Best Fighter III - Page 22 - Aircraft of World War II

cheddar cheese · 06-25-2005, 05:18 AM

They were written off but still flew back to base.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 06-25-2005, 09:42 AM

Upon landing at the base the mechanics discovered that it was not repairable.

the lancaster kicks ass · 06-25-2005, 12:44 PM

what, when they saw an entire engine blown off

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 06-27-2005, 03:01 PM

There are a lot of things that can cause it to be deemed unrepairable. Structural damage can be very hard to repair especially if it is in the ribbing.

wmaxt · 06-27-2005, 06:05 PM

Also once an aircraft is twisted or out of true you only fly it again in extream circumstanses. Amoung the numbers written off are training accidents, collisions and any aircraft lost on the ground.

The P-47 has a better total writeoff rate, it seams that 3,077 were written off (423,000 sorties) with 1,043 not returning to base. One note has to be mentioned here P-47s flew the Britten to German border escort leg twice a day on bomber missions. These missions were not normaly heavily contested, greatly reducing both opportunities and danger while doubling sortie count.

wmaxt

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 06-28-2005, 08:50 AM

Do you have the written off records for other aircraft?

Parmigiano · 08-02-2005, 11:46 AM

Hi everybody, been lurking the forum for a while and finally registered

One reflection point on this topic: it is almost impossible to come to a rational conclusion, we'll never be able to compare apples with apples.
For instance, every aircraft or improvement made in Germany after 1943 was heavily burdened by the overall situation (i.e. need to work with lowering quality fuel and raw materials, need to be assembled underground etc.) while the developments managed in the US and UK could rely on optimal environment and resources.

Also, the Germans were forced to shove in service every new achievement (often disregarding the reliability) while the Allied forces tend to rely on validated solutions: this could very well explain in part the German advantage on shown technology.

If we want to evaluate the design, then the Me262 is in my opinion unchallenged (although it was more a bomber-destroyer than a fighter)

What would had happened if Junkers could had tested the 004 in a normal situation instead of 'freezing' the development as soon as it was barely suited for operations? We will never know.

ciao

lesofprimus · 08-02-2005, 06:03 PM

Welcome to the site Parm...

I find the Fw-190D-9 to be the best Fighter of WWII... About 1 out of 3 members of this Board also agrees with that aircraft...

the lancaster kicks ass · 08-03-2005, 03:34 AM

i'm not sure what i'd pick........

Smokey · 08-03-2005, 06:15 AM

Does the He162 count?

http://members.tripod.com/airmodeller/48GrHe162.htm

It had some structural problems, but these appear to have been solved during production
It would have a great mix of speed and maneuvrability, range seems poor, so best interceptor maybe?
Service history is a tad short and the claims are 1 He 162 shot down by an allied fighter for one typhoon lost in return

lesofprimus · 08-03-2005, 06:41 AM

Lanc, if memory serves me right, u never did put ur 2 cents in on this one...

Parmigiano · 08-03-2005, 07:54 AM

Les, I agree with the majority on the 'Langenase Dora' as best prop driven fighter of WW II

About the He 162 Salamander, I would not personally include it in the 'best fighter' contest.
The machine was developed in the 'Volksjaeger' program, to have an high performance fighter that should have been cheap and fast to produce and easy enough to fly by untrained pilots.
It achieved the first goals but not the last: apparently was a bit tricky to fly and required an experienced horseman.
It is a mistery if it actually saw combact action, although a good number was produced and several hundreds were almost completed by the end of the war.
As many of the last year planes was pushed in production before all the 'natural' youth problems were ironed out, typically they had to change the planned guns (2 x MK10

with 2x MG151 because the vibration of the 30mm were too much for the structure.

A strenghtened version, plus many other variants with Jumo 004 instead of BMW003, with butterfly tail, with 2x Argus pulsejet (the same engine as V1 cruise missile) and others were either on drawing board or in prototype stage.

Sorry, I can't state numbers here because I'm away from home and have no access to my documentation: in case I will come back with it but not before September.

cheers

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 08-03-2005, 03:04 PM

I agree with you Les either the Fw-190 D-9 or the Ta-152H.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parmigiano

Also, the Germans were forced to shove in service every new achievement (often disregarding the reliability)

This I disagree with. Yes they did shove into service everything whether it was reliable or not which they should not have done but they did this by choice and dumb mistakes. They did not have to they had aircraft that were competitive with the allied aircraft like the Dora-9. They just made bad choices by not making them in large numbers rather than mass produce projects that had not affect on the outcome of the war.

Parmigiano · 08-03-2005, 03:41 PM

Yes Adler, I think you have a good point here: how much they forced in service 'experimental' planes because of the desperate situation and how much because of their 'technological nymphomania'.

Another peculiarity unexplainable by common sense is why they released the patent rules only very late (I remember late in 44):the Allieds used to share know-how routinely (see Merlin built by Packard, Hurricanes and Lancs in Canada, the sleeve valve issue in the Napier Sabre cured with technology borrowed from Bristol etc.), while in Germany every Company was engineering their projects in almost complete isolation.

As example, the 262 and 163 were developed at Messerschmidt in two completely separated pipelines, nowhere the Lippisch and the Voigt team shared know how and solutions.

This brought to the development of many potentially great designs but at the cost of a waste of resources that no Nation (with the possible exception of US because of industrial power and 'privileged' situation) could have sustained.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 08-03-2005, 03:51 PM

Actually many programs were worked on by several companies. Lippisch worked on several Messerschmitt programs and because of work load some were handed off to other companies like the Me-155 was handed over to Blohm & Voss and later renamed the Bv-155 after design changes.

06-25-2005, 09:42 AM	#317
DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany Posts: 34,732	Upon landing at the base the mechanics discovered that it was not repairable. __________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"

06-25-2005, 12:44 PM	#318
the lancaster kicks ass Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 19,925	what, when they saw an entire engine blown off __________________ "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy."

06-27-2005, 03:01 PM	#319
DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany Posts: 34,732	There are a lot of things that can cause it to be deemed unrepairable. Structural damage can be very hard to repair especially if it is in the ribbing. __________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"

06-28-2005, 08:50 AM	#321
DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany Posts: 34,732	Do you have the written off records for other aircraft? __________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"

08-02-2005, 06:03 PM	#323
lesofprimus Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Long Island Native in Mississippi Posts: 18,708	Welcome to the site Parm... I find the Fw-190D-9 to be the best Fighter of WWII... About 1 out of 3 members of this Board also agrees with that aircraft... __________________

06-25-2005, 05:18 AM	#316
cheddar cheese Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: WSM, England Posts: 20,368	They were written off but still flew back to base.

06-27-2005, 06:05 PM	#320
wmaxt Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Boise, Idaho Posts: 1,175	Also once an aircraft is twisted or out of true you only fly it again in extream circumstanses. Amoung the numbers written off are training accidents, collisions and any aircraft lost on the ground. The P-47 has a better total writeoff rate, it seams that 3,077 were written off (423,000 sorties) with 1,043 not returning to base. One note has to be mentioned here P-47s flew the Britten to German border escort leg twice a day on bomber missions. These missions were not normaly heavily contested, greatly reducing both opportunities and danger while doubling sortie count. wmaxt

08-02-2005, 11:46 AM	#322
Parmigiano Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Campospinoso (PV), Italy Posts: 682	Hi everybody, been lurking the forum for a while and finally registered One reflection point on this topic: it is almost impossible to come to a rational conclusion, we'll never be able to compare apples with apples. For instance, every aircraft or improvement made in Germany after 1943 was heavily burdened by the overall situation (i.e. need to work with lowering quality fuel and raw materials, need to be assembled underground etc.) while the developments managed in the US and UK could rely on optimal environment and resources. Also, the Germans were forced to shove in service every new achievement (often disregarding the reliability) while the Allied forces tend to rely on validated solutions: this could very well explain in part the German advantage on shown technology. If we want to evaluate the design, then the Me262 is in my opinion unchallenged (although it was more a bomber-destroyer than a fighter) What would had happened if Junkers could had tested the 004 in a normal situation instead of 'freezing' the development as soon as it was barely suited for operations? We will never know. ciao

08-03-2005, 03:34 AM	#324
the lancaster kicks ass Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 19,925	i'm not sure what i'd pick........ __________________ "Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy."

08-03-2005, 06:15 AM	#325
Smokey Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 532	Does the He162 count? http://members.tripod.com/airmodeller/48GrHe162.htm It had some structural problems, but these appear to have been solved during production It would have a great mix of speed and maneuvrability, range seems poor, so best interceptor maybe? Service history is a tad short and the claims are 1 He 162 shot down by an allied fighter for one typhoon lost in return

08-03-2005, 06:41 AM	#326
lesofprimus Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Long Island Native in Mississippi Posts: 18,708	Lanc, if memory serves me right, u never did put ur 2 cents in on this one... __________________

08-03-2005, 07:54 AM	#327
Parmigiano Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Campospinoso (PV), Italy Posts: 682	Les, I agree with the majority on the 'Langenase Dora' as best prop driven fighter of WW II About the He 162 Salamander, I would not personally include it in the 'best fighter' contest. The machine was developed in the 'Volksjaeger' program, to have an high performance fighter that should have been cheap and fast to produce and easy enough to fly by untrained pilots. It achieved the first goals but not the last: apparently was a bit tricky to fly and required an experienced horseman. It is a mistery if it actually saw combact action, although a good number was produced and several hundreds were almost completed by the end of the war. As many of the last year planes was pushed in production before all the 'natural' youth problems were ironed out, typically they had to change the planned guns (2 x MK10 with 2x MG151 because the vibration of the 30mm were too much for the structure. A strenghtened version, plus many other variants with Jumo 004 instead of BMW003, with butterfly tail, with 2x Argus pulsejet (the same engine as V1 cruise missile) and others were either on drawing board or in prototype stage. Sorry, I can't state numbers here because I'm away from home and have no access to my documentation: in case I will come back with it but not before September. cheers

08-03-2005, 03:41 PM	#329
Parmigiano Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Campospinoso (PV), Italy Posts: 682	Yes Adler, I think you have a good point here: how much they forced in service 'experimental' planes because of the desperate situation and how much because of their 'technological nymphomania'. Another peculiarity unexplainable by common sense is why they released the patent rules only very late (I remember late in 44):the Allieds used to share know-how routinely (see Merlin built by Packard, Hurricanes and Lancs in Canada, the sleeve valve issue in the Napier Sabre cured with technology borrowed from Bristol etc.), while in Germany every Company was engineering their projects in almost complete isolation. As example, the 262 and 163 were developed at Messerschmidt in two completely separated pipelines, nowhere the Lippisch and the Voigt team shared know how and solutions. This brought to the development of many potentially great designs but at the cost of a waste of resources that no Nation (with the possible exception of US because of industrial power and 'privileged' situation) could have sustained.

08-03-2005, 03:51 PM	#330
DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crewchief Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany Posts: 34,732	Actually many programs were worked on by several companies. Lippisch worked on several Messerschmitt programs and because of work load some were handed off to other companies like the Me-155 was handed over to Blohm & Voss and later renamed the Bv-155 after design changes. __________________ fly boy:"isnt that the first jet bomber becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles"

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode