- Thread starter
-
- #21
carman1877
Airman
- 51
- May 14, 2009
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Good observation. We in 15th AF bomber crews speculated repeatedly that the only reason we were winning the war was because the Germans made many more goofs than we did. It was instructive to watch.correct Vikings pic is a late Ju 290A of FAGr 5, I have a couple of photos including full length fuselage shot in my base.
the maritime recon was a joke and it is interesting that KG 40 was able to kick out as much success as they had. FAGr 5 took over armed recee but was not really in the attack mode but in surveliance only allowing the KM to use it's U-Boot force to it's fullest, at least that was what was proposed in theory. This indeed was one of the worst blunders of the war for the Third Reich as little to no working capabilities between the Luftwaffe and the Kreigmarine.
Grame thanks for the schematics of the Kondor variants, although the C-6 depicted would of carried the FuG 200 "H" radar as standard
E ~
Production statistics aside, it was not a particularly robust airframe. Even for maritime missions, it wasn't strong enough to carry the weapon loads attempted.I wonder why the FW 200 condor wasn't used during the Battle of Britain. Did it not operate well at high altitudes?
Structural weakness of Fw 200 design also must be considered. This aircraft was primarily designed as airliner and only later military version ..................
In a time where the Baltimore was a major British maritime bomber,
Ju 88H-1
...................but there's no reason the program couldn't have been funded by the German Navy during 1939. It could have been built concurrent with the Ju-88A. Makes more sense to me then purchasing converted airliners for about the same price.