Author Topic: JU88G vs 110G  (Read 912 times)

Offline OLtos

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 61
JU88G vs 110G
« on: May 17, 2004, 12:25:55 PM »
I heard a German Night fighter vet say that his JU88 was faster than the 100.  WHOA that sounded wrong but it wasn't.


From:   "Jane's Fighting Aircraft of World War II" Crescent Books,  New York1989  (being a reproduction of the 1945/46 book.

P173,
"THE JUNKERS 88G . . . Performance - Maximum (speed without drop tankor flame dampners) 402 MPH (643km.h at 29,800 feet) . . ."


P177
"THE MESSERSCHMITT Me 110g . . .   Performance -  A typical Me 110g night fighter had the following performance: -  Maximum speed at 21000 feet (6,404 m.) 340 m.p.h. ..."

Looks like that old German vet was right.  

Jane's also notes (p177) that some 110 g varients had twin 30mm cannon mounted in the rear cockpit firing forward and upward at 65 degress as did the JU88 night fighter varient.  So that in Aces 110s might have four 30mm cannon but two of htose should be the oblique mounted critter.

Man I want that JU88G modle!

Offline Batz

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3470
      • http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/o/wotans/4JG53/
JU88G vs 110G
« Reply #1 on: May 17, 2004, 01:22:05 PM »
the Ju88 G-6 was a badass, wish we could get one in AH...

Offline WHATTHEHELL

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 209
JU88G vs 110G
« Reply #2 on: May 17, 2004, 09:21:06 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Batz
the Ju88 G-6 was a badass, wish we could get one in AH...


Ah I love my night fighter books, have one on the He-219 and what the pilots used to do to get as much speed out of it as possible.  I am sure the same was said about the 88's and 110's.  All the books in the world glisten the night fighters with mass amounts of guns and loadouts and toilets and sinks and small squirrels but in reality most chose to go into combat with not more then 2-4 cannon.  Experienced crews found that was all they needed.  And the weight saved was the key.  More to come later.  Oh and yes the 88 G-6 was truly a bad bellybutton twin :D

Offline Batz

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3470
      • http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/o/wotans/4JG53/
JU88G vs 110G
« Reply #3 on: May 17, 2004, 09:39:19 PM »
Kicks a He-219 *** any day :p (err night)

Offline WHATTHEHELL

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 209
JU88G vs 110G
« Reply #4 on: May 18, 2004, 12:27:46 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Batz
Kicks a He-219 *** any day :p (err night)


Eye of the beholder, but can either one of those dive to 800 kmh to escape Mossies?  One of the benefits of that plane was its ability to dive to evade.  Insane dive speed on it.

Offline Grendel

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 877
      • http://www.compart.fi/icebreakers
JU88G vs 110G
« Reply #5 on: May 19, 2004, 05:22:06 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by WHATTHEHELL
Eye of the beholder, but can either one of those dive to 800 kmh to escape Mossies?  One of the benefits of that plane was its ability to dive to evade.  Insane dive speed on it.


Ju-88 was designed as dive bomber and was capable of vertical dives.

Offline WHATTHEHELL

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 209
JU88G vs 110G
« Reply #6 on: May 19, 2004, 05:44:47 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Grendel
Ju-88 was designed as dive bomber and was capable of vertical dives.


Aye, but not to 800 K, structural limit would not allow such speed.

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
JU88G vs 110G
« Reply #7 on: May 21, 2004, 05:18:07 AM »
Outtdive a mossie?????
In the night, a capability for fast and wild reversions would be more practical, as the issue is getting out of the other one's radar.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline jetb123

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1807
JU88G vs 110G
« Reply #8 on: May 28, 2004, 10:24:50 PM »
I like the JU88 better killer bombs nice for gvs:aok

Offline WHATTHEHELL

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 209
JU88G vs 110G
« Reply #9 on: May 29, 2004, 11:42:10 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
Outtdive a mossie?????
In the night, a capability for fast and wild reversions would be more practical, as the issue is getting out of the other one's radar.


Do you even know what you are talking about?  Read the combat reports from the night fighter pilots.  The mossie was faster at level speed, but in a dive its limits were small in comparison to the diving speed of an He-219.  Pilots did not just rely on radar.  :rolleyes:

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
JU88G vs 110G
« Reply #10 on: May 29, 2004, 01:07:03 PM »
WHATTHEHELL,

Please post an example.  All of the NF Mossie kills I've read about the enemy had no idea they were there.  It got so bad that there are examples of German nightfighters flying into hills in their effort to stay low and out of the Mossie's hunting area.

Any nightfighter that failed to come home was being chalked up as a Mossie kill by the Germans.  Looking at British claims it is apparent that many were not.

-Karnak
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
JU88G vs 110G
« Reply #11 on: May 31, 2004, 07:54:08 AM »
Reading the accounts of a Mossie radar operator, it seemed to be the hardest thing keeping the enemy within Radar during maneuvers. A low break would typically be the worst thing to stay with.
In most cases the enemy never knew what hit him.
In all cases as far as I remember, the mossie closed the gap speedwise rather quickly.
In most cases the visibility was very very little.
It seems that the mossies were usually even better equipped than their foes.
Max speed was enough to catch V-1's, - yup, Mossies actually shot down V-1's at night.
some more to follow....
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
JU88G vs 110G
« Reply #12 on: May 31, 2004, 08:42:25 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Grendel
Ju-88 was designed as dive bomber and was capable of vertical dives.


How did the NF Ju-88 keeps its speed down in its vertical dives with no dive brakes fitted?

Offline Wilbus

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4472
JU88G vs 110G
« Reply #13 on: June 02, 2004, 03:22:49 AM »
The 110 was a pretty crappy plane, the JU88, and quite a few other twins were far superior.

One more thing, don't trust Janes when it comes to WW2 planes, it is quite often wrong from what I have seen of it, not always but quite often.
Rasmus "Wilbus" Mattsson

Liberating Livestock since 1998, recently returned from a 5 year Sheep-care training camp.

storch

  • Guest
Re: JU88G vs 110G
« Reply #14 on: June 02, 2004, 08:53:21 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by OLtos
Jane's also notes (p177) that some 110 g varients had twin 30mm cannon mounted in the rear cockpit firing forward and upward at 65 degress as did the JU88 night fighter varient.  So that in Aces 110s might have four 30mm cannon but two of htose should be the oblique mounted critter.

Man I want that JU88G modle!


It was 20mm cannons and it was called Schrage musik, and it worked wonderfully against lancs.