B-25 vs. Ju-88 (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

V-1710

Airman 1st Class
185
5
Nov 8, 2005
A quick check of the specifications reveals these to were pretty close.
 
this's a very odd comparison? in what way do you mean? if they were dogfighting each other? or just comparing their stats in the bombing role? or the anti-shipping role? we're gonna need to know more about what you mean, however if it's a dogfight i'm gonna have to say Ju-88..........
 
These too aircraft were both very versatile but I think overall the Ju-88 has the edge. It is certainly one of the most versatile aircraft of WW2. If the two aircraft were to get into a Dogfight I would have to go with the Ju-88 as well. It was used as a night fighter and had experience in a fighter type role.
 
i don't think anyone can argue with the Ju-88 shooting the B-25 outta the sky... so what about say, anti-shipping? which would you back? do we go for a bog standard bomber 88 or soemthing with a large cannon or missiles?
 
I think the B25 gunship versions would be the one that could blow a JU88 out of the air. 10 .50's in the nose, two .50's's in the tail, two .50's in the upper turret and one .50 on each side would mean that no matter how well the -88 maneuvered (or where), someone on the B25 is going to get a shot at it.

They were two great medium bombers, but I would say the B25 had the edge on anti shipping and ground attack.
 
The Ju-88 is a formidable anti shipping plane. One of the few to carry two torpedoes or a huge payload. But I think the B-25 carried at least some of the radar guided anti shipping missiles, didn´t they?
I am sure that the Ju-88 didn´t carry Fritz-X or Hs294 (He-177 and Do-217 did), so I would put it on a slight disadvantage here. Not decisively but worth to mention.
 
They were both designed as medium level bombers, and comparing them as such reveals very similar performance. Both were to prove very versitle, the JU-88 being developed into night fighter and ground attack variants, and the B-25 as a ground attack and Navy patrol bomber. I believe there were instances of B-25's shooting down G4M and Ki-21 bombers.
 
Aggie08 said:
Probably, there were even reports of b-25's shooting down japanese fighters.

Not surprising really with all that firepower including turrets and the Japanese fighters usually being contructed of petrol tanks wrapped with balsa wood and old newspapers. ;)
 
I think one would have to compare them in each roles and I think the Ju-88 has the B-25 in number of roles and most importanly maneuverability. So in that case teh Ju-88 wins.

I dont know if one can say the B-25 was better in the anti shipping roles. We would need statistics to prove this.
 
The gunship B25's in the low level antishipping role would have the edge because of the massed .50's in the nose and the 75mm cannon.

I dont think the -88 had a weapons combo like that.

The -88 could carry torpedo's, but the Allies in the SW pacific found skip bombing to be more effective than torpedo attacks.
 
syscom3 said:
The gunship B25's in the low level antishipping role would have the edge because of the massed .50's in the nose and the 75mm cannon.

Wasn't that the gun which would pull itself loose after just 1-2 shots, instantly rendering the weapon hopelessly inaccurate ? ;)

I dont think the -88 had a weapons combo like that.

How about the Ju-88P-4 armed with one 75mm Pak40 anti-tank cannon plus or two 37mm Flak-38 cannons, or what about the G-1 armed with 6x20mm cannons, I'd say thats packing a punch !

The -88 could carry torpedo's, but the Allies in the SW pacific found skip bombing to be more effective than torpedo attacks.

Allied torpedo's = crap.

Load up a Ju-88 with a T5 Zaunkönig torpedo and watch the fireworks!
 
Soren said:
Wasn't that the gun which would pull itself loose after just 1-2 shots, instantly rendering the weapon hopelessly inaccurate ? ;)
No evidence of that happening, although the sheet metal near it would work loose requireing reriveting once in awhile.


How about the Ju-88P-4 armed with one 75mm Pak40 anti-tank cannon plus or two 37mm Flak-38 cannons, or what about the G-1 armed with 6x20mm cannons, I'd say thats packing a punch !

Agree'd, but what else does it have to shoot at other angles besides "frontwards"?

Allied torpedo's = crap.

No argument from me on that!

Load up a Ju-88 with a T5 Zaunkönig torpedo and watch the fireworks!

It still has to come in slow to drop it. Skip bombing means you can come in far faster with less exposure time, drop several bombs (vs two torpedo's for the -88) that have very little chance of malfunctioning, that will skip along the water at the speed of the airplane and hit the target before it could maneuver out of the way.

For low altitude anti-shipping, the B25 s best.
 
syscom3 said:
It still has to come in slow to drop it. Skip bombing means you can come in far faster with less exposure time, drop several bombs (vs two torpedo's for the -88) that have very little chance of malfunctioning, that will skip along the water at the speed of the airplane and hit the target before it could maneuver out of the way.

For low altitude anti-shipping, the B25 s best.


This always depends on what thread scenario You estimate. Against a single, large ship, which need to be taken out, now (either merchant or not) the torpedo is more effective, against a better defended target You might want skip bombing (have to point out that Skip bombing was a particularly tatcic used by Ju88 /188 in the anti-shipping role) for the expense of accuracy and destructive force.
By the way, T-5 Zaunkönig couldn´t have been loaded on airplanes.
 
delcyros said:
By the way, T-5 Zaunkönig couldn´t have been loaded on airplanes.

The vital internal parts being too sensitive ?

In any case the F5 would prove very destructive as-well..
 
My vote goes to the B-25, for anti-shipping at least. The Ju-88 was much more versatile though, so it takes the cake in most other places.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back