Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: storch on January 18, 2006, 09:21:09 AM

Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: storch on January 18, 2006, 09:21:09 AM
this heavy fighter would add more dimension and see considerable use in AH. especially in the upcoming TOD and specialty arenas such as AvA and SEA
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: hogenbor on January 18, 2006, 09:26:09 AM
What could it do? Speed, armament?
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Karnak on January 18, 2006, 10:05:21 AM
It could do a little over 400mph and had a good aray of cannons in the nose.  It was probably Germany's best night fighter that saw service in any significant numbers.

I'd like to see it added as well.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: storch on January 18, 2006, 10:41:57 AM
Quote
Originally posted by hogenbor
What could it do? Speed, armament?
speed was around 360mph/580kph @ 9600m  IIRC armament depended on specific model but generally 5 or 6 20mm MG151 forward firing with 400rpg 2 20mm MGFF schrage musik with 2 60 rd drums but were able to reloaded in flight  and 2 13mmMG with 1000 rds for the tailgunner.  they were fast and hard hitting especially when the lichtenstien short range radar was omitted. what karnak said for speed without the radar on board
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: storch on January 18, 2006, 10:51:19 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Karnak
It could do a little over 400mph and had a good aray of cannons in the nose.  It was probably Germany's best night fighter that saw service in any significant numbers.

I'd like to see it added as well.
they were used extensively against the american bombers during daylight attack as well.  the tactic was for 109s/190s to draw off the escorts and the Ju88s/Me410s/Bf110s would attack from high HO in slash attacks
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Squire on January 18, 2006, 11:10:29 AM
I think you mean the Ju-88C-6. Solid nose "heavy fighter" varient for day and night work. It did a wide array of missions.  It did have a night fighter version as well, but many were day fighters.

Ju-88G was used almost exclusively as a night fighter against the RAF, and was radar equipped, very specialist, and narrow in its mission.

As to the Ju-88C-6, I saw "yes" add it it. Kinda like a "LW A-20G" of sorts. Its been asked for before as I recollect. Cool plane.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: bozon on January 18, 2006, 12:18:32 PM
Sounds like a good option for a late LW bomber.

Bozon
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Karnak on January 18, 2006, 12:29:17 PM
Quote
Originally posted by bozon
Sounds like a good option for a late LW bomber.

Its not a bomber.  Its a fighter.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Krusty on January 18, 2006, 12:35:14 PM
C model had 3x 7mm and 3x MG151/20s in the solid nose (asymmetrical, pilot on one side, most of the guns on the other).

I'd like to see either. It's an amazingly LARGE target, but it's somewhat nimble and can take a beating. I wonder if the C/G climbed any better than the A-4 we have in AH now.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: storch on January 18, 2006, 12:45:06 PM
both the C and the G variants were used in night and heavy day fighter configuration IIRC the most common day bomber interceptor was the G4.  I could be mistaken though.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Krusty on January 18, 2006, 01:21:25 PM
A few generic facts from a Gunston book (he's not always right but seems to get it right a lot of the time)

C-6b top speed: 300mph
G-7b (no DTs or flame dampers -- this means daytime use??) top speed: 402mph

Initial Climbs:
A-4 (for comparison): 1312 fpm
C-6b: "About" 985 fpm
G-7b: 1640 fpm

Arms:
C-6b: 3x 20mm MG/FF (blech!! worse than I thought) and 3x MG17s firing forward with 2 20mm Schrage musik
G-7b: Ventral fairing with 4x MG151/20 (200rpg) and 2x Schrage musik and rear upper guns listed as MG131s (no ventral on the C/G)
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Morpheus on January 18, 2006, 01:25:16 PM
plz model this plane.

step up the ju87 too.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Karnak on January 18, 2006, 01:51:16 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Krusty
C-6b top speed: 300mph
C-6b: "About" 985 fpm
C-6b: 3x 20mm MG/FF (blech!! worse than I thought)

Those are the reasons I always advocate the Ju88G-7b and not the Ju88C-6b.  Particularly the bolded part.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Krusty on January 18, 2006, 01:54:03 PM
Wise man :)
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Squire on January 18, 2006, 02:21:32 PM
There are two versions of the Ju88C-6, one of them has the night fighter radar antenna, so be carefull when quoting speed and climb. It made a sizeable dip into its performance. The day fighter would have been faster and would have had a better climb. I have 310mph for it but I dont know what exact varient. My book says it went an extra 20mph without the forward gondola as well, so that makes it 330mph "clean".

Nose armament (FF) was 3 x 7.92mm, 1 x 20mm MG-FF and 1 x 20mm MG151/20. Could carry 1100 lbs of bombs.

As for the Ju-88G, I can find nothing on it that indicated day fighter use. Looks like they all went to NJG units. They had no a-g ord of any kind, and were all radar equipped.

Some model pics for interest that I found on the C-6:

http://hsgalleries.com/ju88c6fo_1.htm
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: SMIDSY on January 18, 2006, 02:30:31 PM
funny story: American fighter pilots made a habbit of HOing bomber JU-88s which could be distinguished from the fighter varient by their glazed nose. well, pilots of FIGHTER Ju-88s got wise to this and painted the nose of their aircraft blue, luring in foolhardy american pilots...HAY!! we got a paint scheme for the sucker all ready!! WOOT!!!
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Bruno on January 18, 2006, 03:37:17 PM
The Ju 88G-6 was the ultimate German night fighter in the NJG force in November 1944 until May of 1945 and carried the final versions of the Neptun FuG 217 in the wings and 218 in the nose and at least 12 examples carrying the advanced FuG 240 Berlin 1 radar sets. The G didn't enter service in any meaningful numbers until late '44 and hardly ever flew during daylight.

Some G-6s were used as Lotsen for fighters in daylight. These provide Navigation in blind flying situations such as Bodenplatte. Ju-88s (mostly Gs) lead / navigated the LW fighters to the front. Flying OTD in low light conditions with fresh snow while in formation and watching for the enemy was a bit much for the the average LW fighter pilot, not to mention the Nachwuchs at this point in the war..

But as a daylight fighter it saw almost no usage and wouldn't have lasted 10 seconds over NWE in late '44.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Bruno on January 18, 2006, 03:44:41 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Karnak
Those are the reasons I always advocate the Ju88G-7b and not the Ju88C-6b.  Particularly the bolded part.


First the G-7 saw almost no use, second as a point of interest the a, b, and c designations were provisional only and did not officially exist for the C-6 series or for the G-6 series and the non operative G-7.  

Just dont get to caught up onthe a b and c's ;)
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Klum25th on January 18, 2006, 03:52:35 PM
Wasnt there a version on the Ju88 night fighter that had a big radar on front, and I think where the tailgunner sat, there was a big gun that was used on RAF bombers at night since the RAF bombers where vunderable from the belly. Not saying this would be good to add to the game, but wasn't there 1 like that, or was there another german plane like that.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Lusche on January 18, 2006, 04:15:40 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Klum25th
Wasnt there a version on the Ju88 night fighter that had a big radar on front, and I think where the tailgunner sat, there was a big gun that was used on RAF bombers at night since the RAF bombers where vunderable from the belly. Not saying this would be good to add to the game, but wasn't there 1 like that, or was there another german plane like that.


This kind of additional armament was used on many nightfighters, Ju88, Do 217, He 219, Bf 110 etc. it was called "Schraege Musik" and consisted of 2 cannons of various type (20-30mm). They fired at a fixed angle upward. If I recall correctly, around 60-65 degrees. The pilot had an additional gunsight for this.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Krusty on January 18, 2006, 04:16:59 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Bruno
First the G-7 saw almost no use, second as a point of interest the a, b, and c designations were provisional only and did not officially exist for the C-6 series or for the G-6 series and the non operative G-7.  

Just dont get to caught up onthe a b and c's ;)


Bruno I only quoted the variants my book mentioned. It's relatively safe to say that the G6 and G7 are relatively similar in performance and capabilities. Otherwise, I would have posted a more numerous variant (or heck, posted info on more variants, larger pool of info).
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: chris3 on January 18, 2006, 04:29:47 PM
moin

i think this g6 is not a nightfighter. No Radar is shown on the pick.

(http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Bilder/Ju88/Ju88G6C-1.jpg)

cu chris3
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Debonair on January 18, 2006, 04:34:53 PM
Does anyone know how many of the 21cm rockets the rocket firing Ju88s carried?
I know 4 on the BF-110s & I've seen photos of 6 on Me-410s, one might guess more on a larger plane like the Ju88...
...that photo of the Do217 with 4 torpedos was a real eye opener.  I thought the B-24s that carried 3 were the most...
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Squire on January 18, 2006, 04:39:20 PM
What Bruno said.

"i think this g6 is not a nightfighter. No Radar is shown on the pick."

Then why is it in night fighter camoflage?

I admitt, I cant see the antenna in the photo, but it looks like a non operational a/c, over run by the allies. Could have been damaged or removed.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: chris3 on January 18, 2006, 04:53:27 PM
mmh, Maybe. thats interestening idee.
Im not sure that it is nightfighter camoflage because did you remember the 109g10 skin of jg 300 it locks the same.
i m still cherching for some thinks to say that the ju88 was used as a dayfighter too (in the beginning of the airbatel over germany).
cu chris3
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Lusche on January 18, 2006, 05:05:22 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Squire
What Bruno said.

"i think this g6 is not a nightfighter. No Radar is shown on the pick."

Then why is it in night fighter camoflage?

I admitt, I cant see the antenna in the photo, but it looks like a non operational a/c, over run by the allies. Could have been damaged or removed.


In the last weeks of the war, many nightfighter and bomber units were used solely in a night-jabo role ("nachtschlacht").  Reason was allied dominance in the air and breakdown of the ground based radar net.
Nightfighter planes were converted to this role: radar and radar antennas were removed, sometimes additional guns installed, bomb bays and/or wing hardpoints refittet, as well as some minor system changes. Of course, the painting scheme was retained.

This specific G6 may be one of those, for i agree with squire that the plane seems to have been captured by the allies near/at the end of war.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: storch on January 18, 2006, 05:21:39 PM
I'll look up my darn Ju88 book and post it as a source.  It still doesn't mean I'm right just that I read it.  Now I'm not sure if it was a 110G4 or a Ju88G4 that I read about though.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Krusty on January 18, 2006, 05:36:17 PM
I don't think they saw much (if any) daylight service storch, I think you read about 110s and 410s.

Still, it would be a novel plane to fly, eh?
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: storch on January 18, 2006, 05:42:31 PM
if they implement TOD it sure would be.  I would use it hit buffs in the MA all day long as well.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Krusty on January 18, 2006, 05:47:04 PM
Hehehe, I was doing a BOB setup once where some dweeb found a glitch and upped a N1K2, as an allied pilot, and came after my Ju88 formation. I dropped my bombs, lost my drones in the ensuing dogfight, but I outflew that N1K2 (lmao) and used all my forward gun's ammo to kill his oil then his eng. He ended up diving away and ditching at the city I just bombed, the lucky bugger. I made it back but sans kill :P
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: justin_g on January 19, 2006, 04:29:05 AM
Quote
Originally posted by storch
I'll look up my darn Ju88 book and post it as a source.  It still doesn't mean I'm right just that I read it.  Now I'm not sure if it was a 110G4 or a Ju88G4 that I read about though.


It would have been the Messer, as there was no Ju 88G-4 produced.

Related, here is a webpage with a letter written by a "Nachtjagd" pilot: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/2072/thun.html
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: hogenbor on January 19, 2006, 04:37:12 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Krusty
Hehehe, I was doing a BOB setup once where some dweeb found a glitch and upped a N1K2, as an allied pilot, and came after my Ju88 formation. I dropped my bombs, lost my drones in the ensuing dogfight, but I outflew that N1K2 (lmao) and used all my forward gun's ammo to kill his oil then his eng. He ended up diving away and ditching at the city I just bombed, the lucky bugger. I made it back but sans kill :P


He should have gone vertical, would have killed you in an instant :D

That having said, in my early days I got in a dogfight with a Ju-88 who actually pinged me, I was amazed by his agility. Can't remember what I was flying back then though. Shot him down eventually but that he even was able to put up a fight amazed me.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: storch on January 19, 2006, 07:34:50 AM
Quote
Originally posted by justin_g
It would have been the Messer, as there was no Ju 88G-4 produced.

Related, here is a webpage with a letter written by a "Nachtjagd" pilot: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/2072/thun.html
yup I reckon so.  great read and great site thanks for the link.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Angus on January 19, 2006, 08:48:57 AM
One day, AH will perhaps see a "night" where radar equipped night fighters come in use. It will be good for Mossies, Beaus, Ju88's, 110's and Uhu's, Black widows and more.
But this daylight interceptor, now that's still an angle, for the firepower. Would it carry external bombs as well?
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Krusty on January 19, 2006, 10:19:00 AM
No, the C and G models could carry no internal/external ord. Pure fighter configuration.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Squire on January 19, 2006, 10:29:05 AM
The Ju88C series was a true "multi role" a/c, it did both day and night missions, had forward firing guns, gun pods, and air to ground ordnance, including bombs and torpedos.

It flew in all the LWs fronts during the war, Western Front, Med, Russia, and others 1940-45. Thats why I would like to see it in AH2. As for "Combat Tour" because its an 8th AF vs the LW thing, it probably wouldnt see much use, but thats no reason to not eventually get it.

It would be a very decent "attack" a/c, more surviveable than a Ju-88A, and with a much heavier load than a Bf 110 or a Stuka.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Krusty on January 19, 2006, 03:00:51 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Squire
The Ju88C series was a true "multi role" a/c, it did both day and night missions, had forward firing guns, gun pods, and air to ground ordnance, including bombs and torpedos.  


Uhh.... No it didn't. No source I've ever read mentions any of this. In fact most say that it was devoid of any ord and only carried guns (no external/internal bombs, rockets, etc).

Might I ask where that info comes from?
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Lusche on January 19, 2006, 04:11:56 PM
Most 88C were heavy fighters and carried indeed just guns, but not all. Several versions could carry bombs:

Ju 88C-2
Converted to fighter-bombers from A-3 configuration. Were able to carry 500kg bombs. 62 build in 1940

Ju 88 C-7a:
Was variant of the Ju 88 C-6
Was equipped to carry 500kg bombs in bomb bay
Ju 88 C-7b had additional hardpoints under the wing for loads up to 1600kg

My source: Nowarra, Heinz: Die Deutsche Luftrüstung 1933-1945, Volume 3
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Squire on January 19, 2006, 07:05:25 PM
"Ju-88 in action" part 2 br Brian Filley.

The Ju-88C-6 had an internal bomb bay. So did the C-2 and the C-4.

It was used in the anti-shipping role by V/KG40. Kind of hard to do that without any ordnance. You cant sink ships with strafing attacks.

KG3, 30, 51, 53,55,76,77 and ZG 76 all used it. Kampfgeschwader units all.

May I ask, is there some reason they would deliberately remove any ability to carry ord on it? I cant think of one. In any case if you have a source that says otherwise, post away.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Krusty on January 19, 2006, 07:16:07 PM
Well the reason would be that the C was introduced as a dedicated night fighter (albeit before the radar was available for the planes).

So then it would seem the best C version for AH consideration would be the C-7. Were there any G's that had this capability?
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: Squire on January 19, 2006, 07:23:06 PM
The Ju-88G < was a dedicated night fighter. With radar. No evidence it ever carried bombs or was used by day.

The Ju-88C < was a "heavy day fighter" and it was also used as a night fighter. Both. The night fighter version had radar, and I doubt ever carried bombs. The heavy day fighter version did, and was used for ground attack and anti-shipping, and a variety of other roles.

The confusion probably lies in that an armament quote for the Ju-88C-6 night fighter would say "no bombs". Which im sure is right.

The Ju-88 was the most versatile a/c in the LW and was modified to do just about everything, save day fighter ala the 109 and 190.
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: parin on January 22, 2006, 06:10:01 PM
(http://www.migman.com/ref/2000_combat/MSCFS3/pics/Ju-88P-4_01.jpg)
Can we get that in the weapon package too?
Title: why no Ju88G?
Post by: JAWS2003 on January 22, 2006, 06:46:56 PM
For me a Me-410 with a pair of Mk-103's, or a little Bk5 please(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/%3cFA%3eJaws/049.gif)



(http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/images/wrg0238.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/70/Me_410_with_BK50.jpg)