Me 262B performance

[Nightbomber]

Does anybody of you chaps know a source/literature/scores of Me 262B nightfighter performance at night fights?
What I am interested in is: it's speed on approach to a target, flying capabilities (how the Neptun radar affected it), pilot's records, tactics, armament effectiveness and everything that could help to recreate such combat in a tabletop game like WoG.

I am also interested in comparison of weaponry effectiveness to other nightfighters, like 110G-2/4, Ju 88C, He 219 - in abstract points.
Let's start with a relation to: Bf 110 C-4 simple nightfighter version: forward firing: 8 points.

[Naharaht]

Amazon sell a Kindle edition of 'The Me262 Stormbird: From the Pilots Who Flew, Fought, and Survived It'. I have not read it and it is expensive.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Me-262-Stormbird-Survived-ebook/dp/B0085WLDY2

[richard m schwab]

Andy

From what i have read the the 262B was slower than the day fighters due to the radars. But still faster than a Mosquito. All that speed is great if you are looking for other night fighters! The cruising speed of a Lancaster 200 mph, compared to 559 top speed of a 262 that is overkill! Not that many were produced. Standard night fighter tactics seemed to work just as well. I found this on the 110.

Rich

[Marechallannes]

Andy

From what i have read the the 262B was slower than the day fighters due to the radars. But still faster than a Mosquito...

Something is wrong in this sentence. :confused:


I am also interested in comparison of weaponry effectiveness to other nightfighters, like 110G-2/4, Ju 88C, He 219 - in abstract points.
Let's start with a relation to: Bf 110 C-4 simple nightfighter version: forward firing: 8 points.


I have no reliable information about the Me 262 night fighter version.


In General it'S hard to make a difference between the armaments of the nightfighters.


Of course the forward firing capacity of a Bf.110G4 (4x 7,92-mm-MG 17 und 2x 20-mm-MG 151/20) was much bigger then it's "Schräge Musik" with only upward firing 2× 20-mm-MG 151/20 but it was with a correct aproach much more deadlier.


In my eyes it makes no difference if a Bf.110, a Ju88 or a Me262 hits a heavy bomber with a mixture of explosive, incediary and armor piercing ammo. Especially if the bomber is loaded.

[milcoll73]

i thinks its more a time on target kind of thing. at 450+ miles per hour in the dark that doesnt leave much time to line up a shot even with radar.

[Nightbomber]

Thanks for your insights so far, friends. I do appreciate them very much. Let's continue the brainstorming.

[Nightbomber]

Let me ask you of your opinion, chaps:
What would be the forward fire rating in general gaming terms when you should compare nightfighters listed below to an early NF like Bf 110C - rating 8.
1) Ju 88C: ?
2) Bf 110G4: ?
3) He 219: ?
4) Me 282B: ?
And what would be the Schraege Music rating?

[Jager]

Let me ask you of your opinion, chaps:
What would be the forward fire rating in general gaming terms when you should compare nightfighters listed below to an early NF like Bf 110C - rating 8.
1) Ju 88C: ?
2) Bf 110G4: ?
3) He 219: ?
4) Me 282B: ?
And what would be the Schraege Music rating?

A question; does the abstracts take in account range between firer and target? ;)
Karl

[Nightbomber]

A question; does the abstracts take in account range between firer and target? ;)
Karl

;)
Let's say it's the (very) close range rating, Karl.

[Marechallannes]

i thinks its more a time on target kind of thing. at 450+ miles per hour in the dark that doesnt leave much time to line up a shot even with radar.

German Nightfighters were guided to the bombers by radar ground stations.

The moment they get in range (some kilometers) they could use their own radar system to detect bombers.

A Me262 didn't need to fly full speed the whole time!

But the aproach to the bomber stream or the escape from an Allied nightfighther is much easier because of the top speed.

[Marechallannes]

Ok, I found something.

The first Me262 A-1a was used for "Wilde Sau" operations in December 1944. One seater versions without radar on board.

In March 1945 the two seater version Me262 B-1a/U1 with a FuG218 radar on board reached some units. Top speed was 795 km/h in 6000m altitude versus 870 km/h in 6000m altitude of the original version. (above)


Due to the general lack of fuel and the number of used Me262 versions in WW II nightfights, the result wasn't that bad.

Their main targets were Mosquito nightfighterst that caused a lot of trouble to the "standart" nightfighters of the Luftwaffe.

(infos from: NACHTJÄGER UND BOMBER Deutsche Luftwaffe 1935 - 1945 by Herbert Ringstetter)

[Marechallannes]

Let me ask you of your opinion, chaps:
What would be the forward fire rating in general gaming terms when you should compare nightfighters listed below to an early NF like Bf 110C - rating 8.
1) Ju 88C: ?
2) Bf 110G4: ?
3) He 219: ?
4) Me 282B: ?
And what would be the Schraege Music rating?

I can't answer this.

The firing distance between nightfighters and bombers were much below 200 meters. Maybe you use Karl's WW II armament statistics to set them in relation to each other.

If you set the Schräge Musik in normal relation to the frontal armament for gaming, it's no option for shooting down a bomber.

[Nightbomber]

I can't answer this.


If you set the Schräge Musik in normal relation to the frontal armament for gaming, it's no option for shooting down a bomber.

:)
1. Yes, you definitely can!
2. No, it should be used right from below. Then it could be obviously possible! I have a smart secret idea.

[Jager]

The bigger problem for the Me.262 was it's slow acceleration. Also, did the jets show a "flame" at night?

Here's my take on the weapons values:
1) Ju-88C-6: 9
1a) Ju-88G-7 (NOV-44): 18 SM(2 x 20mm MG151): 8
2) Bf 110G4: 13 SM (2 x 20mm MG FF): 3 or (late) (2 x 20mm MG151): 8
3) He 219: 23; SM (2 x 30mm Mk108): 7
4) Me 282B: 13
And if you want to add the Do.335A-1a what if: 9
Note that the 30mm MK-108 was actually an inferior weapon than the 20mm MG151, due to a slow RoF, low MV, and general inaccuracy. The 30mm Mk-103 was a rather better weapon, but fortunately for the Allies, it came too late.
Karl

[Nightbomber]

Again - many thanks, Karl. We can count on you.
Any other thoughts?

[Jager]

The stats I found for the Me-262B-1 had it 20MPH slower than the A; not a big deal. The radar might slow it another 5-10MPH. It should still catch a Mosquito PF, which was it's real prey; the bombers could be handled but the regular Jaegers and Wild Sau just fine.
Otherwise, not really. I find the concept of NF in WoG to be interesting, but in a practical sense, you need to have a moderator to work it right. There may be a double-blind system you can pirate...er import, from some other game (I have one or two in the house somewhere), but in truth, the bombers' are going straight, dumb and unhappy until they get shot at, or sight the Jaeger. The real game is blindman's bluff with another nightfighter.
Hmm.....He-219 Uhu vs. P-61 Black Widows :slysmile:

Karl

[Nightbomber]

My blasphemous research is aimed at another game, not WoG, which I find not suitable for NF because of the high plane's base "speed" comparing to NF's speed.
Catching up with a Lanc with Bf 110 from behind is fruitless when you start one ruler plus 2 cm behind a bomber. On the other hand when a bomber makes an evasive maneuver and a NF turns the other way around is usually the end of fun, IMHO. Getting another opportunity for an approach and salvo is kind of miracle.

[Marechallannes]

The bigger problem for the Me.262 was it's slow acceleration. Also, did the jets show a "flame" at night?...

I don't think so, Karl.

As far as I know, the Schwalbe had no afterburner like a F14 Tomcat. ;)

[Jager]

My blasphemous research is aimed at another game, not WoG, which I find not suitable for NF because of the high plane's base "speed" comparing to NF's speed.
Catching up with a Lanc with Bf 110 from behind is fruitless when you start one ruler plus 2 cm behind a bomber. On the other hand when a bomber makes an evasive maneuver and a NF turns the other way around is usually the end of fun, IMHO. Getting another opportunity for an approach and salvo is kind of miracle.

Well, yes I understand that. Nevertheless, my statement stands, as you need a moderator or a double-blind mechanic in the gaming engine :fixit:;)
As for the speed problem, have you been flying the Lancs slow only? They are carrying a full load of child-killers, after all. :erk:
Karl

I don't think so, Karl.

As far as I know, the Schwalbe had no afterburner like a F14 Tomcat. ;)

True, but they had to put exhaust dampeners on piston engine planes for night work, so.....
Karl

[csadn]

Otherwise, not really. I find the concept of NF in WoG to be interesting, but in a practical sense, you need to have a moderator to work it right. There may be a double-blind system you can pirate...er import, from some other game (I have one or two in the house somewhere),

Not true -- I've had reasonable success with my system (each unit has a "dummy" to go with it, which maneuvers using the same deck as the actual unit; when one gets within short range, one turns the card over to see if it's the unit or the dummy; if it's the dummy, the dummy is then placed atop the actual unit, and begins maneuvering away from that one; if it's the actual unit, the next turn, if the firer is still within short-range and the actual unit is in arc, the firer may take a shot).

[Nightbomber]

I find the concept of NF in WoG to be interesting, but in a practical sense, you need to have a moderator to work it right. There may be a double-blind system you can pirate...er import, from some other game (I have one or two in the house somewhere), but in truth, the bombers' are going straight, dumb and unhappy until they get shot at, or sight the Jaeger. The real game is blindman's bluff with another nightfighter.
Hmm.....He-219 Uhu vs. P-61 Black Widows :slysmile:

Karl

There is an Umpire player in Nightfighter boardgame by GMT and a working solo version developed by Phil Sabin, a respectful author and historian.
In the game I work on nowadays there is no need of a party like umpire or a second (Bomber) player. There even should not be one. Player (-s) play only as NF chasing bombers. The bombers are ruled by really working rules included in Angels 20/Bandits High system which is highly and demanding-ly soloable in it's core rules. I just add some random maneuvers by cards. And the bombers can not escape the fighters, like this is in WoG, while sometimes the fighters may pass the bombers because of their higher speed.
The good thing is players may focus on chasing bombers and the bombers' damage is simplified; if anyone knows the A20 system, there is no need for further explanation how the damage is run. Enough to say: a bomber may escape the fray undamaged at all if the crew has the Lady Luck on it's side that particular night.

[richard m schwab]

Andy

I have always liked the KISS rule for gaming, Keep It Simple Stupid! My idea was to have the table set up with radar sites,AA sites, bombing targets and enemy airfields. The night fighters are up and ready. The bombers are represented by numbered base sized cards, the cards may or may not be bombers.The attacking player moves their bombers against to chosen targets. I think a ten bombers to one night fighter would work, the ratio of real to dummy bombers should be 1 in 3. The night fighters may be directed to the bombers at a distance of four firing sticks from a site. Night fighters own radar picks up bombers at long range. AA batteries do not unmask bombers, AA damage is taken by bomber. Night fighter must be at close range and have a firing arch to unmask the bomber. Dummy bombers are removed. Bombers fire at short range .

Rich

[Marechallannes]

Maybe a sytem to play a game, but not the way German radar worked during WWII.

Frya and Würzburg Radars led the nightfighters to the Bombers. From 1943 on, the nightfighters switched then to own radar Systems on board.


Before 1943 they had to look out for enemy bombers and the ground radar tried to led them as close as possible to one enemy bomber.

Remember - a visible contact was at the earliest possible below 200 meters distance.


So there was no phantom or dummy huntig.

They spot it - or they spot them not.

[Nightbomber]

Maybe a sytem to play a game, but not the way German radar worked during WWII.

Frya and Würzburg Radars led the nightfighters to the Bombers. From 1943 on, the nightfighters switched then to own radar Systems on board.


Before 1943 they had to look out for enemy bombers and the ground radar tried to led them as close as possible to one enemy bomber.

Remember - a visible contact was at the earliest possible below 200 meters distance.


So there was no phantom or dummy huntig.

They spot it - or they spot them not.

And these factors I have in mind. Bf 110C and Ju 88C hunt without onboard radars, while 110G-4 and 262B with mounted Neptun or similar equipment.

[Nightbomber]

Andy

I have always liked the KISS rule for gaming, Keep It Simple Stupid! My idea was to have the table set up with radar sites,AA sites, bombing targets and enemy airfields. The night fighters are up and ready. The bombers are represented by numbered base sized cards, the cards may or may not be bombers.The attacking player moves their bombers against to chosen targets. I think a ten bombers to one night fighter would work, the ratio of real to dummy bombers should be 1 in 3. The night fighters may be directed to the bombers at a distance of four firing sticks from a site. Night fighters own radar picks up bombers at long range. AA batteries do not unmask bombers, AA damage is taken by bomber. Night fighter must be at close range and have a firing arch to unmask the bomber. Dummy bombers are removed. Bombers fire at short range .

Rich

Rich,

you read my mind.
KISS is the right approach. Most of your ideas are incorporated in very, very similar way! One thing more: My "nights" are or Moolight or Darkness and I use illumination depended on the size of the target. Then 1 NF = 3 possible targets, 2 NF = 5 possible targets. When there is Darkness, target must be illuminated to be identified. There is no specific target, bombers just have to fly a defined distance assuming they release their eggs on the way and then scatter on the way home, while NF return to hunting positions.
There is no AA fire, since when NF start their job the flak must be turned off.
The fun is to hunt, not to manage the targets on the ground or the bombing crew. The bombers always have a defensive fire on all around, but it's effectivenes is very limited comparing to NF salvo.
Unfortunately if WoG Lancs are concerned, their defense fire may be just lethal and it is neither historical nor gaming accurate (+A counter option continuous fire:erk:).

[richard m schwab]

Andy

From what i have seen, the first indication a bomber had of an approaching night fighter was his tracers and the bullets striking home.:eek: Any bomber against any night fighter! How would you like to encounter a Beaufighter at pistol range!:thumbsup:



Rich

[Jager]

Andy

From what i have seen, the first indication a bomber had of an approaching night fighter was his tracers and the bullets striking home.:eek: Any bomber against any night fighter! How would you like to encounter a Beaufighter at pistol range!:thumbsup:



Rich
Sometimes yes, others, maybe.
That was the perfect interception scenario. In real life, as the Jaegers are being guided in by those on the ground looking at 1st gen radar scopes, and straining to catch a glimpse of a backlite bomber, it was all too easy for the hunter to be spotted first. And like as not have incoming fire point out the "hunted" :erk:
It's entirely possible that some sort of spotting rules are needed.
Karl

[richard m schwab]

Karl

It is always better to be the hunter in that situation.


Rich

[csadn]

And if the British figured out which frequency the German ground-controllers were on, the night-fighters were *screwed* -- can you say "misinformation"?

There is a tale told of a British "jammer" who spoke fluent German; he got onto the night-fighter control frequencies, and began not only contradicting the actual German controllers, but when a German would claim he was authentic, the Brit would then claim "it is the Britisher speaking". The pandemonium resulting left one German controller cursing a blue streak over a hot mike -- without missing a beat, the Britisher said "The Britisher is now swearing"; to which the exasperated German replied, "It is not the Britisher swearing -- it's *me*!"

[Marechallannes]

Measures & countermeasures.

Didn't affect the nightfights notably but was a steady offence. :mad:

[Jager]

Measures & countermeasures.

Didn't affect the nightfights notably but was a steady offence. :mad:

Indeed; one section from Dunnagan's "Dirty Little Secrets of WW2" listed the various measures, counter-measures and counter-counter-measures that came up in the night war over Germany.
It's an impressive list, and included such things as devices to enhance the sound of a bombers engines (to foil acoustic detection), and detection of the enemy aerial radars to tell when a NF was approaching, or if a bombers rear radar might be seeing you.
Karl

[milcoll73]

Indeed; one section from Dunnagan's "Dirty Little Secrets of WW2" listed the various measures, counter-measures and counter-counter-measures that came up in the night war over Germany.
It's an impressive list, and included such things as devices to enhance the sound of a bombers engines (to foil acoustic detection), and detection of the enemy aerial radars to tell when a NF was approaching, or if a bombers rear radar might be seeing you.
Karl

the wizard war of the black boxes.......