ME410 'Performance'

[CAFulcrum]

Sorry to start another 410 thread, but the other's have been somewhat specific.

 

Everyone knows the 410 is a bomber-destroyer, but when it comes to fighter combat they were more or less massacred by allied fighters during the war.  I've noticed in AQMB my wingmates last about as long as flies at a frog farm, and I feel like a wallowing pig in a turnfight, and the late-1944 tempests and p47Ds seemed to be able to keep up.

 

Question is this: has anyone had any luck with this as a dogfighter?  Can you even run in it as a JABO?  Is it better suited to high altitudes?  Does it have any advantage over the 110G?  Curious what other's experiences have been, especially online against human opponents.  I hate thinking it's a lackluster dropandscoot bomber.  The ccip-ish bombsight and the cockpit in general are amazing.

[Drano]

What were you expecting exactly? It's certainly a cool looking plane and was an improvement over the 210 but not by much. It is a dead sexy twiin. Historically it wasn't some wonder weapon tho. Never thought of it as a pure fighter. And this from a dedicated "bomber" pilot mind you!

[BlitzPig_EL]

After flying it for a while now I concur.  It's a sort of fast in a straight line target drone.  As a one pass and haul ass point target intruder it may have some use, but I like the 110 better overall.

 

It is handsome though.

[DBFlyguy]

47 minutes ago, CAFulcrum said:

Sorry to start another 410 thread, but the other's have been somewhat specific.

 

Everyone knows the 410 is a bomber-destroyer, but when it comes to fighter combat they were more or less massacred by allied fighters during the war.  I've noticed in AQMB my wingmates last about as long as flies at a frog farm, and I feel like a wallowing pig in a turnfight, and the late-1944 tempests and p47Ds seemed to be able to keep up.

 

 

 

This is more of a issue with the AI than the plane itself.  Granted, the 410 isn't a dogfighter, it's meat on the table for any competent single engine fighter pilot, despite what some may argue on the forums. The current AI in game, especially while using AQMB is....not good. AI has made some subtle improvements which are appreciated but there is still a very LONG way to go especially compared to legacy products like IL2 1946.  I still remember my frustration recently of watching my flight of P-51Bs (ACE level) get wiped out by JU-88C6s (Novice level) in AQMB...

 

For whatever reason, its seems like the opposing side always shoot and fly better than your wingmen/side, no matter if you pick allies or axis, no matter their "skill level" the side you fly on seems to have really poor AI where you end up having to save them or lose them all/most of them.

Edited August 11, 2022 by DBFlyguy

[Raptorattacker]

56 minutes ago, CAFulcrum said:

and the late-1944 tempests and p47Ds seemed to be able to keep up.

To be fair the Tempests were well-known for their speed, even if they DID poison the pilots with Carbon Monoxide!!

[Wilhelm_Heidkamp]

55 minutes ago, CAFulcrum said:

 Is it better suited to high altitudes?  Does it have any advantage over the 110G?  

 Yes, DB.603 engines. 

[Jaws2002]

1 hour ago, DBFlyguy said:

For whatever reason, its seems like the opposing side always shoot and fly better than your wingmen/side, no matter if you pick allies or axis, no matter their "skill level" the side you fly on seems to have really poor AI where you end up having to save them or lose them all/most of them.

 

 

This is the " grass is always greener on the other side of the fence" syndrome. ?

 But I agree, the AI is pretty weak. You can outfly any plane, regardless of the AI level, in pretty much any plane.

 

About the Me-410, think of it as a heavy multirole aircraft. It's not a pure fighter, or even a pure heavy fighter. It's a long range multirole plane, good for long range recon, strike, heavy, long range interceptor,  maritime patrol.

 It was not supposed to go up against the bombers and escorts alone. It had escorts when attacking bomber formations. 

Edited August 11, 2022 by Jaws2002

[[LeLv34]Lykurgos88]

What I wonder myself is that currently Bf 110 G2 has better max speed and way better acceleration then the ME-410.

 

Is this accurate? Was BF110 actually a lot faster then Me -410 in real life? According to Wikipedia it does not seem so, and I can't reach Wikis max speed in Me-410 even with minimal fuel and loadout at sea level.

[Wilhelm_Heidkamp]

Me-410 was faster.  At least 15-16km/h faster at sea level. Improving with altitude. Loading bombs and guns, Me-410 was faster too because less drag (internal bomb bay) than  equivalent Bf-110G-2  external load (increased drag).

[ITAF_Airone1989]

The Big me410 advantage is the stuvi sight... You can drop from 2k (maybe even more)

This mean that:

- enemy fighters cannot wait you on the deck, so will be easier for the escort to see them

- if somebody is chasing you, you still have altitude to dive and keep an high speed, exposing the enemy to your gunner (that seems to be more effective than others)

 

 

[CountZero]

42 minutes ago, [LeLv34]Lykurgos88 said:

What I wonder myself is that currently Bf 110 G2 has better max speed and way better acceleration then the ME-410.

 

Is this accurate? Was BF110 actually a lot faster then Me -410 in real life? According to Wikipedia it does not seem so, and I can't reach Wikis max speed in Me-410 even with minimal fuel and loadout at sea level.

If your looking at cockpit speed gauge, then you will be comparing corect speed on 110G gauge to broken speed gauge that 410 have now, for some reason its gauge is showing 20-30kmh lesss then 410 speed is.

If you turn on instrument panel and compare speed you see there youll see 410 is faster, and on top when you load bombs on it its even faster as 110 have to have them outside.

 

This is my speed test of default 110G vs 410A:

Spoiler

Blue lines are 410A, red is 110G, first lines from left are combat last emergancy.

 

[Feldgrun]

From my experience, I believe the 110G turns better than the 410A.

 

And turning is half the battle... in a dogfight with AI.

[DBFlyguy]

2 hours ago, Jaws2002 said:

 

 

This is the " grass is always greener on the other side of the fence" syndrome. ?

 

 

 

 

Haha! there is definitely a bit of that admittedly, I just hate seeing my virtual squadron mates buy the farm on the regular flying against what should be clearly inferior opponents?

2 hours ago, Jaws2002 said:

 

 

About the Me-410, think of it as a heavy multirole aircraft. It's not a pure fighter, or even a pure heavy fighter. It's a long range multirole plane, good for long range recon, strike, heavy, long range interceptor,  maritime patrol.

 It was not supposed to go up against the bombers and escorts alone. It had escorts when attacking bomber formations. 

 

Agreed.  I honestly haven't flown the 410.  When I do fly Axis its either in the 109G6, G6Late, K4 , 190 A6 or A8, everything else is just targets for my 51s, Spits, Tiffy or Tempest the majority of the time.

[PatrickAWlson]

4 hours ago, CAFulcrum said:

Sorry to start another 410 thread, but the other's have been somewhat specific.

 

Everyone knows the 410 is a bomber-destroyer, but when it comes to fighter combat they were more or less massacred by allied fighters during the war.  I've noticed in AQMB my wingmates last about as long as flies at a frog farm, and I feel like a wallowing pig in a turnfight, and the late-1944 tempests and p47Ds seemed to be able to keep up.

 

Question is this: has anyone had any luck with this as a dogfighter?  Can you even run in it as a JABO?  Is it better suited to high altitudes?  Does it have any advantage over the 110G?  Curious what other's experiences have been, especially online against human opponents.  I hate thinking it's a lackluster dropandscoot bomber.  The ccip-ish bombsight and the cockpit in general are amazing.

 

The Germans withdrew the 410 from daylight operations in Sept 1944.  That says something about its odds of survival late war.  

[Kurfurst]

5 hours ago, CAFulcrum said:

Everyone knows the 410 is a bomber-destroyer

 

Nope, its a fast bomber.

[Avimimus]

1 hour ago, PatrickAWlson said:

 

The Germans withdrew the 410 from daylight operations in Sept 1944.  That says something about its odds of survival late war.  

 

Well, perhaps favourably though... I mean daylight bomber operations gradually end after their experiences in 1942, and began redesigning their bombers as night bombers... even in 1944 the Fw-190 Jabos were having a very hard time of it.

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

Nope, its a fast bomber.

 

It's classified in official documentation as a destroyer, fast bomber, and reconnaissance plane. 

10 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

Well, perhaps favourably though... I mean daylight bomber operations gradually end after their experiences in 1942, and began redesigning their bombers as night bombers... even in 1944 the Fw-190 Jabos were having a very hard time of it.

 

Lol no, it was not because of favorable conditions. 

[Avimimus]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

Lol no, it was not because of favorable conditions. 

 

Well, my point was that it is hard to say that it was withdrawn from daylight operations in 1944 because it hardly says much about the quality of the design. Everything had trouble surviving in the daylight of the Western front by that time.

 

Of course, the Zerstörer concept might have been flawed to begin with, and should probably have been abandoned in 1940... but that is another conversation entirely.

[PatrickAWlson]

59 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

 

Well, my point was that it is hard to say that it was withdrawn from daylight operations in 1944 because it hardly says much about the quality of the design. Everything had trouble surviving in the daylight of the Western front by that time.

 

Of course, the Zerstörer concept might have been flawed to begin with, and should probably have been abandoned in 1940... but that is another conversation entirely.

 

I'm going to argue that the Zerstorer concept morphed.  I am willing to bet that, after 1940, the LW understood that they were not effective against single engine fighters.  So why keep building them?  Zerstorers,  including the 410, worked well as long as they was were used against unescorted heavies.  The made great night fighters and raiders as well.  Just don't ask them to take on single engine fighters.

 

I just don't think that the Germans expected a capable single engine fighter that flew from England to Berlin and back.

[cellinsky]

Good, unbiased read. No wonder-weapon for sure and controversial among its pilots as well.

[Kurfurst]

13 hours ago, LukeFF said:

It's classified in official documentation as a destroyer, fast bomber, and reconnaissance plane. 

 

No, the official documentation classifies it as a fast bomber. Flugzeuge der Baureihe Me 410 A-1 werden als Schnellkämpfer eingesetzt. Every other modification of the A series was just a Sonderausführungen, or a specially modified version. The A-1 was the main version, and the later models weren't around until 1944, were built for a relatively small period and in smaller numbers.

 

The plane of course was highly modular and was actually designed from the start to be adaptable, so other roles were possible, but being a fast bomber was always its first and primary role. That's why it has things like an internal bomb bay, dive breakes, actual gunsights, and a bucketload of armor fitted, clearly indicating the primary purpose. That's how it was used East, South and West, with classic heavy fighter operations being just brief, and not very successful exceptions.

 

The very reason of the birth of Me 210/410 was to create a fast engine bomber , with everything else being secondary option. The doctrine changed from the early heavy fighter Zestörer concept to the Kampfzestörer, a plane that is a bomber first and everything else is secondary. The earliest sketches were more or less showing a 110 with a bomb bay, a bigger canopy and remote barbettes, but it still had the twin tail design. It got the bomb bay for a reason. 

 

Edited August 12, 2022 by VO101Kurfurst

[ShamrockOneFive]

IMHO, after diving reasonably deep into the type's history a pattern emerges. You have destroyer squadrons tasked mostly with interception and bomber squadrons, typically former Ju88A groups, transitioning to the Me410 for use as a light bomber. Within the light bomber context you can see how useful and fast this aircraft is in the 1943 context. But the odds were beginning to come overwhelming. Still, they raided a number of targets along the English coast and in as far as London.

[Jaws2002]

17 hours ago, DBFlyguy said:

I honestly haven't flown the 410. 

You should. It flies beautifully. It's such a stable platform. You can easily trim it for hands free flying to fast cruise across the landscape.  Dive bombing is also addictive in it, because of the Stuvi gunsight. You can accurately dive bomb targets from much higher up than other planes. 

It's a joy to fly.?

[LukeFF]

4 hours ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

No, the official documentation classifies it as a fast bomber. Flugzeuge der Baureihe Me 410 A-1 werden als Schnellkämpfer eingesetzt. Every other modification of the A series was just a Sonderausführungen, or a specially modified version. The A-1 was the main version, and the later models weren't around until 1944, were built for a relatively small period and in smaller numbers.

 

Yes, I know, I'm quite aware of all that. You're picking nits here, dude. ? Yes, it was officially described as a fast bomber, but then it was also classified for all for those other roles in the that very chart you posted, which is what I was referring to when I made my post up above. The A-3 wasn't a "Fast Bomber Specially Modified for Reconnaissance," it was simply "Reconnaissance." 

[DBFlyguy]

2 hours ago, Jaws2002 said:

You should. It flies beautifully. It's such a stable platform. You can easily trim it for hands free flying to fast cruise across the landscape.  Dive bombing is also addictive in it, because of the Stuvi gunsight. You can accurately dive bomb targets from much higher up than other planes. 

It's a joy to fly.?

 

I'm sure I'll give it a try eventually, I can tell the devs put a ton of work in it... its just not on the list of aircraft that interest me.  I hope that work and time the devs put into the 410 and 234 helped them get closer to finally being able to do some "complex" aircraft for the allies too eventually ... like a flyable B-25 or B-26 sooner than later/never

Edited August 12, 2022 by DBFlyguy

[JG13_opcode]

I bet Arianne has a 410 ace in a flight video already.

[Sunde]

18 hours ago, JG13_opcode said:

I bet Arianne has a 410 ace in a flight video already.

Am sure he will, but almost any plane in il-2 can make you become ace in a flight!
Just takes enough bad opponents and a bit of luck ;D 
The 410 is really in my opinion a VERY cool plane. The engine limitations seem oddly agressive, although i am sure some manual somewhere has stated this to be accurate, just odd imo. 

[CountZero]

2 hours ago, Sunde said:

Am sure he will, but almost any plane in il-2 can make you become ace in a flight!
Just takes enough bad opponents and a bit of luck ;D 
The 410 is really in my opinion a VERY cool plane. The engine limitations seem oddly agressive, although i am sure some manual somewhere has stated this to be accurate, just odd imo. 

I would like to see manual that states that youll recover emergancy 1 min fully only after you fly 12min on combat, i bet that manual dont exist, but its how its in game, still having some absured long recover times on 1min timer for german airplanes.

[RyanR]

It'd be nice if you had some escort for intercept missions. Otherwise, everybody dies pretty quick.

 

It is pretty nifty to dial up some B-26/B-25's in the "plain" QMB. The 50mm shoots real nice from outside the range of their defensive guns.

 

It certainly is a very cool plane. I hope BoN has some ground attack roles for it.

 

-Ryan

[the_emperor]

16 hours ago, Sunde said:

The engine limitations seem oddly agressive,

Did it inherit the artificial 1min WEP limitation of the Bf109G with the DB605a?

[Sunde]

23 hours ago, the_emperor said:

Did it inherit the artificial 1min WEP limitation of the Bf109G with the DB605a?

Indeed
This sims archaic way of modeling/simulating engines/limitations gets a bit old at this point lol. You'd think this many years later they would have evolved beyond the "just slap a timer on it" technique. 
But regardless its a cool plane. 

Edited August 15, 2022 by Sunde

[CountZero]

1 hour ago, Sunde said:

Indeed
This sims archaic way of modeling/simulating engines/limitations gets a bit old at this point lol. You'd think this many years later they would have evolved beyond the "just slap a timer on it" technique. 
But regardless its a cool plane. 

its even wors then on that picture, 84% is wrongly telling you your in combat mod, another fake info from techchat when you look at engines. If you go by what techchat tells you, you think you have 30min, but you have more like 20min if you use 84%, 80% is true max combat that specs say, why they are not making this accurate is another broken thing about timers and techcat.

 

Techchat message that tells player when timer runs out or gets recovered dont work when techchat is on, and on top mod info is on all airplanes wrongly saying your in combat when your already flying in early emergancy and waisting combat timer at mutch bigger rate... and this is for some reason tolarated as normal... just imagine if trim tab techcat is telling you wrong position by few deg... it would be caled a bug, not a interesting feature of a game. Afcorse you can just look at cokpit trim tab to know exact deg or position, but then whats the point of trim tab info in techcat if its fake, this is what is hapening with combat mod techcat saying its combat mode but its already in emergancy...

Edited August 15, 2022 by CountZero

[Robli]

I don't have tech chat on any more and don't pay attention to the throttle percentages, as I fly by gauges, but I recall that the timers did not have hard limits where 1% throttle difference would matter much. If you are just slightly in "combat mode", you have long time to fly before engine breaks compared to if you are 1% away from "emergency mode". I think there is some kind of curve and probabilities build into the timers.

 

1 hour ago, CountZero said:

Techchat message that tells player when timer runs out or gets recovere

 

So is techchat telling that kind of info nowodays, too? I think in the past it just used to say when you got into "combat mode" or "emergency mode", but did not tell anything about timer or recovery times.

[Luftschiff]

I still feel like the performance is off, even the speedometer bug can't account for the whole discrepancy. I should not have to use WEP and closed radiators to even get close to achieving listed 'cruise speed', nevermind max speed, but being unable to qualify that emotion beyond already listed charts and documents, I will leave that discussion to wiser minds. All in all still love the bird, definitely my favourite addition to the series in a long time. 

[CountZero]

1 hour ago, Robli said:

I don't have tech chat on any more and don't pay attention to the throttle percentages, as I fly by gauges, but I recall that the timers did not have hard limits where 1% throttle difference would matter much. If you are just slightly in "combat mode", you have long time to fly before engine breaks compared to if you are 1% away from "emergency mode". I think there is some kind of curve and probabilities build into the timers.

 

 

So is techchat telling that kind of info nowodays, too? I think in the past it just used to say when you got into "combat mode" or "emergency mode", but did not tell anything about timer or recovery times.

techchat on in realisam settings and you aint gona see message that tells you when safe bosted/emergancy/combat/continuous time run out, or more importantly when its recovered. This only works if you turn on instrument panel on, that have nothing to do with techchat or engine... so its clearly buged. For example its same like having icons on for enemy airplanes would only show up if you turn on icons and outside view on in realisam, if you just turn on icons you have only frendly icons showing up.

 

combat mod in spec say its at 30 min, if you fly by icon in techchat, that stays on on 84% you aint gona get 30min, because if you look at rpm and ata youll see your runing it at higher then what spec say. What spec say combat max is, you see  as 80%, not 84%, at 84% your already in emergancy mode, it should switch from combat to emergancy mode at 81% not 85%, and on some other airplanes its even wors how unaccurate it is. So it shortens your time when you think you have 30min, try for example fly on max combat mode shown by techchat in mosquito, it should be 1h, you aint gona get half of that if you trust techchat mode icons.

 

So in short icon lies to you your in combat, and icon that tells you when your safe time is over dont work when techchat is on.

You can say just use cockpit and so on... but there is reason why techchat is in game, and it should work properly. Its like flying with icons on and icon is teling you enemy airplane could be 109 or 190, who knows, insted corectly saying its 109. If i wonted to guess i would fly with no icons, if i use icons i expect correct info, not its close enough or who knows.

 

44 minutes ago, Luftschiff said:

I still feel like the performance is off, even the speedometer bug can't account for the whole discrepancy. I should not have to use WEP and closed radiators to even get close to achieving listed 'cruise speed', nevermind max speed, but being unable to qualify that emotion beyond already listed charts and documents, I will leave that discussion to wiser minds. All in all still love the bird, definitely my favourite addition to the series in a long time. 

I run tests and speed of airplane is same as specs say when used same settings they used in test, nothing looks wrong there, while gauge is clearly wrong. You just have to turn on instrument panle on and see in hud how wrong it is, on every other airplane HUD speed and gauge speed is same on any alt when they both show ias.

Edited August 15, 2022 by CountZero

[the_emperor]

3 hours ago, Sunde said:

Indeed
This sims archaic way of modeling/simulating engines/limitations gets a bit old at this point lol.

 

Well, thats a bummer. I have not seen any manual (for the DB603 or ME410 alike) that does state the 1 min limit.  This seems as like really, dare are say, sloppy...

49 minutes ago, Robli said:

as I fly by gauges

and here in lies the problem. You cant, as the gauges dont give you any indication that you are running the engine beyond its time limit or outside it comfort zone.

it just suddenly dies on you. one would at least except something like a drop in oil pressure or rough running, or any feedback from the engines. but there is none.

It is very arcade like.

[Lusekofte]

If 410 had been operating in early 43 it would be a destroyer , but mid /late 44. That role was impossible

[=MERCS=JenkemJunkie]

I hate the timers, I'm not defending them in this post, just explaining how it is. You cant assume you have 30 minutes just because the yellow combat icon is showing. The icon that shows just let's you know that your using up the combat timer, but it wont show you the rate that your using it. Look at your ata and rpm gauges when your at 84, it will be higher then the numbers in the manual so you'll be using that 30 minute combat timer at a faster rate. It's a good thing that we can do this, because it gives us the option to use "super combat" mode and push the engine harder before going into the emergency timer if we want to. I just make a pilot note that has the real timer values for the max combat setting so I'm not surprised when a timer runs out quicker then the manual says. It feels really bad and arcadey to run the engine like that, but that's how it is.

[CountZero]

3 hours ago, =MERCS=JenkemJunkie said:

I hate the timers, I'm not defending them in this post, just explaining how it is. You cant assume you have 30 minutes just because the yellow combat icon is showing. The icon that shows just let's you know that your using up the combat timer, but it wont show you the rate that your using it. Look at your ata and rpm gauges when your at 84, it will be higher then the numbers in the manual so you'll be using that 30 minute combat timer at a faster rate. It's a good thing that we can do this, because it gives us the option to use "super combat" mode and push the engine harder before going into the emergency timer if we want to. I just make a pilot note that has the real timer values for the max combat setting so I'm not surprised when a timer runs out quicker then the manual says. It feels really bad and arcadey to run the engine like that, but that's how it is.

Thats all good, just look at P-51 or P-47 and what kined of differant combinations you can use to get longer timers and better speed and so on...while still under combat limits in specs.

 

Problem is in this, if spec say 1.3ata and 2600rpm is combat 30 min , then combat icon in techcat should end displaying combat mode when you go abow that value, because abow that values your eating timer faster, its no longer combat, its abow that, and thats emergancy mode, and 100% is full emergancy of 1min. How is that so complex to understand, its as simple as 1 and 0.

 

For example does overheat message shows up after alowed temp is crosed ? yes if max temp is 120deg at 121 deg you get overhat message ,not at 140deg when you already did damage... same should work for anything in techchat, its made to give exact info to player, if you wont exact info you turn it on if you dont you turn it off...

 

Just look at 410 speed gauge, now its showing wrong speed compared to other airplanes and hud, its just 20 kmh more or less, is that ok, its not big error but why is that considered bug, but 4% in techcat is not considerad bug... maybe this 410 speed gauge its new game feature to sim of poor work quality of german manufacturers late in war , or poor placment of pitot tube that was never discovered on model we have but some soviet documents show it, or its clearly bug, should it not be fix just so player can go by guess your speed on landings? or should it be correctly showing speed like on other airplanes in game considerad brand new and build by best workers in best conditions with best materials.

 

 

Edited August 15, 2022 by CountZero

[the_emperor]

I guess by the arcadic nature of the engine timers with  the power settings we could be in use of an artificial display of how much percentage of which power setting was already used (and which is currently recovering), mabey in form of a percentage bar.

at least that option would be nice to enable, since flying by gauges is not an option and we get no feedback of any kinds from the engines

17 minutes ago, CountZero said:

just look at P-51 or P-47 and what kined of differant combinations you can use to get longer timers

Yes, that manipulation of engine timers itself by different rpm/map combinations is really weird and does feel gamy instead of simulation.

I dont understand why they went that route, when the premise is, that we always get a brand new flown in aircraft and we dont have to worry about engine service life (which in the real life does make total sense. one has to keep in mind that in addition a run in procedure on the bench each engine had to be flown i about ~10 hours in an aircraft cell, checked and regulated before it was cleared for the front line service . That makes these engines a scarce and highly valuable resource, which must not be wasted (especially with the ever growing fuel shortage on the German side), like we do in the game).

TeamFusion with the CLoD series did it right in my mind (with the premise of always getting a brand new aircraft and have dont to worry about service life):