German "Warthog"

Deleted member 1487

Admittedly I cannot even distinguish between a 210 and a 410 when I have only one picture :eek::eek::eek::eek:. As far as I remember I just read "210" in the artist's description of the picture. You are certainly right, wikipedia mentions the BK 5 only for the Me 410. .... And then I (and the artist who made the picture) may have made another mistake: wikipedia mentions the BK 5 only as a bomber destroyer weapon, not as a ground attack weapon. Perhaps he just thought that the Messerschmitt attacking the T-34s would look cool, without any proof that this weapon was used to attack tanks at all.
The Me210 and 410 were the same plane, just with minor changes. The 210 was so troubled that it was decided to renumber it entirely to convince the pilots the new plane was entirely redesigned. It wasn't, but the issues were corrected. The big problem is the Me410 was a shit CAS/AT aircraft. It was at best a fighter-bomber, just a Bf110 upgrade. It was a multirole plane that did nothing well, least of all AT work.
 
In 1918, Antony Fokker brought a new fighter, the V-11, to a fighter competition. Von Richthofen flew it and said it was the worst airplane ever. Fokker took the airplane back for a weekend and added one bay to the fuselage, and a bit of vertical fin. Von Richthofen said it was the best fighter ever. They called it the D VII.

The Me-210 could have been fixed over a weekend, but it took much longer to recognize and remedy in much the same way as the Fokker.

It wasn't used in CAS/AT, so judgments on it's performance in the role may be presumptuous. It was effective at flying over England and not doing much. It was an effective bomber destroyer in the absence of escort. There actually was a variant planned to take the BMW 801 engine.

Had the Me-210 had that weekend in Fokker's shed, early in it's life, it might have been a contender, for a while.
 
Could the Bf 110 have been made into a tank buster? Ditch the third crewmember, and put a 37 mm in the nose? It's in trouble against fighters--but much less so than the Stuka.

The German's _did_ put a 37mm underneath a Me-110, but IIRC it was for use as a anti-bomber weapon, not ground attack. And it degraded performance horribly and was not accepted for service.

The comment about lack of control was interesting, relooking at the Me-110 one can't help but notice the two rather small rudders...

Did they ever build a Ju-88 with a practical anti-tank gun? You don't need a 75 mm if you're attacking from the back or top.

One sub-model carried a single 50mm cannon (single-shot IIRC) while another carried two 37mm cannons. That's the version I'd vote for but I suspect it was rather vulnerable to both AA and fighters.
 
The Me210 and 410 were the same plane, just with minor changes. The 210 was so troubled that it was decided to renumber it entirely to convince the pilots the new plane was entirely redesigned. It wasn't, but the issues were corrected. The big problem is the Me410 was a shit CAS/AT aircraft. It was at best a fighter-bomber, just a Bf110 upgrade. It was a multirole plane that did nothing well, least of all AT work.


Hi, that is not true...

the me210 and the me410 were basically complete differtent planes... the parts of the me210 could not be used in the 410... so i would say - different planes...

hm, my books about it says so too... have you sources about them beeing similar (similar looking is not the same as be similar)
 
Back to Fokker again. When the Fokker E V proved to be a killer, the improved aircraft was called the D VIII which did not have the bad reputation. They were the same enough.

When the improved Me-410 lost it's bad characteristics, the original leading edge slats from the -210 were retro-fitted to the wings.
 
Back to Fokker again. When the Fokker E V proved to be a killer, the improved aircraft was called the D VIII which did not have the bad reputation. They were the same enough.

When the improved Me-410 lost it's bad characteristics, the original leading edge slats from the -210 were retro-fitted to the wings.


Hi, do you mix two different things?

the me210 was a fault, messerschmidt works developted it and create the me410... the idea was the same, the tool was different - the parts do not fit. So the me210 and me410 are totally different planes, they had less then 20% of the parts similar...

how was this with the Fokker...
 
The concept of TOTALLY different planes could be dubious. I pointed out the Fokker as an example of a bad plane, fixed and renamed to disassociate it. I now present an aircraft with highly different engines and lengthened fuselage, both called DC-8, because they were good airplanes.

douglas_dc8_3v.jpg
 
The concept of TOTALLY different planes could be dubious. I pointed out the Fokker as an example of a bad plane, fixed and renamed to disassociate it. I now present an aircraft with highly different engines and lengthened fuselage, both called DC-8, because they were good airplanes.


Well - it is not my opinion, just plain facts... for me both look similar... but the books say something else
 
A Hail Mary

A push-pull design came out in 1937. The Germans were doing well and felt no need to develop it. Later in the war, it became the Dornier Do-335. If the German Air Force had selected it for tank-killer in '37, would be good enough for service?
 
A push-pull design came out in 1937. The Germans were doing well and felt no need to develop it. Later in the war, it became the Dornier Do-335. If the German Air Force had selected it for tank-killer in '37, would be good enough for service?

There are a couple problems with wing mounted guns. These problems are worse on the Do-335 because the undercarriage has a very wide track, requiring underwing guns to be mounted well away from the centerline.
 
Top