Best WWII Air-Force

[Soren]

Originally Posted by lesofprimus

Yea Soren, u seemed to ignore my post above Bills....

Sorry Les.

Yes there were some crashes, but most were pilot error IIRC, and some haven't been explained. A few were the cause of technical problems.

Bill,

I didn't realize it was purely about bombing, but since it is according to you the Ju-88R was capable of dropping bombs, and it was just as fast as the G-7. But by 1944 the Ju-88's role had switched from bombing to night fighting, the bombing was mainly carried out by the Ju-188 & Ju-388 which were both better medium bombers than any USAAF a/c.

PS: The Ju-88G-7B was even faster than 626 km/h, it would reach 647 km/h at 10,200m with MW-50.

And as to your so called "BS-Alerts", very funny, perhaps I should say that about some the ridiculous stuff you have claimed.

The Russians most likely didn't build the He-277 for a number of reasons:
A) They didn't know about this a/c
B) The manufacturing of this a/c was too complex for their industry (Wouldn't be a first)
C) They already had a B-29

Oh and btw, you can stop your ridiculous digging after sources that claim the Dora-13 suffered many accidents, you'll realize how ridiculous that claim of yours is when you realize just how many were actually made.

[Soren]

Oh and as for references:
ch11-2

[The Basket]

The order to copy the B-29 was from Stalin not Tupelov. Tupelov would have rather designed his own plane. He wanted B-29s from USA but they wouldn't give him any so he copied the three that he had.

Stalin wanted a strategic bomber force very very quickly. The B-29 was proven and the technology available. Bet on the winning horse for low risk and quick results.

[Graeme]

OH NO, Quick Basket, get out of there, you just entered a MINEFIELD!

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Soren

The Russians most likely didn't build the He-277 for a number of reasons:
A) They didn't know about this a/c
B) The manufacturing of this a/c was too complex for their industry (Wouldn't be a first)
C) They already had a B-29

And was so complex about the assembly of the He 227? I see it no more complex to assemble than and other large 4 engine bomber of WW2.

[pbfoot]

The USAAC had something the Germans never quite mastered and that was the art or ability to strategic bomb. How many bombers could they put up on a consistent basis .They would have been smart to scrap any of their heavy bomber projects and invested the saved money in other endeavours. Let alone freeing up shopspace and trained manpower to enhance their fighter production .
If my info is correct the Steinbock raids of 43/44 were any example they started out with about 427 bombers and within 5 months and 29 raids the RAF had the LW down to 130 bombers .

[drgondog]

[quote=Soren;261385]Sorry Les.

Yes there were some crashes, but most were pilot error IIRC, and some haven't been explained. A few were the cause of technical problems.

Point made on Ta152 but more to come. Your point made on Fw190D-13 - I misspoke and meant Fw190D program but I accept that -13s didn't have troubled history except for 3 stage carb that didn't work very well.

Having said that my comment to you is that the P-80 had some problems but really no more than the Ta152 and Fw190D. Stand by that comment!

Bill,

I didn't realize it was purely about bombing, but since it is according to you the Ju-88R was capable of dropping bombs, and it was just as fast as the G-7. But by 1944 the Ju-88's role had switched from bombing to night fighting, the bombing was mainly carried out by the Ju-188 & Ju-388 which were both better medium bombers than any USAAF a/c.

Ju388 - how many ships built? how many missions flown? Ditto for the 'Medium Bomber Choice de Jour version of the Ju188? versus the A26?

PS: The Ju-88G-7B was even faster than 626 km/h, it would reach 647 km/h at 10,200m with MW-50.

Yawn - it was a Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggggghhhhhhhhtttttt Fighter with uprated engines heavy forward firing armament designed to shoot down Lancasters

And as to your so called "BS-Alerts", very funny, perhaps I should say that about some the ridiculous stuff you have claimed.

Soren - you went on the tangent to describe that the Ju88 was a better bomber with suprior performance to the A26. I simply rebutted it and then you brought in one of several Night Fighter versions to compare speed - works well in "BS" pot!

The Russians most likely didn't build the He-277 for a number of reasons:
A) They didn't know about this a/c
B) The manufacturing of this a/c was too complex for their industry (Wouldn't be a first)
C) They already had a B-29

Soren - you make me smile. The Soviets didn't KNOW about the mysterious He277. Germany MANAGED to keep this marvelous a/c hidden from USSR. B-29 simpler to copy and tool for than complex, secret, unknown He277?USSR 'children' unable to comprehend the complexities of the he277 so took second (or is it third or fourth) best heavy bomber of WWII

LOL!

In the book "Me-262", Smith and Creek, Volume 4 is a summary of a direct comparison tests done after the war and it suggested the overall superiority of the Me-262 vs the XP-80 .

I assume that this is the test series which the source of your quotes but still can't find the actual tests and flight data that is quoted in the book? Do you have it?

Having said that, it's important to note that that comparsion was allegedly between a stripped recon verson of the Me-262 and the XP-80 (which was dimmensionally smaller and had 1,000 lbs less thrust than the P-80A). This was either one of the XP-80 ships remaining in England or one from Italy that went over in Nov 1944 or Jan 1945

This was the only test that I know of where both planes were present at the same place and time.

Two other comparisons made between the flight test data of the 1946 tests for the Me262 and the P-80A describe the P-80 as "faster, climb faster, higher ceiling, nearly equal roll" - no comment on acceleration

Is this the test you wish to make your case on versus the P-80A (which was not done head to head) which was in production in Feb1945? The pilots that flew both the P-80A and THAT Me262 described the P-80A as the "Best in the world" although proponents of the Meteor 4 could have something to say about that description!

What is the USAAF Report number and date you are quoting from?

Regards,
Bill

[Soren]

Originally Posted by drgondog

Point made on Ta152 but more to come. Your point made on Fw190D-13 - I misspoke and meant Fw190D program but I accept that -13s didn't have troubled history except for 3 stage carb that didn't work very well.

Finally..

Having said that my comment to you is that the P-80 had some problems but really no more than the Ta152 and Fw190D. Stand by that comment!

Err, yes it did - the FW-190 Dora didn't suffer any serious problems, and the Ta-512's equipped with the good batch of engines performed excellently with no troubles at all.

Ju388 - how many ships built? how many missions flown? Ditto for the 'Medium Bomber Choice de Jour version of the Ju188? versus the A26?

101 + Ju-388's were produced, and ~1,230 Ju-188's were produced.

Yawn - it was a Niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggggghhhhhhhhtttttt Fighter with uprated engines heavy forward firing armament designed to shoot down Lancasters

Still, find me a USAAF nightfighter that can go just as fast.

Soren - you went on the tangent to describe that the Ju88 was a better bomber with suprior performance to the A26. I simply rebutted it and then you brought in one of several Night Fighter versions to compare speed - works well in "BS" pot!

The point was to compare the Ju-88's fitted with the BMW-801 G engines which were faster than the A-26, the bombers actually being much faster - the night-fighting equipment robbing around 25 km/h of the top speed.

[b]Soren - you make me smile. The Soviets didn't KNOW about the mysterious He277. Germany MANAGED to keep this marvelous a/c hidden from USSR. B-29 simpler to copy and tool for than complex, secret, unknown He277?USSR 'children' unable to comprehend the complexities of the he277 so took second (or is it third or fourth) best heavy bomber of WWII

I make you smile ??!

Cut the indirect bias accusations, it doesn't get you anywhere other than you being looked upon as a child.

What is it about the fact that the Russians didn't know about the He-277 that you don't understand ?? They never even had a look at one in the air ! And the Russians didn't acquire themselves an example of the He-177 either - they were gone.

And as to the complexity of the He-277 design, well it was likely a very complex design, it was after-all German, and the Germans have a habbit of over-engineering - OT example: The design of the 120mm L/44 Rheinmetall gun had to be simplified in order for US industry to be capable of producing it.

Having said that, it's important to note that that comparsion was allegedly between a stripped recon verson of the Me-262 and the XP-80 (which was dimmensionally smaller and had 1,000 lbs less thrust than the P-80A). This was either one of the XP-80 ships remaining in England or one from Italy that went over in Nov 1944 or Jan 1945

The Me-262 wasn't a recon version, all captured Me-262's which entered comparative testing were fighter versions. But would you be so kind as to tell me where you've heard the rumor that it was a recon.

Also I'd very much doubt that the P-80 was a XP or YP prototype, it was much more likely a A series production model. But the XP & YP prototypes were both lighter than the A series production model.

Is this the test you wish to make your case on versus the P-80A (which was not done head to head) which was in production in Feb1945? The pilots that flew both the P-80A and THAT Me262 described the P-80A as the "Best in the world"

I'd have wondered if they didn't cause the captured Me-262's certainly weren't run at full power, and the pilots weren't used to it either, plus there's always some national pride. The German pilots who flew both a/c describe the Me-262 as the best, but again the same factors apply. All in all I believe that an excellent example Me-262 & P-80 were overall equal to each other, the Me-262 being more maneuverable at high speed and possessing a higher critical mach number.

although proponents of the Meteor 4 could have something to say about that description!

The Meteor Mk.4 was too slow though - an otherwise fine a/c though.

What is the USAAF Report number and date you are quoting from?

Its the same as yours I'd presume.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I can allready see this thread is going to be marred with insults and everything and get the thread closed, which is going to ruin it for everyone else because people are going to stop acting like adults.

[syscom3]

OK, to get things back on track.....

I was wondering what the rest of you think about how Germany's obvious lead in advanced aerial weapons really counted in the equations of WW2.

I was dwelling on this today as I flew back from Dallas to OC, and came to the conclusion that it shouldn't even be counted, as these were weapons for the future, not for the "here and now" reality of 1939-1945.

For instance, the jet bombers were still a couple of years away from being in production (sorry Soren, but its obvious that the LW was going to rush many prototypes into service before they were fully tested and made ready) and couldn't even be considered weapons of WW2. They flew no missions and had ZERO impact on the war besides scaring the crap out of the allies.

Ditto the same for the rockets...... too little too late. Would have been a big factor had the war in Europe dragged on for another year or two.... but like I said, we're talking about the actual war years, not a "what if or could of" scenario.

I was also thinking about the real impact of the Me-262. Just what did it really do besides showing to the allies that the Germans were in the forefront of jet technology? I dont recall it shooting down masses of bombers, and it seems that the kill per sortie rate wasn't too impressive.

Your thought's?

[Soren]

The Me-262 certainly wasn't rushed into production, it was massively delayed, it was ready already in 1943. And its the same story about many other German machines, so forget your little prototype theory.

As to the Me-262's service record, its excellent considering the situation under which it operated, and it acquired itself a very nice kill ratio in terms of shoot downs vs losses due to aerial combat. Counting losses from all causes the Me-262 has a 1.5 to 1 kill/loss ratio.

[Marcel]

Originally Posted by Soren

The Me-262 certainly wasn't rushed into production, it was massively delayed, it was ready already in 1943. And its the same story about many other German machines, so forget your little prototype theory.

As to the Me-262's service record, its excellent considering the situation under which it operated, and it acquired itself a very nice kill ratio in terms of shoot downs vs losses due to aerial combat. Counting losses from all causes the Me-262 has a 1.5 to 1 kill/loss ratio.

You're right about the ME262 being delayed, but I think the question is: would the LW be better served by more FW190/Bf109's that could have been build instead of the handfull Me262's? After all, development these new types used a lot of resources which could have been used for building a lot more other "established" fighters.

[syscom3]

Originally Posted by Marcel

You're right about the ME262 being delayed, but I think the question is: would the LW be better served by more FW190/Bf109's that could have been build instead of the handfull Me262's? After all, development these new types used a lot of resources which could have been used for building a lot more other "established" fighters.

Exactly Marcel.

Personally I feel the LW would have been better served by concentrating on only -190 and -262 production.

But when you look at the actual war record of the -262, for having an aircraft a whole generation better than the allied types, scoring only 1.5 kills isn't really that impressive. The LW was needing to knock down hundreds of bombers at a time and they could only shoot down this number?

Soren.... "delays" are nothing but excuses. Several key AAF airplanes had delays, but no one here is arguing "if only.....".

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Marcel

You're right about the ME262 being delayed, but I think the question is: would the LW be better served by more FW190/Bf109's that could have been build instead of the handfull Me262's? After all, development these new types used a lot of resources which could have been used for building a lot more other "established" fighters.

I have to admit this is a very good point. As well as increased numbers had the development effort on the Me262 been put to use, you may well have had the 190D six months earlier and the 152. This could easily have made quite a difference.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I find it ineteresting how something that was still having major engine problems in 1945 was ready to go in 1943. Seems to me it still needed some work.

I agree with Marcel that the Luftwaffe would have been better served with more 190s and 109s.