Bf-110 successor

Ju-88 needed DB603 engines to reach it's full potential. Unfortunately (for Germany) RLM cancelled funding for that engine program during 1937 to 1940. Otherwise a DB603 powered Ju-88 night fighter might have entered service during 1941 which would have allowed Me-110 to entirely end production during 1942.
 
davebender said:
Ju-88 needed DB603 engines to reach it's full potential. Unfortunately (for Germany) RLM cancelled funding for that engine program during 1937 to 1940. Otherwise a DB603 powered Ju-88 night fighter might have entered service during 1941 which would have allowed Me-110 to entirely end production during 1942.
Click to expand...

By 1942 I don't think the DB603 is necessary for the Ju88 to be competitive, but by 1943 you are right. Still even with the DB605 and upgraded Jumos/BMW 801s it was very useful. I think it matters for the Ju188s in 1943 when the Mosquito is really becoming an issue.
 
davebender said:
Ju-88 needed DB603 engines to reach it's full potential. Unfortunately (for Germany) RLM cancelled funding for that engine program during 1937 to 1940. Otherwise a DB603 powered Ju-88 night fighter might have entered service during 1941 which would have allowed Me-110 to entirely end production during 1942.
Click to expand...

By 1942 I don't think the DB603 is necessary for the Ju88 to be competitive, but by 1943 you are right. Still even with the DB605 and upgraded Jumos/BMW 801s it was very useful. I think it matters for the Ju188s in 1943 when the Mosquito is really becoming an issue.
 
davebender said:
He-219 was also a rather large and expensive aircraft.
Click to expand...

It was also probably Germany's most competitive night fighter and a project that Milch really did try to kill on more than one occassion :)

Cheers

Steve
 
Dave,

According to the findings of Prof. Budraß, the Ju288A was less expansive and less demanding on spare ressources than was the Ju-88A in mass production. Details of production habe been much improved on the -288. Components from both, fuselage and wing are serially produced Ju88 elements. Noteworty was a significantly decreased degree of handcraftmanship required in the production run. Working time per unit was 18% less compared to 1941 Ju88. Hardly a very expansive airplane. It may have been less stellar performing with Jumo-211 or BMW-801 but it was an airplane capable to cruise at 300 mph outbound with very good endurance and payload options. Much better than the Ju-88.
It was also more maneuverable thanks to new Hirth flaps and ergonomical because of the fighter cockpit.
The fuselage could be modified for NF. Replace the two barbettes with units each for Schräge Musik and turn the gunners position to a radar operators one with front mounted radars.
 
http://www.econ.yale.edu/growth_pdf/cdp905.pdf
By the end of 1942 the Ju-88 airframe cost only about 140,000 RM. Dirt cheap for an aircraft of that size. Less then the cost of American made P-38 and P-47 fighter aircraft.

Ju-288 never entered mass production so we cannot know for sure. But I would bet against Junkers delivering Ju-288 airframes for less then 140,000 RM each.
 
I cannot comment on prize per unit in RM currancy for the Ju-288, since only prototypes were buildt (except for a single serial C-1 delivered prior to the stop caused by the Jägernotprogramm in 1944).
But what i can comment about is that spare ressources beeing more effectively distributed within the Ju-288 and Jumo-222 program than they were distributed in the existing Jumo-211 and Ju-88 program. This has been commented by Otto Marder in dezember 1939 in the minutes to the stand of development Jumo-222, while Hertel commented to the RLM for reduced worktime hours for unit production of the Ju-288A compared to the Ju-88A in 1941. This was before Milch´s decision in august to split up engine and airframe development.

The Jumo-222 A/B first run in july 1939 and attained 2000 hp in march 1940 on the testbench (Brandner in decembre 1939 believed that 2000 hp would be attainable in february 1940, not that far off from schedule).
Indeed, the Jumo-222 was plagued by subsequent changes of the requirements with drastic increases in demands of power from the part of Milch /RLM. Milch changed the original RLM requirement for power rating of the Jumo-222 A/B from 1900 hp to 2500 in july 1941 (just when it was cleared for 2000 hp after passing the 100 hour test run with 2000 hp continous in spring 1941) and then to 3000 hp in 1942 (just half a month before it was cleared for 2500 hp) in order to justify the disconnection between Ju-288 airframe and Jumo-222 engines. Then Milch choosed the Jumo-213 to be preferred in development and production as R&D of the Jumo-222 to be shifted to Dessau to delay the Jumo-222 even further. The Jumo-222E/F was finally certified cleared for 3000 hp max continuous rating late in 1944. It however, could have gone into serial production as version Jumo-222A/B with the original, 2000 hp rating in the already tooled up and set up production lines at Vienna Ostmark facory in december 1941, which had a legend production capacity of 1000 Jumo-222A engines / month under full working load. Production of other factories didn´t even had to be reduced. Changing requirements meant that only small series production was commenced for testing and other purposes, one of the reasons for low Jumo-222 production output (totalling ~300 engines) was that there are no airframes designed for this engine!

Even without the Jumo-222. The Ju-288V-3 alone logged more than 100 flight hours with BMW-801A before the end of 1941. I would rather have the Ju-288 than the Ju-188/388, even if it comes only with Jumo-211 or BMW-801A.
 
I agree.

However you are talking about replacing the Ju-188 level bomber rather then the Me-110 night fighter.
 
I am not sure why it technically should be impossible to replace the Ju-88A NF derivates with a Ju-288A NF derivate in mid´43 (replacing Bf-110G all along with them). They are both similarely sized (the Ju-88G is actually a bit larger than the more compact Ju-288A:

Ju-88C1
2 x Jumo-211J (1,400 hp each)
height: 5.07m
span: 20.08 m
length: 15.55m (length with radar 16.50m)
wing area: 54,70m²
weight (normal, internal fuel, no external stores or internal bombs): 11.8 tons
max cruise speed: 270 mp/h (radar antennas take away 19 mph A/C speed = 251 mph)
max. emergancy speed: 317 mp/h (radar antennas take away 22 mph A/C top speed = 295 mph)
take off roll: 2,340 ft

Ju-288A with Jumo-211 engines
2 x Jumo-211J (1,400 hp each)
height: 4.15m
span: 18.29m
length: 15.89m (length with radar 16.84m)
wing area: 60.0 m²
weight (normalm internal fuel, no external stores or internal bombs): 13.9 tons
max cruise speed: 320 mp/h (radar fit takes away est. ~22 mph A/C top speed = 298 mph)
max. emergancy speed: 348 mp/h (radar fit takes away est. ~24 mph A/C top speed = 324 mph)
take off roll / lift off: 2,950 ft

The Ju-288A with proposed Jumo-222A engines:
2 x Jumo-211J (2,000 hp each in -A1 version certified 1941)
height: 4.15m
span: 18.29m
length: 15.89m (length with radar 16.84m)
wing area: 60.0 m²
weight (normalm internal fuel, no external stores or internal bombs): 14.5 tons
max cruise speed: 351 mp/h (radar fit takes away est. ~24 mph A/C top speed = 327 mph)
max. emergancy speed: 401 mp/h (radar fit takes away est. ~28 mph A/C top speed = 373 mph)
take off roll / lift off: 1,970 ft
 
Last edited:
I hadn't realized they were so close in size. Guess I should have checked specifications.

How did Junkers manage to put a decent size bomb bay on Ju-288 yet were unable to put a decent size bomb bay on Ju-88?
 
This is not quite correct. The Ju288a used an internal enclosed bombbay dimensioned to fit a torpedo or three SC-1000 or two of the largest sized bombs (2500 kg SC-2500 ones IIRC) with various options to accomodate different sets of 50-, 80-, 250-, and 500 kg Bombs.
I have somewhere the files for it. edit: added it below.
External racks existed, too (primarely intended for 900ltr drop tanks or guided weapons) but the bombbay was primary in the function. Even the biggest bombs fitted in it (note the text: "ohne Umrüsten")



Consequently, neither the fuselage nor the bombbay was much changed in the Ju-288B, but the cockpit was.


It was Hertel's task to formulate a space and production optimised fuselage for the Ju-288a and by all accounts, he succeeded in this target. the fuselage was only 3ft wide but about 6ft tall and not circular in diameter. It could have been more low drag smoothed but not more space efficient.
Hertel came from Heinkel, he had nothing to do with the Ju88 design process.
 
Last edited:
Interesting site about the Ju288 in German only but with a pic showing the bomb bay
FlugzeugLorenz: Junkers Ju 288
 
Some more details about the various Ju-288a data aviable.
There are, in part, conflicting data aviable on the net.

Ju-288 (initial proposal, also termed Junkers EF-73).
This design was closer to the Ju-88A. It had the same rear fuselage with the Ju-88A tail section and a smaller wing. Two JUMO-222A (2 x 1840 KW) were proposed to drive the airplane. Under development from 1937 to 1940. Another version was proposed to be propelled by two JUMO-224A Diesel with ultra long range (marine purposes). No prototypes.
Span: 15.70m
wing area: 48.0m²
speed: 675 km/h at 8,000m
internal bombload: 4,000kg (=2 x SC2000)
max. take off weight: 14,600kg
Range figures as given by Junkers appear to be to high (the RLM concerns about this and I guess they were right in their suspect) and are not reproduced here until more data is aviable

Ju-288A (scheduled for serial production late in 1941, initial variant, studied 1939 to 1941)
The design had to be changed owing to a larger requirement of internal bombload from the RLM. Driven by two derated JUMO-222A/B (2 x 1440 KW) but other engines were under consderation, too (see above). The Ju-288V1 was buildt according to these requirements, the Ju-288V5 was buildt as a full pre production prototype, driven by JUMO-222A/B.
Span: 18.29m
wing area: 54.0m²
speed: 660 km/h at 8000m
bombload: 5000kg (=2 x SC 2500 internal)
max. take off weight: 15600kg
range: 3850km

Ju-288A modified (scheduled for serial production late in 1941, modified variant, studied 1941 to 1942)
The design had to be changed owing to a larger requirement of internal bombload from the RLM. Driven by two derated JUMO-222A/B (2 x 1440 KW) but other engines were under consideration, too (see above). The big difference to the Ju-288A above is the bigger wingsize. The Ju-288V2-V4 were buildt as prototypes following these specifiations.
span: 20.06m
wing area: 60.0 m²
speed: 645 km/h at 8000km
bombload: 5000kg (two SC2500 internal) (+ 1200kg external drop tanks or +1000kg external bombs, optional)
max take off weight: 17300kg
range: 3600km

Now the RLM changed once more requirements, calling for an even larger endurance, requiring yet another, even bigger wing (span= 22.0m, wing area = 64.0m², beeing represented by the Ju-288V6-V8 and Ju-288V12, leading to the Ju-288B design stage) and eventually a fourth crewmember (Ju-288V9-11) in a wider cockpit. Simultaneously, the power requirement for the JUMO-222A/B was increased to 1844 KW, which -as it was hoped, would compensate for the larger airplane.
I was somehow suprised to see that they required so much larger payloads from the initial proposal EF-73. Even driven with only 1044 KW JUMO-211J instead, the A/C should be fast (~580 km/h) and nimble and represents (in my eyes) a more capable plane than Bf-110 and Ju-88/-188 with regard to utility and load taking vs range capability.
 
Last edited:
The relatively small EF-73 might make a good night fighter. Ju-288A would be the bomber. They are different enough that, if produced, they should probably have different model designations.
 
For a plane capable of effectively fighting the NF Mossies it should to have quite a speed advantage over the latter. So incorporating a low drag laminar flow wing would had been obviously of use.
But in none of the aircraft mentioned it had been done?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Holtzauge
Could the Bf 109 E really out-turn the Spitfire Mk I?
10 11 12
Replies
227
Views
24K
Engineman
E
CHen10
Bf-109 vs Bf-109 23 December 1944 [SOLVED]
Replies
1
Views
2K
CHen10
CHen10
W
Bf-109F-4 # 8694
Replies
1
Views
2K
mjfur
M
Holtzauge
Would a Spitfire with the same wing area as on the Bf 109 have been a good idea or not?
3 4 5
Replies
95
Views
15K
Reluctant Poster
R
J
BF-109K-4 aerial victories
2
Replies
37
Views
11K
Jerrybandit67
J
Back