Bf-110 Zerstorer. Battle of Kursk (1943)

Combat footage. Die Deutsche Wochenschau.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• ww2
• wwII
• me
• me-110
• bf
• 110
• messerschmitt
• zerstorer
• wochenschau
• newsreel
• footage
• bf-110
• heinkel
• he219
• uhu
• luftwaffe
• ju88

[trent8002003]

The Zerstorer was quite useless as a dogfighter. It was effective only agst slow movers like other 2 engine bombers or ground attackers like the IL 2.

[trent8002003]

That's where its rationale is flawed. A fighter is a fighter. Inevitably, you're thrown in agst other fighters regardless of whether you're "heavy' or not. Once you're up agst other fighters, you have to dogfight. No other way out. The "heavy" fighter concept makes sense only in nightfighting, which is where the zerstorers excel.

[CaptHawkeye]

@trent8002003 You're getting worked up over nothing. Chillax.

Yes, 110s were sent in "Because they were there" the Nazis built over 3000 of them for christ sake. What are they going to do leave them for Crete? Goring had no idea the 110 would get slaughtered over Britain that's why it participated in the first place!

Oh dear, the LW encountered the Hurri and Spit over Dunkirk. Yes i'm sure a single battle that they WON would do a lot to make them really fear those planes.

[trent8002003]

@CaptHawkeye The Spits were used to cover the Dunkirk retreat and Hurricanes were used extensively in France and other parts of Europe before losses caused Dowding to decide to pull them back to conserve strength for the Battle of Britain. In any case, the Luftwaffe were not ignorant of the presence of either type. The Zerstorers were sent in NOT because there were there. You mean Goring knew they'd be slaughtered and still sent them in just because there were scores of them. Please.

[CaptHawkeye]

@trent8002003 Zerstorers were used in the Battle of Britain mainly because the Luftwaffe had so many of them. There were more 110s than 109s and they couldn't just *not* use them.

The Spitfire never served in France and the Hurricane was only deployed in very tiny numbers. The RAF basically saw no action during the invasion of France. Fighter command had precisely zero interest in risking Airgroups for a lost cause and besides that, the RAF was low on recruits until September.

[trent8002003]

@CaptHawkeye Then why sent them to sure defeat agst Hurricanes and Spitfires. If the Me110 was meant only to deal with big planes, then they shouldn't never have been deployed over Britain agst the obviously agile and advanced Hurris and Spits esp after these were already proven wicked dogfighters over France and Norway. The fact that they were used in the battle of Britain showed that the Luftwaffe had been under the illusion that the Zerstorers could hold their own agst single seaters.

[CaptHawkeye]

@trent8002003 It wasn't really intended to dogfight anyway. The 110 was a product of a time when biplanes were still commonplace and it was expected it would use its speed to jump an enemy and then run away after it had made its attack. Fighting the RAF was to be honest, beyond what the design was intended for or capable of. It's just that the Luftwaffe had built a ton of them during the 30s so what else were they going to do with them?

[notaire2]

Die Luftangriffe waren sehr effektiv gegen sowjetischen Panzer.

[tranmere789]

In fact total Soviet tank losses in operation Citadel amounted to 1 614 tanks totally destroyed, the vast majority to German tanks and assault guns. Further detailed research has shown air power only accounted for 2-5% of Soviet tanks destroyed in the battle of Kursk. This equates to at most around 80 tanks. Again, even if this is a low estimate, where are the hundreds of tanks destroyed by German ground attack aircraft?

[functio1]

It's not strictly true that the Bf110 was 'useless' as a dogfighter. If it had a tactical advantage, it could prove effective. For example, pilots such as Theo Weissenberger and others from JG5 had some success with it as a day fighter.

[unkowndrunkenfrankli]

thats pure propaganda for you , my friend