1940: the best bomber in service?

[davebender]

Ju-88 was a purpose built bomber. He-111 was a modified transport aircraft.

I suspect the purpose built aircraft has all sorts of small advantages that don't necessarily show up by reading Wikipedia data. For instance the Ju-88 probably had superior crew protection and a sturdier airframe. Ju-88 was probably also more maneuverable so it could take evasive action.

 

[tomo pauk]

Hi, buffnut,
What would be the "significant flaws"?
As for fighters available in 1941, the Bf-109F-4 was there, the 1st 400 mph fighter, above 20000 ft. Spitfire V makes 375 above 20000 ft. Unlike for 1940, when we talk about 350 mph at 17-18000 ft - not going to cut it, reliably, vs. a bomber that can make 320 mph at 25000 ft. So I'd say that 'no' is the answer to the second question.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Regardless of which individual aircraft was the best, the Luftwaffe had the most accurate, with the use of radio navigation/bombing aids years before the RAF/USAAF.

And that equipment was? NDB? Bombsights? The LW most certainly had the combat experience but "radio navigation/bombing aids" didn't vary much between combatants.

 

[buffnut453]

And what were those flaws when compared to say the JU.88 A-1, Wellington or He.111? Armor plate? Self sealing tanks? Compare what those early WW2 bombers had that made them "combat effective" with early B-17s....

For its size and speed, the early B-17s lacked defensive armament. The Ju-88 could fly rather faster, was more manoeuverable and could undertake a broad variety of roles. A lot of this argument comes down to an individual definition of "best"...and that's before getting into yet more argument over differing roles. However, at face value, I still think the Ju-88 was, all-round, a better combat machine than the B-17A thru C.

 

[buffnut453]

And that equipment was? NDB? Bombsights? The LW most certainly had the combat experience but "radio navigation/bombing aids" didn't vary much between combatants.

I think German use of radio bombing aids preceded pretty much anyone else (at least in an operational sense).

 

[tomo pauk]

Agreed on that.

Ju-88 was a purpose built bomber. He-111 was a modified transport aircraft.

I suspect the purpose built aircraft has all sorts of small advantages that don't necessarily show up by reading Wikipedia data. For instance the Ju-88 probably had superior crew protection and a sturdier airframe. Ju-88 was probably also more maneuverable so it could take evasive action.

For a purpose built bomber, one wonders what kind of bomb size was contemplated for it in design phase? Any bigger bomb must have gotten under wing, compromising the speed.

For its size and speed, the early B-17s lacked defensive armament. The Ju-88 could fly rather faster, was more manoeuverable and could undertake a broad variety of roles. A lot of this argument comes down to an individual definition of "best"...and that's before getting into yet more argument over differing roles. However, at face value, I still think the Ju-88 was, all-round, a better combat machine than the B-17A thru C.

As the early B-17s significantly differ from late B-17, the same holds true for Ju-88.
The variants in use in 1940 (A-1, A-5 - Jumo 211B or G engines) were not as fast as A-4 later ones (Jumo 211F and better engines). The speed attained for A-1 A-5 was under 300 mph (only 285? - I'm open for corrections) at less than 18000 ft - the humble Hurricane can get it. Let alone if the bombs are hung outboard. Flying at such height, the bomber is well within a scope of any competent AAA of 1940, unlike the Fortress flying at 25000 ft.

 

[cherry blossom]

Just to be contrary, the French introduced several bombers during 1940 including the LeO 451, the Amiot 354 and the Bloch MB.175. One of these, probably the MB.175, must have been the fastest bomber in service in 1940.

I am not sure how effective the MB.175 actually was as a bomber, partly because they were actually used for reconnaissance in 1940, and, although they could carry bombs internally, might not have any advantages over the Bf 110, which does not qualify for this thread.

The problem with the LeO 451 was the armament which included a retractable dustbin, which greatly increased drag if deployed, and a powerfull cannon with only a fairly small magazine. However, I suspect that stripped of its dustbin, it would have been one of the best at night.

 

[buffnut453]

To Tomo Pauk...

But the Ju-88A-4 entered service in 1940 so it still counts. I believe the German 8.8cm Flak gun could reach 25,000ft as an effective ceiling.

These "best of" discussions are interesting but always hard to quantify, not least because of the incredibly rapid rate of technological advance particularly during the early war years.

 

[Vincenzo]

the 111 was a bomber from design the born of civilian variant was for overtaken the peace treaty.
The B-17C was one of faster bombers available.

 

[davparlr]

For 1940, the B-17B was as fast as the Ju-88 and cruised at the same speed. The B-17 had much better load carrying capacity and range. In addition, the B-17 had a much higher ceiling. The B-17C, also available in 1940 and was much faster in top speed (40 mph) and 20 mph faster in cruise speed, along with all the other advantages of the B-17B. And I suspect both were better armed than the Ju-88. As a bomber there seems to be no comparison here. With other planes, haven't looked.

 

[Vincenzo]

i checked the A-4 is available in the fall of 1940.
wheatever the 88A-4 can load 6x250kg bombs under the wing and the full internal fuel 2.6 ton
the 111H can load 8x250kg bomb in the bay and 2.4 ton of internal fuel
probably despite the less fuel the 111H had more range because of all internal load.

 

[davparlr]

To Tomo Pauk...

But the Ju-88A-4 entered service in 1940 so it still counts. I believe the German 8.8cm Flak gun could reach 25,000ft as an effective ceiling.

"German Combat Planes" by Wagner and Nowarra states, "Late in 1941, the Ju 88A-4 arrived with the 1410 hp Jumo 211J".

I believe the German 8.8cm Flak gun could reach 25,000ft as an effective ceiling.

I suspect coverage area at 25k ft was very small. Also, the B-17B and B-17C had a service ceiling of 36-37k ft. The Ju-88 ceiling was more than a mile less.

 

[buffnut453]

And service ceiling with a full bomb load was????

 

[davebender]

Could the aircraft dive bomb (70 degree angle) using the bomb bay?

 

[Shortround6]

As mentioned, the He 111 was a bomber first and a transport second, not the other way around. In the Mid 30s many aircraft companies tried for duel purpose designs to make the most money possible but some of the German "dual purpose" had some rather severe limitations for commercial use.
Big British bombers of the 30s often had the requirement of carrying 24 troops to parts of the British Empire in the same aircraft not a different version.

For a brief history of the Early B-17 in British service see : Fortress I for RAF

While the Germans did have some radio navigation systems I think ( and could be corrected) they were used by only a few units?

"Best" bomber depends on which attributes you favor. The Wellington and Whitley were slow but could carry a large bomb load fairly far. Very few 1940 bombers could operate by day without escort.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

For its size and speed, the early B-17s lacked defensive armament. The Ju-88 could fly rather faster, was more manoeuverable and could undertake a broad variety of roles. A lot of this argument comes down to an individual definition of "best"...and that's before getting into yet more argument over differing roles. However, at face value, I still think the Ju-88 was, all-round, a better combat machine than the B-17A thru C.

If you're comparing a JU.88 A-4 and later, yes, compare a B-17B or C and they offered better performance than the A-1. As far as different roles and maneuverability, I would agree, hands down to the Ju.88 - as far as a level "heavy" bomber, the B-17

I think German use of radio bombing aids preceded pretty much anyone else (at least in an operational sense).

All "radio bombing" was is an ADF unit, technology that was around before the war.

 

[Juha]

Could the aircraft dive bomb (70 degree angle) using the bomb bay?

IIRC no

 

[Juha]

...While the Germans did have some radio navigation systems I think ( and could be corrected) they were used by only a few units? ...

IIRC Knickebein could be used by at least most LW bomber units but only KGr 100 had equipmnt and training for the use of the more accurate X-Verfahren

 

[davparlr]

Could the aircraft dive bomb (70 degree angle) using the bomb bay?

So, the only thing that makes a great bomber is dive bombing, vs max speed, cruising speed, altitude, load carrying, and range? Interesting.

 

[Vincenzo]

"German Combat Planes" by Wagner and Nowarra states, "Late in 1941, the Ju 88A-4 arrived with the 1410 hp Jumo 211J".

this source is sure best of mine Aircraft Database