Developer Diary 277 - Discussion

[Mysticpuma]

3 hours ago, Lythronax said:

be still my beating heart :0

 

https://youtu.be/VmgecjXac3k?t=618

 

Video showing the Typhoon 1B car door version in action in a film on how to rescue a trapped pilot

 

Edited March 31, 2021 by Mysticpuma

[Zippy-do-dar]

20 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

But...but...but...

 

The Germans have the 262, and will have the Arado jet bomber, and the Allies have... ????

 

This isn't about one for one balance.

Balancing is for arcade games, not a simulation.

Gloster Meteor would be nice for the allies and it was operational. Its first job was chasing down V1's and we will have them soon.

[Asgar]

21 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

But...but...but...

 

The Germans have the 262, and will have the Arado jet bomber, and the Allies have... ????

 

This isn't about one for one balance.

Balancing is for arcade games, not a simulation.

considering that the US and UK used less jets than the German Me 410s while having many many times the aircraft in service... that seems totally fine to me. Neither of the Allies really had any jets in SIGNIFICANT air to air combat.

[BlitzPig_EL]

Very true Asgar.  Still would be cool to have the Gloster Meteor in the sim though. It was flown operationally, even if in small numbers, and makes more sense for the sim than say the Komet. 

[Stoopy]

Shocklngly I completely missed this latest Dev Diary (how can that happen, right??!) but have to say it's one of the coolest ones in a while, and they're all good!

 

LOVE the new MC.202 and Ju88 skins, perfect timing since the Moscow Interactive Playground is now in testing and will be coming out soon - it needs to include some of these great skins!

[=SqSq=Civilprotection]

11 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

Well, I'd like to clarify I'm not criticizing German engineering capabilities. But even brilliant engineers have duds and bad ideas; or good ideas that simply can't be realized because of limitations in certain manufacturing fields.

 

Similarly, I'm not trying to lessen interest in the 410. I want to fly it. It's one of the major draws for me to buy the whole Normandy package. But I can still take that enthusiasm, put it aside, and objectively look at the service history of the 410 outside of the game. And that history looks, frankly, like shit. So much so, that I find myself wondering just how and why the 410 failed to impress the Germans or their enemies.

 

I judge planes by results. So, for instance, when a Japanese plane like the Ki-100 or the George develops a reputation for fighting hordes of American planes and surviving or even managing to shoot a few down, that plane earns a reputation among armchair historians. It might well be exaggerated, but there's a kernel of a few very positive combat reports to build on.

 

With the 410, I can't find a single anecdote that's impressive. I know it could shoot down bombers--when absolutely no escorting fighters were nearby. But the real challenge was how to survive the fighters. And under no circumstances could it do so. Unfortunately, that must be classified as a failure. It doesn't matter how unfair the tactical and strategic situation was in '44. The plane could not cope. In terms of sitting duck (versus enemy fighters) reputations, it may as well have been a Stuka or a Bf-110.

 

My apologies. It was not my intention to imply that you, or anyone else, was criticizing German engineering capabilities-- nor do I suspect that you are trying to dampen the excitement for the 410. There is no argument here I hope.

 

I was simply interested in a discussion about the remote barbette system in comparison to other remote turret systems fielded during the war, rather than a discussion of the plane as a whole.

3 hours ago, Mac_Messer said:

Let`s be frank, nobody expects dev team to release the 410 with rear firing guns that are worthless.

I agree 100%. I have a gut feeling that those rear facing 13s will be godly in the hands of the AI.

[oc2209]

13 hours ago, Juri_JS said:

USAAF ace James Madison Morris was shot down by a 410 gunner near Leipzig on 7 July 1944.

 

Thanks for this. What plane was Morris flying at the time, out of curiosity?

 

10 hours ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

 

I appreciate completely where you're coming from - you're trying to understand it from a metric / results based standpoint - fair enough. The problem is the Me 410 wasn't really designed for dealing with fighters.

 

 

No, I'm not trying to argue that the 410 should have a performance/agility level equal to, say, the P-38. I'm not saying the 410 should be able to mix it up with fighters. What I am saying, however, is that it should be able to survive contact with enemy fighters, with acceptable losses. Not the 80%+ loss rate I typically see when it's intercepted. Again, I would expect a Stuka or Bf-110 intercepted in daylight operations to suffer catastrophic losses. But why was the 410 equally vulnerable as older, slower designs, with weaker defensive armament? That is the crux of my line of questioning.

 

The overall 410 design proved to be so marginal in operational ability, that it wasn't able to be used successfully enough in any capacity to justify high production numbers to the end of the war. Just as the Ju-88 found life in multiple roles outside of its intended original purpose, and the Bf-110 had a night-fighter service life that far outshone its daylight history, the 410 could and should've found a role somewhere, you would think... but it didn't. Recon is the only role I can think of where it didn't fail conspicuously. But it also didn't really stand out brilliantly, either.

 

What I wonder most, is why it was seemingly incapable of being successfully adapted to something other than a daytime bomber-interceptor. It couldn't replace the 110 for night operations. It couldn't replace the Ju-88 for precision tactical bombing. What was it good for, then? Seemingly nothing, from what I can tell.

 

I have an He-219 book with some German opinions on the 219 versus the 410 in handling. The 219 was said (by one very experienced pilot, anyway) to have much better handling than the 410; easier to land and operate in general. The only opinion that I've seen to the contrary is not German, but Eric Brown. He says the 219 is an underpowered death trap, but I really don't take his accounts seriously to be honest. There are any number of reasons why the captured German planes he flies wouldn't be properly serviced, with 100% performance, and why he wouldn't be able to fly them 'correctly'. The Germans who tested planes during the war have no reason to lie or misrepresent a plane in their reports. So if it's several German sources versus Brown, I pick the former.

 

My whole point is that I've never seen an account that says the 410's handling was great. It was absolutely horrible as the 210, and only with redesign effort was it brought up to adequate. I think its mediocre handling is probably the chief reason it wasn't able to be adapted into other roles.

[IRRE_Genius]

Hello just one question: Can we lock the skins without locking the tactical codes ?

 

Thanks

[oc2209]

2 hours ago, =SqSq=Civilprotection said:

I have a gut feeling that those rear facing 13s will be godly in the hands of the AI.

 

Absolutely. I expect to be killed by them from insane angles, given the performance of AI with lowly hand-held guns so far.

 

I've had Ju-88 rear gunners flame my engine from... at least 300m. And that's with rifle ammo.

[Juri_JS]

24 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

 

Thanks for this. What plane was Morris flying at the time, out of curiosity?

 

He was flying a P-38J.

[easterling77]

On Axis side - I fear those Peshka gunners and I assume I will fear the 410 gunners as allied fighter too.

[Juri_JS]

29 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

...the 410 could and should've found a role somewhere, you would think... but it didn't.

The Me-410 was actually quite successful as night intruder over Britain, particularly when attacking RAF night bombers returning from missions. The problem was, that the number of aircraft that were available for such intruder missions were never large enough to have a real impact on RAF bomber operations.

[Aurora_Stealth]

14 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

Thanks for this. What plane was Morris flying at the time, out of curiosity?

 

 

No, I'm not trying to argue that the 410 should have a performance/agility level equal to, say, the P-38. I'm not saying the 410 should be able to mix it up with fighters. What I am saying, however, is that it should be able to survive contact with enemy fighters, with acceptable losses. Not the 80%+ loss rate I typically see when it's intercepted. Again, I would expect a Stuka or Bf-110 intercepted in daylight operations to suffer catastrophic losses. But why was the 410 equally vulnerable as older, slower designs, with weaker defensive armament? That is the crux of my line of questioning.

 

The overall 410 design proved to be so marginal in operational ability, that it wasn't able to be used successfully enough in any capacity to justify high production numbers to the end of the war. Just as the Ju-88 found life in multiple roles outside of its intended original purpose, and the Bf-110 had a night-fighter service life that far outshone its daylight history, the 410 could and should've found a role somewhere, you would think... but it didn't. Recon is the only role I can think of where it didn't fail conspicuously. But it also didn't really stand out brilliantly, either.

 

What I wonder most, is why it was seemingly incapable of being successfully adapted to something other than a daytime bomber-interceptor. It couldn't replace the 110 for night operations. It couldn't replace the Ju-88 for precision tactical bombing. What was it good for, then? Seemingly nothing, from what I can tell.

 

I have an He-219 book with some German opinions on the 219 versus the 410 in handling. The 219 was said (by one very experienced pilot, anyway) to have much better handling than the 410; easier to land and operate in general. The only opinion that I've seen to the contrary is not German, but Eric Brown. He says the 219 is an underpowered death trap, but I really don't take his accounts seriously to be honest. There are any number of reasons why the captured German planes he flies wouldn't be properly serviced, with 100% performance, and why he wouldn't be able to fly them 'correctly'. The Germans who tested planes during the war have no reason to lie or misrepresent a plane in their reports. So if it's several German sources versus Brown, I pick the former.

 

My whole point is that I've never seen an account that says the 410's handling was great. It was absolutely horrible as the 210, and only with redesign effort was it brought up to adequate. I think its mediocre handling is probably the chief reason it wasn't able to be adapted into other roles.

 

Well, there's a lot to unpack here. The Me 410 was designed to replace the Bf 110 - its painful and delayed development (incl. Me 210) ensured that this did not happen as planned (two years late) and this is the real culprit behind all this. Had it arrived in strength a year earlier in 1942 it may have had a much bigger splash and greater role to play and that was actually what many in the Luftwaffe had been hoping for. By 1943, the tide had turned and the situation was changing fast in the air war. The He 219 was great performance wise, but again, such a specialised aircraft with very few actually produced and so late in the war.

 

Those 80% losses mainly occur in the early 1944 period. The P-38 had to be withdrawn as a primary fighter after losses occurred in late 1943. The Bf 110 is a similar story. The Stuka was almost entirely replaced by the Fw 190 all for the same reasons. So those all disappeared from intense combat operations in 1944.

 

I don't think any Luftwaffe aircraft could survive with "acceptable" losses by early 1944 in the daytime... at least over the frontline areas - that's the thing - even the Me 262 was being shot down over their own airfields in increasing numbers. This is why they pulled squadrons further and further out of range and why German vehicle convoys started assigning dedicated AA units. There is no technical or aviation answer in the world to 'how do i build an aircraft that can cope in an environment where you have already lost air superiority by an overwhelming enemy force'. Its a strategic failure by then.

 

And like you say, it was probably easier to handle the Bf 110 in takeoff and landing in the night and easier to train pilots on it (important in '44 - 45), it was more flexible/survivable to use the Fw 190's during the day as a fighter-bomber; the Ju88 had a higher bomb-load and could still be operated in the night... and the Arado 234 was faster for specific hit and run attacks during the day. This leaves little room for the Me 410. Crews were already trained on other types and from a logistics point of view it was a very sophisticated aircraft to produce. So the Me 410 became obsolescent fairly quickly because it entered service too late and other technology by then was promising a greater advantage, or otherwise proven designs were less hassle/time consuming to re-train pilots on. It was not uncommon to have night fighter pilots pulled from bomber squadrons so... you can see the logic there relying on Bf 110's and Ju88's and other more stable multi-crew aircraft for night ops.

 

This all being said - you don't have to deal with this strategic situation so much (at least online) in IL-2. The AI gunners tend to be quite accurate, skill levels of players are broadly speaking more balanced and numbers of aircraft on each side tend to be fairly equal (for gameplay reasons).

Edited April 1, 2021 by Aurora_Stealth

[oc2209]

23 hours ago, Juri_JS said:

He was flying a P-38J.

 

I had a hunch it'd be a large target. Unfortunately for 410s, it looks like P-38s won the engagements much more often than not.

 

8 hours ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

Those 80% losses mainly occur in the early 1944 period. The P-38 had to be withdrawn as a primary fighter after losses occurred in late 1943. The Bf 110 is a similar story. The Stuka was almost entirely replaced by the Fw 190 all for the same reasons. So those all disappeared from intense combat operations in 1944.

 

I don't think any Luftwaffe aircraft could survive with "acceptable" losses by early 1944 in the daytime... at least over the frontline areas - that's the thing - even the Me 262 was being shot down over their own airfields in increasing numbers. This is why they pulled squadrons further and further out of range and why German vehicle convoys started assigning dedicated AA units. There is no technical or aviation answer in the world to 'how do i build an aircraft that can cope in an environment where you have already lost air superiority by an overwhelming enemy force'. Its a strategic failure by then.

 

So the Me 410 became obsolescent fairly quickly because it entered service too late and other technology by then was promising a greater advantage

 

I'm reading a new 410 book at the moment, by Osprey. Above and beyond the other dedicated 410 book I've quoted in earlier discussions on the 410 (I mean weeks/months ago).

 

From what I gather, the 210 in North Africa (as in, prior to '44) was useless. I've read accounts of it being shot down by: P-38s (frequently), a P-40, and Spitfire Vs. In the latter two cases, those aren't advanced fighters by '43. I therefore doubt an earlier introduction of the 210/410 would've mattered, if it wasn't even competitive against 1940-41 tech.

 

In mock dogfights, the Bf 110 was found to be more stable in turns (and could turn tighter), more responsive, and again, easier to handle overall. Pretty much the only advantage the 410 had over the 110 was speed. And that speed, clearly, wasn't enough to make a difference against halfway competent enemies.

 

I'm reading details about the 210's handling problems that are so staggering they defy belief. It was dangerous to take off in, as it veered terribly. I mean, it made the 109 look good by comparison. It ground looped easily, in general. It would enter unrecoverable flat spins at any speed, in regular flight. It killed experienced pilots almost as much as rookies.

 

Most of these horrific problems are related to, supposedly, Messerschmitt's direct intervention to shorten (therefore, lighten) the fuselage. The RLM supposedly demanded the removal of the leading edge slats to save weight/manufacturing complexity.

 

However, even when the original design was revived in an attempt to save the project, these problems didn't disappear entirely. Bear in mind the original design wasn't by Messerschmitt or an experienced designer. It was a guy in his late 20s who had a sort of wunderkind reputation. I know age isn't an automatic strike against someone, but it does make me skeptical as to just how sound the overall design was. Hitherto getting into the details of its development (I actually bought these books because I was excited about the upcoming Battle of Normandy release), I knew little about the 410. I knew the 210 was a failure, but from short blurbs in general history books, I had the vague impression that the 410 was a vast improvement, a solid plane that was simply a bit too late to the party to matter. I very much doubt that assessment now. I don't think a plane that was as godawful as the 210, could ever be remedied.

 

The 410 in my eyes is a catastrophic waste of resources and an interesting lesson in how badly any complex project can go.

 

That said, I'll still fly it because it has a novel cockpit layout. And, because this is a game, I like the way the 410 looks. I think it's a strangely attractive plane, despite not having the usual qualities of an attractive design. But in real life, looks and coolness and novelty don't mean squat. That's how I can totally separate my (newfound) knowledge of the actual 410 from the game version of the 410. I know everyone else isn't so keen on compartmentalization, so I'm sorry to be a Debbie Downer in that respect.

[CountZero]

In game 410 will be great GA airplane, it will have rear gunner with HMG that is AI controled = your 6 is covered no need for escorts, it will have good forward guns = you can destroy ports and hangars and factorys, players online will play with it with low fuel = will make it perfect for low alt turn fights, it will be buffed 110 who lacked stronger gunners. On the other hand Mosquito dont have rear gunners so it will be less popular but still good turner and factory destroyer.

[=621=Samikatz]

I don't think a plane has to be dominant or even competitive to be worth flying in sim. Airplanes are very regularly exciting to fly because of their failures. The LaGG-3 was by all accounts thoroughly mediocre, but it was part of the Soviet's aircraft roster, so it's good that we have it

[I./JG1_Baron]

1 hour ago, oc2209 said:

 

I had a hunch it'd be a large target. Unfortunately for 410s, it looks like P-38s won the engagements much more often than not.

 

 

I'm reading a new 410 book at the moment, by Osprey. Above and beyond the other dedicated 410 book I've quoted in earlier discussions on the 410 (I mean weeks/months ago).

 

From what I gather, the 210 in North Africa (as in, prior to '44) was useless. I've read accounts of it being shot down by: P-38s (frequently), a P-40, and Spitfire Vs. In the latter two cases, those aren't advanced fighters by '43. I therefore doubt an earlier introduction of the 210/410 would've mattered, if it wasn't even competitive against 1940-41 tech.

 

In mock dogfights, the Bf 110 was found to be more stable in turns (and could turn tighter), more responsive, and again, easier to handle overall. Pretty much the only advantage the 410 had over the 110 was speed. And that speed, clearly, wasn't enough to make a difference against halfway competent enemies.

 

I'm reading details about the 210's handling problems that are so staggering they defy belief. It was dangerous to take off in, as it veered terribly. I mean, it made the 109 look good by comparison. It ground looped easily, in general. It would enter unrecoverable flat spins at any speed, in regular flight. It killed experienced pilots almost as much as rookies.

 

Most of these horrific problems are related to, supposedly, Messerschmitt's direct intervention to shorten (therefore, lighten) the fuselage. The RLM supposedly demanded the removal of the leading edge slats to save weight/manufacturing complexity.

 

However, even when the original design was revived in an attempt to save the project, these problems didn't disappear entirely. Bear in mind the original design wasn't by Messerschmitt or an experienced designer. It was a guy in his late 20s who had a sort of wunderkind reputation. I know age isn't an automatic strike against someone, but it does make me skeptical as to just how sound the overall design was. Hitherto getting into the details of its development (I actually bought these books because I was excited about the upcoming Battle of Normandy release), I knew little about the 410. I knew the 210 was a failure, but from short blurbs in general history books, I had the vague impression that the 410 was a vast improvement, a solid plane that was simply a bit too late to the party to matter. I very much doubt that assessment now. I don't think a plane that was as godawful as the 210, could ever be remedied.

 

The 410 in my eyes is a catastrophic waste of resources and an interesting lesson in how badly any complex project can go.

 

That said, I'll still fly it because it has a novel cockpit layout. And, because this is a game, I like the way the 410 looks. I think it's a strangely attractive plane, despite not having the usual qualities of an attractive design. But in real life, looks and coolness and novelty don't mean squat. That's how I can totally separate my (newfound) knowledge of the actual 410 from the game version of the 410. I know everyone else isn't so keen on compartmentalization, so I'm sorry to be a Debbie Downer in that respect.

 

Thanks for info. Let me note that the Me210 was not as tragedy as it is usually written, and Hungarian pilots liked to fly the Me210 (and successfully). Whether it concerns the Me410, I don't think it was primarily intended for fighter combat against fighters, but for combat with bombers, namely four-engine. As far as I know, they did well in this task both during the day and at night. The fact is that at that time, the Allies already had a large air superiority - but even they do not claim that the Me410 was an easy target, quite the contrary. Another thing that disadvantaged the Me410 was fact, that usually had heavy secondary armaments - mostly encountered by Allied fighters in attacks on bombers or antiground attacks. However, if it happened that Hornisse was not loaded with additional equipment and in addition, if it was piloted by an experienced pilot, he became a hard nut to crack.
Either way - I'm really looking forward to Hornisse, I've always liked this machine.

Edited April 1, 2021 by I./JG1_Baron

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, I./JG1_Baron said:

Let me note that the Me210 was not as tragedy as it is usually written, and Hungarian pilots liked to fly the Me210 (and successfully).

 

Well, the Hungarians liked their Me 210s, because by then the C model that they were flying didn't have the atrocious handling problems of the early 210s. The Me 210 As were truly awful aircraft and it was for good reason that the chief test pilot associated with the program commented that the 210 A had "all the least desirable attributes an aeroplane could possess."

[Juri_JS]

4 hours ago, I./JG1_Baron said:

However, if it happened that Hornisse was not loaded with additional equipment and in addition, if it was piloted by an experienced pilot, he became a hard nut to crack.

I've just taken a look at the victory reports of ZG 26 and ZG 76 in 1944 and found around 20 claims of P-51s or P-38s by Me-410 pilots. So apparently the Me-410 was far from helpless when encountering enemy fighters. During the same period units flying the BF-110 as day fighter had almost no fighter claims.

 

And coming back to the topic of the effectiveness of the Me-410 barbettes - while researching KG 51 night intruder operations I was surprised to discover that Me-410 gunners claimed several bombers during these missions. Because it was possible to fire almost vertically with the guns they could be used similar to the "Schräge Musik" upward firing guns of German night fighters.

[Cybermat47]

1 hour ago, Juri_JS said:

I've just taken a look at the victory reports of ZG 26 and ZG 76 in 1944 and found around 20 claims of P-51s or P-38s by Me-410 pilots. So apparently the Me-410 was far from helpless when encountering enemy fighters.

How many of those claims can be verified?

[oc2209]

9 hours ago, =621=Samikatz said:

I don't think a plane has to be dominant or even competitive to be worth flying in sim. Airplanes are very regularly exciting to fly because of their failures. The LaGG-3 was by all accounts thoroughly mediocre, but it was part of the Soviet's aircraft roster, so it's good that we have it

 

Agreed. I'm not arguing that no one's 'allowed' to enjoy flying the 410 just because of its historical flaws. Nor am I arguing it should be omitted from the game because of said flaws. 

 

9 hours ago, I./JG1_Baron said:

 

Whether it concerns the Me410, I don't think it was primarily intended for fighter combat against fighters, but for combat with bombers, namely four-engine. As far as I know, they did well in this task both during the day and at night. The fact is that at that time, the Allies already had a large air superiority

 

Strictly speaking, the 210/410 was originally designed as a long-range (by German standards) escort. It was designed almost at the same time as the Bf-110. The Germans were still under the misguided belief that heavy fighters were the wave of the future, and would sweep the skies of enemy fighters before their bombers struck.

 

It's quite ironic that the 'Zemke fan' with P-47s, heavy fighters in the extreme, later achieved the dream. At least, they got much closer than the Germans ever did.

 

Anyway, it's only later on during the development cycle that things like dive bombing capability were added to the 210/410's potential uses. Just like the 110, the 210/410 was only taken off of fighter duties because it was an abject failure in said duties. Not because it wasn't designed for them.

 

Beyond that, I was just thinking tonight about the Fw-190D. The 190D really doesn't have a stellar combat record. Largely because of the way it was employed, the low quality of the Luftwaffe's average pilot in '44-45, etc.

 

The difference, however, between the 190D and the 410 is that, while both faced severe adversity that limited their efficacy, the 190D is plainly a great design that could work very well in spite of the Allies' overwhelming advantages. While the 410 crumpled under the same pressures. I've been trying to find the 'diamond in the rough' qualities that would've made the 410 shine under different circumstances... and I can't. The more I search, the less I find. But everyone else is free, of course, to reach their own conclusions. 

[Juri_JS]

3 hours ago, [Pb]Cybermat47 said:

How many of those claims can be verified?

I don't have the necessary allied sources to check all of them. These are claims that have gone through the official Luftwaffe approval process. In the Reichsdefence such claims are usually more reliable than in other operational areas. In my experience the overclaim rate is generally somewhere between 20-30 %.

 

What is more interesting than the actual number of kills is the difference in fighter claims between Me-410 and Bf-110 units, that flew the same types of missions and suffered similar losses.  The Bf-110 was obviously almost completely helpless when encountering escort fighters, in contrast the Me-410 was able to defend itself to a certain extent, although it was of course still inferior to single engined fighters.

[Cybermat47]

3 hours ago, Juri_JS said:

I don't have the necessary allied sources to check all of them. These are claims that have gone through the official Luftwaffe approval process. In the Reichsdefence such claims are usually more reliable than in other operational areas. In my experience the overclaim rate is generally somewhere between 20-30 %.

So we’re probably looking at somewhere between 14 and 20 victories. That’s pretty good for a twin-engined German day fighter in 1944 - as well as the overwhelming superiority of Allied air forces at that time, they probably weren’t flying that much due to fuel shortages.

[oc2209]

20 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Well, the Hungarians liked their Me 210s, because by then the C model that they were flying didn't have the atrocious handling problems of the early 210s. The Me 210 As were truly awful aircraft and it was for good reason that the chief test pilot associated with the program commented that the 210 A had "all the least desirable attributes an aeroplane could possess."

 

I want to also clarify that the Hungarian version had the lengthened fuselage (hugely important to counter ground looping, bad spin characteristics, etc), and it had the leading edge slats, and above all that, it removed all but the 8mm armor plate for the crew. The standard armor fitting for the 410 eventually reached nearly 500 kg. So if the Hungarian 210 (essentially modified to most 410 standards) saved that much weight, that absolutely had to improve the overall handling.

 

It makes me wish we could have an option to reduce armor, to reflect the Hungarian modifications.

 

For a single-seat Zerstörer test build, Messerschmitt reduced the 410's weight by 1800 kg (don't ask me how, I don't know; but I'm definitely curious), so that the MW boost system could be added while still reducing overall weight. This was in an attempt to improve high-altitude performance and ceiling.

Edited April 2, 2021 by oc2209

[oc2209]

Not to beat dead horses, but I just finished the Osprey book about the Me 410. The conclusion (which focused on the late '43 and '44 anti-bomber operations) is just as disillusioning as the rest of the book. One quote stands out to me as a good summary (in the words of the author, Robert Forsyth):

 

"[...] the new Messerschmitt was not liked among veteran Zerstorer crews, despite it being faster than the Bf 110. The Me 410 was not as maneuverable as its predecessor, it was unable to absorb hits as well as the Bf 110 and it was harder to bail out of once on fire."

 

The bail out aspect is something I noticed throughout the book. So many crews died without bailing out. You'd think the armor protection would keep them uninjured enough to escape, but evidently not.

 

Saying it couldn't take as many punches as the 110 is also difficult for me to comprehend, as I've noted the 410 had nearly 1,000 lbs of armor.

 

These are the words of Fritz Buchholz, ZG 26 pilot:

 

"The Me 410 was a mixed bag. It had good, stable flying characteristics, but it wasn't good in the turn--here the Bf 110 was better. Other than that, when flying the aircraft, there were generally few problems. In air combat, however, it was a different story. For a start, it was easy prey for enemy fighters, and when flying in formation, it was unwieldy. The Me 410 also made a nice, big target for the bomber gunners. Generally, we were ineffective. The Zerstorer units were too slow and unmanageable [...] the increasing numbers of escort fighters made a hard job harder, and whenever they appeared we were forced to break off because of the risk of being shot down due to our lack of adequate defensive armament."

 

So that's a summary straight from the horse's mouth. Pretty bleak. Pilot quality and experience didn't matter for much, since many veteran Zerstorer pilots, including Condor Legion vets and the highest scoring Zerstorer ace (not nightfighter), were killed in 410s.

 

One sortie is detailed in which a mixed group of 110s and 410s attacked an unescorted bomber formation. The 110s got 14 kills, the 410s got zero.

 

On 4/1/2021 at 1:47 PM, CountZero said:

In game 410 will be great GA airplane, it will have rear gunner with HMG that is AI controled = your 6 is covered no need for escorts, it will have good forward guns = you can destroy ports and hangars and factorys, players online will play with it with low fuel = will make it perfect for low alt turn fights, it will be buffed 110 who lacked stronger gunners. On the other hand Mosquito dont have rear gunners so it will be less popular but still good turner and factory destroyer.

 

I'm quoting this because I agree, GA will be the only value the 410 has in the game, as far as I can tell. Except for the turning part, which the 410 clearly can't do well. It will handle more like a faster Ju-88 than a Bf-110.

[BlitzPig_EL]

What is the bomb load on a 410?

[ShamrockOneFive]

10 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

What is the bomb load on a 410?

 

The internal bomb bay could carry up to two SC250's or two SC500's. It can also carry up to four SC50/70's on the wing stations. Vik's was also asking about the SC1000 and if it could fit in the bay.

 

It sounds like two SC250's or SC500's on the internal bomb bay would be a pretty good fast bomber loadout. I would assume the speed loss to be minimal.

[oc2209]

3 hours ago, ShamrockOneFive said:

 

The internal bomb bay could carry up to two SC250's or two SC500's. It can also carry up to four SC50/70's on the wing stations. Vik's was also asking about the SC1000 and if it could fit in the bay.

 

I don't think 2xSC500 were possible in the closed bay. I've only seen 2x250 in this book. Alternately, I saw 8x50 in the bay. Probably 1x500 would fit.

 

The book explicitly states that only the narrower SD 500s could fit 2 in the closed bay. So 2xSC250 was the standard loadout, along with maybe a few wing-mounted 50s.

[ShamrockOneFive]

7 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

I don't think 2xSC500 were possible in the closed bay. I've only seen 2x250 in this book. Alternately, I saw 8x50 in the bay. Probably 1x500 would fit.

 

The book explicitly states that only the narrower SD 500s could fit 2 in the closed bay. So 2xSC250 was the standard loadout, along with maybe a few wing-mounted 50s.

 

Right! I did forget to mention that the bay doors couldn't be fully closed. Yep. I'm guessing although have no evidence to prove that those bombs in the bay, even with the doors not fully shut, would probably still be a bit more aerodynamically efficient than hanging them on the exterior.

[Bremspropeller]

A couple of things:

 

The 410 was a heavy Zerstörer and not in any way comparable to the P-38, which was a regular fighter. Want a comparable german airplane? Take the Fw 187.

The 410 in a way was the answer to the Mosquito - their metrics are close enough to say that. The 410 couldn't quite cope with the multi-mission capability of the Mossie, though. Maybe it could have, had they tried a little harder.

 

The He 219 wasn't all that great performance-wise. It lacked the Jumo 222 engine to really make use of it's theoretical capabilities as long-range night fighter.

 

The P-38 wasn't phased out because of losses - it had lots of teething issues, reliability problems and little support in the higher echelons. Had the RAF not shot down an aircraft with conversion-kits for the dive-flaps, it might have done a little better overall. In any case, the P-51 was the rising star and the P-38s were in dire need in the Pacific, so they were phased out in Europe with only one FG (474th) flying them through to VE day.

[Irishratticus72]

18 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

A couple of things:

 

The 410 was a heavy Zerstörer and not in any way comparable to the P-38, which was a regular fighter. Want a comparable german airplane? Take the Fw 187.

The 410 in a way was the answer to the Mosquito - their metrics are close enough to say that. The 410 couldn't quite cope with the multi-mission capability of the Mossie, though. Maybe it could have, had they tried a little harder.

 

The He 219 wasn't all that great performance-wise. It lacked the Jumo 222 engine to really make use of it's theoretical capabilities as long-range night fighter.

 

The P-38 wasn't phased out because of losses - it had lots of teething issues, reliability problems and little support in the higher echelons. Had the RAF not shot down an aircraft with conversion-kits for the dive-flaps, it might have done a little better overall. In any case, the P-51 was the rising star and the P-38s were in dire need in the Pacific, so they were phased out in Europe with only one FG (474th) flying them through to VE day.

Plus, a plane that can go the same distance or more on half the engines is pretty sexy from an efficiency point of view. I recall a report where Lindbergh spent time with the 38, then went out to the south Pacific and taught the squadron pilots how to damn near double their range through rpm and manifold pressure management. 

 

https://generalaviationnews.com/2005/06/17/lindberghs-secret/

Edited April 5, 2021 by Irishratticus72

[BlitzPig_EL]

Yup.  "Lucky Lindy" essentially taught what is now called the "lean of peak" technique.

[Irishratticus72]

9 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Yup.  "Lucky Lindy" essentially taught what is now called the "lean of peak" technique.

There was also the whole, "other thing", but we'll swiftly move past that. 

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Charles-Lindbergh/Germany-and-the-America-First-movement

[BlitzPig_EL]

Has nothing to do with this discussion.

[Irishratticus72]

2 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Has nothing to do with this discussion.

True, but I always try to offer value for money. 

[LukeFF]

4 hours ago, Irishratticus72 said:

True, but I always try to offer value for money. 

 

Please don't.

[oc2209]

8 hours ago, ShamrockOneFive said:

 

Right! I did forget to mention that the bay doors couldn't be fully closed. Yep. I'm guessing although have no evidence to prove that those bombs in the bay, even with the doors not fully shut, would probably still be a bit more aerodynamically efficient than hanging them on the exterior.

 

Yeah, it's hard to say what the speed loss would be. More to the point, I doubt the game will allow us to fly with doors partially-open.

 

What I'm hoping for are a lot of different customization options. Like, the option to remove the barbettes (admittedly, it'd be a bad idea given that the AI gunner is a better shot than most people), armor, etc, and fly with the bomb bay fully closed. With all the most favorable changes, and the most powerful engines possible (assuming we get the B series), having a top speed of close to 400 MPH with 2xSC250 would be pretty tough to intercept. The downside, of course, is that you'd be a sitting duck after dropping the bombs, but no more than if you made the same run in a dedicated bomber (like the Ju-88). No defensive armament (if you select that option), but decent enough speed to quickly get back to base if you're lucky enough to not be spotted.

 

6 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

A couple of things:

 

The 410 was a heavy Zerstörer and not in any way comparable to the P-38, which was a regular fighter. Want a comparable german airplane? Take the Fw 187.

The 410 in a way was the answer to the Mosquito - their metrics are close enough to say that. The 410 couldn't quite cope with the multi-mission capability of the Mossie, though. Maybe it could have, had they tried a little harder.

 

I doubt many people were expecting the 410 to rival the P-38, but what I think a lot of people (myself included) were assuming/hoping was that the 410 would be an improved Bf-110. It took 2 books to reframe my perspective to a much more reasonable expectation. With my new perspective, the 410's best suited to being a fast, light bomber. Expect nothing else of it, and you won't be disappointed.

 

Given that B-17s and B-24s aren't in the game yet, there's really no point in having the 50mm or 4x rocket mortar loadouts for Zerstorers. I mean, they might be included, but there's no use for them beyond being a novelty. Having the 4 20mm mod would be welcome, though; extra 20mm are always practical for strafing if nothing else.

[ShamrockOneFive]

A fast light bomber would actually suite me just fine. I've managed to do alright with the A-20B on Combat Box so if I can hop over to the German side and fly the Me410 around in much the same way using both its powerful forward firing armament as well as ample speed and internal bomb bay... Yeah that would work for me very well.

[Aurora_Stealth]

Same here, I'm sure there will be veterans in-game of the Bf-110 who will still defer to its agility over other potential advantages in performance.

 

But the idea to me of having an aircraft that is faster, climbs and dives much quicker and is potentially better armed and less affected by carrying bombs while still being more maneuverable than an A-20 (probably somewhere between the Bf-110G and A-20B) is still frankly a big improvement for me in the kind of hit and run / strike attacks needed on many online servers. I've found that relying on maneuverability to get home against single engined fighters isn't the best insurance policy, but does sometimes buy you a little time.

 

At least I can better minimise the closure rate of intercepting fighters and let the AI gunner have at them while pushing into a shallow dive in the '410; good luck trying to do that in an A-20 or Ju-88 I'd say.

[easterling77]

Yup to both statements above?