| Return Create A Forum - Home | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| IL2 Air Combat! | |
| https://il2freemodding.createaforum.com | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| ***************************************************** | |
| Return to: Plane of the Week Articles | |
| ***************************************************** | |
| #Post#: 11901-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Plane of the week: the Messerschmitt Me 410 Hornisse | |
| By: vonofterdingen Date: July 20, 2020, 4:13 pm | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| https://i.postimg.cc/SKyrNTZM/Screen-Hunter-358.png | |
| The Luftwaffe�s attempts to update the obsolete Bf-110 have | |
| always fascinated me. Granted, getting the concept of heavy | |
| fighter correct was elusive for many aircraft makers. Perhaps | |
| only the US P-38 was genuinely successful. But Messerschmitt�s | |
| initial update to the Bf-110, the Me-210, was a big | |
| disappointment. And though the next iteration, our plane of the | |
| week the Me-410 was better, it was not really better enough. Not | |
| all aircraft designs work as expected. | |
| From Wikipedia: | |
| The Messerschmitt Me 410 Hornisse (Hornet) was a German heavy | |
| fighter and Schnellbomber used by the Luftwaffe during World War | |
| II. Though an incremental improvement of the Me 210, it had a | |
| new wing plan, longer fuselage and engines of greater power. The | |
| changes were significant enough for the aircraft to be renamed | |
| the Me 410. | |
| Development of the Me 210 had been underway since 1939 but | |
| the aircraft proved unstable and was never considered for | |
| full-scale production. Modifications to the layout produced the | |
| Me 210C and 210D, which proved somewhat superior. As studies | |
| progressed on the Me 210D, and with a separate parallel attempt | |
| to improve upon the 210 with the Messerschmitt Me 310 in the | |
| second half of 1943 � which provided almost no aerodynamic | |
| improvement over the 210's risky handling qualities � it was | |
| instead decided to introduce a new model, the Me 410. | |
| The major change between the Me 210 and 410 was the | |
| introduction of the larger (at 44.5 litre, 2,715 in3 | |
| displacement) and more powerful Daimler-Benz DB 603A engines, | |
| which increased power to 1,750 PS (1,730 hp, 1,290 kW) compared | |
| to the 1,475 PS DB 605s used on the Me 210C - the interim Me 310 | |
| design experiment actually used the DB 603 powerplant choice | |
| first. The engine performance increased the Me 410's maximum | |
| speed to 625 km/h (388 mph), greatly improved rate of climb, | |
| service ceiling, and most notably the cruising speed which | |
| jumped to 579 km/h (360 mph). It also improved payload | |
| capability to the point where the aircraft could lift more war | |
| load than could fit into the bomb bay under the nose. To address | |
| this, shackles were added under the wings for four 50 kg (110 | |
| lb) bombs. The changes added an extra 680 kg (1,500 lb) to the | |
| Me 210 design, but the extra engine power more than made up for | |
| the difference. As with the Me 210, the 410's rear gunner used | |
| the same pair of Ferngerichtete Drehringseitenlafette FDSL | |
| 131/1B turrets mounted on each side of the aircraft, each still | |
| armed with a 13 mm (.51 in) MG 131 machine guns, retaining the | |
| same pivoting handgun-style grip, trigger and gunsight to aim | |
| and fire the ordnance as the 210 did. | |
| [img width=1024 | |
| height=564] | |
| https://i.postimg.cc/pLQCvbBv/Screen-Hunter-357.png[/img] | |
| The new version included a lengthened fuselage and new, | |
| automatic leading edge slats, both of which had been tested on | |
| Me 210s and were found to dramatically improve handling. The | |
| slats had originally been featured on the earliest Me 210 | |
| models, but had been removed on production models due to poor | |
| handling. When entering a steep turn, the slats had a tendency | |
| to open due to the high angle of attack, analogous to the | |
| opening of the slats during the landing approach. (This problem | |
| was first observed on the Bf 109V14 and V15 prototypes for the | |
| Bf 109E), which added to the problems keeping the aircraft | |
| flying smoothly. However, when the problems with the general | |
| lateral instability were addressed, this was no longer a real | |
| problem. The wing panels of the earlier Me 210 had been designed | |
| with a planform geometry that placed the aerodynamic center in a | |
| rearwards direction in comparison to the earlier Bf 110, giving | |
| the outer sections of the wing planform beyond each engine | |
| nacelle a slightly greater, 12.6� leading edge sweepback angle | |
| than the inner panels' 6.0� leading edge sweep angle. This | |
| resulted in unreasonable handling characteristics in flight for | |
| the original Me 210 design. The new Me 410 outer wing panels had | |
| their planform geometry revised to bring the aerodynamic center | |
| further forwards in comparison to the Me 210, thus making the | |
| leading edge sweepback of the outer panels identical to the | |
| inner wing panels with both having identical 5.5� sweepback | |
| angles, which improved handling. | |
| Deliveries began in January 1943, two years late and | |
| continued until September 1944, by which point a total of 1,160 | |
| of all versions had been produced by Messerschmitt Augsburg and | |
| Dornier M�nchen. When it arrived, it was liked by its crews, | |
| even though its improved performance was not enough to protect | |
| it from the swarms of high performance Allied fighters they | |
| faced at this stage of the war. | |
| The Me 410 night bomber proved to be an elusive target for | |
| the RAF night fighters. The first unit to operate over the UK | |
| was V./KG 2, which lost its first Me 410 on the night of 13�14 | |
| July 1943, when it was shot down by a de Havilland Mosquito of | |
| No. 85 Squadron RAF. | |
| The Me 410 was also used as a bomber destroyer against the | |
| daylight bomber formations of the USAAF, upgraded with | |
| Umr�st-Baus�tze factory conversion kits, all bearing a /U | |
| suffix, for the design � these suffixes could vary in meaning | |
| between subtypes. As one example, the earlier Me 410 A-1/U1 | |
| designation signified a camera-fitting in the under-nose | |
| ordnance bay for reconnaissance use (as the A-3 was meant to do | |
| from its start), while the same /U1 designation or the later Me | |
| 410 B-2 signified a mount of a pair of the long barreled, 30mm | |
| calibre MK 103 cannon in the undernose ordnance bay. The /U2 | |
| suffix designated a fitment of two additional 20 mm MG 151/20 | |
| cannons in the under-nose ordnance bay instead � the A-1/U4 | |
| subtype fitted the massive, 540 kg (1,190 lb) weight Bordkanone | |
| series 50 mm (2 in) BK 5 cannon, loaded with 21 rounds in the | |
| same undernose ordnance bay in place of either the /U1's cameras | |
| or MK 103s, or the /U2's added pair of MG 151/20 autocannon. For | |
| breaking up the bomber formations, many Me 410s also had four | |
| underwing tubular launchers, two per wing panel, firing | |
| converted 21 cm (8 in) Werfer-Granate 21 infantry barrage | |
| rockets. Two Geschwader, Zerst�rergeschwader 26 and 76, were | |
| thus equipped with the Me 410 by late 1943. | |
| They were moderately successful against unescorted bombers | |
| through 1943, with a considerable number of kills against USAAF | |
| day bomber formations being achieved. However, the Me 410 was no | |
| match in a dogfight with the lighter Allied single-engine | |
| fighters such as the North American P-51 Mustang and Supermarine | |
| Spitfire. In early 1944, the Me 410 formations encountered | |
| swarms of Allied fighters protecting the bomber streams, usually | |
| flying far ahead of the combat box formations as an air | |
| supremacy move in clearing the skies of any Luftwaffe | |
| opposition, resulting in the Me 410's previous successes against | |
| escorted bombers now often being offset by their losses. An | |
| example of this � as part of a campaign started two days earlier | |
| by the USAAF � was on 6 March 1944 during an attack on Berlin by | |
| 750 8th AF heavy bombers, when 16 Me 410s were shot down in | |
| return for eight B-17s and four P-51s (which were destroyed by | |
| Bf 109 and Fw 190 fighters escorting the Me 410s). The following | |
| month on 11 April, with 8th AF raids hitting Sorau, Rostock and | |
| Oschersleben, II./ZG 26's Me 410s accounted for a rare clear | |
| success, initially bringing down 10 B-17s without any losses. | |
| During the course of the same raid, their second sortie was | |
| intercepted by P-51s that destroyed eight Me 410s and three Bf | |
| 110s. Sixteen crewmen were killed and three wounded. | |
| From mid-1944, despite being Hitler's favourite bomber | |
| destroyer, the Me 410 units were taken from Defence of the Reich | |
| duties and production was phased out in favour of heavily armed | |
| single-engine fighters as dedicated bomber destroyers, with the | |
| Me 410s remaining in service flying on reconnaissance duties | |
| only. Some Me 410s were used with Junkers Ju 188s during the | |
| Battle of Normandy, for high-altitude night reconnaissance. | |
| [img width=1024 | |
| height=604] | |
| https://i.postimg.cc/43B1K6MF/Screen-Hunter-359.png[/img] | |
| In game� | |
| I enjoy flying the Me-410 in game, but only in certain roles. | |
| Even with the rear gunnery the Hornisse is no match for Allied | |
| fighters of the period. As a bomber attack aircraft, however, it | |
| does quite well. So when flying the Me-410 my recommendation is | |
| to look for missions or campaigns that feature it in opposition | |
| to unescorted bomber formations. Even then though I personally | |
| would rather be in a Bf-109 or FW-190. | |
| #Post#: 11903-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: Plane of the week: the Messerschmitt Me 410 Hornisse | |
| By: cafs Date: July 20, 2020, 7:21 pm | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| Thanks for another great PoW, Von. You bring back to life | |
| another forgoten WW2 plane. Kudos for that. | |
| After finishing my M-113 APC 1960-75, US, ARVN and Australian | |
| variants on Vietnam book, I'll start the Me-210/410 Zestorer | |
| Units of WW2. | |
| 👍🏆 | |
| #Post#: 11905-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: Plane of the week: the Messerschmitt Me 410 Hornisse | |
| By: vonofterdingen Date: July 20, 2020, 11:23 pm | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| That would be great Cafs, when time allows. The 210 and 410 are | |
| a little under-represented in the game in my opinion. I believe | |
| that they were also used by other axis air forces. | |
| #Post#: 11907-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: Plane of the week: the Messerschmitt Me 410 Hornisse | |
| By: larsresult Date: July 21, 2020, 5:50 am | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| Good write up Von.The Hungarians were successful with their | |
| Me210Ca-1 dive bomber variant, although not much has been | |
| written about them in English. Despite this, I don't believe | |
| they received any Me410s. The Me410 in Luftwaffe service had | |
| little chance to show its potency as a bomber destroyer as it | |
| arrived in 1943 only a few months before the long range Allied | |
| fighters appeared such as the P51 Mustang. As Von says if you | |
| catch an unescorted bomber unit you can create mayhem. | |
| On 2nd July 1944 20 Me410s of I/ZG76 attacked a lone combat wing | |
| of 15th USAAF B-17s over Budapest. They claimed 13 B-17s for the | |
| loss of one Me410. In fact 4 B-17s were lost but the rest were | |
| badly damaged. | |
| Osprey recently released a well written book Me210/410 Zerstorer | |
| Units by Robert Forsyth which covers Luftwaffe and Hungarian | |
| usage. | |
| #Post#: 11909-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: Plane of the week: the Messerschmitt Me 410 Hornisse | |
| By: JG51_Ruski Date: July 21, 2020, 11:26 am | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| Good post Von thank you!! | |
| #Post#: 11911-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: Plane of the week: the Messerschmitt Me 410 Hornisse | |
| By: ben_wh Date: July 21, 2020, 7:53 pm | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| Thanks again for a good post, von. | |
| As you pointed out, twin-engine fighters had a mix record in | |
| WW2. The twin engine design allowed the designers to pack a | |
| lot of firepower along the center line of the plane, which can | |
| be a strong positive factor for an interceptor. However the | |
| twin engine fighters were often less agile than the contemporary | |
| single engine ones, which caused problems in a 1:1, few:few | |
| situation. | |
| P-38s in the Pacific was an exception, but this was partly due | |
| to the sizable speed advantage of the P-38 over the Zeroes or | |
| Ki-43s (not to mention G4Ms or Ki-21s). | |
| Cheers, | |
| #Post#: 11912-------------------------------------------------- | |
| Re: Plane of the week: the Messerschmitt Me 410 Hornisse | |
| By: DHumphrey Date: July 22, 2020, 12:34 pm | |
| --------------------------------------------------------- | |
| Good post Von, very good article, learned something today ... | |
| today is a good day. :) | |
| ***************************************************** |