Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Erich said:at night ? ........... nope ! during the winter of early 44 daylight raids, yes, NJG 2 and 3 Ju 88C's were lost attacking B-17 formations.
your comments are noted, and my first statements STAND, bomber or recon Ju 88 vs B-25 Mitchell
Glider said:I am wondering at some of the statements made in this forum in particular the concept of a B25 landing on a carrier without any arrestor gear. Landing a spit on the wasp was considered close to a miracle and it stopped I think it was 40 ft from the Bows. This was an RAF spit bound for Malta that had a fault with the drop tank.
Trying to do that with a B25 which is many times heavier and comes in much faster would be a one way trip into the ocean. Does anyone have any evidence to back up the claim.
The other statement that because the Ju88 didn't fight in the Pacific it couldn't of done I also find a little suprising. As far as I know and to the best of my recollection the Germans were not at war with Japan and had enough US and UK aircraft to fight on their own doorstep.
I suspect the Japs would have loved to have some JU88's in 1941. By Jap standards it was fast well protected and carried a large bombload.
Could a stripped down Ju88 take off from a carrier. Of course it could. It was lighter, had a better wing loading and a shorter take off run.
Jank said:No, you are wrong. Any variatons due to ammunition alone (99%)would not consistently favor one gun (1%) over another to the degree it does. Think about it.
With all due respect Soren, you are full of ****! Only 3 to 9 feet per second difference between the two? The standard deviation (SD) for the ammunition is much greater than that.
Do you know how the standard deviation is calculated in a statistical analysis? Even if the velocity differences attributed only to the guns amounted to 3-9 fps, a SD in the ammunition of even 25 feet per second would require you to fire and record the velocities of more than 100 rounds in each gun in order to factor it out. You do understand that don't you?
Something tells me that you have not undertaken such a experiment.
BTW - What the Hell is "full power ammunition"? As opposed to what? Do you know what the SAAMI specs are for the 8x57? (chuckling at Soren trying to sound like he knows what he's talking about)
Syscom
Putting an arrestor gear on any plane may not be complicated but does involve the one thing the raiders could not afford, weight.
I was always taught the base line, that if you add a pound of weight to the airframe and want to maintain the same performace, speed, range, climb etc then you ended up adding ten pounds to the take off weight. Wouldn't take much to get through another 1000lb.
The arrestor gear and hook is but one component the, the additional strengthening of the airframe would be a major contributor to the gain in weight. They may well have thought about it but it wouldn't have got much further.
As for the Japanese being happy with their aircraft in 1941, they had good reason to have confidence in their aircraft. However I know they had a huge admiration of the Fw190 (and who wouldn't in 1941) and had mixed feelings about the 109E liking its speed and armour but not being so keen on its agility. What I don't know, is what they thought of the German Bombers but the Ju88 carried around 5,000 lb of bombs and most Jap bombers only carried around 2000Ib so a certain respect was likely.
DerAdlerIstGelandet said:Agreed as well Glider.
You can not just add most components like that to an aircraft without strengthening and modifying the airframe. With the force that the plane is landing without the strenghtening it would rip the airframe apart.
DerAdlerIstGelandet said:I am not saying that it could not be done. On the contrary it is very likely that it could have been done, what I am saying is you can not just install a damn arrestor hook. You have to strengthen the fuselage.
Hell even when we install a new antenna to our helicopters we have to double and strength the fuselage, what makes you think it would not have had to be done for an arrestor hook on a B-25.
Trying to land a B-25 with an arrestor hook without doing that would have caused damage to the airframe.
V-1710 said:In addition, a one shot deal is different than doing it on a regular basis.