I think everyone will agree on the fact Germany was far from being in position to introduce and mass produce a new plane at the time, especialy a brand new design : impossible to train pilots, and anyway, no more gas to fly anything and impossible to convert a factory to build it.

Everyone will also agree the Do-335 was not operational and only an handfull ever flew.

We also know that, with the end of WWII, the fighter planes entered the jet era, and therefore, onre can't expect such a design to have a long future.

And everyone will agree that Germany was not rational with so many "ultimate planes" projects, some of them totaly crazy, sucking time and supplies when these were so scarse, instead of putting everything they had into already proven but competitive designs.

It's just that :

- at the time it flew, not 4000 km away from the battlefield like Chome says, the operational tests were successfull so far (although they were not completed), this plane had very good performances without major teething problems or conception flaw, so it is very allowed to think that, not taking into account the context, it technicaly could have entered production and been operational, if the Germans had what it takes to do it, which was far from being the case at the time.

- at the time it was under operational tests, it flew faster than any allied pistion fighter in the sky of Germany.

So don't stress, I don't think anybody says Germans were smarter than Americans because of the DO-335, or that the Do-335 was close to enter mass production and to change the course of the aerial warfare.

__________________
http://www.costnet.com/images/skyhawk-pic.jpg

Some I think have missed the original point, which was not tooling up at the end of the war for the DO 355, rather it was delayed 2 years. The better approach would have been to work on it earlier. & unlike the P-47 J or XP-72, it had been around for a long time & was as far as we can tell pretty well combat ready. The p-47 M had bugs.

& it is not outside the realm of possibility that it flew in the combat zone. Professor Tank did inadvertantly in his 152. It is also then possible Clostermann chased one. He chased "something" that outran his Tempest. How many options does that leave? A 152, or perhaps some other advanced longnose, V-18 maybe. But again with his experience, one would think identifying a plane with a prop on the back, or one without one would be within his ability level. Very doubtful it was a jet.

& I find it unfortunate that some feel he was a incompetent boob & 100 % unreliable for writing some errors in his book. Something he has in common with gads of other aviation writers. Townsend Bickers, Arch Whitehouse & so on. I could go on, but the point is made. & again, an error is not the same as an outright lie. I've not met Clostermann, but he was at least respectful of the 109 in his book, & again had the birdseye view none of us had.

Along this line of reasoning, could we (it's Christmas season, remember?) Wish for the MiG-15 in 1943 and the T-34 in 1941?

Oops! The T-34 *was* available in 1941

__________________

maybe go back to the reasoning of elimination of the DO 335 idea altogether and get rid of the Dora idea and pursue the Ta 152H as T.A.G suggests instead of wasting precious man hours and hardly available funds on a pusher principle

jets were in the fortee for the future, the Dora would of meant nothing in bomber elimination with it's limited arms

Mig 15 in 43? that's dumb. The Dora could well have been available in 43 if the DB 603 engines had not been used up by the UHU & ME 410. Same old personal jibes from Za. Typical.

Dora in large numbers would have indeed been better than the twin engined planes that neither performed as well as the Dora, nor could be built in nearly as large of numbers because of extra material required to make these twin engined planes. Switching Antons to Doras much easier to facilitate.

Jets may have been the future, but wars are fought in the present. The reliability and maintenance needs of the jets were a major problem.

Piston aircraft was still a major factor twenty years later. Maybe not as fighter aircraft, but in many other areas.

__________________
Lord, let me be the person my dog thinks I am.

Jets also needed long concrete runways. The Luftwaffe had a winner in the 355 & didn't pursue it starting in 42 when they could have done.

& Hackl & Schroer had no prob with the heavies with the Dora. Schroer could knock down B-17's with a G-6 in the med, which had less armament than the Dora.

No doubt the 30 mm cannon was the better weapon though.


As for pursuing the 152 instead of the Dora & 355, it looks good on paper, but doubtful in the timespace available. 152 was not really ready til 45 no? Would this have changed had 152 been given go ahead earlier?

neither of the pilots you mentioned scored US heavy bombers in their tally with the Fw 190D-9

remember Schroer was on the Ost front with the Dora against Soviet a/c

this is getting off topic, last point Schroers G-6 was a Kanonboot which had two underwing 2cm mounts making one more cannon than the Dora 9 equipment

You youself mentioned Hackl downing a heavy on his 1st mission in the Dora.

Am familiar with Schroers late war G-6. This however was not the machine he used in 43 in med against B-17's as far as I know. His Dora kills look to be all Russian, so correct on that point.

here are his 43 B-17 kills. Some in May 43.

70. 11.5.1943 12:14 B-17 Stab II./JG 27 S Marsala
71. 18.5.1943 13:45 B-17 Stab II./JG 27 NW Trapani
72. 19.5.1943 13:42 P-38 Stab II./JG 27 W Maréttimo
73. 21.5.1943 11:21 B-17 Stab II./JG 27 S Marsala
74. 21.5.1943 11:28 Spitfire Stab II./JG 27 NW Pantelleria
75. 25.5.1943 11:17 B-17 Stab II./JG 27 NW Maréttimo
76. 31.5.1943 14:40 B-17 Stab II./JG 27 WNW Trapani
77. 7.6.1943 6:44 P-40 Stab II./JG 27 5km N Pantelleria
78. 10.6.1943 9:26 P-46 Stab II./JG 27 3km SSW Granitola Torreta
79. 10.6.1943 9:27 P-46 Stab II./JG 27 4km SSW Granitola Torreta
80. 10.6.1943 - Boston Stab II./JG 27
81. 15.6.1943 8:23 B-17 Stab II./JG 27 2km W Favignana
82. 11.7.1943 13:20 B-24 Stab II./JG 27 25km S Crotone
83. 16.7.1943 13:00 B-24 Stab II./JG 27 5km SW Santeramo in Colle
84. 16.7.1943 13:15 B-24 Stab II./JG 27 10km WSW Bari
85. 23.7.1943 14:10 B-17 Stab II./JG 27 20km N Stromboli
86. 6.9.1943 11:08 B-17 Stab II./JG 27 E Geislingen
87. 6.9.1943 - B-17 HSS Stab II./JG 27 S Echterdingen
88. 6.9.1943 - B-17 HSS Stab II./JG 27 SE Stuttgart
89. 14.10.1943 - B-17 Stab II./JG 27 Alzey
90. 29.11.1943 14:48 B-17 Stab II./JG 27 SSW Bremen
91. 19.12.1943 12:38 B-17 Stab II./JG 27 Krimml

wrong I never said that Hackl scored in any Dora 9 Fw 190, he scored many in his Fw 190A-8 and used the Bf 109G-6 with out underwing cannon to engage Us fighter escorts. He had several a/c and it was his perogative to use what seemed fit to him up in the air. courtesty of volume 2 JG 1 and 11 Dr. Jochen Prien

Yah you did. Said he got a Stang & moquito & a B-24. & gun pod U-4 & R-6 were not around mid 43 in the Mediteranean when Schroer got the 13 B-17's shown above as far as I know.

This I got from you..

He recieved the Dora late 44 & on his 1st mission in this kite he scored a Mustang, a Lancaster, & a Mosquito in 4 minutes!

actually in 5 minutes in the II./JG 26 war diary that he led on 23 December 44

note : NO US BOMBERS, and that is my point

minor point by photo's, G-6 Trops with Gondelwaffen: datum, 7 Juni 1943. Existing G-4 trops also were equipped. page 284 photo evidence of leader Emil Claude sitting on the fuselage in front of the cockpit on his Kanon bird - March 1943 and page 288, showing black 11.

Prien, Rodeike u Stemmer, II./Jagdgeeschwader 27

Oh I see, US bombers leagues better than 4 engined British ones. & some G-4's had pods, great did Schroers June 43 109 have them? Were they commonplace in the Med in June 43?

Back on topic, having Doras & 355's instead of 410's & Uhu's would have been better strategic path. Those planes need 2-3 crew, all of whom have to be trained. So without an extended dissertation on how many 355's & Doras could've been made vs 410's & Uhu's, one can easily see more would have been built & more would have flown as only one pilot required to fly either, ( 2 seat excepted ). I would imagine both of these could outdive & outmanoeuver the twin engined planes, which means they could hit & git much better, & survive to have a go another day.

http://www.ipmsstockholm.org/magazin...pahr_me410.htm

The 410's operational record, beginning in 1943, was moderately successful until allied fighters started escorting the bombers and made their own fighter sweeps. Even the improved 410 was no match in dogfight for a modern single-engine fighter such as the P-51 or the Spitfire. Beginning in the summer of 1944, the destroyers were taken from front line duties and production was phased out in favor of single-engine fighters, with the 410's remaining in service flying reconnaissance duties only.

Did we catch that Za? phased out summer 44, which oddly enough was about same time Dora given green light.

What I find typical is your constant twiddling with reality, your "wish it weren't so", your "if the Germans did as I think they should have done, then they would have won the war". Now that *is* dumb.

[img]tongue.gif[/img]

__________________

hmmmmmmmm why is the Dora even being mentioned as that was not the original intent of the topic.

you say the Uhu should not have been introduced and replaced by what ? the Do 335 night fighter which would of been a joke, also it would of been a two seater so that defeats the purpose of your statement.

thought it was pretty clear in my remarks that G-4's and G-6's had gun pods in the MTO. JG 27, 53 and 77 all used them in their service there. Of course Schroer had underwing arms on his 109

"What I find typical is your constant twiddling with reality, your "wish it weren't so", your "if the Germans did as I think they should have done, then they would have won the war". Now that *is* dumb."


Hmm, What ifer's number perhaps in the millions around the globe & you Za think they're all dumb, now that is dumb. 'What if' is all about twiddling about with strategy. If that doesn't interest you, what on earth are doing here??!!

Um no didn't say 355 would replace uhu as night fighter. A joke of a conclusion that again I didn't put forward. What I said was, the availability of the 603 engine would be facilitated by not building uhu & 410. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Dora is being mentioned as an addendum to D0 355 being introduced as an overall stategy. as opposed to building 2 engined planes mentioned above.

& 90% of the photos of 109's in med circa 43 do not show gunpods. It is possible that Schroer had em in June 43, but unlikely. You haven't provided any solid evidence that he did.

forget it Steve, your repeated attempts to suck me of info has finally come to it's end.

If you can't get some decent references especially Prien's histories to find the info you are looking for yourself then you are beyond help

I see, can't prove it, cut & run. Plenty of G-2 trops flying in med 'mid' 43, which had no pods.

This Bf 109 G-2 trop (Stkz. GJ+QR), "yellow 10", Werk-Nr. 14800 was flown by Fw. Hans Döbrich after the loss of his first G-2. The eight holes for the location of the sand filter can be seen.
Most likely this aircraft had a standard Mediterranean camouflage scheme applied by the factory and it was repainted by JG 5. Part of the sandy colour can still be seen . The picture was taken at Salmijärvi in April/May 1943.

Yah some gunpod types appeared mid 43 & flew along with the G-2's without pods. But G-6 with pods were not the main type produced.

P.S. don't give me any nonsense about sucking you into anything. You made the snarky comment above, & as well started the vein were in about armament. You provided the wood, gas & the match. take resonsibility for your emanations rather than attempt to push it off on someone else.

http://hsfeatures.com/features04/bf109g2trop32ir_1.htm

who cares about G-2's

I was mentioning G-4's and G-6's, the proof is in the publications, go out and purchase them .........and quit depending on internet source(s)

I know you want photo proof it's there besides the other JG 27 histories published

and you have the gall to post hs ` a model plus Osprey as a source - ? still do not get you man, G-6 was not the main type produced ? they flew in the MED period, what more proof do you need