Stripped Down Ju 88

[kool kitty89]

How would the Ju 88 have done without the added weight and drag of the aditional "pet projects" the RLM requested to be added (namely dive bombing capable) and in a stripped-down, unarmmed Mosquito-like configuration?

Used in this configuration from the begining of the war. (and in development)

No external racks, no (or extremely limited) armament, a more streamlined canopy, no bulky ventral tray/gondola, and retain the original smaller span wing of the early A series, or clip it back slightly further. Reduce unnecessary weight to a minimum. Use a two man crew.


Would it have the same kind of speed advantage to contemporary fighters as the Mossie?


It would have been easier to develop such a version into a heavy-fighter or nightfighter. (with considerably better performance than early the historical conterparts)


Edit:
Would the Ju 88 have been more sucessful if used in this proposed configuration from the begining of the war.

 

[Graeme]

Sounds a little like the V-5 version that set the world record of 321mph carrying a 4400lb load over 621 miles on March 19 1938...

 

[Lucky13]

I've always liked the S variant of the 88.....smooth machine!

 

[Matt308]

Wouldn't this idea just be a Ju-388 introduced at the end of the war? As I recall the Ju-388 had the ventral gondola removed, the bomb racks, better streamlining and alot of the defensive armament taken out. And didn't it have a top speed around 390mph or so and a 40,000+ ft ceiling?

Luftwaffe Aviation Art - Color profiles by Simon Schatz

 

[delcyros]

The S- subtype of the Ju-88 / 188 series is what You are basically asking for.

Junkers Ju 88S

Max. speed was augmented by GM-1 injection above critical pressure altitude, the Ju-188T achieved a max. of 435 mp/h.

 

[Erich]

well consider the late war Ju 88G-6 with Berlin 240 AI radar. it was fast, too few to prove itself, and had it been stripped of some of the techno garbage then yes it would of been a speedster

 

[HoHun]

Hi Koolkitty,

>How would the Ju 88 have done without the added weight and drag of the aditional "pet projects" the RLM requested to be added (namely dive bombing capable) and in a stripped-down, unarmmed Mosquito-like configuration?

Junkers actually provided a breakdown of the speed losses due to the changes you mention.

These were:

Dive brakes: 5 km/h
4 external bomb racks: 14 km/h
Bathtub for belly gunner: 7 km/h
Rectangular windshield segments for improved visibility: 5 km/h
Large wheel with large fillet: 5 km/h
Flat armour glass pane for the dorsal gun position: 4 km/h
Camouflage paint: 3 km/h
Additional antenna: 2 km/h

Total: 45 km/h

(From Helmut Erfurt's "Vom Original zum Modell: Junkers Ju 88")

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

[B-17engineer]

Good info HoHun haven't seen you around in a while

 

[kool kitty89]

I knew of most of those Ju 88 varients, though not the V-5 pic, and the great performance breakdown HoHun listed.

What I meant is to ask is would the Ju 88 have been more sucessful if used in the proposed configuration from the begining of the war. (a bomber with in the 320 mph range with a load of 3084 lbs of bombs)

It would also be good to improve the bomb bay early on to allow horizontal mounting of larger bombs.




We could get into alternative engines as well, but that would get into other issues, both political and material. (in the case of the DB 601 you could get into the usefulness of the Bf 110 and if the engines had been used on the Ju 88 instead, but there would still be a supply issue and if your going to downplay the 110 and get into further changes in RLM policy, there's the Fw 187 to contend with)

So the DB 601 probably isn't going to be a practical choice (at least not for the standard varients), perhaps used for the Nightfighter varients prior to the adoption of the BMW 801's. Though the DB-605 may have offered superior speed at altitude than the 801 and again there's the DB 603 to consider. (the standard bomber varients would probably stay mainly with the Jumo 211 perhaps some bomber versions with the 801, but the Jumo 213 should probably be reserved for the Nighfighters and Fw 190D series)

 

[Soren]

Wouldn't this idea just be a Ju-388 introduced at the end of the war? As I recall the Ju-388 had the ventral gondola removed, the bomb racks, better streamlining and alot of the defensive armament taken out. And didn't it have a top speed around 390mph or so and a 40,000+ ft ceiling?

Luftwaffe Aviation Art - Color profiles by Simon Schatz

The Ju-388 had a 616 km/h top speed, 44,100 ft ceiling and featured an internal bombbay. Excellent machine.

 

[B-17engineer]

Yes could a Modified Spitfire catch it...because a Modified one caught a Ju-86 on a recon mission over england

 

[Matt308]

B17, I found this interesting. Wonder if other forum members can support or dispute it.

"In early 1945 a Ju 388 was intercepted while flying at approximately 13,410 m (44,000 ft) over the English Channel by a Supermarine Spitfire. The Spitfire, operating above its service ceiling, was not able to reach the altitude of the Ju 388 but was able to fire upon it from below and bring it down. It is believed that this was the highest altitude shoot down of WWII."

 

[B-17engineer]

Huh Interesting...cause I remeber Adler was talking about Modified Spitfires once

 

[kool kitty89]

In 1945, it almost certainly wouldn't be a one of the modified Spitfiers (Mk.V's) used as intrim high alt fighters for intercepting the high alt Ju 86 bomber/recon plane.

 

[Njaco]

Matt, I always thought it was a Ju 90 that achieved that with the Spit. I could be wrong.

too few to prove itself,

That says it all - no matter what the machine.

 

[Lucky13]

The 88 is good and sound machine....

 

[kool kitty89]

Matt, I always thought it was a Ju 90 that achieved that with the Spit. I could be wrong.

Would,'t have been a Ju 90, it's service ceiling was below 20,000 ft!


I do remember reading that an Ar 234 kill was the highest altitude one of the war though.


Edit: coundn't find the thing on the Ar 234 (though that would seem wron anyway given the Arado's lower ceiling) but I found this on the Ju 86:

Junkers Ju 86 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Satisfied with the newer version, the Luftwaffe ordered that some 40 older-model bombers be converted to Ju 86P-1 high altitude bombers and Ju 86P-2 photo reconnaissance aircraft. Those operated successfully for some years over Britain, the Soviet Union and North Africa. In August 1942, a modified Spitfire V shot one down over Egypt at some 49,000 ft (14,500 m); when two more were lost, Ju 86Ps were withdrawn from service in 1943.

And note that in this case, it was indeed a modified Spitfire Mk.V scoring the kill.

 

[Njaco]

Thats the one, Kool! I posted off the top of my head. It was the 86.

 

[kool kitty89]

Since no one has yet responed to my last question regarding his topic (which has been aded to the title post as well) I'll ask it again in case anyone missed it.


Would the Ju 88 have been more successful in this stripped-down configuration than it was historicaly in the normal configuration. (I'm referring mainly in the level-bombing role)

By sucessful I mean in terms of performance in combat, effectiveness against the intended target, as well as in terms of development time and materials usage.