Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum  

Go Back   Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum > Discussion > Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces

Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces Please use this forum to discuss the German Luftwaffe and the Air Forces of its Allies.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 2nd July 2007, 07:07
George Hopp's Avatar
George Hopp George Hopp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ottawa, CA
Posts: 830
George Hopp
Re: Me 262 should have been used as a bomber?

Thanks for that, Roger. It adds a great deal of clarification to the topic.
George
  #12  
Old 2nd July 2007, 12:59
RT RT is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: FRANCE
Posts: 3,630
RT is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Me 262 should have been used as a bomber?

The real question is Could it be operational earlier, nd in qty ???

When war hs been "completed", should not the allies give some medals to Prof.Messerschmitt ??

Rémi
  #13  
Old 2nd July 2007, 13:37
RT RT is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: FRANCE
Posts: 3,630
RT is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Me 262 should have been used as a bomber?

I have a question too: why did the Germans introduce the R4M so late?

I read that the german were more confident on cannons, more accurate cost lower...internal weapon..
The rocket seems to more some kind of saturation weapon, not for a scarce-materail country like germany

remi
  #14  
Old 2nd July 2007, 14:19
Graham Boak Graham Boak is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lancashire, UK
Posts: 1,682
Graham Boak is on a distinguished road
Re: Me 262 should have been used as a bomber?

RT: your "real question" has been answered before: No. The introduction of the Me 262 into service was dependent on achieving an acceptable production standard for the Jumo engine. The most that could perhaps have been achieved would be to have a few more fighter pilots in a few more aircraft, a little bit sooner. This would not have been significant.
  #15  
Old 2nd July 2007, 19:07
George Hopp's Avatar
George Hopp George Hopp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ottawa, CA
Posts: 830
George Hopp
Re: Me 262 should have been used as a bomber?

Quote:
I have a question too: why did the Germans introduce the R4M so late?
I imagine, Nick, that the R4M was simply the result of a slow evolution of air-to-air rocket design, and that evolution just got the R4M into service too slowly. They had the RZ65 in 1942/43, and then seemed to go into larger rockets rather than to stay with massed smaller rockets. Perhaps, to increase the amount of propellent. So, perhaps the propellent burn rate, and thrust were the problem. And that's the problem with these things, there are so many aspects to them.

It's not much, Nick. But, maybe a start.
George
  #16  
Old 2nd July 2007, 20:16
CJE's Avatar
CJE CJE is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bordeaux (France)
Posts: 1,409
CJE
Re: Me 262 should have been used as a bomber?

The Me 262 couldn't have been introduced into service earlier for the simple fact that there were not enough turbines. BMW and Junkers experienced a lot of troubles with this new technology and lack of nickel and chrom for the turbine blades had a negative effect on the mass-production.
  #17  
Old 2nd July 2007, 20:44
Nick Beale's Avatar
Nick Beale Nick Beale is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Exeter, England
Posts: 6,131
Nick Beale is a jewel in the roughNick Beale is a jewel in the roughNick Beale is a jewel in the roughNick Beale is a jewel in the rough
Re: Me 262 should have been used as a bomber?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RT View Post
I have a question too: why did the Germans introduce the R4M so late?

I read that the german were more confident on cannons, more accurate cost lower...internal weapon..
The rocket seems to more some kind of saturation weapon, not for a scarce-materail country like germany

remi
But they invested a lot of effort in other weapons to break up formations, rather than hit individual aircraft. It seems to me that the R4M would have served that purpose very well if the bombers could see it coming (e.g. smoke trails). Other advantages were small aerodynamic penalty from carrying them (at least I guess so) compared to a big gun or the WGr. 21 and that they were "fire-and-forget" weapons unlike, say, the X-4.
__________________
Nick Beale
http://www.ghostbombers.com
  #18  
Old 2nd July 2007, 21:25
George Hopp's Avatar
George Hopp George Hopp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ottawa, CA
Posts: 830
George Hopp
Re: Me 262 should have been used as a bomber?

I agree completely, Nick. And, I find it amazing that they were still using WGr. 21s on the Me 262. I find both that installation and the rearward firing WGr. 21 installation beneath the fuselage of the Fw 190 as to be little short of madness. With all the back blast, I can see real problems in firing both sets of rockets, with the one beneath the Fw 190 possibly causing real damage to the propeller, and the Me 262 ones causing damage along the entire bottom of the fuselage.

I can't see the X-4 as anything more than a gimmick since who would want to sit there stearing a rocket while there are escort fighters all around. So, yes the fire-and-forget rockets would be necessary.

The RZ 65 installations on the 109F and 110F were just too elegant, and would have been more effective in multi-shot tubes beneath the wings. And, with the multiple rockets great for downing a single bomber at a time.
  #19  
Old 2nd July 2007, 21:34
CJE's Avatar
CJE CJE is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bordeaux (France)
Posts: 1,409
CJE
Re: Me 262 should have been used as a bomber?

I surely missed an episode. Were WGr. 21 fitted to 262s?
  #20  
Old 2nd July 2007, 22:15
RT RT is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: FRANCE
Posts: 3,630
RT is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Me 262 should have been used as a bomber?

You are right difficult to understand the non use the low technology weapon like rockets, if we use the cumbersome Wgr.21, but further against bombers after the satisfactory use at year end of the R4M, during for example the Korean war it was used cannons. Before the advent of the guided-rockets the cannon was certainly the best compromise, the americans re-introduce it in the F4 even.

An other explanation is that idot-rockets are not german-weapons, Germany in the first part of the century was the show-window of the world science they stole 60 % of the nobel prices in the scientific categories, the french quite achieve this figure too ...but in litterature.

rémi
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
KG51 Me 262 claims / confirmed kills & Me 262 9K+BH Roger Gaemperle Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 4 27th November 2017 21:44
Me 262 wn 111755 FRANCESCO M LENTINI Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 5 29th November 2006 02:53
VVS divisions Mike35nj Allied and Soviet Air Forces 2 7th August 2006 13:27
Losses of B-17's in RCM role paul peters Allied and Soviet Air Forces 4 15th February 2006 20:57
Bomber Aces Jim Oxley Allied and Soviet Air Forces 18 14th October 2005 19:46


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 18:44.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, 12oclockhigh.net