Heavy bombers: B-17G vs. He 177A-5

[Lumpy]

 

[Motherland]

He 219?

And why can't people scan documents in readable resolutions?

The BB's resizes all images to fit screens better. Copy&paste the URL into your browser; the actual image is bigger.

[Lumpy]

Ah ... Thanks!

[Hazzer]

 Here is what Eric brown a Royal Navy test pilot said of the He 177 in 1945 after flight testing a captured example.

 "Shortly after it's arrival I flew the He 177 and was singularly unimpressed.Owtwardly it looked twin-engined but in fact its two power plants each housed two DB605 units mounted side-by-side with a single gear-casing connecting the two crankcases and the two crankshaft pinions driving a single airscrew shaft gear.The huge four bladed propellers were rotated in opposite directions to eliminate take-off-swing.In the  event of engine failure the dead engine automatically disengaged itself from the airscrew shaft.

 The German Air Ministry called for the 177 to have dive bombing capability and be fitted with automatic dive recovery system,but this was plainly absurd since its controls were far to light and its structural strength far to weak.Indeed my feeling with it was of flying a glass aeroplane."

 "One of the very few German aircraft of the period that I tested that I did not enjoy flying"

 Even heinkel begged the RLM to allow them to dump the side by side concept,so they could develop a true four engined bomber in the same way that avro had dumped the troublesome Manchester to produce the outstanding Lancaster.

 He 111 H6/bomber   He 111 R20/Transport  Above all please.

[MiloMorai]

You do know that the He177 was not to be a vertical dive bomber like the Ju87. Iirc the angle was to be around 45 degrees max but was typically 30 degrees. In other words, a steep glide bomb angle.

[angelsandair]

Bring on the He-177 

[TOMCAT21]

stats on B-17G I found.

General characteristics:

Crew: 10: Pilot, co-pilot, navigator, bombardier/nose gunner, flight engineer-top turret gunner, radio operator, waist gunners (2), ball turret gunner, tail gunner[122]
Length: 74 ft 4 in (22.66 m)
Wingspan: 103 ft 9 in (31.62 m)
Height: 19 ft 1 in (5.82 m)
Wing area: 1,420 ft� (131.92 m�)
Airfoil: NACA 0018 / NACA 0010
Empty weight: 36,135 lb (16,391 kg)
Loaded weight: 54,000 lb (24,495 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 65,500 lb (29710 kg)
Powerplant: 4� Wright R-1820-97 "Cyclone" turbosupercharged radial engines, 1,200 hp (895 kW) each

Performance
Maximum speed: 287 mph (249 knots, 462 km/h)
Cruise speed: 182 mph (158 knots, 293 km/h)
Range: 1,738 nmi (2,000 mi, 3,219 km) with 2,722 kg (6,000 lb) bombload
Service ceiling 35,600 ft (10,850 m)
Rate of climb: 900 ft/min (4.6 m/s)
Wing loading: 38.0 lb/ft� (185.7 kg/m�)
Power/mass: 0.089 hp/lb (150 W/kg)

Armament
Guns: 13� M2 Browning .50 caliber (12.7 mm) machine guns in twin turrets, plus single dorsal, fore and aft beam positions (with optional extra nose armament fitted in glazed nose).
Bombs: Although it theoretically could carry 17,417 lb (7900 kg) of bombs, the B-17 rarely flew combat missions with more than 5,071 lb (2300 kg).[citation needed]
Short range missions (<400 mi): 8,000 lb (3,600 kg)
Long range missions (≈800 mi): 4,500 lb (2,000 kg)

[Karnak]

Not really when you consider that the allied fighters at the time were just as good at 30K as they were at 20K, perhaps even better. If the He 177 had been an allied bomber your argument would have been sound because German fighters had performance deficiencies at 30K. In fact if the He 177 had flown at 30K in massive escorted formations like American bombers did it would have been more difficult for German fighters to protect them than at 20k. And if both sides had equally good engines at high altitude it really wouldn't have matter what altitude the bombers flew at.

That doesn't matter.  If it did, the Germans would have easily intercepted and shot down the unarmed Mosquito bombers as all of their fighters, after 1942, out performed it in sheer speed and climb.  The fact is that they couldn't climb to altitude in time to intercept it whereas a climb to 20,000ft to intercept a 230mph bomber is easier than a climb to 27,000ft to intercept a 200mph bomber.

Of course this is all beside the point in AH where all bombers fly with the engine firewalled at all times.  In AH a He177A-5 at 20,000ft would be about as hard to intercept as the Mosquito was in reality because it would be going at over 300mph.

I still favor the Ju188A-1 over the He177A-5.  The Ju188A-1 would immediately replace the Ki-67 as my prefered bomber.

[Angus]

Bring on engine failiure modelling in AH !
 

[Lumpy]

That doesn't matter.  If it did, the Germans would have easily intercepted and shot down the unarmed Mosquito bombers as all of their fighters, after 1942, out performed it in sheer speed and climb.  The fact is that they couldn't climb to altitude in time to intercept it whereas a climb to 20,000ft to intercept a 230mph bomber is easier than a climb to 27,000ft to intercept a 200mph bomber.

Of course this is all beside the point in AH where all bombers fly with the engine firewalled at all times.  In AH a He177A-5 at 20,000ft would be about as hard to intercept as the Mosquito was in reality because it would be going at over 300mph.

I still favor the Ju188A-1 over the He177A-5.  The Ju188A-1 would immediately replace the Ki-67 as my prefered bomber.

Which German fighter outperformed the bomber and recce Mossies at their operational altitudes? I think you are mistaken.

With the advent of radar a bomber raid was usually detected long before crossing the channel allowing the defenders ample time to scramble. A 109G needed only 10-12 minutes or so on climb-power to climb to 30,000 feet. The Germans had in most cases ample time to analyse the allied raids and form large organized groups of fighters and destroyers to attack the bombers in a coordinated fashion. High altitude would not have been such an effective defence had the Luftwaffe fighters not had performance deficiencies at those altitudes.

[Karnak]

Which German fighter outperformed the bomber and recce Mossies at their operational altitudes? I think you are mistaken.

Fw190A and later and Bf109G and later fighters.  The Mosquito B.Mk IV, the most common bomber version until well into 1944, had a top speed of 380mph at 21,000ft without exhaust dampers and 367mph with exhaust dampers at the same altitude.  I believe that the Fw190A and Bf109G are both faster than that at that altitude.  The B.Mk XVI, which first saw use in early 1944, raised that to about 410mph at 25,000ft.  Recon Mosquitoes were similar, being primarily the PR.Mk IV and PR.Mk XVI.

And those are flat out speeds, not cruising speeds, though of course Mossie crews were not at all adverse to going full throttle if they detected a fighter coming for them, no box formation to worry about after all.

The problem, as it has been described to me, is that as the fighter climbs it is doing about 180mph over the ground and the Mosquito is cruising at nearly, or over depending on the version, 300mph.  Once the German fighter has matched altitude and and speed the Mosquito would be so far ahead that the Fw190A and Bf109G could not visually locate it and could not overtake it before running short of fuel even if given the precisely correct vector.  If the vector were even slightly off they would never have a chance, particularly at night.

Obviously the Bf109K-4 and particularly the Me262A would make the overtaking a Mosquito a lot easier, and in fact the first German fighter that caused concern (at least in the PR groups) for Mossie crews was the Me262.

WWII radar simply did not have long enough range to give an adequate warning against fast bombers if the raids formed up outside of radar range.

[Cthulhu]

Well, the He 117A-5 was an excellent bomber, fully sorted and quite capable. However, the A-5 is a 1944 vintage bomber, better compared to the B-29 rather than the B-17 which was flying in 1935 (Boeing  299).


My regards,

Widewing

Thank You Widewing

I was championing the He-177 in another thread a few days ago to no avail. Your comments carry a lot more weight. 

[Lumpy]

So in other words Karnak was wrong and the Mosquito WAS faster than the German fighters and THUS is not applicable to the discussion AT ALL. Like I said initially:

Which German fighter outperformed the bomber and recce Mossies at their operational altitudes? I think you are mistaken.

With the advent of radar a bomber raid was usually detected long before crossing the channel allowing the defenders ample time to scramble. A 109G needed only 10-12 minutes or so on climb-power to climb to 30,000 feet. The Germans had in most cases ample time to analyse the allied raids and form large organized groups of fighters and destroyers to attack the bombers in a coordinated fashion. High altitude would not have been such an effective defence had the Luftwaffe fighters not had performance deficiencies at those altitudes.

If you are arguing that the Mosquito out paced the German fighters at 21,000 feet you are supporting my argument. If you are arguing that the Germans were able to intercept the Mosquito at 21,000 feet you are supporting my argument.

The only way you can defeat my argument is if you can show me that the Mosquito DID NOT out pace the German interceptors and STILL was immune (or nearly so) to interception.


This is my argument that Karnak tried to counter with the Mosquito as example:

Not really when you consider that the allied fighters at the time were just as good at 30K as they were at 20K, perhaps even better. If the He 177 had been an allied bomber your argument would have been sound because German fighters had performance deficiencies at 30K. In fact if the He 177 had flown at 30K in massive escorted formations like American bombers did it would have been more difficult for German fighters to protect them than at 20k. And if both sides had equally good engines at high altitude it really wouldn't have matter what altitude the bombers flew at.

To which Karnak protested:

That doesn't matter.  If it did, the Germans would have easily intercepted and shot down the unarmed Mosquito bombers as all of their fighters, after 1942, out performed it in sheer speed and climb. The fact is that they couldn't climb to altitude in time to intercept it whereas a climb to 20,000ft to intercept a 230mph bomber is easier than a climb to 27,000ft to intercept a 200mph bomber.

Of course this is all beside the point in AH where all bombers fly with the engine firewalled at all times.  In AH a He177A-5 at 20,000ft would be about as hard to intercept as the Mosquito was in reality because it would be going at over 300mph.

I still favor the Ju188A-1 over the He177A-5.  The Ju188A-1 would immediately replace the Ki-67 as my prefered bomber.

A 109G-6 climbs to 21,000 feet in 7 minutes (on climb power (MIL)) and accelerates from climb speed to 300 mph in less than a minute. Lets give the Jerries 10 minutes to detect, plot and scramble fighters (the British did it in 7) and we are looking at less than 20 minutes from detection to fighters going at the same speed and same altitude as a cruising Mosquito. At 300 mph a Mosquito would have flown a mere 100 miles, not even past the first row of radar stations from the point of detection. And the fighter bases were located behind the radar belt and thus would be at the same altitude and speed in front of the Mosquito.

Karnak argues that the Mosquito's high altitude made it very difficult to intercept (which is strange considering 21,000 feet isn't all that high).

I argue that speed and stealth (night, clouds etc.) saved the Mosquito, not high altitude, and thus it is inapplicable to the discussion.

What do you think?

[Karnak]

I will clarify my comments when I have time.  You are misunderstanding some of what I meant due to the brevity/nonspecific nature of my comments I think.

[Lumpy]

That might certainly be the case. I look forward to your clarifications.