Ju88A-4/A-17 Speed with Torpedo?

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

elbmc1969

Senior Airman
574
421
Feb 16, 2019
Does anyone know the maximum speed of a Ju88A-4 or A-17 carrying torpedoes? Speeds at various altitudes is obviously useful.

If it's handy to the Hive mind, what is the rate of climb?
 
There is a German document in Canadian archives that compares the Ju 88 A-17 with the Ju 188 A-3.

Ju 188 with two torpedoes, at sea level: 280 km/h cruise, 365 km/h max
Ju 188 without torpedoes, at sea level: 320 km/h cruise, 395 km/h max

The document says that the Ju 88 A-17 is about 30 kmh slower than the Ju 188 in each case.

Ju 188 normal range: 1580 km, or 2150 km at economical cruise
Ju 88 A-17: 2300 km
 
There is a German document in Canadian archives that compares the Ju 88 A-17 with the Ju 188 A-3.

Ju 188 with two torpedoes, at sea level: 280 km/h cruise, 365 km/h max
Ju 188 without torpedoes, at sea level: 320 km/h cruise, 395 km/h max

The document says that the Ju 88 A-17 is about 30 kmh slower than the Ju 188 in each case.

Ju 188 normal range: 1580 km, or 2150 km at economical cruise
Ju 88 A-17: 2300 km
So more speed, shorter range. For sea, is that a benifit? 75 km 1 leg.
 
So more speed, shorter range. For sea, is that a benifit? 75 km 1 leg.
The 88's listed range is economical cruise, so it's a difference of about 150 km (2150 for the 188, 2300 for the 88). Barely a difference.

What do you mean by "75 km, one leg"?
 
That's the reduction in distance of one leg of a search. Since you have to fly a return leg.
Got it.

To answer the question, it probably doesn't matter much either way for land-based aircraft with fairly long range. If the target isn't being shadowed the whole time you're flying to it, being a little faster means that the target is more likely to still be where you expect it when you arrive. On the other hand, less range means less endurance to search for the target when it's not exactly where you expected.

It's probably a wash. And it's not like these were airframes designed for maritime strikes.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back