How well did the Junkers JU-188 perform in the war?

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

+1

It took a lot of time for anything to catch up with Mossie - eventually jet plane was only thing that really worked.
 
The Ju-188 was a signal improvement on the original Ju-88. From what I have read (Wm Green mostly) it was also very popular with the few units able to get it. The fact that Germany continued to produce Ju88A's throughout the war says as much about chronically poor decision-making by the RLM as it does about the good the qualities of the Ju-88A. Within a year of the Ju-88A entering service, Junkers proposed and built prototypes of the Ju88B, which incorporated a number of design improvements that became the Ju-188 three years later. Following its usual "don't mess with existing schedules and types until you want to build something really stupid" mentality, the RLM told Junkers to can the Ju-88B and put all effort into the much more radical (and unsuccessful) Ju-288. Had the RLM any sense, the Luftwaffe could have been phasing out the Ju88A and introducing a much more capable bomber (the Ju88B/Ju188 ) as early as 1941.
 
can the Ju-88B and put all effort into the much more radical (and unsuccessful) Ju-288.
Click to expand...
The Ju-88 and Ju-288 are not comparable as the Ju-288 was so much larger with a corresponding larger range/payload. Rather like comparing a B-25 with a B-17.

B-17 Flying Fortress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For comparison purposes, B-17G Loaded weight was 24,500 kg.

Ju-88A4. 2 x 1,400 hp Jumo 211J engines.
Junkers Ju 88 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
8,550 kg Loaded weight.

Ju-288C. 2 x DB610 engines (i.e. coupled DB605s)
WRG - Luftwaffe Resource Group - Junkers Ju 288
22,450 kg Loaded weight.

As you can see, the Ju-288 was in the heavy bomber class. The Ju-88 and slightly improved Ju-188 were light bombers.

One can make an argument that Germany should have developed either the Ju-288 or He-177 heavy bombers but not both. However that is a subject for a separate discussion.
 

First of all, I am not comparing the 188 and 288 from a technical perspective. Simply saying that the effort spent on the 288 was a mistake. I would also agree that the Ju88 and 188 would barely qualify as medium bombers, but that is how the Luftwaffe employed them in the Battle of Britain.

Second, you are wrong about the 288 and the 177. The Ju288 was the flagship of the RLM's failed "Bomber B" program (for a modern high altitude medium bomber), and it was specifically proposed by Junkers as a successor to the Ju88. It was never seen as a heavy bomber. As originally flown, it was an extremely small plane, with a wingspan of less than 52 feet with a normal loaded weight of a little over 15,000kg. It grew progressively larger and heavier during its convoluted development process, but this was more the result of the RLM adding on additional demands to what was originally designed as a rather small medium bomber than a deliberate effort to redesign it as a heavy bomber. Even the last serious version (the Ju288C) was had a wingspan of little over 74 feet. It was to be the Luftwaffe's modern medium bomber replacement for the Ju88, He111 and Do17 series. Yes, it was heavy, and could have carried a large operational load, but it wast was never intended as a heavy bomber like the He177, with its crew of seven and wingspan of over 100 feet. The He177 stemmed from a separate program ("Bomber A") for a modern heavy bomber. My source is Wm Greens old, but well researched, Warplanes of the 3rd Reich.
 
I agree. However the fact remains the Bomber B specification gave it range / payload essentially similiar to the B-17G heavy bomber but with vastly superior aerial performance. So if the B-17 is a heavy bomber then so is the Ju-288.

July 1939. RLM issues the Bomber B specification.
…..Speed of 600kph (375mph)
…..Bomb load of 4,000kg
…..Pressurized cabin.
…..Remote control armament.
 
Your B-17 weight is questionable dave.

B-17D - 22,520kg
B-17E - 24,040kg
B-17F - 29,710kg
B-17G - 29,710kg

These are max take off weights.

Ju288B - Max takeoff weight: 21,000 kg
 
The difference between a medium bomber and light bomber is usage, not payload.

The He-111 and B-25 normally conducted level bombing from medium altitudes.

The Ju-88 and A-20 normally attack from low level. In the case of the Ju-88 it can also dive bomb. I assume the airframe was reinforced for this sort of work and additional armor installed to protect against groundfire.
 

Not my problem if the Luftwaffe misused it.

A-20s not only carried a smaller bomb load they had shorter range than than American planes in the medium bomber class. The use of B-25s and B-26s in low level attacks (the reason for those .50 cal cheek guns) didn't turn them into light bombers.
 

This is a reasonable distinction, I believe. the Ju88 and A-20 (as well as the Soviet Pe-2) are much more comparable with each other than they are with planes like the He-111, B-25, Wellington, G4M, Il-4, etc - which were designed as classic medium bombers. But no matter how one defines things there will always be awkward overlaps, such as the Betty and He-111 being also torpedo bombers, the Ju-88 and Pe-2 being dive bombers, and the A-20 being a ground attacker/strafer, and virtually all German bombers being given that ludicrous dive-bombing capability.

My tendency, however, would be to consider all of the planes mentioned above broadly as "medium bombers" because of their twin engined planform, numerous crew members, internal load capability, and defensive armament schemes, with the smaller, more agile, more multipurpose types being a separate sub-category, based as much on how they were predominantly used than any other reason. The fact that the USAAF was thoughful enough to designate the A-20 and A-26 as something other than a "bomber" is certainly to be considered in this regard, even though the A-26 was probably a better "medium bomber" than any other plane.
 
virtually all German bombers being given that ludicrous dive-bombing capability.
Click to expand...
That isn't quite true.

Most German bombers were evaluated for dive bombing capability. And most (i.e. Do-217, Ju-288, He-177) had the dive bombing requirement deleted early in the development cycle. The Ju-88A and Me-410A were the largest German dive bombers.
 


How many Do 217s were delivered with the air brake installed with an alternative tail cone packed discreetly in the bomb bay so the using unit could ditch the air brake at the first opportunity?

While a number of the German planes were not forced to dive bomb on operations some for some of them the requirement was deleted quite soon enough in the development cycle and they carried the heavier structure to the end of their days to the detriment of either performance or load carrying ability.
 
How many Do 217s were delivered with the air brake installed
Click to expand...
Looks like 185 x Do-217E2 dive bombers to me. Out of 1,730 total Do-217s produced.


Dornier Do 217 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
How did the I-16 Really Perform in WWII?
3 4 5
Replies
88
Views
5K
bf109xxl
A
Why did British aircraft production stagnate a bit during the war?
Replies
18
Views
3K
Geoffrey Sinclair
G
N
How capable was the Ki-44?
4 5 6
Replies
105
Views
11K
Irregualr23
I
A
Help identifying possible Junkers Ju 88s in archive footage
Replies
7
Views
498
Wurger
How often did wing-folding mechanisms fail in flight?
2 3
Replies
48
Views
8K
R Leonard
Menu
Log in
Register