Your Personal Airforce

[Juha]

Hello
262 problems were not limited to Jumos, there were many small problems which might have serious effects in ops but which did not show in specs

see for ex. Radio problems Me 262. - Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum

Juha

 

[tail end charlie]

Hello
262 problems were not limited to Jumos, there were many small problems which might have serious effects in ops but which did not show in specs

see for ex. Radio problems Me 262. - Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum

Juha

Thats why my airforce uses it as a trainer

 

[BombTaxi]

The He177 spec actually insisted that it be capable of shallow-angle dive-bombing, which in turn motivated the disastrous choice of the DB610 'power systems' as opposed to four conventional engines in four conventional nacelles. According to the He177 Wiki (so please correct this if it's wrong), shallow-angle dives were an integral part of He177 operational tactics:

While Steinbock could be considered as an unsuccessful operation, the He 177 did achieve some successes. The more experienced crews typically carried two 1,800 kg (3,968 lb) and two 1,000 kg (2,204 lb) bombs. Climbing to 7,000 m (22,965 ft) while still over German territory, the He 177s approached the target in a shallow dive, each aircraft throttled back, the pilot putting his aircraft into a gliding descent to take it across the bomb release-point at about 4,500 m (14,763 ft). After releasing the bombs the pilot re-opened the throttles, but continued the descent at approximately 200 m (656 ft) per minute. The bombers typically re-entered German airspace at an altitude of 750 m (2,460 ft), and headed back to base. By such means, the He 177s were able to keep up speeds of about 600 km/h (373 mph) to 700 km/h (435 mph) during their withdrawal phase. The higher speed and constant change of altitude made the aircraft harder to intercept, increasing the survivability of the aircraft, but contrarily decreased bombing effectiveness. In fact, with an average loss rate of 60% for every type of bomber used in Operation Steinbock, the He 177s had a loss rate well below 10%, making them the most survivable bomber used in this campaign.

 

[davebender]

He177 spec actually insisted that it be capable of shallow-angle dive-bombing

I suspect that most heavy bombers could attack at a 30 degree angle. What was so special about the He-177 dive angle?

 

[tail end charlie]

I suspect that most heavy bombers could attack at a 30 degree angle. What was so special about the He-177 dive angle?

what I read was someone insisted the 177 be made capable of dive bombing which delayed production for a while until it was decided it was impossible. I suppose anything is capable of dive bombing but not all can pull out of the dive.

A question

If a JU87 was dive bombing but the bomb failed to drop could it still pull out of the dive?

 

[BombTaxi]

As I said, the inclusion of this requirement in the spec played a large role in pushing the designers to the ill-fated DB610, as four nacelles would have prevented the 60 degree dives demanded. From the Wiki:

Unfortunately, the dive bombing requirement was later increased to 60° attacks rather than the medium angle dives originally called for, resulting in further structural strengthening and an alarming increase in weight. Nevertheless, the requirement to dive bomb up to 60° was never satisfactorily solved, due to the constant increases in loaded weight.

An idea of how specialised the dive-bombing requirement was is given by Eric Brown's account of the dive-bombing equipment carried:

The aircraft had an automatic pull-out device and an acceleration warning apparatus fitted

This heavy bomber, which would have been four engined if not for the dive-bombing requirement, was expected to the job of the Ju88 and the Lancaster... not a good combination of priorities, and not one attempted by any other country in their heavy bomber designs.

 

[davebender]

Heinkel He 177 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

With the introduction of the Lotfe 7, which offered an average error of 20 m to 30 m (65 ft to 98 ft) from a release altitude of 3,000 m to 4,000 m (9,842 ft to 13,123 ft), and Hermann Göring's rescindment of the dive attack requirement in September of 1942, the barred-gate type dive brakes were omitted from all He 177 built after the initial pre production batch.

This doesn't square with Eric Brown's statement that the He-177A5 (main production model) had specialized dive bombing equipment.

 

[BombTaxi]

Perhaps Brown was mistaken then. But my point was that the need to make steep-angle dive attacks forced the choice of of the DB610 on the designers so that there would only be two nacelles. That arguably ruined what could otherwise have been a very promising aircraft.

 

[davebender]

need to make steep-angle dive attacks forced the choice of of the DB610 on the designers so that there would only be two nacelles. That arguably ruined what could otherwise have been a very promising aircraft.

I think it's a bit more complex then that.

The Ju-288A1 bomber and Jumo222A engine were supposed to be in mass production before the end of 1942. If that 400mph bomber had entered service as originally planned then the He-177 would not be needed to strike targets in England. In fact the He-177 program could probably be entirely cancelled. The abrupt cancellation of the Jumo 222A engine on December 24, 1941 forced the Luftwaffe to find other aircraft to perform what would have been Ju-288 missions.

It also forced the Luftwaffe to get serious about DB603 and Jumo213 engine production. These large V12s were needed to power newer versions of the Ju-88 and Fw-190. If the Jumo222 engine had entered mass production then the Ju-288 supercedes the Ju-88 and the Fw-190 gets a Jumo222 engine ILO the historical Jumo213 V12.