Author Topic: German Bombers  (Read 1222 times)

Offline theNewB

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 262
      • http://www.greatergermany.net
German Bombers
« on: August 25, 2002, 07:20:36 PM »
I have taken a lil time to think about what german bombers would be needed in AH.

1st I think the He-111 should be added (probably the H model)

2nd the Dornier Do 217 or Do 17 (both great AC's and are missing from AH and would keep even with the b17 and the Lancaster as a heavy bobmer)

3rd The Ju-87 (sure its crap like most ppl say but it is still needed we have a American , Japanese , and now we need a german one)

4th The Ju-52 (this plane is needed, the C47 is great but woudlnt it be good to have a german one? It has armourment and would replace the C47 in missions where it requires a german transport)

This is all i see that would be good in AH for now and would keep the community happy :) .What are your opinions on this guys?
« Last Edit: August 25, 2002, 07:23:14 PM by theNewB »

Offline brady

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7055
      • http://personal.jax.bellsouth.net/jax/t/y/tyr88/JG2main.html
German Bombers
« Reply #1 on: August 25, 2002, 08:20:30 PM »
The Only German Bomber worth adding is the He 177, I realy don't consider the JU 87 a "bomber" rather a close suport aircraft.

 The He 111 and the D0 217 are curently represented by the JU 88, The JU 88 is a much better plane than either of the these early war bombers. What the Germans nead is a late war buff and the He 177 is the best of the lot.

 I can't see them doing a JU 52, for a number of reasions, the leaet of which is it's redundancy.

 Redundancy, If I can stand on my soapbox and yell to the heavens on how a B 24 is a redundant choice for adation to AH, because it is already represented by the B 17 in AH( that is an American Heavy bomber) than I can say the same for the He 111 and the Do 217.

Offline cajun

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1112
German Bombers
« Reply #2 on: August 25, 2002, 08:39:46 PM »
I would like to see some early war german bombers as well as heavy, but ju88 cant be only early war bomber, like in the BoB scenario we have, ju88a-4 is really faster than the hurricane and the historical bob ju88a-1, and other bombers such as the He-111 played important bombing roles, balancing the hurris/bombers...  But I guess for late war we do need a little bit heavier bomber than ju88 for germans...

But if your talkin about dive bombers as well, my vote goes for the Hs-123 and Ju87 also! Hs123 could carry 2x20mms and decent amount of bombs, about the same as the vals bombload *I think*!
« Last Edit: August 25, 2002, 08:45:35 PM by cajun »

Offline BenDover

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5803
German Bombers
« Reply #3 on: August 25, 2002, 10:12:28 PM »
I wander if any1 made a siren noise when they dive bombed in a val:)

Offline theNewB

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 262
      • http://www.greatergermany.net
German Bombers
« Reply #4 on: August 25, 2002, 11:08:44 PM »
I agree we need heavy German bombers but i would count the He-177 as the last on the list.Why because it was so problematic.But none the less it still should be appart of AH.But I was just pointing out what most of us would like to see (usuing the knowledge that i see on the BB) in our AH bomber selection.

Heh Ben:p

Offline whgates3

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1426
German Bombers
« Reply #5 on: August 25, 2002, 11:18:08 PM »
from what i've read, the krauts considered the He177 to be somewhat of a failure, crew nicknamed it "the flaming coffin", mechanics thought it most troublesome.  certainly not the only luftwaffe bomber worth adding.  even for a heavy, i think the Ju 290 might be a more attractive option, as it was a paratroop carrier as well, but the kraut bomber i would like to see most is the Heinkel 219.  although not really a bomber, it did preform this duty well.  it seems that the He219 was sort of a german equivalent to the Mosquito, but faster (top speed w/out nitrous oxide boost =~ 410 MPH) & more heavily armed (4 x 30mm + 2 x 20mm).  mostly it was used as a night fighter, but it did bombing & torpedo bombing as well

Offline Soviet

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 586
      • http://flanker2.8m.net
German Bombers
« Reply #6 on: August 25, 2002, 11:18:18 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by theNewB
I agree we need heavy German bombers but i would count the He-177 as the last on the list.Why because it was so problematic.But none the less it still should be appart of AH.But I was just pointing out what most of us would like to see (usuing the knowledge that i see on the BB) in our AH bomber selection.

Heh Ben:p  


The failures arguement doesn't hold much ground in AH.

We have numerous planes in AH that had a history of failures that isn't modeled.

Want and example? Take the n1k2j.  This plane had a HORRIBLE engine record, tons had engine failures yet it is in AH and the problems aren't represented.  Failures would be cool for the first few times it happend then it would just get annoying.

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
German Bombers
« Reply #7 on: August 25, 2002, 11:26:18 PM »
cajun the ju88a-4 is not faster then a hurricane, complete bs AH allied propaganda.

its 12 miles faster then the ju88a-1. The hurricane is still faster then it at all altitudes.

In the BoB our ju88s at no time flew at full manifold. They even slowed down when attacked.

A4 max speed is 292mph empty (no bombs)  (ah 290)
A1 max speed is 280mph empty (no bombs)

The Hurricane MkI does 318mph.(ah 325 with wep)

12 mph top speeds makes little difference in this event. The Ju 88s involved in the Battle of Britain were a mix of Ju 88A-1s and Ju 88A-5s. The Ju 88A-4 was designed to use the more powerful Ju 211J engine, and longer wings. However these new engines were not yet ready for delivery, so the interim Ju 88A-5 entered service instead, in Summer of 1940. It still had 1,200 hp engines (a4 had 1,400 hp eng), but received the longer wings (and longer ailerons) of the a4.

ju-88a1 was powered by a pair of 1,200 hp Jumo 211B-1 engines, and could reach 450 km/h

ju-88a4 was powered by a pair of 1,400 hp Junkers 211J eng and could reach 472 km/h.



325 @ 17k



290 @ 17k

Please dont make untrue statements. I will assume you did so out of a lack of knowledge and simply repeated AH raf/allied propaganda.

the he111 was much tougher then the ju88 and Do-17z had a lower top speed then the ju88 but at cruise speed it wouldnt matter.

« Last Edit: August 25, 2002, 11:30:35 PM by Wotan »

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
German Bombers
« Reply #8 on: August 25, 2002, 11:56:32 PM »
brady,

You're thinking of the Do17.  The Do217 is markedly superior to the Ju88A-4.

Wotan,

The fact of the matter is that in AH we run at full power constantly.  That means that the Hurri is only going a little faster than the Ju88 and has a much harder interception than was historical.

The German bombers attacking the UK cruised at what? 180mph? 200mph?  Speeds that are far easier for the Hurricane to deal with.

As to the drive of this thread, I think the Ju188A-2 and He177A-5 should be the next big German bombers.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline J_A_B

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3012
German Bombers
« Reply #9 on: August 26, 2002, 12:31:08 AM »
"I can't see them doing a JU 52, for a number of reasions, the leaet of which is it's redundancy. "

We don't need another Italian fighter Brady.  It'd be redundant--after all, we already HAVE an Italian fighter.  We don't need an SM 79 bomber.  We already HAVE bombers that are just as good and/or better.  For that matter, why do we need to have so many different types of fighter planes?   I mean, they all do the same thing--shoot down other airplanes.  Isn't it redundant to bother with adding so many?  


Sorry, but your argument about redundancy doesn't hold water.   What matters is CHOICE, and right now the C-47 is the ONLY choice for aerial supply/paratrooper drops.  There are TWO heavy bombers in AH.   In BETA AH had more fighters than that!

The Ju-52 would DOUBLE the number of transport planes available.   It's be GREAT for Allies vs Axis setups and it'd even see use in the MA (doutlessly LW-oriented squads would choose it over the C-47).  Adding the B-24 (Or He-177) would increase the number of heavy bombers available by 50%; adding them both would double the heavy bomber choices available.


J_A_B

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
German Bombers
« Reply #10 on: August 26, 2002, 01:20:17 AM »
karnak I am talking about the BoB scenario in which I am axis CO.

the ju88a-4 has a order setting cruise well below full man. At cruise setting the ju88-a4 and do-17z will be within 8 mph. Hardly noticeable. Same goes for the ju88a-1 or a-5.

Leading up to this event folks have suggested the ju-88a4 was to good for this event.

I am pointing out that this is unwarranted. The ju-88s in the AH event bob do not cruise at full man and do not cruise at optimum alt.

In the main where planes are run at full man it wouldnt matter.

But in the main you dont have ju88s vrs hurri 1s

ju88a-1

Powerplant: Two 1,200 hp Junkers Jumo 211B-1 twelve-cylinder liquid-cooled engine.

Span: 59ft 10¾in (18.25m)

Length: 47ft 1in (14.35m)

Max Speed: 286 mph (461km/h) at 16,000 ft (4,876m)(ahs ju88a-4 max speed 290)

Armament: Three 7.9mm machine guns in front and rear cockpit mountings and ventral gondola.

Bombload: Normal load of 3,968lb (1,801kg) carried on gour underwing pylons, plus small internal capacity.

Accommodation: Pilot and three gunners/navigators/bomb-aimers.

Recognition:Long, thin fuselage with triangular fin and glazed nose. Straight wings mounted well forwrd on the fuselage with mainwheels retracting into engine cowlings.

DO-17z
Powerplant: Two 1,000 hp Bramo 323P nine-cylinder air-cooled engines.

Span: 59ft ¾in (18.00m)

Length: 52ft 0in (15.85m)

Max Speed: 265 mph (427km/h) at 16,400 ft (4,998m)

Armament: Between four and eight 7.9mm machine guns in front, rear and beam cockpit mountings and ventral position.

Bombload: Normal load of 2,200lb (1,000kg).

Accommodation: Pilot and four gunners/navigators/bomb-aimers.

Recognition:Thin, 'pencil' fuselage with bulged forward fuselage featuring heavily-framed cockpit and ventral gun position. Small twin fins at the rear. Mainwheels retract into engine fairings.

Theres a 25 mph max speed difference between the ju88a-4 and the do-17z

At cruise settings they are about the same. The do-17 is better armed then the ju-88 but carries a lot less of a bomb load. It was "weaker" then the ju-88 and he-111.

he-111

Powerplant: Two 1,100 hp Daimler-Benz DB601A-1 twelve-cylinder liquid-cooled engines.

Span: 74ft 1¾in (22.60m)

Length: 53ft 9½in (16.39m)

Max Speed: 247 mph (398km/h) at 16,400 ft (4,998m)

Armament: Three 7.9mm machine guns in nose, dorsal and ventral positions.

Bombload: Normal load of 4,410lb (2,002kg).

Accommodation: Pilot and two gunners/navigators/bomb-aimers.

Recognition:Sleek, shark-like fuselage with faired-in cockpit featuring large glazed areas. Prominent fin with gun position above and below the fuselage. Mainwheels retract into engine fairings.

It had lower max speed then both the ju88 and do-17 but carried more bombs. It was armed similiar to the ju88 but was the tougher of the three.

In the event we are running it would have been great to have all these aircraft represented. But to say that the ju88a-4 faster then a hurricane or suggest that the axis have an advantage because of the ju88a-4 is not correct.

I wont give out my instruction for how the ju88s are to be flown and operated because theres 2 frames left. they are however being operated well below full man and at historically correct altitudes.

The point of my post was to dispell the AH allied/raf propaganda about the ju88a-4 is incorrect.

After all you know my opinion on bombers in general for the main.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2002, 01:22:49 AM by Wotan »

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
German Bombers
« Reply #11 on: August 26, 2002, 02:22:54 AM »
Wotan,

Ju88A-4s using cruise settings are entirely appropriate in my mind.  I'm not participating in the BoB scenario, but I think you're running your side very well if you insist on your pilots using historical speeds.

The BoB environments that I am familiar with are those in the CT, where every Ju88A-4 I've run into has been going flat out.  I don't think that the Do17 or He111 would change this as it is an issue with how AH models engine heat and wear.

In a controlled environment like the BoB scenario the Ju88 does fine. Though it would be nice to have some of the more common and weaker German bombers there too, they are far from required.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline brady

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7055
      • http://personal.jax.bellsouth.net/jax/t/y/tyr88/JG2main.html
German Bombers
« Reply #12 on: August 26, 2002, 06:09:12 AM »
We don't need another Italian fighter Brady. It'd be redundant--after all, we already HAVE an Italian fighter. We don't need an SM 79 bomber. We already HAVE bombers that are just as good and/or better. For that matter, why do we need to have so many different types of fighter planes? I mean, they all do the same thing--shoot down other airplanes. Isn't it redundant to bother with adding so many?

 Lighten up man, besides I dont want a SM 79 I want a Cant Z 1007:)

 
"Sorry, but your argument about redundancy doesn't hold water. What matters is CHOICE, and right now the C-47 is the ONLY choice for aerial supply/paratrooper drops. There are TWO heavy bombers in AH. In BETA AH had more fighters than that! "

 The problem I see in modeling a JU 52 is well the time frankely, I would rater see something else made in the time it would take them to model a German transport, the C 47 is faster and that 7.9mm MG on the JU 52 is going to scare nobody:)

"The Ju-52 would DOUBLE the number of transport planes available. It's be GREAT for Allies vs Axis setups and it'd even see use in the MA (doutlessly LW-oriented squads would choose it over the C-47). Adding the B-24 (Or He-177) would increase the number of heavy bombers available by 50%; adding them both would double the heavy bomber choices available."

 True it would, but J_A_B I am shure you have noticed this 99% of all this BS on the BBS is about personal oppinion, and lobbying for whatever we feal is right for what ever our reasion. I lobby for the underdogs, IF US planes were unrepresented I would lobby for them, as it is adding planes that add new dimenshions to the game, new abalities and expand the CT, and the CM corp's tools is what I am after, and adding a plane like a B 24 is not somthing I would back because it simply add's nothing we dont already have a US heavy bomber from WW 2, a lot of fighters are from diferent times in the war, and different models, they add somthing because they represent different time frames differnt set up's. Heck during Stalengrade in the CT We had NO Soviet planes from that battle the only planes that were in service that AH had modeled were the Brit ones we added. Thats why their are so many different planes added, other than the Furball MA whear realy only the late war planes can compeat truley effectively. So If you add a Cant Z 1007 you add somthing new to the game and expand the set up's we can do in the CT or for a special event, do I expect it to be used in the MA, well for torpedo sorties maybe but not much else.



 Karnak, I feal the JU 88 is a better bomber than the Do 217 primarly because of it superlative handeling and dive bombing abalities, in terms of defensive firepower if we look at the models that were in exestance at the time of our A4 JU 88, they are realy very simmilar, granted the Do 217 could cary aprox, 2000 pounds more, it should be remembered that our JU 88 is missing the outer wing bomb mounts that would lessen this advantage it has, and that is it's only real advantage over the JU 88, slightly larger bomb load.

Offline J_A_B

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3012
German Bombers
« Reply #13 on: August 26, 2002, 02:05:44 PM »
THIS is the Brady I miss seeing  :)

Actually, from a CT/scenario perspective I'm surprised that you aren't clamoring for a Ju-88.  The Goonie is probably the most common sunbtitution in the CT right now.

While supply planes might not have the same "glamor" as fighters, the Goon in AH sees more use than many of the AH fighters; an alternative supply plane would doutlessly see as much if not more use in the MA and the CT/scenarios than something like a Cant Z 1007

J_A_B

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
German Bombers
« Reply #14 on: August 26, 2002, 02:43:46 PM »
Hi Karnak,

>You're thinking of the Do17.  The Do217 is markedly superior to the Ju88A-4.

Do you have a good overview on the Do 217's loadout options?

I've only seen one for the Ju 88A-4:

Front bomb bay: 18 x 50 kg
Rear bomb bay: 10 x 50 kg
Inboard wing root racks: Up to 1800 kg each
Outboard wing root racks: Up to 500 kg each
Optional outer wing racks: Up to 500 kg each

(from "Junkersflugzeuge 1933 - 1945" by Dressel/Griehl)

The Do 217 seems to have been able to carry 2500 kg internally or 4000 kg in total, but I don't know in which combinations.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)