Why were Me-262s used againsg B-26s?

[Felix C]

I read of a few cases where they were used to intercept B-26 formations. Would not such a rarely available a/c be used against only heavy bombers?

[Graham Boak]

They were used against those raids in the area of their bases. Thus JG7 in the North was used against (amongst others) the British daylight raids in that area, whereas JV44 was based in the south of Germany and was in a position to counter the 9thAF.

Why should the American heavies be any more important a target? The B-26s could carry as many bombs as a B-17.

[Felix C]

Originally Posted by Graham Boak

They were used against those raids in the area of their bases. Thus JG7 in the North was used against (amongst others) the British daylight raids in that area, whereas JV44 was based in the south of Germany and was in a position to counter the 9thAF.

Why should the American heavies be any more important a target? The B-26s could carry as many bombs as a B-17.

Heavy bomber more lost to the enemy if shot down compared to a medium bomber.

[Pilot]

As I know there is even one B-26 gunner credited with two Me 262 kills

[Graham Boak]

Are the Me262s supposed to stay grounded the days the 8th AF doesn't raid but the 9th does?

[Felix C]

That was not the questions but the answer to yours is were the sortied whenever airspace was intruded upon?

Usually you are quite polite. But you appear as an ass in responding to my recent posts.

[Larry deZeng]

Hey, Felix. Maybe Graham B. won't fire back at you, but I will. What the hell kind of convoluted English are you writing here? If you wrote clear and grammatically correct sentences maybe people could understand you and answer your questions. So make sure your own house is in order before you jump on someone else. Got it?

Heavy bomber more lost to the enemy if shot down compared to a medium bomber.

Originally Posted by Felix C

That was not the questions but the answer to yours is were the sortied whenever airspace was intruded upon?

Usually you are quite polite. But you appear as an ass in responding to my recent posts.

[Graham Boak]

I'm sorry you took it that way rather than humorously, but humour translates badly on the internet. The point I was trying to make was that you do seem to be neglecting that the role of the Luftwaffe was to defend Germany against all such attacks, within its capabilities. No, they would not be used only against heavy bombers. A bomber is a bomber, and can do damage to Germany's remaining military and industrial capacity. They were all to be fought at every suitable opportunity. If the day brought heavy bombers, then heavy bombers were intercepted. If the day brought the mediums, then the mediums were intercepted. The pilots could not sit by out of some kind of snobbery whilst Germany burned - if for no other reason that the B-26 formations might have been heading for their own airfield.

The days of even thinking of defeating the US by attrition were long gone. The difference in cost between a B-17 and a B-26 was miniscule in comparison with the forces available, but either bomber could burn a factory or a hospital or force the abandoning of another strongpoint. The activities of the fighters were recognised as futile in what remained of a lost battle but they did their duty to minimise the effect of Allied superiority.

[Horst Weber]

Originally Posted by Graham Boak

I'm sorry you took it that way rather than humorously, but humour translates badly on the internet. The point I was trying to make was that you do seem to be neglecting that the role of the Luftwaffe was to defend Germany against all such attacks, within its capabilities. No, they would not be used only against heavy bombers. A bomber is a bomber, and can do damage to Germany's remaining military and industrial capacity. They were all to be fought at every suitable opportunity. If the day brought heavy bombers, then heavy bombers were intercepted. If the day brought the mediums, then the mediums were intercepted. The pilots could not sit by out of some kind of snobbery whilst Germany burned - if for no other reason that the B-26 formations might have been heading for their own airfield.

The days of even thinking of defeating the US by attrition were long gone. The difference in cost between a B-17 and a B-26 was miniscule in comparison with the forces available, but either bomber could burn a factory or a hospital or force the abandoning of another strongpoint. The activities of the fighters were recognised as futile in what remained of a lost battle but they did their duty to minimise the effect of Allied superiority.

Exact explanation !

If the WW 2 would have had lasted some more month 1945 in Germany, even
Me 162 would have attacked allied bomber-streams. No question about, when the enemy were heavies of 8th AF, twin-engined of 9th AF or the RAF Bomber-Command on a daylight raid.

Best wishes !

Horst Weber

[Stein Meum]

Larry deZeng: Watch your step! Felix C's English is NOT his mother's tongue. That should be pretty clear. There are many non-English/Commonwealth/American users on this forum that don't speak English in their everyday lives. And they are wonderful contributors here, not only judged by the answers they are able to provide, but also by the questions they pose.

Try answering Felix's posts in his own native language!

Stein