Best WWII Air-Force

[Hunter368]

Yup I knew it. LOL

Damn I think I have ESP or something.

 

[Soren]

By WW2 a tail dragger multi engine aircraft was a dinosaur - a hazard to operate, from loading it with bombs to landing, it was an obsolete configuration. Right there both aircraft were off to a bad start.

Well it doesn't seem there were any problems loading the He-177 or He-277, there being lots of space beneath it to load bombs.

Fire control, pressurization, internal avionics, configuration were all superior to both 177 and 277.

I doubt that very much FLYBOYJ. Avionics certainly weren't better, fire control was neither (They were exactly similar infact), prezzurization I can't speak of but I'd guess its the same, just as with the internal configuration.

Not to say the Germans didn't have better of each, the B-29 just put it all together into one weapons' system that worked and that's what made it superior to both 177 and 277.

I don't get what your saying here, as the He-277 was both faster, could go much higher and carry a similar bomb load compared to the B-29..

several hundred B-29s were able to be produced a month with ease, to even say Germany had the capability to produce the 177 or 277 in the numbers the B-29 was being produced is nonsense.

Agreed.

You're speculating both aircraft "would of" operated as advertised and based on the 177 I find that unlikely.

As advertised ? They actually did FLYBOYJ.

"Would of could of should of" - for that matter "IF" the 177 or 277 made it into significant numbers and deployed in a capacity where they were to be intercepted, then you might of had say a P-58 intercepting them, top speed in excess of 450 mph and specifically designed to take on aircraft like the He 177

The P-58 has a max speed of 436 mph and can't even reach 12km FLYBOYJ, making the He-277 immune to it.

It was and never deployed in numbers to mean anything...

Forget about the numbers produced, there's a reason for that, Germany was concentrating on fighters fighterbombers by 1944 -45, and the multiple front war coupled with Allied bombing raids put such a strain on the German industry that producing these a/c in large numbers was an impossibility.

All true but don't forget while the B-29 was in gestation the B-29D was being developed which took care of all problems first encountered with the B-29. the B-29D became the B-50...

So ? The He-177, He-277, Ju-390 Me-264 were all ready to go the Germans were on the road to building jet bombers as-well.

 

[Soren]

Me-264

Ju-390

He-177

He-277

 

[syscom3]

Soren, if you bothered to read the thread on "the best bomber of WW2", you would have learned that every single bomber that dropped its payload at high altitudes, almost always missed its target.

So what if your bomber(s) flew at 40,000 ft. It wouldn't have hit anything just as the B17, B24 and B29 didn't.

Now about your statement about the German bombers had higher structural strength than the allied bombers is pure speculation bordering on the absurd.

We know how strong the Lanc, B17, B24 and B29 were, because THEY FLEW 100'S OF THOUSANDS OF SORTIES IN COMBAT AND THE GERMAN BOMBERS HAD ONLY A HANDFULL.

Don't make these ridiculous statements unless you have data to back yourself up on it.

So ? The He-177, He-277, Ju-390 Me-264 were all ready to go the Germans were on the road to building jet bombers as-well.

They were hardly ready to go as like all of Germany's aircraft projects , they were rushed into assembly before their bugs were ironed out.

And none of the ones close enough to be thought of as being ready for operations still didn't come close to the B29 capabilities that was proven in combat and not on paper.

And please stop mentioning "jet bombers". Its completely irrelevant as none of them were produced in the war and they fall under the "paper air force category".

 

[syscom3]

Heres a nice website about fight tests of the Me-264.

Seems like this "wonder bomber" had serious flight issues that were never corrected and about the only extensive missions it flew was on paper.

Messerschmitt Me 264 Luft '46 Entry

When you look at its payload figures, its worthless. All that time and material to build a bomber that could only carry a paltry payload. And to top it off, only one prototype was built and it was still working out some serious problems while the B29 was beginning to approach mass production.

I think we can scratch this clunker off of the German "superior" bomber list!

 

[Soren]

Soren, if you bothered to read the thread on "the best bomber of WW2", you would have learned that every single bomber that dropped its payload at high altitudes, almost always missed its target.

So what if your bomber(s) flew at 40,000 ft. It wouldn't have hit anything just as the B17, B24 and B29 didn't.

Now about your statement about the German bombers had higher structural strength than the allied bombers is pure speculation bordering on the absurd.

We know how strong the Lanc, B17, B24 and B29 were, because THEY FLEW 100'S OF THOUSANDS OF SORTIES IN COMBAT AND THE GERMAN BOMBERS HAD ONLY A HANDFULL.

Don't make these ridiculous statements unless you have data to back yourself up on it.

Ha ! And thats coming from you !


I can easily back it up, the He-177 was made to be able to dive bomb, hence its structural integrity had to be much higher than a conventional bomber.

They were hardly ready to go as like all of Germany's aircraft projects , they were rushed into assembly before their bugs were ironed out.

Pure BS, every new design has a high probability of having some bugs, the B-29 had its own to deal with.

The Me-210 wasn't a good a/c to begin with, but look at what happened with the introduction of the Me-410 - a completely excellent aircraft.

And none of the ones close enough to be thought of as being ready for operations still didn't come close to the B29 capabilities that was proven in combat and not on paper.

Thats completely and utterly untrue!

The He-277 was faster, could carry roughly the same bomb-load and had a much higher ceiling!

The Ju-390 Me-264 could both carry a far larger payload coupled with a longer range as-well.

Heres a nice website about fight tests of the Me-264.

Seems like this "wonder bomber" had serious flight issues that were never corrected and about the only extensive missions it flew was on paper.

Messerschmitt Me 264 Luft '46 Entry

When you look at its payload figures, its worthless. All that time and material to build a bomber that could only carry a paltry payload. And to top it off, only one prototype was built and it was still working out some serious problems while the B29 was beginning to approach mass production.

I think we can scratch this clunker off of the German "superior" bomber list!

For christs sake read what is written Syscom3 ! The 3,000 kg payload figure isn't the max bomb-load figure ! The max bomb load figure is above 23,000 kg !!

The 3,000 - 5,000 kg bomb-loads are for long range missions.

 

[Glider]

Can I just ask one question. If the He177 had such good structural integrity and was so robust, why did it catch fire so easily. If produced in numbers and deployed there is every chance that it would have been a latter day Betty. Long range, heavy defensive weapons and lit like a torch every time.

Also about intercepting the He277, can I suggest the much maligned Meteor. Easily fast enough, decent range and very well armed, as well as being in production and service.

 

[The Basket]

Ernst Heinkel hated the He-177...blaming Udet for the stupid dive bombing requirements.

The Fw200 Condor was far better. Because it was available and did something. But not built in the numbers required and far too easy to fall apart. But it was there and earned its medals.

Did the aircrews love to fly the He-177? Nope. Says it all.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Well it doesn't seem there were any problems loading the He-177 or He-277, there being lots of space beneath it to load bombs.

Sure there is, but your loading bombs on and aircraft resting at an angle, it's a lot easier if the aircraft has a nose landing gear, but that's only one minor issue. Bottom line a tail dragger multi-engine bomber was just an operation accident waiting to happen, and the proof of this is that there were no large multi engine tail draggers built in the postwar years.

I doubt that very much FLYBOYJ. Avionics certainly weren't better, fire control was neither (They were exactly similar infact), prezzurization I can't speak of but I'd guess its the same, just as with the internal configuration.

I don't get what your saying here, as the He-277 was both faster, could go much higher and carry a similar bomb load compared to the B-29..

And how many were built and what was its impact? I know - "fighter defence." Would of could of should of...We're talking about a whole Airforce here. What good is the weapon when you cant use it to its capacity and both the 177 and 277 were prime examples of this...

The P-58 has a max speed of 436 mph and can't even reach 12km FLYBOYJ, making the He-277 immune to it.

The 277, if it was built in numbers and if it was put in a position where it "would of" been intercepted would not have been bombing with any accuracy or effectiveness at it higher operating altitudes, as evident in the B-29.

Forget about the numbers produced, there's a reason for that, Germany was concentrating on fighters fighterbombers by 1944 -45, and the multiple front war coupled with Allied bombing raids put such a strain on the German industry that producing these a/c in large numbers was an impossibility.

And that's history, something that's not being changed...

So ? The He-177, He-277, Ju-390 Me-264 were all ready to go the Germans were on the road to building jet bombers as-well.

So was the B-50, and although the allies were lacking jet bombers they still defeated Germany with their "marginal Air force." Quantity vs. Quality?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Here's a comparison between the He 277 and the B-29. Not much difference.

Specifications (He 277B-5)
General characteristics
Crew: 7
Length: 22.14 m (72 ft 8 in)
Wingspan: 31.43 m (103 ft 1¾ in)
Height: 6.66 m (21 ft 10½ in)
Wing area: 100.00 m² (1,076.39 ft²)
Empty weight: 21,800 kg (48,060 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 44,500 kg (98,105 lb)
Powerplant: 4× Daimler-Benz DB 603A 12-cylinder inverted-vee engine, 1,305 kW (1,750 hp) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 570 km/h at 5,700 m (354 mph at 18,700 ft)
Cruise speed: 460 km/h (286 mph)
Range: 6,000 km (3,728 miles)
Service ceiling: 15,000 m (49,210 ft)
Armament
8 × 7.92 mm MG 81 machine guns in forward and rear fuselage barbettes
3 × 13 mm MG 131 machine gun in two dorsal turrets
1 × 15 mm or 20 mm MG 151 cannon in nose
up to 3,000 kg (6,612 lb) of disposable stores

B-29 General characteristics
Crew: 11: (A/C)pilot, co-pilot, flight engineer, bombardier, navigator, radio operator, radar observer, blister gunners (two), CFC upper gunner, and tail gunner
Length: 99 ft 0 in (30.2 m)
Wingspan: 141 ft 3 in (43.1 m)
Height: 27 ft 9 in (8.5 m)
Wing area: 1,736 ft² (161.3 m²)
Empty weight: 74,500 lb (33,800 kg)
Loaded weight: 120,000 lb (54,000 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 133,500 lb (60,560 kg)
Powerplant: 4× Wright R-3350-23 turbosupercharged radial engines, 2,200 hp (1,640 kW) each
Zero-lift drag coefficient: 0.0241
Drag area: 41.16 ft² (3.82 m²)
Aspect ratio: 11.50
Performance
Maximum speed: 357 mph (310 knots, 574 km/h)
Cruise speed: 220 mph (190 knots, 350 km/h)
Stall speed: 105 mph (91 knots, 170 km/h)
Combat radius: 3,250 mi (2,820 nm, 5,230 km)
Ferry range: 5,600 mi (4,900 nm, 9,000 km)
Service ceiling: 33,600 ft (10,200 m)
Rate of climb: 900 ft/min (4.5 m/s)
Wing loading: 69.12 lb/ft² (337 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.073 hp/lb (121 W/kg)
Lift-to-drag ratio: 16.8
Armament
Guns:

12× .50 in (12.7 mm) M2 Browning machine guns in remote controlled turrets
1× 20 mm M2 cannon in tail (removed shortly after put into service)
Bombs: 20,000lb (9,000 kg) standard loadout, could be modified to externally carry two 22,000lb (10,000kg) T-14 'Earthquake' bombs

I had to use Wikipedia because some of the other sites for the He 277 information were very lacking.

Internal equipment? The B-29 carried "liaison set, radio compass, marker beacon, glide path receiver, localizer receiver, IFF (identification friend or foe) transformer, emergency rescue transmitter, blind bombing radar (on many aircraft), radio countermeasures, and static dischargers."

I see nothing listed for the He 277.

I'm not saying the He 277 WOULD OF been a formidable aircraft. It was just as fast as the B-29 and could fly higher. It's defensive armament was impressive but the B-29 had the most advanced and effective firecontrol system of any WW2 aircraft (and admittingly it did have some teething problems). That combined with its internal equipment made it the best bomber of WW2 period. Over all the 277 was close but no cigar....

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

What ?!

He means the standard configuration was tricycle landing gear....

Thats incorrect, the He-277 wasn't just a prototype, it was finished well before wars end, the Fighter-defence program made sure both the He-177 -277 didn't see much action though and is the pure reason for the low service record - trained pilots and fuel was missing. And in the few mission carried out escorts were missing.

And that still means that since it was not being used to bomb targets it is not a factor therefore is not part of the equation and therefore does not matter and as you called my point "moot" makes the He 277 a moot point to make...

The B-29 wasn't ahead any way other than having a larger payload.

Actually its fire control system was ahead of anything in use at the time. The B-29 in all actuallity was the first "modern" heavy bomber.

Way more capable ? The He-177 -277 were both structurally more sound

Please prove this? What sources do you have to say so. Have you taken a B-29 and a He 277 and He 177 apart and studied the structures at detail.

If you can prove this, then please do so. If you can not then dont assumptions please...

Interestingly the Germans had the Ju-390 that beats all three with a max bomb load of over 26,000 kg !! Range is much longer than all of the above as-well, an incredibly long 6,039 miles ! And despite the huge bombload speed is an impressive 505 km/h and the ceiling 6km with full bomb load.

And how many Ju 390s were actually built and used as bombers? None there were 2 prototypes built. 26 were ordered but never delivered. I dont think any of the 2 prototypes was actually flown with a bombload anyhow.

This baby even reached the coast of the US during WW2.. (This could only be done with a very light bombload though)

And that is also debatable. It can not be proven or disproven.

Read the book KG 200 The Luftwaffes Most Secret Unit by Geoffrey J. Thomas and Barry Ketley. Interviews with Luftwaffe pilots from FAGr 5 state that this flight never happened. It was planned but never happened.

Also read the book Luftwaffe Over America The Secret Plans to Bomb the United States in WW2 by Manfred Griehl. It also shows evidence that it never happened as well.

FAGr 5 unit records also do not prove or disprove whether this flight actually took place.

FAGr 5 records state that the first prototype V1 (GH+UK) did not fly the mission which only leads us to the second prototype V2 (RC+DA) and Rechlin Test pilot, Oberleutnant Eisermann who also was flying (RC+DA) said that the second prototype did not fly the flight either.

Now having said all this. I believe the Ju 390 could have been a marvelous bomber (this is just my opinion though) but could have, should have, would have are all different things.

Or what about the Me-264, with a speed of 560 km/h, a max bomb-load of 23,000 + kg, a range of 6,250 miles, and a service ceiling of 8km with full bomb-load. A very impressive aircraft, although cancelled with the initiation of the Fighter-defence program.

Again they never had anything other than prototypes. Therefore this aircraft is a moot point as well...

The RAF is a strong contender for the best airforce of 1944 to 1945.

How was it better than the USAAF in 1945?

The Allies didn't possess as good a tankbuster as the Hs-129, it was better armed, armored and a more stabile gun platform than any Allied ground attack aircraft. The problem with its engines were solved pretty early btw.

That is not true. The Allies had many fine tank busting aircraft.

And the Hs 129 still did not have that great of performance. Sorry it is true. I like the aircraft and agree it could have been the best in its role but it was not a "special purpose aircraft" in that sense and the allies had tank busting aircraft so this point is moot as well...

And to your other comment about the Hs-129's combat effectiveness, well any of the dedicated ground-attack a/c of WW2 were vulnerable unless escorted by fighters - so thats a pretty moot point to make.

Negative the P-47 could take care of itself just fine so could the Tempest and the Typhoon and the ground attack versions of the Fw 190. Whether you want to realize it there were dedicated ground attack and tank busting versions of these aircraft so whos point is moot now...

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Ha ! And thats coming from you !


I can easily back it up, the He-177 was made to be able to dive bomb, hence its structural integrity had to be much higher than a conventional bomber.

Okay but have you actually tested the structural integrity of the B-29. What you just said up there is still speculation that the He 177 was stronger than the B-29.

Unless you have done tests and taken them apart and studied them, you are only speculating as syscom has said. This point is moot....

You see I can use the word moot as well....

 

[Soren]

I had to use Wikipedia because some of the other sites for the He 277 information were very lacking.

The top speeds are very close but they don't matter much, what matters is the difference in cruise speed - check that out - The He-277 is a good deal faster than the B-29 at cruise speed; 460 km/h > 350 km/h.

Internal equipment? The B-29 carried "liaison set, radio compass, marker beacon, glide path receiver, localizer receiver, IFF (identification friend or foe) transformer, emergency rescue transmitter, blind bombing radar (on many aircraft), radio countermeasures, and static dischargers."

And the He-177 He-277 carried about all of that as-well + infrared equipment.

I'm not saying the He 277 WOULD OF been a formidable aircraft. It was just as fast as the B-29

Faster at the all important cruise speed.

It's defensive armament was impressive but the B-29 had the most advanced and effective firecontrol system of any WW2 aircraft (and admittingly it did have some teething problems).

I don't believe the B-29 firecontrol system was any better than that carried on the He-177 or He-277, as far as I can see they have exactly the same functions.

That combined with its internal equipment made it the best bomber of WW2 period.

The B-29 had the advantage of not having its IFF equipment jammed, thats about all that made it superior, the He-177 He-277 both carried pretty much the same equipment with very few exceptions.

Over all the 277 was close but no cigar....

I believe that had the LW invested trained men fuel in this machine then it was just as good if not better than the B-29 - but as it looked there just wasn't any fuel or trained crew to spare, and the huge numbers of Allied fighters certainly didn't make life any easier.

 

[Soren]

And as to Jet-bombers:

Ju-287

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The top speeds are very close but they don't matter much, what matters is the difference in cruise speed - check that out - The He-277 is a good deal faster than the B-29 at cruise speed; 460 km/h > 350 km/h.

Agree, but what about range?

I don't believe the B-29 firecontrol system was any better than that carried on the He-177 or He-277, as far as I can see they have exactly the same functions.

Weren't some of the guns still hand operated in the 177? The only "hand gun" was the tail gunner on the 29 and in some cases that worked to an advantage.

The B-29 had the advantage of not having its IFF equipment jammed, thats about all that made it superior, the He-177 He-277 both carried pretty much the same equipment with very few exceptions.

Agree

I believe that had the LW invested trained men fuel in this machine then it was just as good if not better than the B-29 - but as it looked there just wasn't any fuel or trained crew to spare, and the huge numbers of Allied fighters certainly didn't make life any easier.

Agree there, but both aircraft were still taildraggers, recipes for disaster especially for green pilots. If there was a slight chance of either aircraft coming close to being operational, I think you would of had just as many losses to ground loops as you would of had to enemy fire.

 

[syscom3]

B29 vs He-277:

Armament for He-277
* 8 × 7.92 mm MG 81 machine guns in forward and rear fuselage barbettes
* 3 × 13 mm MG 131 machine gun in two dorsal turrets
* 1 × 15 mm or 20 mm MG 151 cannon in nose.

Look at that: 8 rifle caliber MG's compared to the B29's twelve .50's.

Plus the -277 DID NOT have a CFC system like the B29. The -277 guns were manually aimed, or mechanically controlled using traditional optical sites.

The B29 gets the points for having not only heavier firepower, but superior fire control.

Now for bombing radars:
The B29: Its tarted the war with the AN/APQ-13 radar bombing/navigational aid set, and then was upgraded to the AN/APQ-7 Eagle radar unit was used. Note - the Eagle antenna was mounted in a wing-shaped housing installed underneath the forward section of the fuselage.

The -277 had exactly what? And what was the IR set for?

The B29 gets the points for having aproven radar bombing set. The -277 gets no points simply because no reference is given to what avionics suites were used. And unfortunatly for the LW, as the war progressed to its final year, attaching radar bomb mechanisms to airframes and getting them to work became a lower and lower priority, while the converse was true for the RAF and AAF.

Production numbers:
He-277: Eight. And I didnt see any reference to any combat missions flown.
B29: Three thousand eight hundred ninety five (3895). Missions, I have to look it up tomorrow, but to say it was over 100,000 would not be an overstatement.

So Soren is comparing an airplane that was inferior in many area's, and was essentially never built or flew a mission, to one of the all time great bombers of WW2. Plus hes complaining that the LW didnt have the resources or fuel to get it to work as planned.

 

[Graeme]

Regarding that famous Junkers Ju 287V1 prototype.

It was just a large lash up, roughly the same size as the eventual bomber but made up of of bits of other aircraft. The objective was to test the forward swept wing (FSW) at low speeds. Surely it would have been better to build a high-speed testbed so that a scaled wing could be tested at all speeds?

The Ju287V1 used a fuselage based on that of an He 177, a tail from a Ju 388, main wheels from a Ju 352 and two nose wheels from captured B-24 Liberaters!
To avoid cutting into the wing the main gears were fixed and spatted, though the wing box was cut open to receive the legs and bracing struts. The fixed nose gears were also spatted, and mounted side by side under the He 177 type cockpit. Four Jumo 004B turbojets were used, two on the sides of the nose and two under the trailing edge of the wing, where under high g loads they twisted the wing the wrong way.

This ungainly contraption first flew on 16 August 1944. Bill Green says it was once dived to 404mph; they were pushing their luck. It certainly showed that at low speeds an FSW aircraft could fly well, but that was never questioned. Even at speeds around 300 knots it was found that wing deflection was causing serious problems. Junkers decided with the Ju 287V2 -which may have completed by the Russians-to use six Jumo 004Bs in triple clusters hung ahead of the wing, to try stop it twisting. But with traditional metal wings the whole idea was an impossibility, unless the wing was almost solid!

'Back to the Drawing Board'-Bill Gunston 1996.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

And as to Jet-bombers:

Ju-287

And did they actually have these bomber, let alone in any significant numbers?

No just like any of the other heavy bombers.

 

[Marcel]

No matter what, eventually all threads will become a best bomber thread

 

[mosquitoman]

Because ultimately, fighters are mainly defensive weapons of war, bombers are the offensive arm of any air force.