Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rnd 1 Grp C - Dornier Do 17-217 (Germany) vs Handley Page Hampden (Britain)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rnd 1 Grp C - Dornier Do 17-217 (Germany) vs Handley Page Hampden (Britain)

    Round 1, Group C: Dornier Do 17/215/217 (Germany) vs Handley Page Hampden (Britain)





    Candidate #33 - Dornier Do 17/215/217 (Germany)

    Service Intro - 1937
    Roles - light & medium bomber; maritime strike; night fighter; recon
    Quantity Produced - 4,169
    User Nations - Germany + about 10 other countries

    For further info & some technical details, you can start with Wiki here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dornier_Do_17
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dornier_Do_215
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dornier_Do_217









    Candidate #43 - Handley Page Hampden (Britain)

    Service Intro - 1938
    Roles - medium bomber; minelayer; long-range torpedo bomber; maritime recon; trainer
    Quantity Produced - 1,532
    User Nations - Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, SU/Russia

    For further info & some technical details, you can start with Wiki here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handley_Page_Hampden








    Will you vote for the Do 17/215/217 or the Hampden?


    Only one of these two candidates will make it to the next round!


    Which of them is the more significant and/or influential?


    Consider the criteria with care! You decide!
    85
    Dornier Do 17/215/217 (Germany)
    90.59%
    77
    Handley Page Hampden (Britain)
    9.41%
    8

    The poll is expired.

    Last edited by panther3485; 05 Dec 15, 00:46.
    "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

  • #2
    The later models of the "Flying Pencil" were more significant.
    Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

    Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

    by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

    Comment


    • #3
      The Hampden did well but IMO the Dornier proved more viable as a multi-role platform into the later stages of the war.
      "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

      Comment


      • #4
        The Dornier.
        However, one wonders. Was a multi-role aircraft like this, which received more and more additional roles, and possibly succeeded at them, as the war went on, really that versatile, in comparison with another aircraft that just soldiered on in their 1-2 original roles? Or was it the case that the country using the former aircraft simply was more hard-pressed and the country using the latter was more spoilt for choice of specialized and new models?
        Michele

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Michele View Post
          The Dornier.
          However, one wonders. Was a multi-role aircraft like this, which received more and more additional roles, and possibly succeeded at them, as the war went on, really that versatile, in comparison with another aircraft that just soldiered on in their 1-2 original roles? Or was it the case that the country using the former aircraft simply was more hard-pressed and the country using the latter was more spoilt for choice of specialized and new models?
          Yes, that's certainly a factor in many cases. However, I don't see how we can evaluate an aircraft in terms of roles that it might have been able to perform but never did. Regardless of the circumstances it would be pure speculation. Interesting thought, though.
          "England expects that every man will do his duty!" (English crew members had better get ready for a tough fight against the combined French and Spanish fleets because that's what England expects! However, Scotland, Wales and Ireland appear to expect nothing so the Scottish, Welsh and Irish crew members can relax below decks if they like!)

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by panther3485 View Post
            Yes, that's certainly a factor in many cases. However, I don't see how we can evaluate an aircraft in terms of roles that it might have been able to perform but never did. Regardless of the circumstances it would be pure speculation. Interesting thought, though.
            No, I'm aware that consideration is not particularly helpful when it comes to making a decision here. That's why I voted and stated what I voted, first - and then spelled out my musing...
            Michele

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by panther3485 View Post
              Yes, that's certainly a factor in many cases. However, I don't see how we can evaluate an aircraft in terms of roles that it might have been able to perform but never did. Regardless of the circumstances it would be pure speculation. Interesting thought, though.
              On the other hand, an aircraft might be pressed into service in the hope that it could a good job outside its usual role - but failed miserably. This was proved tragically true over the English city of Birmingham in December, 1940.
              During a particularly devastating Luftwaffe raid, the searchlights were extinguished, anti-aircraft guns silenced and a force of Hampdens went aloft, carrying extra guns -on the reasoning that, without carrying a bomb-load and possessing equal endurance, they could take-on the attacking bombers on better-than-equal terms.

              The experiment was never repeated.
              "I dogmatise and am contradicted, and in this conflict of opinions and sentiments I find delight".
              Samuel Johnson.

              Comment


              • #8
                Remeber, the DO-17 was the fastest bomber on the planet when it first appeared.

                Both of these designs suffered from having two engines. A tri motor just would not do for British aircraft, and the Dornier seems to have been the far more mallable of the two.

                Dornier
                My Articles, ALMOST LIVE, exclusive to The Armchair!

                Soviet Submarines in WW2....The Mythology of Shiloh....(Edited) Both Sides of the Warsaw Ghetto
                GULAG Glossary....Who Really Killed The Red Baron?....Pearl Harbor At 75
                Lincoln-Douglas Debates

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think the HP Hampden is as much under rated as the Do 17-217 is over rated. The Do as a night fighter did not really cut it amongst other things it was considered too slow. The Dornier however was produced in greater numbers.
                  The repetition of affirmations leads to belief. Once that belief becomes a deep conviction, you better wake up and look at the facts.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Drusus Nero View Post
                    Remeber, the DO-17 was the fastest bomber on the planet when it first appeared.
                    The Blenheim 1 which entered service the same year was 10 mph faster at 15,000 ft
                    Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
                    Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by dutched View Post
                      I think the HP Hampden is as much under rated as the Do 17-217 is over rated. The Do as a night fighter did not really cut it amongst other things it was considered too slow. The Dornier however was produced in greater numbers.
                      The Hampden had some serious issues, firstly the rearward firing guns could not traverse a full 90 degrees in either direction. This meant they could not fire to the beam. On one occasion Me 110 s took out most of a Hampden squadron by flying parallel to them at the same speed and the 110's observer taking out the Hampden pilot with his machine gun. Secondly the narrow fuselage meant that if the pilot was hit it was impossible to get him out of his seat and another crew member to take the controls.

                      The Dornier Do17 night fighter with a top speed of 265mph may have been too slow but only nine entered service anyway. The Do 217N with a top speed of 320mph was more than fast enough to deal with any of the Allied medium and heavy night bombers
                      Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
                      Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by MarkV View Post
                        . On one occasion Me 110 s took out most of a Hampden squadron by flying parallel to them at the same speed and the 110's observer taking out the Hampden pilot with his machine gun.
                        Could you provide further information on this incident (Squadron that suffered losses/date)? Harry Moyle's book "The Hampden File" describes two incidents in which Hampden squadrons suffered such losses, September 29 1939 when 5 144 Squadron Hampdens were lost attacking shipping near Helgoland and April 12 1940 when 7 44 Squadron Hampdens (2 lost) and 5 50 Squadron aircraft (4 lost) attacked Kristiansand. In both cases losses were mostly attributed to fighters but Bf109s, not Bf 110s.

                        Moyle notes that the post mortem of the Kristiansand raid describes something similar to what you describe:
                        Some of the fighter's attacks had been made by flying parallel to the bombers until slightly ahead of them and then turning in to make a beam attack against which none of the Hampden's guns could be brought to bear. The crews who flew the Hampdens were well aware this form of attack was possible, having experienced it on numerous occasions during fighter affiliation exercises, but their reports had been dismissed by "experts" who still maintained such attacks were impracticable. Experience on this occasion did at least teach something and the installation of beam positions was proceeded with as a matter of urgency
                        [Moyle p25]

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by CarpeDiem View Post
                          Could you provide further information on this incident (Squadron that suffered losses/date)? Harry Moyle's book "The Hampden File" describes two incidents in which Hampden squadrons suffered such losses, September 29 1939 when 5 144 Squadron Hampdens were lost attacking shipping near Helgoland and April 12 1940 when 7 44 Squadron Hampdens (2 lost) and 5 50 Squadron aircraft (4 lost) attacked Kristiansand. In both cases losses were mostly attributed to fighters but Bf109s, not Bf 110s.

                          Moyle notes that the post mortem of the Kristiansand raid describes something similar to what you describe:
                          [Moyle p25]
                          You'll have to bear with me whilst I try and find the book it was in. I remember the account stating that one pilot was reduced to firing his service revolver in sheer desperation at the 110.
                          Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe (H G Wells)
                          Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens (Friedrich von Schiller)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Thank you.
                            The losses of Sept 1939 were the result of attacks by I/ZG26 but at the time the unit was flying Bf109s, still awaiting its Bf 110s.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by MarkV View Post
                              The Hampden had some serious issues, firstly the rearward firing guns could not traverse a full 90 degrees in either direction. This meant they could not fire to the beam. On one occasion Me 110 s took out most of a Hampden squadron by flying parallel to them at the same speed and the 110's observer taking out the Hampden pilot with his machine gun. Secondly the narrow fuselage meant that if the pilot was hit it was impossible to get him out of his seat and another crew member to take the controls.

                              The Dornier Do17 night fighter with a top speed of 265mph may have been too slow but only nine entered service anyway. The Do 217N with a top speed of 320mph was more than fast enough to deal with any of the Allied medium and heavy night bombers
                              Werner Held-Holger Neuroth quote: translated: The greater range and larger fire power were the only plus sides of this variant (N). Quote: translated: (speaking of the N variant) A major drawback was the low speed and the lacking of manoeuvrablity. Both in straight line speed and climbing speed she (the N) was inferior to both British Lancaster and Halifax. Max speed is quoted as 290 Mph. Which is lower than your sources.
                              Also reading through Wespennest Leeuwarden I get the impression that the German Night fighter pilots thought the Do 217 N a bit of a dog.
                              The repetition of affirmations leads to belief. Once that belief becomes a deep conviction, you better wake up and look at the facts.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X