More advanced aircraft during WW2? Germany or Japan?

[DonL]

1939 Germany didn't have effective torpedoes (either aerial or submarine) nor did they have an adequate stockpile of aerial mines.

Ah ok! Then I imagine the G7e Torpedo (Produktion 1936)and the LT F 5b / LT I (Produktion 1939).
What do you mean with effective?
The only Problem (Torpedokrise 1940 for 3 month) was the change from piercing fuze to magneto.

Ah, the Germans did not have an effective air launched torpedo bomber until October 1941, and that was initially the He 111. At the time the Ju88 was being designed and tested, they deid not even have an effective aerial torpedo. .

Me 110s aand FW 187s never carried torpedoe

I dont profess to know much about the FW 187, I am sure that the supporters of this aircraft will rush to correct my misreading of the potentialities of their pet aircraft, but I also can see dodgy research and claims when they are made, and this appears to be one of those occasions

Ah parsifal I have nothing else expected from you.
Because a Me 110 and FW 187 never carried a torpedo but for example a FW 190 caried one, so for you it's a matter of fact that there is no technological chance for the other birds and also no technological chance for Germany to develope an effective aerial torpedo bomber earlier when needed.

What was the operation purpose of the LW?

And wow the FW 187 is a dodgy research and claim.
This bird is fact and the flight and the speed of the FW 187 V6 (1939) too.
It's major problems were more political and not technological and the statements from a lot of members that Germany could not develop technological a state of the art long range fighter simply isn't true.
And this bird was not a promising design it was fact and ready to go in production.
There is no technological advantage from other nations compare to the LW in the area range.

 

[Glider]

DonL

I think you need to consider what time periods you are talking about. For instance there is no doubt that Germany had significant problems with the fuses on her torpedos for at least the first 12 months of the war. They were fixed that is true but the million dollar question is when.

It is also true to say that Germany didn't have an effective aerial torpedo and they did use the Italian torpedo's first. Not a lot of good developing an aerial torpedo bomber without a torpedo. Don't underestimate the difficulty involved in such a development. So again for the first 12 months Germany had a problem.

The Me110, I don't believe that this aircraft ever carried a torpedo in action. I am not aware of the payload of an early Me110 but to carry a torpedo you are looking at the best part of 2,000lb which is pushing it for a Me110 C/D and as for the impact on range, it would have been significant. Just because it might in theory be able to get into the air with a torpedo doesn't mean that it was a practical idea.

I admit I hadn't heard of the Ju88 carrying a torpedo in action but it had the payload to do this job.

As for the FW 187 carrying a torpedo I don't think this is a goer. The aircraft is light and as far as I am aware didn't have the payload for a torpedo bomber. Imagine a Whirlwind with a torpedo and you will see what I mean.
The He111 carried two torpedo's for training but IIRC only carried one on missions. They are big heavy lumps of metal and not easy to fit onto aircraft not designed for the role or without a large internal bomb bay.

 

[davebender]

Why would you use fighter aircraft as a torpedo bomber when the Ju-88 and He-111 are available? Not to mention the Ju-87 which can carry a torpedo ILO dive bombing. Just because things are technically possible doesn't mean it's a good idea.

You might make a case for turning the Me-110 into a light naval attack aircraft. However I think the Ju-88A is an inherently better choice. In fact the Ju-88A is almost ideal as it can dive bomb, torpedo bomb and perform the "Swedish Turnip" skip bombing method. By attacking with all three methods at once you split the defending flak and make it more difficult to dodge all the incoming weapons.

 

[DonL]

For the G7e torpedo and "Torpedokrise"
G7e torpedo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is also true to say that Germany didn't have an effective aerial torpedo and they did use the Italian torpedo's first. Not a lot of good developing an aerial torpedo bomber without a torpedo. Don't underestimate the difficulty involved in such a development. So again for the first 12 months Germany had a problem.

No it's not true! The LT F 5b / LT I (Produktion 1939) was a german developed arial torpedo and has no problems.
Lack of success and lack of emphasis on the part of the Navy during the first days of the war led to a decision adopted by leader("Führerentscheid") to cancel the complete production of the LT F 5b / LT I, so the stock to plummet in the LT operational in October 1940 to less than 40 pieces . Successes of other nations (LTs British against the French battleships Strasbourg "and" Richelieu "in July 1940, paralysis of the" Bismark "by British LT in May 1941, use of LTs Japanese at Pearl Harbor and the sinking of Prince of Wales and Repulse in December led 1941) for a review of this decision, as though not enough of their own aerial torpedoes were available, delivered Italy from 1940 to the German Air Force aerial torpedoes that were introduced as LT and LT R 5w F 5i.

You might make a case for turning the Me-110 into a light naval attack aircraft. However I think the Ju-88A is an inherently better choice. In fact the Ju-88A is almost ideal as it can dive bomb, torpedo bomb and perform the "Swedish Turnip" skip bombing method. By attacking with all three methods at once you split the defending flak and make it more difficult to dodge all the incoming weapons.

I agree.
But the ME 110 can also dive bomb and torpedo bomb but is also very fast and it's very difficult to intercept her. The same is for the FW 187. The two birds can easily carry 2000lbs.
The FW 187 was also heavily discussed 1942 by the RLM to go in production as Nightfighter for the 110 but the decision was made for the HE 219 and a Nightfighter FW 187 could carry 2000lbs Bombs plus drop tanks.

For more Information:
Focke-Wulf FW 187: An Illustrated History
by Dietmar Harmann, Peter Petrick

 

[Marcel]

I think you have me confused with Soren. How insulting...

That would be difficult as he is banned again and you're not

BTW I think Soren deserves an award for "most often banned member" or we should put him in the battle of the aircraft in the HOS

Sorry for side-tracking, couldn't resist...

 

[DAVIDICUS]

From January 1943 U.S. Intelligence Bulletin on the Savoia-Marchetti 79 torpedo bomber:

Torpedo squadrons are believed to have the highest morale of all units of the Italian Air Force. Their efficiency is such that Germany has sent squadrons to Italy for instructions in torpedo tactics. Italian aircraft torpedoes are believed to be superior to those of German design and are probably used by the German Air Force.​

 

[davebender]

FW 187 was also heavily discussed 1942 by the RLM to go in production as Nightfighter

Like the single engine Me-109, the twin engine Fw-187 was made as small as possible to achieve the best possible power to weight ratio. That works great for a day fighter but is a handicap for a night fighter. Hardly any room for the radar operator and his equipment. The Me-110 is a better choice as it has more internal space.

The Fw-187 was a superb long range day fighter. If Germany elects to mass produce the Fw-187 it should be escorting bombers ILO the marginal (for that mission) Me-110.

 

[Glider]

For the G7e torpedo and "Torpedokrise"
G7e torpedo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



No it's not true! The LT F 5b / LT I (Produktion 1939) was a german developed arial torpedo and has no problems.
Lack of success and lack of emphasis on the part of the Navy during the first days of the war led to a decision adopted by leader("Führerentscheid") to cancel the complete production of the LT F 5b / LT I, so the stock to plummet in the LT operational in October 1940 to less than 40 pieces . Successes of other nations (LTs British against the French battleships Strasbourg "and" Richelieu "in July 1940, paralysis of the" Bismark "by British LT in May 1941, use of LTs Japanese at Pearl Harbor and the sinking of Prince of Wales and Repulse in December led 1941) for a review of this decision, as though not enough of their own aerial torpedoes were available, delivered Italy from 1940 to the German Air Force aerial torpedoes that were introduced as LT and LT R 5w F 5i.

The LT F 5b entered service from late 1941 so as I said earlier, it depends on what your timescale is.
German Torpedoes of World War II

I agree.
But the ME 110 can also dive bomb and torpedo bomb but is also very fast and it's very difficult to intercept her. The same is for the FW 187. The two birds can easily carry 2000lbs.
The FW 187 was also heavily discussed 1942 by the RLM to go in production as Nightfighter for the 110 but the decision was made for the HE 219 and a Nightfighter FW 187 could carry 2000lbs Bombs plus drop tanks.

For more Information:
Focke-Wulf FW 187: An Illustrated History
by Dietmar Harmann, Peter Petrick [/QUOTE]

As for the Fw 187, my understanding is that it had an empty weight of 3,700 Kg and a max take off weight of 5,000 Kg. As a torpedo and its launching equipment plus additional beefing up of the structure will be in the region of 1,000 kg, it leaves you with 300 Kg which isn't enough for pilot fuel and other items such as ammo.

 

[Vincenzo]

From January 1943 U.S. Intelligence Bulletin on the Savoia-Marchetti 79 torpedo bomber:

Torpedo squadrons are believed to have the highest morale of all units of the Italian Air Force. Their efficiency is such that Germany has sent squadrons to Italy for instructions in torpedo tactics. Italian aircraft torpedoes are believed to be superior to those of German design and are probably used by the German Air Force.​

idk the reliability of intelligence source...

the first sucessfull (so claimed) air torpedo attack of italian air force came the 17th (just before of 18th) september 1940 versus the british cruiser Kent

 

[DonL]

@ davebender

Like the single engine Me-109, the twin engine Fw-187 was made as small as possible to achieve the best possible power to weight ratio. That works great for a day fighter but is a handicap for a night fighter. Hardly any room for the radar operator and his equipment. The Me-110 is a better choice as it has more internal space.

The Fw-187 was a superb long range day fighter. If Germany elects to mass produce the Fw-187 it should be escorting bombers ILO the marginal (for that mission) Me-110.

I agree with you.
But there is also a lot of dicussion about the FW 187 as a night fighter or as a true multirole plane.
But to my opinion it would be an superb long range fighter and i have take her in the discussion to show, that the LW have had no technological problems with a very good long range fighter early in the war.

@ Glider

Sorry Glider then we have different sources about the LT F 5b / LT I.
From my german sources it was in service late 1939 and solved the heavy problems of the LT F 5a.
Then the complete production was canceld in 1940. So the german navy imports the italien arial Torpedos to have a stock of pieces. The new production of the LT F 5b / LT I from 1941 till end was very small because for most people it was not important enough.
Also I'm a big fan of the navyweaps board but my german sources tells an other story of timeline.

Here are some data for the FW 187 night fighter projekt

Fw 187 - Kampfzerstörer 1942

Wing span: 15,3
Wing Surface Area: 30 qm
Length: 12,45

Crew: 2 (200 kg)
Empty weightt: 5600kg
Maximum weight: 8200 (with 1 x 1000 kg Bombe)

Engine: DB 605

range: 1200 km without
----------------------2100km with Droptanks

Guns:
4 x 151 / 20 with 250 bullets
2 x 131 mit je 450 bullets -
1 x MG 81 mit 750 bullets
(gesamt: Waffen 392 kg; Mun 306 kg)

Bombs:
maximal 2.000 kg
1 x 1000 kg + 2 x 500 kg or
1 x 1000 kg + 4 x 250 kg or
10 x 50 kg bzw. 10 x AB 23 / 24

 

[DAVIDICUS]

The U.S. Intelligence Bulletins represented the best information and judgments available at the time.

Not sure what the January 1943 report has to do wth "the first sucessfull (so claimed) air torpedo attack of italian air force on the 17th (just before of 18th) september 1940 versus the british cruiser Kent."

Italian Aerial Torpedo technology was impressive.

From U.S. Intelligence Tactical and Technological Trends, November 5, 1942:

ITALIAN CIRCLING TORPEDO

The British Navy has recently made known the recovery of an Italian circling parachute torpedo, which has a number of characteristics that distinguish it from any other torpedo of its kind.

After the torpedo had been rendered inoperative and examined, it was found to have no depth-setting device and would therefore travel on the surface of the water with a probable wake. It is 19 inches in diameter, approximately 8 feet long, and weighs about 750 pounds, the weight of the explosive charge being nearly 250 pounds. The torpedo has a running time of about 30 to 40 minutes. It is equipped with a three-blade propeller and a 250-volt electric motor.

This is a highly advanced device. Features of the torpedo that differ externally from other Italian circling torpedoes are listed below:

(a) The position of the impact fuzes.
(b) The use of a ring bolt for the carrying fitting.
(c) The location of the switch on the under side, port quarter.
(d) Propeller streamlined flush with the body of the torpedo.
(e) 19-inch instead of 18-inch diameter.

Internal differences which characterize the torpedo include the following features:
(a) 250-volt instead of 220-volt motor.
(b) Motor speed of 3,700 rpm instead of 2,880 rpm (geared down to 750 rpm).
(c) Mercury switch on the battery. (Hitherto not found.)
(d) Spring-loaded tail switch operated by a spring-loaded rod inside the after-part of the propeller shaft.
(e) Starboard helm setting. (Others are set for port helm only.)

The rudder of the circling torpedo is actuated by the arm bearing on the eccentric projection of the cog-wheel, which is driven by the worm on the propeller shaft. The torpedo moves to starboard in a series of increasing circles.

Of the three fitted switches, one is an external hand switch on the port quarter and one a mercury switch on the battery, cutting out when the torpedo head lies approximately 45 degrees depression to horizontal. The third switch, which is spring-loaded, is placed inside of the after-part and is held open by a roller bearing and a disc fitted around the propeller shaft. The disc is secured by a spring-loaded rod inside the propeller shaft and projecting inside the propeller boss, where it appears to be held by a parachute lug and a plug, which is soluble. When the plug dissolves, the spring-loaded rod ejects the parachute lug, and simultaneously brings the disc further aft, permitting the spring-loaded switch to close and the motor to start.

It is believed that the torpedo had been dropped about two months prior to its recovery, as it was heavily corroded. Since the corrosion prevented the unscrewing of the impact fuze, it was decided to remove the war head complete and recover the propulsion machinery, etc. This was successfully accomplished and the war head rendered inoperative. Following the examination of the torpedo, this new propulsion machinery and other parts of the advanced mechanism were dispatched to London for further study.

It is believed that circling torpedoes have been used only experimentally up to the present time. When employed against convoys, the pilot would probably not have to maneuver his aircraft within close range of antiaircraft fire in order to score a hit, but could drop the torpedo at a reasonably safe distance and immediately resort to evasive tactics. The average running time of the torpedo which is from 30 to 40 minutes, would give an additional advantage. A weapon of this kind would, therefore, present a serious problem to a convoy.

This type of torpedo might also be used against large vessels lying at anchor. They could best be protected against such an attack either by being surrounded with lighters made fast to the ships or by being anchored in an area enclosed by a barrage net extending to a depth of 5 feet.

 

[Waynos]

Having a quick scan through 'Japanese Secret Projects' there are some beautiful and promising aircraft, but nothing that I could see giving difficulties to German manufacturers, there are also several different designs that borrow very heavily from German planes like the Me 163 and 262 and He 162.

Looking through the Luftwaffe Secret Projects volumes I have not seen anything that came from Japan

 

[Vincenzo]

The U.S. Intelligence Bulletins represented the best information and judgments available at the time.

Not sure what the January 1943 report has to do wth "the first sucessfull (so claimed) air torpedo attack of italian air force on the 17th (just before of 18th) september 1940 versus the british cruiser Kent."

as intelligence information they are no sure.
none, i go under see not related with the reply

 

[Kurfürst]

The LT F 5b entered service from late 1941 so as I said earlier, it depends on what your timescale is.
German Torpedoes of World War II

The site is simply wrong... the Germans had 76 F 5b type (German) when the war started (and some time before), and it continued to increase to about 135 when it appears that their own production stopped(?? - Führerbefehl).

Regardless they were using these aerial torps since the start of the war, and rather actively since August 1940.

 

[Kurfürst]

Ah, the Germans did not have an effective air launched torpedo bomber until October 1941, and that was initially the He 111.

They had, at the start of the war, the Heinkel 115.

The first He 111 H-4s with torpedo release equipment were issued to III/KG 26 at the start of 1940.

The Ju 88 was initially not cleared for torpedo bomber missions due to Hitler's decision not to use the aircraft in such role.

 

[DAVIDICUS]

Vincenzo, if you have some evidence that the U.S. Intelligence Bulletins did not represent the best information and judgments known to the Allies at the time or that the January 1943 Intelligence Bulletin itself presents flawed information (perhaps due to information from the Italians or Germans themselves or later acquired information / judgments by the Allies), please share what you know.

 

[drgondog]

The development of every nation's collection of aircraft, prior to and during the earlier phases of WWII, were tailored to the strategic doctrine at the time prior to WWII.

Th Luftwaffe was primarily tailored to a.) supporting control of the air and ground around the Wermacht, and b.) attempting to neutraize the theoretical enemy's advantages. In the case of France and Great Britain, the LW developed aircraft which could find and attack surface ships from land bases but did not develop long range escort for long range bombers.

The Japanes was all about Fleet support, and Army support and its aircraft (long range Zero, amphibians, torpedo bombers, long range land based medium bombers) were tailored to that mission.

Neither aircraft pool was particulary suited to the other country's mission.

I am inclined to think that a.) overall manufacturing base and design (airframe, engines, armament) advantage rested in Germany at the beginning of WWII although Japan would not have had an advantage with all German designs, and b.) increased its advantage as the war progressed.

Additionally Germany started with better access to war materials prior to the war and swiftly expanded its base as the war progressed through 1942 with less vulnerability to disruption of logistic flows of raw materials until 1944. Germany had manufacturing facilities throughout occupied Europe - Japan was a single point manufacturing base surrounded by water and submarines early, and sub, surface and air interdiction late.

 

[Vincenzo]

Vincenzo, if you have some evidence that the U.S. Intelligence Bulletins did not represent the best information and judgments known to the Allies at the time or that the January 1943 Intelligence Bulletin itself presents flawed information (perhaps due to information from the Italians or Germans themselves or later acquired information / judgments by the Allies), please share what you know.

i never writing of known to the allies, i think that today what was known to the allies it's near irrilevant we can known as was. The use of intelligence information can give a false immagine of real. i've not nothing on specificy on italian aerosiluranti history/development/morale.

 

[davebender]

Japan was a single point manufacturing base surrounded by water

That isn't quite true.

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/txu-oclc-247232986-asia_pol_2008.jpg
By 1941 Japan had a considerable size empire which they have occupied for 10 or more years. Long enough for economic exploitation.
.....Japanese home islands.
.....Japanese Manchuria. Occupied 1905.
.....Chinese Manchuria. Occupied 1931.
.....Formosa. Occupied 1895.
.....Korea. Occupied 1895. (formally annexed 1910).

All of this territory was located relatively close to the Japanese home islands, allowing commercial interaction via coastal freighters. All of this territory has considerable economic value (just look at the modern day GDP of Taiwan, Korea and Manchuria).

 

[drgondog]

That isn't quite true.

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/txu-oclc-247232986-asia_pol_2008.jpg
By 1941 Japan had a considerable size empire which they have occupied for 10 or more years. Long enough for economic exploitation.
.....Japanese home islands.
.....Japanese Manchuria. Occupied 1905.
.....Chinese Manchuria. Occupied 1931.
.....Formosa. Occupied 1895.
.....Korea. Occupied 1895. (formally annexed 1910).

All of this territory was located relatively close to the Japanese home islands, allowing commercial interaction via coastal freighters. All of this territory has considerable economic value (just look at the modern day GDP of Taiwan, Korea and Manchuria).

Fully agree the minerals and economic value - so how many ship bbuilding, Mitsibishi, Nakajima, Arisaka, etc plants were in operation offshore from japan?