What was the best Multi-Role aircraft of WWII? (1 Viewer)

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

So, how many were sold for export or delivered as a superior choice to the Mossie, the B-25.

Would it have been better than even the P-61 or F7F or the P-38J had other a/c not been better in the individual roles?

Would the LW have picked it over the JU-88/188 if it had a choice? Or Do 217?

To me the Peshka was a medium performing twin that was pressed into a lot of roles - not because there weren't superior choices but because it was available and flexible.. and it did a good job.

The Russians didn't sell any planes for export during the war, they needed them. But neither did they buy Mossies and B-25s to replace their Peshkas. They used A-20 Bostons early in the war, because they were cheaply available lend-lease planes, not because the Peshka was in any way inadequate.

Medium performing? The Peshka was faster and more maneuverable than the Ju-88 and more maneuverable than a Mossie. The variants used as heavy fighters and night fighters had quite a strong armament in their own right, though they might not have been as heavy as the guns on the Mossie or the Ju-88 night fighters.

If the Luftwaffe had the choice, yeah I think they would have picked the Peshka over the Ju-88. The only advantage the Ju-88 had was in bomb load. The performance of the Peshka was much better, even at high altitude. Here's a chart listing the speed by altitude of various bombers tested by the Soviet Union:

Pe-2speed2.jpg


The fastest plane there, the thin blue line, is the Pe-2I, a Pe-2 using the new VK-107A engines. They were built in limited series production. The Mosquito MkIV is slower, it's the red line, though it's faster than most series production Peshkas with the older M-105 and VK-105 engines. But even those Peshkas are faster at all altitudes than the Ju-88A-6 that was tested alongside them.

So, how can you justify calling it a "medium-performing" plane while in the same breath extolling the virtues of the slower, less-maneuverable, less-advanced Ju-88?
 
surely as bomber Pe-2 was fastest of 88, and how you tell with smallest bomb capacity, but i think him talking of night fighters 88
 
The Ju-88A-6 was a 1940 limited production version equipped with cable cutters. Hardly a fair comparison to the 1942 or later Pe-2 not encumbered with cable cutters. Nor is it a fair comparison to the 1942 Mosquito reconnaissance version.
 
The Peshka was more maneuverable than the than a Mossie.
The wing loading is almost identical on both aircraft, do you have flight data to prove that?

DH.98 Mosquito F. Mk II
Performance

Maximum speed: 318 knots (366 mph, 610 km/h) at 21,400 ft (8,500 m)
Range: 782 nm (900 mi, 1,500 km) 410 gallon fuel load at 20,000 ft
Service ceiling: 29,000 ft (8,839 m)
Rate of climb: 1,740 ft/min (8.8 m/s)
Wing loading: 39.9 lb/ft² (195 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.189 hp/lb (311 W/kg)

Petlyakov Pe-2
Performance

Maximum speed: 580 km/h (360 mph)
Range: 1,160 km (721 miles)
Service ceiling: 8,800 m (28,870 ft)
Rate of climb: 7.2 m/s (1,410 ft/min)
Wing loading: 186 kg/m² (38 lb/ft²)
Power/mass: 250 W/kg (0.15 hp/lb)
 
I went for the plane that came straight into my mind when I saw the question posted

P-38 Lightning

It was a long-range escort, a high-altitude fighter, a low-altitude fighter-bomber, with the Droopsnoot it could lead a formation of 'B-38s' on high-level bombing runs, it could handle reconnaissance and absorb a fair bit more battle damage than most single-engined a/c, it had a devastating nose armament and could carry 4,000lbs of external ordnance in the form of bombs and rockets, it was also a night-fighter.

It was versatile
 
The wing loading is almost identical on both aircraft, do you have flight data to prove that?

DH.98 Mosquito F. Mk II
Performance

Maximum speed: 318 knots (366 mph, 610 km/h) at 21,400 ft (8,500 m)
Range: 782 nm (900 mi, 1,500 km) 410 gallon fuel load at 20,000 ft
Service ceiling: 29,000 ft (8,839 m)
Rate of climb: 1,740 ft/min (8.8 m/s)
Wing loading: 39.9 lb/ft² (195 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.189 hp/lb (311 W/kg)

Petlyakov Pe-2
Performance

Maximum speed: 580 km/h (360 mph)
Range: 1,160 km (721 miles)
Service ceiling: 8,800 m (28,870 ft)
Rate of climb: 7.2 m/s (1,410 ft/min)
Wing loading: 186 kg/m² (38 lb/ft²)
Power/mass: 250 W/kg (0.15 hp/lb)

I thought the wingloading was higher on the Mossie than the Peshka, but I guess I was mistaken. Of course, in that version of the Mossie the speed difference is only 6mph, so that's very favorable for the Peshka. And if we're including the Pe-3bis in our comparison that had automatic leading edge slats which would substantially improve its maneuverability. I think my points stand either way though. The Peshka was not a "medium performance" bomber for its day by any stretch of the imagination. It clearly could and did compete with both the Mosquito and Ju-88 in terms of performance. It was a multi-role aircraft used all over the place on the Eastern Front, and so I think it deserves recognition.
 
The Russians didn't sell any planes for export during the war, they needed them. But neither did they buy Mossies and B-25s to replace their Peshkas. They used A-20 Bostons early in the war, because they were cheaply available lend-lease planes, not because the Peshka was in any way inadequate.

I didn't say it was inadequate - just mediocre in contrast to the others in Multi Role. BTW the A-20 was significantly more expensive than the Pe 2 so cost wasn't the factor in using A-20s...and the A-20G went to USSR in significant numbers in 1943 and 1944. nor were many B-25s available but the Soviet Union did receive B-25C's.

My only point is that nobody on the Allied side said 'wow - we need THAT airplane so that we can do Mission A, B and C better than what we have. Can we license it?"


Medium performing? The Peshka was faster and more maneuverable than the Ju-88 and more maneuverable than a Mossie.

That might be one or two variables and mission profiles of importance. So the bombload, range and ceiling superiority of the Ju 88/188, the extreme performance superiority of the Mk XVI Mossie (speed, ceiling, firepower, range and speed with load, etc) over the Pe 2 (any and all variations) make them less mission capable and multi role flexible than the Pe 2?

The variants used as heavy fighters and night fighters had quite a strong armament in their own right, though they might not have been as heavy as the guns on the Mossie or the Ju-88 night fighters.

And what radar system did the Pe 2 finally adopt to replace searchlights?

If the Luftwaffe had the choice, yeah I think they would have picked the Peshka over the Ju-88. The only advantage the Ju-88 had was in bomb load. The performance of the Peshka was much better, even at high altitude. Here's a chart listing the speed by altitude of various bombers tested by the Soviet Union:

Pe-2speed2.jpg


Are you suggesting that 6Km is 'High Altitude"?? Where did Pe 2 stack up at 9-10km??

The fastest plane there, the thin blue line, is the Pe-2I, a Pe-2 using the new VK-107A engines. They were built in limited series production. The Mosquito MkIV is slower , it's the red line, though it's faster than most series production Peshkas with the older M-105 and VK-105 engines. But even those Peshkas are faster at all altitudes than the Ju-88A-6 that was tested alongside them.

See comments below.

So, how can you justify calling it a "medium-performing" plane while in the same breath extolling the virtues of the slower, less-maneuverable, less-advanced Ju-88?

I notice you are comparing the top performing Pe 2 against a select version of Ju 88 of 1941 vintage and Mossie Mk IV of same timeframe - how about laying the Ju 88G-1 and Mk XVI in your performance chart??

As to 'justifying the Ju 88" -

Well, just because the slower, less manueverable JU 88 had about 10+ variants that all performed their different missions very well... and most of them they performed far better than the Pe 2.

The Pe 2 was faster - Ok. The A-20 was also faster than the Ju 88's of 1941 and 1942. How well would the Pe 2 perform the high altitude recon mission? Long range escort for Fw 200 in anti shipping role. Long Range Anti shipping role. Night fighter against RAF. Medium bomber/long range?

The Pe 2 was faster than the Ju 88 and Ju 188 (slightly)... that's about it. Manueverability superiority would have been useful if it had to dogfight against say an A-20 or even a Mossie. How does that work against a 109 or a Spit or a 190?

When you add range, bombload with range, mission variation with airframe, the Ju 88 IMO was a Far Superior airframe - but I like the Mossie better.

Further, I can't think of a role that the P-38L would not perform better than the Pe 2 other than perhaps dropping a spy behind enemy lines... at night.
 
THunderbolt all the way. Great air superiority aircraft and an awesome ground attack bird.

Do you really want to put that into contention with more versatile aircraft such as the Mossie, Ju 88 and P-38?

Besides if you want to go single engine aircraft the Corsair and the Fw 190 are probably more versatile.

It is not asking what was the best air superiority or ground attack aircraft, but what was the best Multi-Role aircraft.
 
I notice you are comparing the top performing Pe 2 against a select version of Ju 88 of 1941 vintage and Mossie Mk IV of same timeframe - how about laying the Ju 88G-1 and Mk XVI in your performance chart??

As to 'justifying the Ju 88" -

Well, just because the slower, less manueverable JU 88 had about 10+ variants that all performed their different missions very well... and most of them they performed far better than the Pe 2.

The Pe 2 was faster - Ok. The A-20 was also faster than the Ju 88's of 1941 and 1942. How well would the Pe 2 perform the high altitude recon mission? Long range escort for Fw 200 in anti shipping role. Long Range Anti shipping role. Night fighter against RAF. Medium bomber/long range?

The Pe 2 was faster than the Ju 88 and Ju 188 (slightly)... that's about it. Manueverability superiority would have been useful if it had to dogfight against say an A-20 or even a Mossie. How does that work against a 109 or a Spit or a 190?

When you add range, bombload with range, mission variation with airframe, the Ju 88 IMO was a Far Superior airframe - but I like the Mossie better.

Further, I can't think of a role that the P-38L would not perform better than the Pe 2 other than perhaps dropping a spy behind enemy lines... at night.

First of all, why does everyone look at a chart and call it "my" chart? It's clearly from a Russian book, it's not my chart. I can't put in planes that weren't tested and come up with results that weren't recorded and put them in a chart that I didn't make in a book that I didn't write. I was simply showing what I had available, which is far more than you have done for YOUR Ju-88 and Mosquito.

Furthermore, none of the roles you mentioned the Ju-88 performing were not also performed by the Peshka in some form or another. The Pe-2/3 did perform the anti-shipping role in the Baltic and in the Arctic up near Murmansk, covering the convoys coming in through the North Sea. The Pe-2/3 was faster and more maneuverable than the Ju-88G-1 which was even heavier than the model compared above (though it was faster than the A-6, but still slower than the Peshka).

You say that the mission variation with airframe goes to the Ju-88, but how can you say that when the Peshka performed all the same missions? Moreover, you say that bombload is one of the crucial factors, but is it really? How does bomb load factor in to escorting FW-200s or nightfighting or reconnaissance? It clearly doesn't, and yet those are all very important roles, and roles you mentioned. You're cherry-picking the good points of the Ju-88 to try to get it to stack up to the Peshka.

You say the Ju-88 had 10+ variants. The Pe-2/3 had at least that many, though probably slightly fewer that saw widespread production.

The Peshka replaced searchlights with the Soviet GNEIS-2 radar system. About 230 sets were produced and used in the air intercept radar role, though there isn't much information available about them in English.

The fact is, the Peshka was anything but a "medium performance" twin-engine plane. It was right up there with the Mossie and the Ju-88, and the only reason it doesn't have fanboys drooling all over it is because it's Soviet.
 
I think it comes down to two different aircraft...

...The Mossie and the Ju 88. No other aircraft was more versatile than those two aircraft...

...The P-38 is a very very close 3rd.
I'm going to stick my neck out and shout for the US ship over the Brit ship; if I was unlucky enough to get hosed, I'd rather be in a P-38 than a flying coffee table. For me, that would be the edge, both planes got hosed (and shot down) but enemy fire would scythe through the Mosquito; for me it's

1. P-38
2. Ju88 (very accomplished a/c but I wouldn't want to go on escort fighter duties in it)
3. Mosquito (I'm not so sure it could 'tough it' the way the other two could)
 
I make no claim to know anything about the Pe-2, however that Mosquito speed curve is just wrong.

Over on Mike Williams' site, the B.IV (not the F.II - flat windscreen and fighter wing) does 364 at 95% take-off weight (including bombs) with saxophone exhausts fitted, on another report on the same site it does 375 with ejector exhausts, not sure of weight.
 
For what its worth, very little I know, I agree that it is a shame the Pe-2 always seems to get overlooked. Not only was it a great aircraft but it was a great looker too and puts the hideous looking P-38 to shame in that department *puts on tin hat and runs away*
 
Pardon, but I don't believe the SBD ever delivered a torpedo. A torpedo weighed 2000 pounds and I don't believe it could get off a deck with that load. The Corsair was an excellent fighter, perhaps the equal of any, it was an excellent fighter bomber, probably the best, it was a good dive bomber, almost the equal of the Dauntless and more accurate than the Helldiver, it was used as a night fighter with radar and could easily have launched a torpedo, it was also used as a photo recon plane.
 
Hello Nightwitch
now the selection of versions into the table you posted has been goal-directed as the selection of Ju 88A-6 showed.
I have not time to dig out proper sources but according to Weal's Weal's Combat A/c of WWII max speed of the most important Ju 88A version, A-4, was 450km/h at 6000m, in fact most of A-4s had a bit more powerful engines than the early version, which data W W gives, their max speed was 472 km/h. Ju 88S-1 with GM-1 boost and only internal load (14*65kg bombs) attained 610km/h at 8200m, Mossie B. Mk XVI had max speed of 656km/h at 7925m.
And while Pe-2 was a great multirole plane it wasn't very manoeuvrable because of high wing and powerloading, Finns used some and I have seen the test reports made by Finns.

Juha
 
Hello Nightwitch
now the selection of versions into the table you posted has been goal-directed as the selection of Ju 88A-6 showed.
I have not time to dig out proper sources but according to Weal's Weal's Combat A/c of WWII max speed of the most important Ju 88A version, A-4, was 450km/h at 6000m, in fact most of A-4s had a bit more powerful engines than the early version, which data W W gives, their max speed was 472 km/h. Ju 88S-1 with GM-1 boost and only internal load (14*65kg bombs) attained 610km/h at 8200m, Mossie B. Mk XVI had max speed of 656km/h at 7925m.
And while Pe-2 was a great multirole plane it wasn't very manoeuvrable because of high wing and powerloading, Finns used some and I have seen the test reports made by Finns.

Juha

Well, it may have been goal-directed by the Soviet author, but all sources have bias, that's the first thing you learn as a historian. The source I quoted is no different. However, it's one of the few sources available that shows actual test data and velocity curves for the various Peshka variants. Since they weren't tested by the other allies or anything like that, it's hard to go with anything other than Soviet sources to learn about their performance.
 
Well, it may have been goal-directed by the Soviet author, but all sources have bias, that's the first thing you learn as a historian. The source I quoted is no different. However, it's one of the few sources available that shows actual test data and velocity curves for the various Peshka variants. Since they weren't tested by the other allies or anything like that, it's hard to go with anything other than Soviet sources to learn about their performance.
Agreed, and the presentation is well put forth.
 
Hello Nightwitch
well I agree that it is a good table on Pe-2s and Tu-2, but to use it as a base of comparation with Ju 88 and Mossie isn't IMHO a very good idea. IMHO it's better to check the specs of the latter from other sources, for ex for Mossie look for ex here http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mosquito/dz540.pdf.

Finns also tested a Pe-2 or -3 and used them operationally. But of course there is a language barrier which made the test reports rather useless to foreigners.

Juha
 
Pardon, but I don't believe the SBD ever delivered a torpedo. A torpedo weighed 2000 pounds and I don't believe it could get off a deck with that load. The Corsair was an excellent fighter, perhaps the equal of any, it was an excellent fighter bomber, probably the best, it was a good dive bomber, almost the equal of the Dauntless and more accurate than the Helldiver, it was used as a night fighter with radar and could easily have launched a torpedo, it was also used as a photo recon plane.

SBD's max payload was 2,250 pounds :)
 
Did the SBD have enough space to mount an aerial torpedo? That was a problem when the Luftwaffe mounted an aerial torpedo on the Fw-190F. It will be a worse problem for American torpedo bombers as they are stuck with the 22.4" Mk 13 aerial torpedo.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back