Nikademus
Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
|
[QUOTE]Originally posted by mdiehl
[B]The deep penetration raids on some occasions had disastrous effects on 8th AF and on other occasions much less disastrous. Bomber box cohesions was part of the equation. In general though you have to view cohesion as something that can deterioriate due to a variety of problems. Mechanical aborts. Pilot fatigue. Incremenatl flak damage, and so forth. So, on long missions the chance of losing cohesion probably increased along the way, thereby making them more risky.
Obviously the best solution was round trip fighter protection.
The "only" solution was round trip fighter protection. That and a changed operational plan from the 'pure' strategic bombing effort to one that sought the complete domination, wearing out, and final defeat of the Luftwaffe, in the air whereever they might be found. Once this transformation was completed it was only a matter of time so to speak. The Germans were able to continue producing as many airframes as needed (the ME-109 was after all the most mass produced fighter of the war) but, like Japan, was unable to keep pace in terms of pilot replacement programs which coupled with the effort against the fuel plants eventually led to complete Allied air superiority.
quote:
*2nd* Schweinfurt was clearly about errors made before the fight began. Losses would have been significantly lower had they gone into the fight cohesive. Rather than 60% cas probably more like 20%. Maybe still too high a price to pay, though.
Heh, maybe, but i'd say thats *very* optimistic esitmates. I've yet to bambozzel or dominate such a raid in BTR yet unless heavily escorted by fighters. Then again, it wont just be 109's out there, but Wulfs (now there's a Fortress killer) and rocket carrying pests
Interesting as this is though we are getting a little off track. Obviously the Japanese arnt going to have to worry about such sized raids until the fall of Saipen by which time they had finally come around to developing other planes that would be better suited than the Zero to intercepting such types of planes. It may have been inadequate but i dont think this seriously detracts from the plane's rep. It was after all never designed with such a mission in mind and as things turned out, said bombers were in short supply until well after the long retreat had begun
quote:
The ME/Bf109 was a mediocre performer but it was still far superior to the pokey Zeke. The 109 was faster, more durable, and had a reliable hard hitting 20mm firing through the propeller hub. The Zeke was slow, flimsy, and had a truly smelly and most outrageously poor 25 mm firing through the nose hub. It was a inaccurate low velocity round that was highly prone to jamming and, because the Zeke had a tepid 900 HP motor and 25 mm are relatively large rounds, insufficient ammo. It's one advantage was that it had a bigger bursting charge. No help against the Allied pilot's armored seat back, but very useful for messing up an engine or wing tank.. when it hit..if it went off. [/B][/QUOTE]
Actually a 30mm through the prop, one with limited ammo and prone to damage. I would hestiate to call the Me109 "far" superior. As with Allied fighters it can be really hard to make fair and accurate comparisons as the two types and philosophies behind the planes were very different and thus, different characteristics were stressed which allowed strengths and weaknesses on all sides. In the end it came down to tactics and pilot skill. Military Intel played it's part as well along with innovation and adjustment.
The Zero was for example, hands down the best dogfighter of the war. It could outturn anything and in the debut year(s) was as fast, faster or at least competetive with most other types (and remember the Japanese did build a version similar to the 109.....using liscensed inline engines....the Ki-61.....it was not "blazingly" superior to the Zeke but was a step in the right direction given the now "long" war Japan faced The Zero also preformed well at higher altitudes were P-39's and 40's would be left wallowing and vulnerable and of course it's speed matched the F4F so that only the latter's diving capabilities were superior (because of the weight)
Its weaknesses of course are well known and were exploited in the war, but hardly alone
The ME was hard to fly.....had weak undercarrage and became inadequately armed by the time the war really heated up. It also had poor visibility to the rear arc and the armor plate for the pilot was set too far back making him much more vulnerable to even light deflection shooting. Fortunately the Germans had a sucessor in the form of the FW-190.....which lucky for us never did surplant the 109 completely.
To go back to the subject of the thread......certainly if facing massive 100+ plane B-17 raids the Zero would be my last choice to face against it. I have been and remain though, more concerned with the quirks in the game that allow even 3-4 plane groups of four engined bombers to ignore fighters (and not just Zeros.....we can include Nicks and Tonys as well) and go about their business as if nothing untoward was happening. The types of raids discussed here would not be much relevent in the beginning stages of the war.......that is....unless Dugout Doug hadn't been caught with his pants down that is ;)
Brushing aside fighter defenses was how the designers envisioned the planes would behave.....thats not how it turned out though :)
|
Printable Version
- 
a reasonable solution? - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread