Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums

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 ...


Go Back   Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums > World War II - Aviation > Aviation

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-01-2007, 03:11 PM   #886
Senior Member
 
Parmigiano's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Campospinoso (PV), Italy
Posts: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by xavier View Post
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
Parmigiano is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 12:25 AM   #887
Senior Member
 
Civettone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Limburg
Posts: 871
Country:
Send a message via MSN to Civettone Send a message via Skype™ to Civettone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glider View Post
You have got to be kidding.
No.



Kris
__________________

Civettone is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 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?
Glider is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2007, 02:44 PM   #889
Senior Member
 
Civettone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Limburg
Posts: 871
Country:
Send a message via MSN to Civettone Send a message via Skype™ to Civettone
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
__________________

Civettone is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 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---
delcyros is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2007, 04:08 PM   #891
Senior Member
 
Civettone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Limburg
Posts: 871
Country:
Send a message via MSN to Civettone Send a message via Skype™ to Civettone
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
__________________

Civettone is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 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---
delcyros is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2007, 05:31 PM   #893
the old Sage
 
Erich's Avatar
 
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 !
Erich is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-07-2007, 09:14 PM   #894
Senior Member
 
Civettone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Limburg
Posts: 871
Country:
Send a message via MSN to Civettone Send a message via Skype™ to Civettone
Oooooooooohh .... sorry about that, JG 400 ... of course!!

Start over Delcyros ...
Kris
__________________

Civettone is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 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
Glider is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2007, 08:21 AM   #896
Senior Member
 
Civettone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Limburg
Posts: 871
Country:
Send a message via MSN to Civettone Send a message via Skype™ to Civettone
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
__________________

Civettone is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 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.
Glider is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2007, 11:05 AM   #898
the old Sage
 
Erich's Avatar
 
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 !
Erich is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-08-2007, 06:08 PM   #899
Senior Member
 
Civettone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Limburg
Posts: 871
Country:
Send a message via MSN to Civettone Send a message via Skype™ to Civettone
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
__________________

Civettone is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2007, 05:25 PM   #900
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 220
Country:
Web site on the Walter engine used in the Me163.
The Walter Rocket Motor Site
AL Schlageter is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.1.0
   

AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com Avitop.com


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84