Which was the best night fighter?

[parsifal]

Very Impressive. I knew the Mossie was good, but not that good. How sure are you of this stat????

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by Hop

According to 8 Group the Mosquito B XVI was capable of 408 mph at 28,500 ft with a 4,000 lb bomb load, and 417 mph after the bomb was dropped.

Yeah for very short periods of time maybe.

[Glider]

The attached is a performance test on a B Mk IX giving the speed of 405mph.
In the report it is stated that these performance figures were less than expected!!!

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...uito/lr495.pdf

[Kruska]

Well taking (non existing or let me rather say not extensivly developed) modells such as the 262, 219 or Arado into account, the 335 would probably have had the highest potential as a nightfighter of all the above mentioned aircraft.

Practicaly it was the Ju 88 IMHO. However I would tend to support the idea that the Luftwaffe pilots would have optioned for a Mossie if they would have been given a choice.

If this applies the best nightfighter would be a Mossie and could have found a strong if not superior followup in the Do 335.

Regards
Kruska

Attachment 62195

[Erich]

the way of the Me 262B-2 was at hand the Do 335 would not have been used by any NJG

[Kruska]

Hello Erich,

I think that by taking the hopeless situation of Nazi Germany in 45 into account, with all attention being focused on the "miracle" Wunderwaffen, there would have been no support or resources freed for "traditional" systems which might have prooven to be far more effective or would have been needed as a basic requirement/supplementary in order to ensure the effectivness of the jets. It would have taken at least another 2-4 years to develop the existing German jets into reliable cost/effecient prop-replacements.

Until then only props such as a Ta-152 or Do 335 could have stood up to the Airforces of the Allies. As such also in an undeniable/necessary role as night-fighters.

The Allies where still using props in large numbers (probably in majority)during the Korea conflict 7/8 years after ww2. Only then and in the ongoing time the props vanished, caused maybe more due to the unstoppable persued path/goal of speed rather then technical or tactical advantage that a jet in the 40's or 50's was capable of.

Regards
Kruska
Attachment 62198

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Kruska

The Allies where still using props in large numbers (probably in majority)during the Korea conflict 7/8 years after ww2. Only then and in the ongoing time the props vanished, caused maybe more due to the unstoppable persued path/goal of speed rather then technical or tactical advantage that a jet in the 40's or 50's was capable of.

Piston engine aircraft stayed around in the post war years for a number of reasons; They were reliable; They were better on gas; the cost of operation still favored recips; spares were plentiful; there was ample fuel for them; there were many people available to maintain them; and for naval operations they offered better acceleration than early jets, essential for balked carrier landings. Piston engine aircraft were still being designed and deployed into the mid 50 until the jet caught up with reliability and efficiency.

[Kruska]

Hello Flyboy,

yes I agree fully to your comment, and as such it supports my earlier expressed view, that props would have been an absolute necessity on the German side to enable the jets to perform.

So besides a planed Nightfighter version of the Ta-152, which other German prop besides a D0335 could have given that superior support in the Nightfighter role immediately?

Regards
Kruska
Attachment 62202

[kool kitty89]

Until then only props such as a Ta-152 or Do 335 could have stood up to the Airforces of the Allies. As such also in an undeniable/necessary role as night-fighters.

That's not really correct, the Fw 190A-9, D-9, and the best models of Me 190 (G-10, K-4) were (at the ranges they operated at) a good match against most allied day fighters (mostly P-51's in a bomber intercept context context), and were better in some areas. And the 190 was as capable of being adapted to Night fighter as the Ta 152. And the Do 335 had other development problems.

The major problems with the Do 335 program was simply its own development, and not changing priorities. The Ta 152 was developing fairly rapidly, but it just started a bit late, looking at development progression there seems to be no hindrance due to priorities, in fact it, like the jets, was rushed in development which resulted in some reliability problems. (though the 152H did fairly well in its limited service)

I think that by taking the hopeless situation of Nazi Germany in 45 into account, with all attention being focused on the "miracle" Wunderwaffen, there would have been no support or resources freed for "traditional" systems which might have prooven to be far more effective or would have been needed as a basic requirement/supplementary in order to ensure the effectivness of the jets. It would have taken at least another 2-4 years to develop the existing German jets into reliable cost/effecient prop-replacements.

While some of the development of the German super weapons obviously wasted resources, many lacked development interest early on (it wasn't till 1942 that the jet program got any real funding other than private, though there was support in '41) The offensive programs were a bit wasteful, particularly the V-2, the V-1 less so. (the V-1 being fairly cost effective, just used in a time when the focus should have been on defensive strategy)

One major advantage of jets that is not often realized is that unlike piston engine a/c running on the limited supplies of aviation gasoline, they used J2 fuel which was basically Diesel with some anti-gelling additives. This was in large supply even at the war's end, though the decimated transportation system made it difficult to get it anywhere. (the transport problem was compounded for piston engined a/c which already had a fuel shortage)

[Kruska]

Hello kool kitty 89,

please don't get me wrong; indeed I admire and I even fancy a/c such as the Horten, 262 or Arado, but as you already mentioned these projects were neglected for too long.

What I try to point out is (just my personal opinion) that more efforts into the ongoing development into promising props such as a Ta or 335 would have paid of far more then putting these recources into a 163 or Heinkel Salamander or endlessly upgrading props like a 109 or persuing a 410. If I take the unreliable jet engines into account (which was known already in 1942) the urge to push a new generation of props would have paid of more.

So taking a Ta152 or 335 and its performance and armament into account, why should this a/c not provide more impact as a night-fighter then a 262 with burned out engines (after 20h) clinching at 450km with maybe one turbine still running?

Regards
Kruska
Attachment 62206

[kool kitty89]

The He 162 didn't use up that many resources and was a simple effective design, a good idea id developed earlier, albeit not much good for anything but high alt day fighter. Simple and cheap to produce with good capabilities)

The Do 335 had unrelated political and situational production problems. (some due to bombings)

The 410 was a good design, but late and not what they needed, so a bit of a waste.

The continued development and production of older designs like the 109 and 190 was necessary, as the other designs weren't ready to be produced in large numbers yet. (production wasn't ready to shift, and shifting took time and would leave a gap in available a/c) This was made worse by the relatively moderate support/priority for the advanced designs prior to 1944, or the developmental problems.


The Jet engines on a whole were not that unreliable, though the prototype 004A's with full refractory metals were not very long lived either (25 hr TBO) they were still developmental designs. The early 004B's were not very good (~10 hr TBO, ie servicing/replacing combustors and turbine) but the later 004B-4 had better performance and could meet 25 hrs between hot section change (combustor change and turbine check/change) in real world conditions. (total of 50 hr before true overhaul/rebuild) The improved 004D was similar, but with better performance and fuel economy along with the solving of the vibration problems (limiting 004B to 8,700 rpm) allowing it to run at the original 9,000 rpm with 920 kp thrust. (~1050 kp at 10,000 rpm -over-rev) Allong with improved throttle control.

The BMW 003 was better in almost all terms (construction time, life, TBO, fuel economy, thrust/weight or thrust/frontal area) with 200 hr for the annular combustor (made mostly of mild steel) and somewhat better turbine life as well) The 003A had similar specific consumption as the 004B at 1.4 lb/[lbf x hr] but the 003E improved this a bit along with capability to overrev and achieve 115% power to 920 kp for 30 sec. Flame-out and over-throttling characteristics were also better than the 004B. The 003 wasn't available in numbers prior to early 1945 however, and couldn't be restarted in flight, while the 004 could.

The throttle problems with flame-outs and (worst) burst combustors was common to allied engines as well the early Welland, Derwent, Goblin, J31, and J33 all suffering from these problems. (though since their turbines were solid and not air cooled, the turbine softening as in an overthrottled 004B -causing excess fuel flow w/out sufficient cooling air as it spooled up- would not be present)


For more on this take it to: http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/avi...ion-12424.html (Mistakes in Aviation)


But on the night fighter issue, I think the Ar 234 would be better than the 262, more room for equipment, belly mounted guns (no muzzle flash blinding) and better endurance, higher ceiling. Performance not as good as the 262B, but more than enough for the role. Plus the 262 was needed more as a day interceptor, while the Ar 234 was a bit underused. (good in recon, but like the 262, sometimes wasted in roles not the most urgent, tough it was a good bomber, it could have served better as a night fighter, and using any jet at low level was not good, as it ate away tons of fuel, less than 1/2 the range than at altitude)

[Erich]

again why are you both dealing with what ifs...........

what was the best night fighter ? stay with the thread unless you want to start a what-if the Do 335 or Ar 234N was used in perscribed numbers and for comparitive purposes, etc ........

the Ar 234N was used in combat on several missions by the way

[kool kitty89]

Ok and here's another better place for that discussion: http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/avi...war-12415.html (players in a prolonged war)

[Kruska]

[quote=Erich;350157]again why are you both dealing with what ifs...........

Hello Erich, what promted me into going into a what if discussion was actually your earlier posted line:

"the way of the Me 262B-2 was at hand the Do 335 would not have been used by any NJG"

To my understanding (I could be wrong) the 262B-2 was more of a prototype with what? 2-3 samples build and maybe 1 in action?

Therefore the forwarded 262B-2 raised the impression in me of a "what if a/c" discussion.

So if we stick to history - or let me rather say actuall performance and contribution, the best NF to me as I stated in an earlier post would be the Mossie.

Regards
Kruska
Attachment 62237

[kool kitty89]

Oh, and a little off topic again, but one of the biggest problems with the Ho IX/229 program was Gotha's discontent with the arrangement, the construction of additional prototypes and preproduction a/c lagged so much. It was relatively simple to build, and flew over 8 months before the He 162.