Best Aircraft in Many Different Roles Part II

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

Oh alright, I'm just a sucker for underdogs, and the Cat is really overlooked, popularly that is. She was a night
attack machine, thats sort of like a nightfighter. In fact short of the fighter role,she did all those roles as well.
No she does deserve to make this list.
 
joebong said:
88's and Mossies are more accurately tactical bombers.
Click to expand...

No that is actually wrong.

Tactical bombers was just one thing that they did. There were dedicated versions of the Ju-88 and the Mossie to each role that were built for that purpose. YOu would be surprised what they actually did. Here is a list for the Ju-88.

Ju-88

Ju-88A-0, A-1, A-2, A-4, A-5, A-9, A-11, A-12, A-14: Bomber/Ground Attack (normal versions)

Ju-88A-3, A-7, A-16: Trainer

Ju-88A-4/Torp, A-17: Torpedo Bomber

Ju-88A-6, A-8: Pathfinder/Balloon Cutter

Ju-88A-6/U: Maritime Patrol/Anti Shipping with Anti shipping Missiles

Ju-88A-13: Ground Attack/Support

Ju-88A-15: Pure Bomber

Ju-88C-2, C-4, C-5, C-6a C-7: Heavy Fighter

Ju-88C-6b, Ju-88-6c: Night Fighter

Ju-88D-0, D-1, D-2, D-3, D-4: Photo Recon

Ju-88P-1, P-2, P-3, P-4, R-1, R-2: Anti Tank

Other roles fullfilled by the Ju-88 were Dive Bomber, Transport, Mistel Carrier, and Mistell Bomb piece, and these are just to name a few.

The Mossie was just as versatile as well, with the Ju-88 only a slight edge over the Mossie in roles that could be performed.
 
I do agree the 88 and D.H are widely considered wonder weapons. Lanc said they were strategic bombers, But in the litteral sense they were not. And i stand
by my vote for the PBY, as its resume is nearly as varied as the others. Bearing in mind it was a flying boat so its roles were limited to maritime.
 
No they could be strategic bomber and more so than you PBY because they could carry a larger bomb load.

Strategic bombing is just a way of bombing and there were dedicated bomber roles for the Mossie and the Ju-88.
 
Why do that? It is fact though that the 2 most versatile aircraft of WW2 were easily the Ju-88 and Mossie follwed by the P-38 and Fw-190. Now the places of these aircraft can be argued.
 
when a force of several hundred mossies take off and fly as a stream towards a major target like a city, each of them operating in the level bombing role from mid- altitude, carrying 4-5,000lbs, they are operating strategically, the same can be said of the Ju-88..............
 
I dont quite understand what you mean.

The Mossie was certainly a better aircraft but the Ju-88 could perform more roles than the Mossie could, hands down.

It does not come down to being rational. The Germans built these different varients because they had to. The British had the luxury of building more purpose built aircraft as did all the allies.
 
I'll rephrase. The Ju 88 did perform more roles than the Mosquito but that doesn't mean it was also capable of more roles. I hope this is a bit clearer...

Not only was the Ju 88 mediocre in several roles, it was also unsuited for a couple others. Just think about the Ju 88P and C-heavy fighters.

Above all, the Mosquito was the Jabo the Ju 88 could never be. Instead the Ju 88 was a bomber with mediocre speed, range and a lousy internal bomb capacity and defensive gun arrangement. Even Göring once said that Junkers had tricked him into the Ju 88 on false promises of its capacities. Not that Göring is really a credible source, but still...

The British had the luxury of building more purpose built aircraft as did all the allies.
Click to expand...
And what does that mean?

Kris
 
What I meant is that the Germans especially toward the end of the war were not at the luxury of building purpose built torpedo bombers (just one example, there are many more purposes that could be listed) and therefore had to build varients of existing aircraft that could perform the roles.

The allies as a whole could afford to build different aircaft for many different roles.

As for the Ju-88 I agree that the Mossie was a better aircraft and the aircraft that the Luftwaffe needed but the Ju-88 was simply the most versatile aircraft of WW2 and performed most of her roles very well. She may not have been the best in any given role but to perform those roles well she was able to do so.
 
I know my comment on the Ju 88 would attract some attention! :twisted: :D

The Ju 88A was designed as a high speed bomber but could never run away from enemy fighters. Its speed was ok for the early war years (though there were faster bombers around, like the LeO 451) but in the second half of the war a maximum speed of 470 km/h was really the minimum. Also important is that the Ju 88 carried most of its bombs externally which is a serious disadvantage towards bombers with a bigger bay.
Its range was ok but not spectacular, especially considering Junkers told Göering that their 88 could fly around England with bombload. There were bombers with a better range.
The gun arrangement of the Ju 88 was folly and resulted in a cramped cockpit and inefficient defensive armament.
Ju-cockpit3.jpg

Finally, an internal bombload of 500 kg is not good.

Kris
 
Why choose the 1939 Ju-88A for comparison with the 1942 Mosquito ?? There were better versions of Ju-88 by that time...
 
Civettone said:
I know my comment on the Ju 88 would attract some attention! :twisted: :D

The Ju 88A was designed as a high speed bomber but could never run away from enemy fighters. Its speed was ok for the early war years (though there were faster bombers around, like the LeO 451) but in the second half of the war a maximum speed of 470 km/h was really the minimum. Also important is that the Ju 88 carried most of its bombs externally which is a serious disadvantage towards bombers with a bigger bay.
Its range was ok but not spectacular, especially considering Junkers told Göering that their 88 could fly around England with bombload. There were bombers with a better range.
The gun arrangement of the Ju 88 was folly and resulted in a cramped cockpit and inefficient defensive armament.
Ju-cockpit3.jpg

Finally, an internal bombload of 500 kg is not good.

Kris
Click to expand...


Ok...by parts here.

The idea of the "schnell bomber" indeed was conceived before the outbreak of the war. Once deployed to frontline units when the war commenced, the Ju 88 became a multi-role plane, serving mainly as medium bomber throughout the first half of the war.

The idea of bombers leaving fighters behind is a pre-war notion; when the war commenced the Germans knew of the Hurricane and Spitfire and they were perfectly aware none of their bombers could surpass the speeds of both enemy planes much less when carrying the bombload. So what´s with the speed issue here? You are not suggesting the Germans commenced the BoB believing the speed of their bombers surpassed the Spitfire´s are you?

The Ju-88 A could never run away from fighters. Do not know of anyone who would claim the opposite. Now, besides the Mossie -a multi role plane-, can you mention any other kind of bomber that was capable of running away from German fighters? I think there were none.

Any allied medium bombers whose speed you might want to compare with the Ju 88?

The B-26? B-25? Vickers Wellington? The old Whitworth Whitley which is definetly inferior to every German medium bomber...In fact the maximum speed of any of those medium bombers remained either inferior or matched to that of the Ju 88 A, so if i follow your logic the speed of any allied bomber in the ETO was mediocre.

It´s speed was ok? Do you know what the difference between the max speed of the Ju 88 A and Hurricane Mk I was in 1940?

"Also important is that the Ju 88 carried most of its bombs externally which is a serious disadvantage towards bombers with a bigger bay."

"Most of its bombs" carried externally? Are you sure? Got to check that out.

Why was carrying bombs externally a disadvantage? Because of the drag caused by the bombs carried externally? You should know the Ju 88 could also function as dive bomber...so when dive bombing would be the type of mission to perform the bombs get affixed externally -especially for anti-shipping missions-. There could be sometimes when bombs got affixed externally when dive bombing would not be the type of mission though.

Whatever was it Junkers promised Göring is irrelevant...the range of the Ju 88 as medium bomber was more than adequate to attack the required targets in England and return home.

Finally, the fact the cockpit was cramped did not result in poor performance of the bomber. Quite the opposite as a bomber it was accurate and very deadly and the defensive machine gun arrangement was also adequate for the type of plane it was but just like the defensive armament arrangement of the heavy bombers of the RAF and USAAF the whole thing points out to the fact bombers lose to intercepting fighters.

You bet a Ju 88 A that had delivered its bombload over England was in a better condition to return to base if compared with the case of a B-17 or B-24 over the Reich during 1943 or 1944.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
Italy VS USA: Different ways to improve the P-35
Replies
3
Views
437
Airborne2001
A
BarnOwlLover
What (or what would) make a good tactical recon aircraft in World War II
Replies
10
Views
1K
ColFord
ColFord
BarnOwlLover
Sten SMG aircraft: productionized aircraft part 1, the reality
7 8 9
Replies
162
Views
9K
Wild_Bill_Kelso
Wild_Bill_Kelso
G
How many Night Fighters did Bomber Command shoot down?
Replies
2
Views
1K
mig2830
M
BarnOwlLover
Best "general purpose" prop fighter also capable of best high altitude performance
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
PAT303
P
Back