He 111

[Zacherof]

Ju188A-1 would be my personal choice.  Such a pretty airplane and I'd love the 20mm in the sleek top turret.

Others say Do217 or He177 though.

Do217 did 340 at alt with 8,000ish of bombs
Armement consited of 13mm and 7.7 mm guns

Ju188
 did 310 at alt and carried 8,600 pounds of ords with
a defense consisting of 20mm, 13mm, and 7.7mm.

He177 did 351 at alt
carried 13,000 pounds internally and 15,000 if external ords are carried.
Defensive weapons consisted of just 13mm and multiple 20mm guns.


Of the 3, the 217 and 177 would be great additions giving the Luftwaffe wienies a LW medium Humber and a heavy bomber. 177 in particular would be the most survivable due to it's gun placements and the guns that it packs

+1 for each

[Tupac]

"But but but but but scenarios are a thing to"

[SmokinLoon]

"Typical fuel load" is quite a vague term. Different players might have different ideas about that. What is a "typical" Lanc loadout ? 25%? 50% Is 75% a 'typical' fuel loadout for the B-29 (for me, it is).
When comparing capabilities, you ideally look to have some standard, in this case to select a fuel loadout that gives roughly equal endurance.
A He-111 with 8x250kg (4,400lbs) and 50% fuel (=1.1h) will climb to 15k in about 21 minutes from SL.
The B-26 (4,000lbs) and 100% fuel (=0.9h) - 15 minutes
Lancaster (14,000lbs), 50% fuel =(1.4h) - ~21 minutes
B-17 (6,000lbs), 50% fuel (=1.2h) - about 17 minutes
B-24 (8,000lbs), 50% fuel (=1h) - ~17 minutes
B-29 (14,000lbs), 50% fuel (=1.4h) - ~18 minutes. Even the heavy 8x2k loadout at 75% fuel (about 2h flight time) takes as much time to reach 15k as the much shorter ranged He-111
I think I can pass on posting Ki-67, G4M or Mossie data
The He 111 is not a good climber for bombers at all, unless you are distorting the comparison by giving it a very light fuel loadout only suitable for very short ranged runs while loading up the other bombers with fuel for a  long range mission.
EDIT: Quick time vs altitude chart. 30 minuets of climbing time from seal level
(Image removed from quote.)

Those are the loadings I used for my testing as well (all very typical in the MA. Looking at the end result is a better control).  I'm I reading the gauges and charts wrong on the 1000+ fpm climb to 12k???  After 12k the He111 really bogs down in the climb, no doubt. 

[Lusche]

Those are the loadings I used for my testing as well (all very typical in the MA. Looking at the end result is a better control).  I'm I reading the gauges and charts wrong on the 1000+ fpm climb to 12k???  After 12k the He111 really bogs down in the climb, no doubt.  

I can't comment on your methodology, I can only present mine:
I load up the bomber I want to test with the loadout in question, make sure that FB is at 2.0 and no wind is set at all. Then I spawn my bomber formation at sea level and start to run film the very moment the wheels begin to roll.
I then use the film viewer to determine height and speed at specific intervals, for bombers that is every 5 minutes. That way I get the actual climbing profile covering time, altitude gained and distance traveled for a specific loadout configuration.

For example the max takeoff configurations of our 4 heavies in AH:



or  old vs new Lancaster:



or some of our medium bombers with comparable fuel & bomb loadout