Dornier Do-17 215, EXCELLENT Luftwaffe bomber

Fafnir

Recruit
2
0
Nov 29, 2004
web.wt.net
It is often said the Ju-88 was Germany's "Schnell bomber" (fast bomber), one so fast it could outrun enemy fighters. Well, the fact is the Spitfire, Hurricane, and Dewotine 520 could easily catch it and shoot it down.
The Ju-88 was fast only in the Luftwaffe's dream.

The Do-17 when it started service was faster then anything the Spanish had. Losses where far greater from AA and accidents then air-to-air.

It was also maneuverable, as written by its pilots, but also those that tried to shoot them down (reported by RAF flyers in Hurricanes and Spitfires!)

Why was it pulled from front line service in mid 1941? The Do-217 was put in full production, can could carry 4000kg the bomb-load. While the He-177 and Ju-288 could not replace the earlier He-111 and Ju-88.

BEFORE you start posting, check out this web site.
Dornier Do-17 and 215 facts and info
do17z-001.jpg
 

DerAdlerIstGelandet

Private Chemtrail Disperser
Staff
Mod
47,840
10,937
Nov 8, 2004
USA/Germany
I believe what you are referring to is the fact that at the beginning of the war the Ju-88 was faster than its primary enemy at the time. Yes the Hurricane adn the Spit were faster but when the Ju-88 came out it was pretty fast for a bomber.

The thing that made the Ju-88 so good was its versatility. It coudl be used for anything.

The 217 was a pretty good bomber and just not used to its advantage.
 

FLYBOYJ

"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Staff
Mod
28,098
8,683
Apr 9, 2005
Colorado, USA
2 things to also look at. How hard was the -17 to maintain in the field and how easy was it to produce? This may be another reason why it was pulled from front line service so soon.
 

cheddar cheese

Major General
20,265
18
Jan 9, 2004
WSM, England
I thought it was the Ju-188 that replaced the Ju-88? In so far as much as ive read the Ju-188 was built in fair numbers and was pretty good. The Ju-488 and Do-317 would have been interesting...
 

DerAdlerIstGelandet

Private Chemtrail Disperser
Staff
Mod
47,840
10,937
Nov 8, 2004
USA/Germany
The Ju-88 was never really replaced. It was supposed to be the replacement and yes it was better in performance. Only about 1036 were built however.

Type: Bomber (D-2 Reconnaissance)
Origin: Junkers Flugzeug und Motorenwerke AG
Models: Ju 188A, D and E series
Crew: Five
First Flight:
Ju 88B-0: Early 1940
Ju 88V27: September 1941
Ju 188V1: December 1941
Ju 188E-1: March 1942
Final Delivery: 1945-46 (French built)
Number Produced: 1,100

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engine:
Ju 188A Ju 188D:
Model: Junkers Jumo 213A
Type: 12-Cylinder inverted liquid cooled vee
Number: Two Horsepower: 1,776 hp

Ju 188E:
Model: BMW 801G-2
Type: 18-Cylinder two-row radials
Number: Two Horsepower: 1,700 hp

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dimensions:
Wing span: 72 ft. 2 in. (22m)
Length: 49 ft. 1 in. (14.96m)
Height: 14 ft. 7 in. (4.44m)
Wing Surface Area: 602.80 sq. ft.

Weights:
Empty:
Ju 188E-1: 21,825 lb. (9900 kg)
Loaded:
Ju 188A D: 33,730 lb. (15,300 kg)
Ju 188E-1: 31,967 lb. (14,500 kg)
Performance:
Maximum Speed:
Ju 188A: 325 mph at 20,500 ft. (6250m)
Ju 188D: 350 mph at 27,000 ft. (8235m)
Ju 188E: 310 mph at 19,685 ft. (6000m)
Initial Climb: N/A
Service Ceiling:
Ju 188A: 33,000 ft. (10,060m)
Ju 188D: 36,090 ft. (11,000m)
Ju 188A: 31,170 ft. (9500m)
Range with 3,300 lb. (1500kg) bomb load:
Ju 188A E: 1,360 miles (2160 km)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armament: Typical.
One 20mm MG 151/20 cannon in nose.

One 13mm MG 131 machine gun in dorsal turret.

One 13mm MG 131 machine gun manually aimed from rear dorsal position.

One 13mm MG 131 machine gun or
twin 7.92mm MG 81 machine gun manually aimed from rear ventral position.

Payload: Typical.
6,614 lb. (3000kg) of bombs internally or two 2,200 lb. (1000kg) torpedos under inner wings.


I think the Ju-188S and Ju-188T would have been interesting had they been developed more. They were built but never tried with a defensive armament. I believe these two could have been good interceptors with bomber killer armament.

High-altitude versions
In 1943 it was planned to upgrade the entire lineup with even more wing area and a pressurized cockpit for high-altitude work. A single basic airframe would be offered in three versions, the Ju 188J heavy fighter, Ju 188K bomber, and the Ju 188L reconnaissance version. All three did away with the under-slung gunner's compartment, leading to a cleaner nose profile, and the bomber and recce versions mounted their loads in a long pannier under the middle of the plane instead of the deeper fuselage of the G and H models.

Simpler versions of these with no defensive armament and even longer wings became the Ju 188S fighter and Ju 188T intruder. With Jumo 213E-1 engines 2,100 hp (1,544 kW) at take-off and 1,690 hp (1,243 kW) at 31,400 ft (9,570 m), the Ju 188T could reach 435 mph (700 km/h). Operating at this altitude, the Ju 188S could carry only 800 kg of bombs.

Before any of these could start production, the entire lineup was renamed the Ju 388, the vastly improved performance warranting this change in name.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Ju_188
 

Attachments

  • ju188_243.jpg
    ju188_243.jpg
    16.3 KB · Views: 599

cheddar cheese

Major General
20,265
18
Jan 9, 2004
WSM, England
Everyone has personal taste...its not possible to not have it...Nothing wrong the 188 though. Not good looking but there are far uglier out there.
 

DerAdlerIstGelandet

Private Chemtrail Disperser
Staff
Mod
47,840
10,937
Nov 8, 2004
USA/Germany
the lancaster kicks ass said:
it is just a matter of personal taste

which you are obviously lacking :lilangel:

I dont know you happen to like the Lanc....that does not say much! :lol:

No really I happen to like some of the wierder designs such as the 188, Ju-288, and espeically the Ju-388.
 

Attachments

  • ju-388_734.jpg
    ju-388_734.jpg
    13.3 KB · Views: 633
  • ju-288_109.jpg
    ju-288_109.jpg
    19.1 KB · Views: 533

Users who are viewing this thread