ju-88vs b-25vs b-26

[davparlr]

One of the things I didn't see in Dave's analysis was the cruise speed and range with max load at that range?

This is part of the problem of comparing small and medium bombers. It is very difficult, at least for me, to obtain data on these variables that actually compare. Not all of the aircraft in my sources have cruising speed, nor are they consistent in the value of range they state, often never stating what the conditions are at all.

The next question is what Mission profile is the basis for comparison? Medium altitude precision bombing, low level attack, long range night strikes, dive bombing? all of the above?

All very good comments. It is hard to nail down what a medium bomber is. In WWII, there were many aircraft handling many different roles. In today jargon, the bomber role has evolved into three categories, with heavy bombers evolving into strategic bombers, light and medium bombers becoming attack aircraft, and fighter-bombers are fighter-bombers. Of course the strategic bomber roles are still well represented by the B-52 (in cruise missile mode), B-1, and B-2. With the demise of the FB-111 and A-6, the only dedicated attack aircraft is the F-117 (in spite of its designation), which is about to fade away, probably being replaced by the F-35, fighter-bomber. The AF is presently looking into developing a "medium" stealth bomber. The fighter-bombers have certainly gained prominence, I think mainly due to increased threat, and possibly, to most of the movers and shakers in the AF and Navy being fighter pilots.

They are all good and versatile aircraft

Very true.

The allies were blessed with great attack aircraft that, with heroic crews, an took the battle to the enemy.
A-20
B-25
B-26
A-26
Various Naval aircraft (although they didn't have a medium bomber available until after the war)
Mosquito

Certainly the Ju-88, and I am sure others, fall into this list with their heroic crew.

Dav, I agree with you that a Corsair can't be considered as a bomber. I still don't believe a JU88 can be considered in the same category with a B25 or B26 but I guess it is really a question of semantics. The Ju88 could carry 4000 pounds of bombs but most had to be carried externally. As a bomber, it was a failure during BOB. Not as effective as the HE111 but maybe that was because the Germans thought it could operate un escorted. The B25 and B26 could and did operate unescorted. They had much heavier defensive armamment that the JU88 and I suspect they were faster with a full load of bombs aboard. However, I still say the JU88 should be compared with the likes of the A20, perhaps the Beaufort or even the Mosquito

I agree with all you say.

 

[fly boy]

oh yea they used those in the bismarck sea from what i know

 

[Conslaw]

I also struggle to identify the best medium bomber. The Americans were blessed with a plethora of medium bombers that were up to date at the beginning of the (American) war and with enough stretch to be competent through the end. The B-25, GB-26 and A-20 were all excellent aircraft. In fact, they were so good that it gave the brass the luxury of botching the introduction of the A-26 without much negative consequence. These bombers were so good that Martin's immediate predecessor bomber, the Baltimore, was not purchased by the Americans. The Lockheed Hudson, Ventura and Harpoon all served well, but (presumably because of lessor defensive protection), the Lockheeds were mostly used for maritime patrol. Had it come into service earlier, the A-26 would have been the standout. Under all the circumstances, I'd say the Mosquito was the best medium bomber of the war. The B-26 was the best for heavily defended targets. The B-25 was best for advanced bases and less than perfect conditions.

 

[davebender]

The purpose of bombing is to put HE on target.

Ju-88 bombing accuracy was far superior to level bombers such as B-25 and B-26. That makes the choice easy, at least until improved bomb sights and/or guided weapons allow accurate level bombing.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Ju-88 bombing accuracy was far superior to level bombers such as B-25 and B-26.

Proof? Define "far superior."

 

[davebender]

HyperWar: The Battle of Britain--A German Perspective
In 1938, "even well-qualified bomber crews could achieve only a two percent bombing accuracy in high-level, horizontal attacks (up to 13,500 feet), and twelve to twenty-five percent accuracy in low level attacks against targets of between 165 to 330 feet in radius

Ju87B-1 could deliver a bomb with an accuracy of less than thirty yards.

Ju-88 could deliver 50 percent of its bomb load within a 50-meter circle.

 

[rinkol]

Renrich, my understanding was that the Ju 88s did fairly well against the Beaufighters in the Biscay fighting, but suffered against the Mosquitos.

 

[tomo pauk]

BTW, we haven't heard from renrich some time?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

HyperWar: The Battle of Britain--A German Perspective
In 1938, "even well-qualified bomber crews could achieve only a two percent bombing accuracy in high-level, horizontal attacks (up to 13,500 feet), and twelve to twenty-five percent accuracy in low level attacks against targets of between 165 to 330 feet in radius

Ju87B-1 could deliver a bomb with an accuracy of less than thirty yards.

Ju-88 could deliver 50 percent of its bomb load within a 50-meter circle.

Gee, with that kind of accuracy, Germany should have won the war! But then again you can put a 500 pound bomb in a pickle barrel with a Norden bomb sight from 20,000 feet!

There is no way anyone could say one bomber's accuracy was better than another UNLESS you show documented proof of sorties, bombs dropped, targets hit (confirmed by both sides) and base this on a similar sortie/ bomb load comparison as well as the TYPE of bombing being compared. Not taking anything away from the Ju.88, B-25s and B-26s, by virtue of superior numbers, saturated their targets. How accurate was the Ju.88 in "Skip Bombing"? Oh wait, did the Ju.88 ever do "skip bombing"?

 

[Tante Ju]

I still don't believe a JU88 can be considered in the same category with a B25 or B26 but I guess it is really a question of semantics. The Ju88 could carry 4000 pounds of bombs but most had to be carried externally.

Actually Ju 88 can carry up to 8000 lbs externally as overload (two SC 1800 bombs).

The B25 and B26 could and did operate unescorted. They had much heavier defensive armamment that the JU88 and I suspect they were faster with a full load of bombs aboard.

IMHO the aircraft that really should be compared to B25/26 is the Ju 88E (aka Ju 188 ). it had cannons in its defensive armament, so I am bit sceptical about the "much heavier defensive armament".

 

[davparlr]

IMHO the aircraft that really should be compared to B25/26 is the Ju 88E (aka Ju 188 ). it had cannons in its defensive armament, so I am bit sceptical about the "much heavier defensive armament".

These were later war models more contemporary to the A-26. They also appears to not be much of an improvement over the Ju-88 and defensive armament seems to have been problematic.

 

[tomo pauk]

Gee, with that kind of accuracy, Germany should have won the war! But then again you can put a 500 pound bomb in a pickle barrel with a Norden bomb sight from 20,000 feet!

There is no way anyone could say one bomber's accuracy was better than another UNLESS you show documented proof of sorties, bombs dropped, targets hit (confirmed by both sides) and base this on a similar sortie/ bomb load comparison as well as the TYPE of bombing being compared. Not taking anything away from the Ju.88, B-25s and B-26s, by virtue of superior numbers, saturated their targets. How accurate was the Ju.88 in "Skip Bombing"? Oh wait, did the Ju.88 ever do "skip bombing"?

Joe, if I may chip in:

Bomber versions of Ju-88 were dive bombers, so they should in theory bomb more accurately than a bomber making a bombing run from, say, 15000 ft. On the other hand, use of 'parafrag' and 'parademo' bombs while flying above tree top was also accurate, like the 5th Airforce B-25s demonstrated in SW Pac.
The skip bombing was a matter of crew training, not a matter of this or that plane; obviously, the bigger and/or slower plane, easier the target for ship-based AAA to harm the incoming plane.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Joe, if I may chip in:

Bomber versions of Ju-88 were dive bombers, so they should in theory bomb more accurately than a bomber making a bombing run from, say, 15000 ft. On the other hand, use of 'parafrag' and 'parademo' bombs while flying above tree top was also accurate, like the 5th Airforce B-25s demonstrated in SW Pac.
The skip bombing was a matter of crew training, not a matter of this or that plane; obviously, the bigger and/or slower plane, easier the target for ship-based AAA to harm the incoming plane.

Exactly!

 

[Vincenzo]

These were later war models more contemporary to the A-26. They also appears to not be much of an improvement over the Ju-88 and defensive armament seems to have been problematic.

the 188E production started in february '43 (2 digit in may) with first mission in august '43. the A-26 delivery started in september '43 ( but the production was very low only in april '44 the month production* get 2 digit (exactly 15), first mission in june '44. So are not so contemporary. It's also true that both B-25 and 26 were in production, in their original form, in early '41.
The bomber production in Germany was stopped near the same time of A-26 get mass production so hard find a true contemporary.
At time of Ju 188E US built B-26C and started F just few time before the end of production of 188E and the B-25D and from end of 43 the J.
Around contemporary of the B-25 and B-26 is the 88A-4


* wrong is the month deliveries

 

[Jerry W. Loper]

On paper the Ju-88 might have compared well to the B-25 and B-26, but in the last couple of years of the war, the airspace over northwestern Europe during daylight was more of a deathtrap for the Ju-88 than for the B-25 and B-26. From 1943 on, the Allies had air superiority over Germany, meaning what future the Ju-88 had left was being modified into a night fighter, while the B-25 and B-26 could be utilized as bombers because the Luftwaffe's fighters were steadily being attrited. Plus, one good hit could take out a Ju-88's whole crew because they were all in the forward fuselage, while the B-25's and B-26's crews were more dispersed and the American bombers had better defensive armament.

 

[Shortround6]

How often were JU-88s actually used as dive bombers?

I an not talking vertical dives but any attack steep enough to call for the use of the dive brakes?

If the majority of attacks were either from the level or from shallow dives then the dive bombing accuracy is something of a misdirection.

A number of aircraft had built in/designed in abilities that were seldom if ever used. Many early B-25s and B-26s had the ability to carry a torpedo even though their crews were never trained to do so. Does this make them better than the Ju-88?

 

[gjs238]

How often were JU-88s actually used as dive bombers?

I an not talking vertical dives but any attack steep enough to call for the use of the dive brakes?

If the majority of attacks were either from the level or from shallow dives then the dive bombing accuracy is something of a misdirection.

A number of aircraft had built in/designed in abilities that were seldom if ever used. Many early B-25s and B-26s had the ability to carry a torpedo even though their crews were never trained to do so. Does this make them better than the Ju-88?

The He 177 was a "dive bomber," so did that make it better than it's Allied contemporaries?

 

[DonL]

I think this is an unlucky comparison.

THe Ju 88 had it's strenghts through it's versatility and was developed later in the war more to a nightfighter, heavy fighter bomber and naval bomber/attack aircraft.

The only real major use of the Ju 88 as true arial medium level nomber was at BoB.

After that many other dutys were also very important next to the duty as medium level bomber.
The Ju 88 was successful as nightfighter, naval attack a/c, support (dive) bomber for the troops and also as heavy fighter in the east.
Medium level bomber wasn't the major duty since 1943.

A better comparison would be the Do 217 since 1941 with the developed steps Jumo 211, BMW 801 and DB 603.
The Do 217 was also nightfighter but the major dutys were medium level bomber and naval attack aircraft and I think in this roles the Do 217 was successful and would be a better match to the B-26 and B-25.
The Ju 88 had more "fighter" genes then all three other mentioned a/c's (especially with the BMW 801 and the Jumo 213), compare all three other a/c's had much more bomber genes.

 

[dobbie]

I think the JU 88 is a fine aircraft and very versatile, but I think it comes up a bit short on the Medium bomber category. To me, it just wasnt quite "enough plane" for that sort of role. The bomb load was a bit light for a truly medium bomber unless you wanted to carry a lot of the load on the wings. Out of the aircraft in the poll, the B-26 had the lowest loss rate in combat so Im thinking it was likely the most effective traditional medium bomber despite a lot of teething problems initially.

 

[Tante Ju]

Ju 88 dive bombing montage from German newsreel.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02jMZN16OrA