Author Topic: German Heavy Bomber  (Read 1813 times)

Offline cut67

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 395
      • 483 BG
German Heavy Bomber
« on: July 12, 2011, 04:20:33 AM »
I dont know if there was one during the war other than the HE111 but it would be nice to see some German/Russian Heavy bombers <S>
The bombers give the boom and the fighters give the zoom

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: German Heavy Bomber
« Reply #1 on: July 12, 2011, 09:17:26 AM »
Germany and Soviet Russia didn't need or depend on heavy bombers, nor could their battle tactics or their strategic plans benefit from them.

They just didn't work that way. That's why they don't have any.

Offline cut67

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 395
      • 483 BG
Re: German Heavy Bomber
« Reply #2 on: July 12, 2011, 09:50:51 AM »
Germany and Soviet Russia didn't need or depend on heavy bombers, nor could their battle tactics or their strategic plans benefit from them.

They just didn't work that way. That's why they don't have any.
Yeah  I read up on it and the Germans Halted their heavy bomber making due to the cost and how it wouldnt benefit to their style of fighting
The bombers give the boom and the fighters give the zoom

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: German Heavy Bomber
« Reply #3 on: July 12, 2011, 12:34:57 PM »
Don't misunderstand heavy effort vs heavy bombers. The Germans put a lot of effort into bombers and used them throughout the war. However, they were all medium or light bombers. Not what you would compare to a B-17 or Lancaster. Often twin-engined.

There was a heavy emphasis on bombers, but not "heavy" bombers, if you see the distinction?

Offline bortas1

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1228
Re: German Heavy Bomber
« Reply #4 on: July 12, 2011, 01:14:08 PM »
didnt the germans have a big 4 engine plane called the condor? or was it just a transport plane?  :salute

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: German Heavy Bomber
« Reply #5 on: July 12, 2011, 01:49:07 PM »
Essentially a long-range airliner converted to maritime patrol (light bomb load to drop on shipping) but it was not a heavy bomber. It was large and it was decidedly fragile, often breaking its own back when landing.

Offline iron650

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 662
Re: German Heavy Bomber
« Reply #6 on: July 12, 2011, 01:51:36 PM »
Well, we should either the He111, Do217, or maybe even the Do17z.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Re: German Heavy Bomber
« Reply #7 on: July 12, 2011, 02:23:17 PM »
Well, we should either the He111, Do217, or maybe even the Do17z.
I would favor the Ju188A over the Do217E, but either would be very nice.  The He111 is needed as a scenario bomber much as the G4M was.  Do17z, well, maybe someday but it has to be far down the list.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: German Heavy Bomber
« Reply #8 on: July 12, 2011, 03:08:46 PM »
The Do17Z was barely adequate during the invasion of Poland and France. During Battle of Britain times it was obsolete and they knew it. It was just too slow, too weak, too lightly armed to do anything. After massive losses in the BOB it was fully removed from frontline service, but it was on its way out either way.

I seem to recall somebody made a breakdown of the plane types in BOB once, and the Do17Z was the smallest portion of the bomber fleet. It wasn't as numerous as the Ju88s or He111s, and frankly if we had either a Ju88A1 or a He111 we would never have a use for a Do17Z ever.

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6168
Re: German Heavy Bomber
« Reply #9 on: July 12, 2011, 03:19:17 PM »
Instead of putting 150 of the B17, B24, or Lancaster size bombers in the air, comparatively the Germans would put 200 of the medium He111's and "light" heavy Ju88's.

Remember, the Ju88 can carry more ordnance weight than the B17.  It just doesnt have the defenses, range, or speed.  The Ju88 didnt really need any of that considering where Germany was bombing. 

Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline olds442

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2239
Re: German Heavy Bomber
« Reply #10 on: July 12, 2011, 05:58:38 PM »
I dont know if there was one during the war other than the HE111 but it would be nice to see some German/Russian Heavy bombers <S>
 HE177!!!=BEST PLANE EVAR!
only a moron would use Dolby positioning in a game.
IGN: cutlass "shovels and rakes and implements of destruction"

Offline Tupac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5056
Re: German Heavy Bomber
« Reply #11 on: July 12, 2011, 06:15:13 PM »
"It was once believed that an infinite number of monkeys, typing on an infinite number of keyboards, would eventually reproduce the works of Shakespeare. However, with the advent of Internet messageboards we now know this is not the case."

Offline iron650

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 662
Re: German Heavy Bomber
« Reply #12 on: July 12, 2011, 06:39:25 PM »
  HE177!!!=BEST PLANE EVAR!


No barely saw combat.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2011, 06:56:40 PM by iron650 »

Offline lyric1

  • Skinner Team
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10687
Re: Italian Heavy Bomber
« Reply #13 on: July 12, 2011, 07:18:07 PM »
I dont know if there was one during the war other than the HE111 but it would be nice to see some German/Russian/ITALIAN Heavy bombers <S>
Fixed. :aok Piaggio P108.

Offline olds442

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2239
Re: German Heavy Bomber
« Reply #14 on: July 12, 2011, 07:29:20 PM »

No barely saw combat.
YES IT DID SEE COMBAT...
only a moron would use Dolby positioning in a game.
IGN: cutlass "shovels and rakes and implements of destruction"