What of the Me 410?

[Glider]

I saw an interview with a BOB veteran who was asked this question. His reply was very simple,
'I was shot down once by an He111 gunner and had to make an emergency landing when hit by a Do17, so they cannot have been that bad. It could have been me of course but I survived the war so logic says I was at least average.'
I think that says it all.

Its interesting to speculate how the Germans would have fared if they had a plane like the Wellington. There is no doubt that twin gunned powered turrets are better than single hand held guns as used by the Germans in BOB.

[CharlesBronson]

Yea , but still it had the shitty rifle caliber Mgs.


Information about operational use of the Me-410.

[Erich]

CB what is the source listed please ? it's wrong anyway in a big way. II./ZG 26 did not have Me 210's in the fall of 1943, they moved the antiquated Bf 110G-2's out for the newer sleeker me 410A's and still put the fat dual rocket launchers under each wing but they did have an advantage as the nose and belly trays could house more 2cm weapons systems

[CharlesBronson]

The source is "Me-210/Me-410 in action" Squadron Signal Publishing.


¿And what about the rest of it ? I mean the losses/victories and all that.

[Erich]

I am going to have to pull the book out. ........... . I think there are more mistakes within

[CharlesBronson]

Im Einsatz sind vor allem bei der Verwendung der so genannten BK/M.Gr. bemerkenswerte Erfolge erzielt worden; so hat z. B. eine Gruppe von 53 Me 410 A-1/U4, die je Waffe mit 36 Schuss ausgerüstet waren, mit der BK 5 bei 6 Feindflügen im Zeitraum vom 22. Februar bis 11. April 1944 insgesamt 129 Stück der B-17 "Fortress" Bomber und 4 Stück der B-24 "Liberator" bei nur 9 Eigenverlusten abgeschossen. Bei Boden Schussversuchen an einer He 111 mit der Spr.G. "M" (0,350 kg Sprengstoff) wurde der Rumpf mit einem Treffer in zwei Teile zerlegt. Auch bei viermotorigen Maschinen genügte ein Treffer, wie die Abschüsse von 9 "Fortress" Bombern aus etwa 800 m Entfernung am 9. und 11. April 1944 bewiesen.

My german is poor, so my translation could be wrong. in Bold.

"In the period of time between 22 February to 11 april of 1944 the Me-410A1 /U4s equipped with the 50 mm BK-5s destroyed 129 B-17s and 4 B-24s with 9 own losses"


If true is a amazing victory-losses rate.


Source:

Luftwaffe [LuftArchiv.de - Das Archiv der Deutschen Luftwaffe] 2.WK

[Erich]

impressive if true but doubtful. ZG 76 used the Bk 5cm on the Ost front as ground attack and had terrible issues with it. ZG 26 and only small portions and am not sure when they say 53 unless it is the total ZG 26 had for the lengthy time period. 29 bombers yes but not 129 destroyed. It was already proven by II./ZG 26 that the forward firepower of the 6 20mm's was ultimate for destroying the Viermots plus not having the big heavy nosed cannon when you are trying to escape US P-47/P-51's.
another reason why I think this may be a typo error from the German docs is that ZG 26 and ZG 76 were only receiving Me 410's in March of 44. II./ZG 26 had the Me 410 as early as September/October of 43 while the rest of the gruppen of ZG kept the Bf 110G-2 as did the whole of ZG 76. The 53 number would be a fat gruppe of destroyers with the long rod if true.

[CharlesBronson]

Thanks for the comments Erich.

My translation wasnt bad after all.

[CPWN]

Originally Posted by CharlesBronson

There was a bunch of good germans single and twin engine fighters that should be cancelled due this"engine sharing" problem.

For example :

FW-187:

This aircraft was equipedd with the little ( 19,7 liters) Jumo 210GA de 700hp, but his design was keeping in mind the DB series.
Even so underpowered this slender aircraft can reach 530 K/h (A-0 series)
The V6 flew with a pair of DB600Aa of 1075 hp, the 32,7 liter Mercedes engine was a huge change for this figther and push it to the amazing at time ( 1939) 636 Km/h.

Other good aircraft ruined by the low DB-601 production was the fast He-100

Can't see the image. Update some form google.











He100 is fast. But it's too small that can't carry more equipment and only could be installed the DB601. Otherwise He100's maneuverability seems not good.

[CharlesBronson]

Wrong topic man...this is for Me-210/410, if you want to discuss about the FW-187 and He-100 better go to:

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/avi...tc-862-22.html (Alternative German Fighters: Me-209, Me-309, He-100, etc.)

----------------------------

Me-410 videos:

YouTube - Messerschmitt Me 410 Hornisse

YouTube - Messerchmitt Me-410

[Soren]

Didn't the fastest version of the Me-410 do around 640 km/h ?

[CharlesBronson]

Yes , the Me-410B variants with the DB-603G 1900 hp engines. (without the 50 mm cannon off course)

[Udet]

Originally Posted by WEISNER

This kite could have well benifited by a redesign of the cockpit canopy and the use of Dual rear MG's, simmular in design to the Bf110 or Ju88 rear defensive guns.
I do not know what this mess of a system weighed used by the 210-410? but I would guess cockpit mounted guns would have saved alot of weight, Materials and also the drag caused by the twin barbetts.
This system was complicated and unreliable to say the least.
The Me 410A-1's of II./ZG26, that were used for high altitude interceptions during 1944, did away with this mess alltogether..... And had the Barbetts removed and faired over, and no second crew member was carried.
Does anyone know, or venture to guess upon the total weight of the rear firing gun mechanism, guns, wiring harness and motors, sights and all other related items?
Kevin

How come it was complicated and unreliable? From the very little information i´ve had available on model, i read no complains at all from the pilots who flew the Hornisse.

The MG 131 rear defensvie system as shown in Charlie´s photo does not seem to be what you´d call a complicated system...surely more "complicated" than a simple gun mount manually handled by a rear gunner...but complicated to such extent it was not possible to be maintained and/or repaired by ground technicians seems quite excessive.

I have yet to find evidence from crews that would tell the system was crap.

Ah, from all photos i have from ZG 26 and ZG 76 during 1944...in absolutely all photos where the fuselage area of the plane appears i can see the MG 131 in place, meaning i have not seen any photo showing the Me 410 in combat units without the defensive gear. If you have any photos to share illustrating this fact, they´d be very much appreciated.

[CharlesBronson]

I saw only one of that aircraft with no defensive armament in that squadron. It seems to be the exception not the rule.




And what would had more benefits? a spare 15 km/h or a couple defensive guns ? probably it go up to the pilot s preferences.

[Udet]

Charlie, hello.

Good photos as usual from your part.

While it seems that in fact the first photo shows a Me 410 with no MG 131s fitted, the second one does...or what was the purpose of the second pic?

Cheers!