Best Bomber Killing Aircraft......

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by Colin1

would this be desirable at night?

1.) The better closing speed, the less time for a tail gunner to pick up something odd in his field of view.
2.) More time in the air to go get another one
3.) Harder to hit by defensive fire

usually one of those would be a good thing.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by Colin1

would this be desirable at night?

To get vectored to the bombers before they reach there target it would be, as well as what Bill listed.

[Vincenzo]

Originally Posted by KrazyKraut

I think what Vincenzo meant was that he understands that the Ju 88 is a better nightfighter than the He 219, but doesn't think that it is the better (heavy) fighter of the two per se.

And I would agree with him as many of the deficiencies of the He 219 would not have mattered had it been used as a heavy fighter and the Ju 88 was never all that successful in that role iirc. However I doubt it (the He 219) would've been markedly superior to a Me 410 and certainly would've had similar problems against escorts. Considering how moderately the EKdo 335 estimated the Do 335 to perform in that role in early '45, I don't think a somewhat/considerably slower plane would've fared better.

You take my point.
and i think best lw heavy fighter it's Me 410 (obv, after the few Do 335)

[Erich]

well for NF the inclusion of twin 2cm Schräge Musik would be enough to flying under the bomber in such a way the heavy bomber tail gunner would not be able to pick out the nif. this was done repeatedly with some practice, in fact many NF aces preferred this method of attack and armament arrangement over the forward firing weapons

[Vincenzo]

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

I do not think that those criteria (except maybe turn and roll rate) are defining factors for a night fighter.

If you wish to really get into depth in the night fighter discussion, we already have a thread about Night Fighters. The topic of He 219 vs. Ju 88 is discussed in depth in that thread.

i reading the thread nothing on question he 219a vs ju 88g as fighter but a generic he 219 it's underpowered but it's power ratio it's not much different from that of ju 88

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by Vincenzo

i reading the thread nothing on question he 219a vs ju 88g as fighter but a generic he 219 it's underpowered but it's power ratio it's not much different from that of ju 88

I will see if I can find the thread for you. This topic has been hashed out over and over.

[Sweb]

The Jug, hands down. High altitude performance, eight .050's with higher firing rates than any German cannon (less time-on-target), range, brutally tough and uncatchable in a dive.

In another role, these puppies in mass flights could have done more pin-point accuracy bombing of German targets than any carpet bombing of the day and saved countless lives on both sides. The pilots of Jugs at the reunions I attended made these comments with the look of in their eyes for the SNAFUs at the top who under-utilized them. Lose 10 Jugs on a surgical strike that takes out the intended target and that's ten lives vs 20 in 2 B-17's. That and on their best days (clear, no winds) a B-17 group might manage target damage. Jugs would render a second mission unnecessary.

With the advent of the P-51 flying cover, Jugs could have done what all the heavies did in less time with less cost and loss of life.

Discuss.

[lesofprimus]

HUH????

The P-47 as a Bomber Killer??? WTF u smokin boy???

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by Sweb

The Jug, hands down. High altitude performance, eight .050's with higher firing rates than any German cannon (less time-on-target), range, brutally tough and uncatchable in a dive.

You want to try and bring down bombers with .50 Cals...

There is a reason why the most successful bomber killers were armed with 20mm and 30mm cannons that used high explosive minengeschoss.

[tomo pauk]

How about the Jug with 4 VYa-23 cannons?

[Valo300]

I would have to go with the F4U-1C armed with 4x 20mm guns.

[imalko]

In my opinion, the best bomber killing fighter aircrafts of WW2 were:

In battle of Britain - Hurricane

In defence of the Reich - Focke Wulf Fw 190A-8 Sturmjager

In the East - Messerschmitt Bf 109G with cannons in underwing gondolas (Fw 190 would be better here too but it was mainly used in ground attack role and only in small numbers in fighter role)

As for defence of Japan, I am not too familiar with Japanese aircrafts, but lets say Ki-61 Hien maybe?

[tomo pauk]

For Japan that would be Kawasaki Ki-45Toryu, the twin engined fighter, that could do the damage to B-17 & B-24.
For attack at B-29 that would be the Nakajima Ki-84 Hayate, since all others lacked speed to catch Superfortreses at 30.000ft.

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by tomo pauk

How about the Jug with 4 VYa-23 cannons?

How about the 51H with the same armament

[tomo pauk]

It would be an uberflieger, but the Jug was available years before.

Now, the engine mounted VYa-23 would transfer the Bf-109 into an bomber killer; even the Friedrich would rock.