing. Easy to fly too.
It had a short endurance, that was its only vice. Even the short firing time was only a problem because of limited training.
Kris
__________________ |
| |
10-07-2007, 02:43 PM
|
#890 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Berlin (Kreuzberg)
Posts: 1,482
| While it is true that few -163 were lost in accidents (measured in total numbers), the LOSS RATE of this plane particular, esspeccially at the EKdo in Bad Zwischenhahn was particularely high - higher than could be postulated before with an unusually high kill rate (40%) of the pilots involved. The plane itselve was tricky (GoG-issues), altough gentle and pleasing to fly if everything was ok. The fuel however, was a real hazard.
__________________ ---delcyros--- |
| |
10-07-2007, 04:08 PM
|
#891 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Limburg
Posts: 871
Country: | Delcyros, you're talking about an Erprobungskommando, so a unit destined to test this new aircraft before it was operational. A better way to judge the Me 163 would be to look at the loss figures of JG 300, the only operational Me 163 unit. You'll see it was more reliable than several Bf 109 or Fw 190 units of the time!
What are GoG issues? (I know CoG, is that what you meant?)
Kris
__________________ |
| |
10-07-2007, 04:56 PM
|
#892 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Berlin (Kreuzberg)
Posts: 1,482
| My fault - CoG - is what I meant
The JG 300 records are indeed telling! If You dig into them You will find an avaiability rate for it´s planes of less than 35% (!!!) -by far the weakest number of any Luftwaffe fighter in 1944/45.
__________________ ---delcyros--- |
| |
10-07-2007, 05:31 PM
|
#893 | | the old Sage
Join Date: May 2004 Location: Platonic Sphere
Posts: 8,789
Country: | geezo Kris check you LW data please, JG 300 never flew the Komet as the pilots would of laughed themselves silly trying to fly that crap against B-24/B-17 formations
the unit you want is JG 400
__________________ zerreißen Sie es oben ! |
| |
10-07-2007, 09:14 PM
|
#894 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Limburg
Posts: 871
Country: | Oooooooooohh .... sorry about that, JG 400 ... of course!!
Start over Delcyros ... 
Kris
__________________ |
| |
10-08-2007, 03:31 AM
|
#895 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London
Posts: 2,794
| I do know that on the 7th October JG400 lost 4 Komets in accidents. Considering the small number of aircraft available this alone must have been a bit of a knock.
2 pilots were killed and one injured |
| |
10-08-2007, 08:21 AM
|
#896 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Limburg
Posts: 871
Country: | Official records show that JG 400 lost 3 aircraft during the entire month of October 1944. They were the only losses of the entire Geschwader which consisted of about 50 aircraft. All losses were non-combat.
Kris
__________________ |
| |
10-08-2007, 08:58 AM
|
#897 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London
Posts: 2,794
| Well it looks as if the official records could be incomplete.
One of the pilots killed was Manfred Eisenmann flying 440013 and the injured pilot was Fritz Husser flying 440165
I dont have the details of the other two aircraft but can I ask how the details above fit in with your info? It might help identify the other two aircraft.
I also know that on the 9th September the Germans lost one flown by Fritz Kelb when demonstrating the aircraft to the Japanese when it caught fire in the air. He was able to bale out. |
| |
10-08-2007, 11:05 AM
|
#898 | | the old Sage
Join Date: May 2004 Location: Platonic Sphere
Posts: 8,789
Country: | their own pilots say upward of at least 12 Komets lost to action also the US gun cameras show otherwise, the 359th fg shot down 2 for fact alone.
12 kills for the whole small Geschwader does not say much at all. As the units was constantly on the move late 44 till wars end due to being planted in the east and the Russians were keen on grabbing as many fleas as possible plus any Komet tech and personell. Fast yes, inefficient yes, no range, sitting ducks in a glide home
__________________ zerreißen Sie es oben ! |
| |
10-08-2007, 06:08 PM
|
#899 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Limburg
Posts: 871
Country: | Even if they lost 12 Komets due to enemy action then it's still less than the 14 bombers they shot down.
Low figures in any case: few losses, few kills. It's clear that they didn't see enough action. IMO because they weren't placed in the right area. I would have put them right in the Ruhr area. Plenty of stuff to do there, and all within range.
Glider, I'm just basing myself on the public Flugzeugbestanden which are summarized on the net by Holm at ww2.dk.
Kris
__________________ |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:04 PM. |  | |