PDA

View Full Version : Just a Thought...



Treetop64
03-07-2006, 05:37 PM
...on what it would be like to even attempt to fly combat missions - successfully - in the Me210! Or, even to properly aim and hit anything with those ill-concieved, rear firing "gunpods".

And what about that forward weapons bay! I read (and also watched, from my endless stack of WWII DVD documentaries) that if those were actually opened in flight, that it would disturb the airflow so much that the aircraft could hardly remain airborne.

Usually, the deployment of flaps is supposed to increase the the lift and stability of an aircraft at low speed. Those on the 210 apparently did the complete opposite!

It's miraculous that the Me210 actually entered production!

It would be fun to have in in FB-AEP-PF! I wonder what kind of discussions regarding FMs and stall characteristics it would generate in the forums...

MLudner
03-07-2006, 05:43 PM
YOU had a thought?!? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif Oh, God, we're doomed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif


(Kidding http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif)


A flyable Me-210 would be fun, but a flyable Me-410 would be fun and interesting.

Xiolablu3
03-07-2006, 05:49 PM
I have always wondered about those rear facing Mg151's.

I cant see how they work, they dont seem to have any sideways movement, so are they aimed by pointing the back of the plane at the enemy?

I know they are aimed thru a periscope.

Does anyone know how effective they were or anything about them please?

MLudner
03-07-2006, 05:51 PM
They could point outward. They were remotely operated and not very effective.

Treetop64
03-07-2006, 05:57 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
I have always wondered about those rear facing Mg151's.

I cant see how they work, they dont seem to have any sideways movement, so are they aimed by pointing the back of the plane at the enemy?

I know they are aimed thru a periscope.

Does anyone know how effective they were or anything about them please?

They did have the ability to spread out in a "V" pattern, but that limited the firepower to one gun per side in that situation.

As it turned out, that whole gun setup had a very high level of mechanical complexity, and proved unreliable - not so much the guns themselves, but the mechanisms used to manipulate them. In practise, they were generally ignored by their crews.

It just seems that sort of arrangement would be impossible to aim. Another example of what seemed like a good idea on paper turning out badly in reality.

Edit: MLudner beat me to the punch. Sorry!

berg417448
03-07-2006, 06:02 PM
€œProtection against rear attacks was provided by a pair of remotely controlled barbettes, one mounted on each side of the rear fuselage just aft of the wing. Each barbette contained one 13-mm MG-131 machine gun. These guns were operated remotely by the rear-facing gunner, and each gun could be directed independently of the other. Each gun could be elevated or depressed through a range of 70 degrees. Each weapon could be traversed through 40 degrees in azimuth, and the barbettes were attached to a drum which traversed the fuselage aft of the cockpit. The drum was rotated via a 1.5 hp electric motor by servo units controlled by a pistol grip. The guns could be fired aft in unison, a contact-breaker device stopping the firing whenever the guns pointed at any part of the aircraft structure.€

http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/me210.html (http://www.csd.uwo.ca/%7Epettypi/elevon/baugher_other/me210.html)

ImpStarDuece
03-07-2006, 06:10 PM
One of my favourite quotes about the Me-210 was from the test pilot Hermann Wurster who said that it had "the worst combination of characteristics of any aircraft I had to fly" after the first test flight in September 1939.

In his report Wurster noted that the pitch and yaw handling were so unstable as to not only be unacceptable but also downright dangerous. The aircraft suffered from extreeme instability, and was prone to stalls and spins in gentle aerobatic manouvers.

In March, 1942, after struggling with the A-0 and A-1 versions for almost 2 1/2 years, Merrerschmitt fitted new slatted outer wings to a 210A-0, lengthened and deepened the fuselage, altered the seating of the tail plane and fitted a further enlarged rear fin. These changes solved the vast majority of handling problems in the 210 although it was never a particularly aerobatic plane.

The final solution was to switch to DB 603 engines in new mountings and to go to a straight wing instead of the 210s 5 degree backwards sweep. The 'new' aircraft was christened the Me 410 and was a much more effective combat performer than its older sibling. With a maximum internal bomb load of 2000 kg (4,400 lbs) and a top speed of 625 kph (388 mph) empty and 595 kph (370 mph) loaded it gave the Mossie some fair competition in the 'schnellbomber' category.

Xiolablu3
03-07-2006, 06:12 PM
Thanks for the info guys!

I guess they were there more to scare off attackers than actually hit them. It would certainly surprise any attacking aircraft that thought he was safe below the position of the BF110 rear gunners firing arc.

From the front even one shell would do a LOT of damage to the attacking fighter.

Still I doubt they ever hit anything, but caused the attacker to think a little rather than just attacking a sitting duck. This may have been enough to save the aircraft.

wayno7777
03-07-2006, 08:06 PM
Originally posted by MLudner:
YOU had a thought?!? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif Oh, God, we're doomed. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif


(Kidding http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif)


A flyable Me-210 would be fun, but a flyable Me-410 would be fun and interesting.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v224/wayno77/Stuff/bump.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif