Why did Germany continue to operate the Me110

[oc2209]

1 hour ago, PatrickAWlson said:

@oc2209So what about my scenario.  Germany does not even try to defeat Britain.  Declare peace after Dunkirk and call it a war.  Stop bombing Britain or, better yet, don't even start.  Counter any further aggression on Britain's part with defensive action.  i.e. combine conquest with diplomacy.

 

Hmm... I'd call that possible but not probable. How would the German taking of Danzig and the Polish corridor be legally resolved in international courts?

 

It's all theoretically possible, of course. Germany could back down from further aggression. It would have established that it could beat its neighbors with relative ease, making the prospect of attacking it rather unpleasant. It would have reformed 'greater Germany' (only possible by keeping the Polish corridor).

 

The problem is, of course, that Germany would still be resource-poor, and wouldn't be the global power that Hitler intended it to be. All of the prelude to WWII would be quite a bit of effort just for reshaping German borders and expanding them slightly.

 

True power lay in the heart of Russia. Hitler had no interest in America, Africa, or the Middle East. He also saw Britain as something of a wayward German cousin; no interest in taking over the British Empire itself. He just wanted the British to step aside and let him dominate Europe. Which, of course, is grossly unrealistic, given that Britain did everything in its power for the previous 200-odd years to prevent any nation (including Russia) from dominating Europe.

 

For Germany, Russia was the logical place to expand. The only place to expand.

 

While the smart move would've been to stop while Germany was ahead, of course, as I said: Hitler was a compulsive gambler. He thought he was on a winning streak. Just one more roll of the dice, just one more....

 

1 hour ago, PatrickAWlson said:

Russia is where it was in 1940.  Will they collaborate with Britain to attack Germany?  That is probably the biggest danger but very far from a sure thing.

 

Like @Eisenfaustus said, the British had a very low opinion of Russia militarily. So much so that the British ignored Russia's diplomatic feelers when Russia wanted to contain Germany in the late 30s with a solid alliance. Which looks pretty stupid for the British, in retrospect. Hitler, always the exploiter of opportunity, moved in to the void that the British left. Stalin never should have been left out to hang that way.

 

It goes to show how blind everyone, Germany and Britain alike, was to how rapid and extensive Russia's modernization was.

[ZachariasX]

7 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Yes, I was fortunate at the time I bought it (a K11) that the dealer (Aim Surplus) was also selling ample amounts of GP11 ammo at the time, plus original slings. I just wish I had bought more ammo at the time, since it's so difficult now to find ammo in that caliber. But, in all it was a very good deal - it's a nice, clean rifle with practically a perfect bore, and I have the tag that was kept underneath the butt plate by its former owner. Speaking of which, is that an address in Bern? I've not been able to determine that.

 

 

Füsilier Badertscher

Füsilier Kompanie III 170

Pulverstrasse 66 Bern

 

Herr Badertscher most likely lived at the Pulverweg 66 in Bern. At the time he could have been in service, this neighborhood was newly erected, most likely as foremost a commercial district. (Then!) Cheap real estate. You can see how the area developped here:

 

https://www.swisstopo.admin.ch/en/maps-data-online/maps-geodata-online/journey-through-time.html

 

There is a Pulverstrasse 66 not far, but it is in the neighboring community Ittingen, belonging to Bern. However, The higher numbers were not erected until rather recently and I am certain Ittingen would have been on the address, not Bern, even though Ittingen belongs to Bern. It is likely that at least for some years there might have been a naming confusion on whether it was a „way“ or a „road“.

 

The Badertscher family (or or just the one who stayed at the adress for more than 50 years) still runs a carpeter/construction company at Pulverweg 66, so I am certain that it is them:

 

https://www.badertscher.ch/

 

Funny enough, this would actually suit the history, or origin, of the name „Badertscher“: It belongs to folks from the Emmental (the Emme valley, supposedly where that cheese is from), sort of the epicenter of provincial Bern. The name derives from „Bader“ and meant (the name is known in that place since  the ~1300 AD) someone who ran a public bath. That it was not only about getting clean goes without saying. But it is charming to see that to this day they still sell shower enclosures.

 

That would also be consistent with the guy newer getting any promotion during his time in the army, otherwise he wouldn’t have kept his rank of fusilier (a soldier; the lowest, basic rank above the recruit), on the label. If he was not of a simple background, he would have made it to at least officer and by then he would have traded his rifle for a pistol. While it is and was possible to keep the rifle, it required you to use it for some sort of regular competitive shooting, hence keeping the rifle in that case is not common. He must have completed his tour (and did service until he was about 50 years old) to keep his rifle. I wouldn‘t consider it probable at all that he refused his promotions (like I did, so I know what that takes) and kept the rifle. Military rank was rather tightly liked to one’s general social status. And people running a bath is more toward the bottom of that food chain than the other way.

 

I would say that the rifle was sold after Mr. Badertscher passed away and his family ended up with the contents of his closet. That is when most rifles hit the market. That would be maybe some 20 years ago.

 

That‘s about what I can gather just off the top of my head from that name tag. It is my best guess.

[Lusekofte]

On 12/22/2021 at 12:51 AM, oc2209 said:

 

I agree with this explanation.

 

Whatever performance gains the 410 had over the 110, it wasn't worth the overall handling loss.

 

I think the 410 handled like a comatose slug. I don't believe that the 210--an unmitigated disaster of a design--could ever be turned into a good plane, regardless of the modifications that were made to fix its many flaws. It was an adequate plane for a few specific purposes (chiefly to replace the Stuka and for recon), none of which mattered by the time the re-branded 410 entered service.

I read that with radar antennas installed the 110 got a very sluggish handling. Any control input had a delay and 110 pilots could not follow a Lankaster in a cork screw. Brown testing a captured 110 said it was a better day fighter than Beufighter, but as a nightfighter it was far worse.

I read some pilots story from lw pilots. They did not complain about the plane, but kind of confirmed what Brown said

[Asgar]

On 12/21/2021 at 10:51 PM, Bremspropeller said:

Also, why would one not build the He 100, which had about the same performance as a contemporary Bf 109 (on the DB601), but had 20% more range on internal gas.

Because it sucks as a fighter design? A single it anywhere in one of your wings and you can see good by to your coolant  and the good performance was only ever tested on completely clean prototypes with no armament

[LukeFF]

9 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

 

Füsilier Badertscher

Füsilier Kompanie III 170

Pulverstrasse 66 Bern

 

Herr Badertscher most likely lived at the Pulverweg 66 in Bern. At the time he could have been in service, this neighborhood was newly erected, most likely as foremost a commercial district. (Then!) Cheap real estate. You can see how the area developped here:

 

https://www.swisstopo.admin.ch/en/maps-data-online/maps-geodata-online/journey-through-time.html

 

There is a Pulverstrasse 66 not far, but it is in the neighboring community Ittingen, belonging to Bern. However, The higher numbers were not erected until rather recently and I am certain Ittingen would have been on the address, not Bern, even though Ittingen belongs to Bern. It is likely that at least for some years there might have been a naming confusion on whether it was a „way“ or a „road“.

 

The Badertscher family (or or just the one who stayed at the adress for more than 50 years) still runs a carpeter/construction company at Pulverweg 66, so I am certain that it is them:

 

https://www.badertscher.ch/

 

Funny enough, this would actually suit the history, or origin, of the name „Badertscher“: It belongs to folks from the Emmental (the Emme valley, supposedly where that cheese is from), sort of the epicenter of provincial Bern. The name derives from „Bader“ and meant (the name is known in that place since  the ~1300 AD) someone who ran a public bath. That it was not only about getting clean goes without saying. But it is charming to see that to this day they still sell shower enclosures.

 

That would also be consistent with the guy newer getting any promotion during his time in the army, otherwise he wouldn’t have kept his rank of fusilier (a soldier; the lowest, basic rank above the recruit), on the label. If he was not of a simple background, he would have made it to at least officer and by then he would have traded his rifle for a pistol. While it is and was possible to keep the rifle, it required you to use it for some sort of regular competitive shooting, hence keeping the rifle in that case is not common. He must have completed his tour (and did service until he was about 50 years old) to keep his rifle. I wouldn‘t consider it probable at all that he refused his promotions (like I did, so I know what that takes) and kept the rifle. Military rank was rather tightly liked to one’s general social status. And people running a bath is more toward the bottom of that food chain than the other way.

 

I would say that the rifle was sold after Mr. Badertscher passed away and his family ended up with the contents of his closet. That is when most rifles hit the market. That would be maybe some 20 years ago.

 

That‘s about what I can gather just off the top of my head from that name tag. It is my best guess.

 

That's much more than I knew before. Thank you!

 

EDIT: I forgot to add to my original post that the rifle is stamped with the letter P, which as I understand meant it was transferred to him after completing his military service, which apparently was a common thing.

Edited December 25, 2021 by LukeFF

[CUJO_1970]

This has been a fascinating thread about rifles, thanks.

[PatrickAWlson]

1 hour ago, CUJO_1970 said:

This has been a fascinating thread about rifles, thanks.

 

And only the cool kids who care about the 110 vs the 410 get to read it  

[oc2209]

6 hours ago, LuseKofte said:

I read that with radar antennas installed the 110 got a very sluggish handling. Any control input had a delay and 110 pilots could not follow a Lankaster in a cork screw. Brown testing a captured 110 said it was a better day fighter than Beufighter, but as a nightfighter it was far worse.

I read some pilots story from lw pilots. They did not complain about the plane, but kind of confirmed what Brown said

 

Logically, if the 110, which had far superior handling to the 410 overall, was so adversely affected by the radar installation, then a 410 with radar would be nigh-unflyable.

 

Which might further explain why the 410 never replaced the 110.

[Kurfurst]

The 110 and 210/410 were built for the different purposes. The 110 was a heavy fighter, conceived at a time when even the best engines available delivered about 1000 HP were not powerful enough to allow single engines fighters to carry any significant payload like fuel and bombs. So, two engines were installed for more range, an extra crew member for observation and operating long range radios, with fighter role and long range interdiction being primary and any other roles like Jabo were an afterthought, although the plane was quite capable to be modified for such. 

 

The 210/410 was a different concept, a fast bomber first and foremost that sometimes could be employed as a fighter if needed. For this role, higher speed was required and higher wingloading was accepted, with less benevolent handling characteristics as the 110. Hence the internal, integral bomb bay. It evolved from the 110 but changed so much it eventually became a new plane.

 

The problem was that the 210 was rushed into production by the RLM before it was fully developed and its teething problems ironed out, and it turned out to be a flop as a result in 1941. Clearly more work and time was needed, but with production lines and jigs already changed for the 210, Messerschmitt had to abandon those at great loss of money. Since a heavy plane was needed for both ground attack in the East, night fighting over the Reich and long range escort in the MTO, only the 110 could fill the void until the 410 and its new DB 603 engines emerged as combat ready by 1943. The factories had to re-tool to 110 production, and the plane proved to be adaptable enough to perform satisfactory in those roles on the meantime. And like many ‘interim’ solutions, it worked well enough that its intended successors never really replaced it in service.
 

The Ju 88 modifications were eventually better as night fighters than either the 110 or the 410, because of their more spacious cocpit, vast range and loiter times, while the 410 came too late, by a time that the air war decidedly turned against the Axis that the 410 never really got a fighting chance, despite being actually a really good aircraft for the role it was intended for (fast bomber and long range interdiction).

 

P.S. Oh and accuracy isnt really an issue with Mosin. They are accurate for a service rifle, the sights are pretty good, and in any case they are more accurate than 95% of the people shooting them anyways. But everything else how they pretend to work is. The action, feeding is garbage. The trigger is poor, though not as poor as those otherwise well liked and very accurate, but comically heavy Sweedish Mausers. 

Edited December 25, 2021 by VO101Kurfurst

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

But everything else how they pretend to work is. The action, feeding is garbage. The trigger is poor, though not as poor as those otherwise well liked and very accurate, but comically heavy Sweedish Mausers. 

 

It all depends on how well the gun was built. My 1942 PU sniper has an excellent trigger, while my Finnish M39 has a trigger assembly that is almost impossible to beat. But yeah, at the other end you have trigger assemblies that are just awful. 

[busdriver]

10 hours ago, LuseKofte said:

Any control input had a delay and 110 pilots could not follow a Lankaster in a cork screw.

 

Schnaufer was pretty good at following a Lancaster or Halifax in a corkscrew and using his oblique guns at the same time, at least from reading these...

 

 

 

But you make a great point about the drag penalties of the AI antenna. Interviews with pilots and Bordfunkers frequently mention that in cases with an engine shutdown, the least dangerous landing was a gear up landing (rather than risk getting too slow and stalling when lowering the landing gear). Throw in a little ice accumulation in the winter, boy that would suck.

 

 

[Lusekofte]

34 minutes ago, busdriver said:

 

Schnaufer was pretty good at following a Lancaster or Halifax in a corkscrew and using his oblique guns at the same time, at least from reading these...

 

 

 

But you make a great point about the drag penalties of the AI antenna. Interviews with pilots and Bordfunkers frequently mention that in cases with an engine shutdown, the least dangerous landing was a gear up landing (rather than risk getting too slow and stalling when lowering the landing gear). Throw in a little ice accumulation in the winter, boy that would suck.

 

 

Thank you for clarifying. One read magazines, some pilot accounts and believe it is a fact. 

I read much about Nightfighter pilots, but mostly you get only their service record. What planes they flew.

I also read that the Malcholm hood on P 51 made some changes in rudder and pitch control surfaces, do you know about this?

[busdriver]

2 hours ago, LuseKofte said:

I also read that the Malcholm hood on P 51 made some changes in rudder and pitch control surfaces, do you know about this?

 

I don't, but let me consult this...[edit: No mention of the Malcolm hood causing or related to any problems.]

 

 

On January 4, details of a P-51B-5 empennage failure during a high-speed slow roll were relayed from Maj Charles Krouse of VIII Air Force Service Command to Frank Lyons, NAA Field Services manager. During January a variety of other problems experienced by 354th FG Mustangs were reported. They included (1) external combat tanks failing to feed at various altitudes above 20,000ft, (2) propellers throwing oil, (3) glycol reserve tank leaks spraying windshields and freezing, (4) cooling system overheating due to radiator corrosion, combined with leaks in the system, (5) radios failing, (6) alarming control response issues due to sloshing fuel in the 85gal tank, (7) poor spark plug performance, (8) excessive oil loss, and (9) ammunition feed failures causing gun jams.

Marshall, James William "Bill"; Ford, Lowell F.. P-51B Mustang (pp. 425-426). Bloomsbury Publishing. Kindle Edition. 

 

On February 3 the Office of the Assistant Chief of the Air Staff, Materiel, Maintenance and Distribution forwarded a memo dated January 27 from Materiel Command to the Technical Executive. It noted that, in response to the recommendations of the December 22 report from Eglin Field that “lateral baffles” be installed in the 85gal tank to prevent fore-and-aft movement of fuel, these had indeed been fitted in all production tanks. The memo further stated that, in the opinion of Materiel Command, this installation sufficiently retarded the motion of fuel, and that the fitment of a longitudinal baffle would be a waste of labor and materials.

Marshall, James William "Bill"; Ford, Lowell F.. P-51B Mustang (p. 435). Bloomsbury Publishing. Kindle Edition. 

 

 

In mid-March several significant problems were encountered with the P-51B. The most serious were structural failures of the empennage, wing, and engine mounts. All aircraft were grounded between March 10 and 15. The engine mount failures were quickly traced (initially) to improper heat treatment of the high-tensile-strength bolts used to attach the Merlin to the engine mounts. All of the bolts were removed and inspected, tested, and either returned as satisfactory or discarded while local sources were scoured to find properly heat-treated bolts. When the accidents persisted, the failed bolts (previously tested and passed) were found to not contain enough nickel to provide the required high-tensile strength, and all engine bolts were inspected again. The substandard bolts were replaced. NAA traced the defective bolts to a specific contractor, and all P-51s on the line and in the field were tested. Remedial steps were taken at the contractor site, and NAA established test processes in-house as new bolts were received.

Marshall, James William "Bill"; Ford, Lowell F.. P-51B Mustang (pp. 444-445). Bloomsbury Publishing. Kindle Edition. 

 

 

The empennage issues were more complicated. The elevator failures were ultimately traced to the differential vertical loads on the horizontal stabilizer imposed by a combination of pull-out loads and the propeller vortex, which added another vertical load to the left elevator. The empennage failures due to torsion were traced to both the elevator and fin/rudder, and were due to a combination of the propeller vortex and increased yaw input caused when performing high-speed sideslips and slow rolls, and excessive rudder input during high-speed diving maneuvers. The solution included installation of the dorsal fin fillet to improve flow over the empennage during sideslip, beefing up the elevator support structure, and adding a reverse rudder boost tab. Following acceptance by the USAAF, work was started to fabricate kits and prepare a Technical Order covering the installation of both the new fin fillet and the reverse rudder boost tab. The last issues causing wing failures began with the problem identified by Rolls-Royce during the late 1942/early 1943 Mustang X dive tests, when the tendency for the main landing gear to “unlock and drop” during high-G (in dive pull-outs or violent turn maneuvers, for example) forced the main-wheel cover fairings to open – which in turn let the gear partially extend into the very-high-velocity slipstream. Additional issues were caused when the door fairing latches failed, releasing the doors and causing an immediate change in the pressure distribution over the wing. The instantaneous result was a sharp change in yaw and roll at high speed. The resultant violent forces on the wing caused by such high and instantaneous drag and lift forces resulted in catastrophic failure. Door up-lock kits were dispatched to the ETO and in-theater by late April. The wheel door fairing latches were modified and introduced in July. The structural failures at Eglin Field during A-36 trials earlier in 1943 had been traced to the violent change of aerodynamic flow and forces when the dive brakes were opened after initiation of the dive-bombing run – similar in cause and effect to the wheel door fairing opening during a dive. The least obvious root cause for wing failure was only discovered during the terminal-dive testing for the P-51D, begun in November 1943. The ammunition/gun bay doors were found to “bulge” owing to aerodynamic loads imposed during the formation of shock waves in the transonic region. The ammunition/gun access doors were stiffened to prevent a catastrophic failure of the wing during extremely high-speed dives. It was also during this period that the elevator bob-weight designs were modified to improve control stick authority when the Mustang approached control reversal during high-G maneuvers.

Marshall, James William "Bill"; Ford, Lowell F.. P-51B Mustang (pp. 446-447). Bloomsbury Publishing. Kindle Edition. 

 

 

2 hours ago, LuseKofte said:

Thank you for clarifying. One read magazines, some pilot accounts and believe it is a fact. 

I read much about Nightfighter pilots, but mostly you get only their service record. What planes they flew.

 

I didn't mean to suggest that Schnaufer's ability was typical. He was pretty talented.

Edited December 26, 2021 by busdriver

[Kurfurst]

11 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

It all depends on how well the gun was built. My 1942 PU sniper has an excellent trigger, while my Finnish M39 has a trigger assembly that is almost impossible to beat. But yeah, at the other end you have trigger assemblies that are just awful. 

 

I have several Hungarian built standard issue Mosins (carbines and a rifle), so it may be down to local licence production, but on all of them the trigger is very mushy, with no clear break point or clear indication thereof. Finnish ones are fabled for their quality and perhaps the sniper versions were improved, nevertheless, they are far from what I consider ideal. On most Mauser 98s I handled the trigger was better, and the action is the most positive there ever is. I did not have the opportunity to try the SMLE. From the looks of it, I don't like the shape of the stock (I prefer those beefy 'Bavarian' style stocks), but the trigger looks sweet. 

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

On 12/21/2021 at 11:32 PM, BlitzPig_EL said:

An endemic problem in the German military.  So many different types of half tracks, all made by different manufacturers to different designs, several different makes/designs of transport trucks.  Why?  Pick a solid design and have it built by everyone.  A complete logistics nightmare.

 

And don't get me started on the Ju52 compared to the C47.  A bloody flying antique. Madness.

 

They kept an outdated rifle built to lower accuracy specifications than the rifles of either Britain or the US.  

 

They utterly ignored their navy and really had no clue how to properly utilize it.

One thing after another.  It's a wonder the war lasted as long as it did really.

 

It's a thing with the Industry back then in which certain skills were very unevenly distributed and it was generally advised to let everyone do what he does best and to keep Production as local as possible with the garbage Road System and our tiny Rail Capacity. 

 

Most people see the Autobahn, but get off those and you are on Dirt and Cobblestone Roads that will barely take 7.5t Trucks, where in America most Highways were paved at that point and built for 25t Truck&Trailers

 

And our Rail System was mostly single Track, even on some very important Lines, Loading was max. 16t per Axle and Train Length severely Limited by the length of the Train Junctions, Speed was mostly about 65km/h and our main Type of Locomotives, which were either about 1500hp 1'E or 1250hp D and later retrofitted 1'D. The US at that point had a lot of 2 and 4 Track Lines and even 6 Tracks with massive Trains, 60mph Running, Massive Locos etc.

 

Some companies were good at casting, others at stamping, some at forging. Some Riveted, others welded. In general there was a lot of specialization at the Manufacture Level but not a lot of generalization at the Indutrial Level. 

It's that way to this Day. 

 

 

[BlitzPig_EL]

Interesting. Thanks for the overview.

I am somewhat aware of the differences in our rail systems, as the steam era of railroading is one of my interests.  Your mention of 60 mph also important.  Some of our railroads had so called "fast freight" trains that had scheduled average speeds in the 60 mph range, which required running at much higher speeds.  Our rail system is an often overlooked cog in the mechanism of winning a war.   Our railroads stepped up and had ton/mile numbers that were stunning.

[Bremspropeller]

On 12/25/2021 at 6:31 PM, Asgar said:

Because it sucks as a fighter design? A single it anywhere in one of your wings and you can see good by to your coolant  and the good performance was only ever tested on completely clean prototypes with no armament

 

Yeah, no.

A larger-sized belly cooler would not have eaten up the speed-differential of ~70kph. Weapons-trials were performed with A-1 prototypes. Still roughly 70kph faster than contemporary 1-oh-neins.

 

[ZachariasX]

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

Yeah, no.

A larger-sized belly cooler would not have eaten up the speed-differential of ~70kph. Weapons-trials were performed with A-1 prototypes. Still roughly 70kph faster than contemporary 1-oh-neins.

 

But Willy thought that two "wan-oh!-nein!" are better than one hynkel. Same as two twin engine bombers were a better sale than one quad. People who just want tons of something (because that was essentially what mattered) are usually not that good in details. Actually, they are usually not much good in general.

 

Still, I very much doubt that these ~70 km/h speed avantage would have remained on producton aircraft. The belly radiator concept works so well in the Mustang because it is based on a high pressure cooling system, something not on the shelves in Germany.

[Avimimus]

On 12/25/2021 at 9:18 AM, LuseKofte said:

Any control input had a delay and 110 pilots could not follow a Lankaster in a cork screw. Brown testing a captured 110 said it was a better day fighter than Beufighter,

 

Well, now you are just making me unsatisfied as a result of not having a Lanc with its 120.5 square metres of wing area to play with.

[Bremspropeller]

51 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

Still, I very much doubt that these ~70 km/h speed avantage would have remained on producton aircraft. The belly radiator concept works so well in the Mustang because it is based on a high pressure cooling system, something not on the shelves in Germany.

 

So do I. Note: The A Block II airframes already had a semi-retractable belly rad for use in the pattern.

Let's assume the airplane just keeps a fraction of those 70pkh (say 20-30kph), because someone's fitting a fixed and enlarged belly-rad.

That's still a sizeable speed-advantage on the same motor, which also means more range at the same power-setting.

Then there's other design-advantages, like a sliding hood, arguably better view outside the cockpit, a wide-tracked landing gear...

 

Staying with the mid-30s designs, when everybody else incorporated late-30s and early-40s designs wasn't really a good idea.

The perks of planned economies - why tie two shoes individually, when you can tie two shoes with one lace?

 

But then again, picking a fight with half the world wasn't gonna rank highly in an ideas-contest either...