Can we get a German Bomber with Range...:)?

[RTHolmes]

4,000lbs ord ...

[Lusche]

With that said, there are no German bombers with range.  Lusche, is that accurate?

    Well at least one anyway    Condor anyone?

Depends on how you define "range"

But first, the FW 200 was no bomber, and it was never used that way. It was a commercial airliner made into a maritime recon plane with the capability of carrying some bombs along... but it's success in that role (for a limited time though) wasn't really a result of the designs strengths as a bomber (or even combat plane)

But yes (or no? lol), the LW had no bombers comparable to the B-17 or B-29 with it's combination of payload, range and sturdiness. German plans didn't call for any bombers fulfilling a purely strategic, long range attrition bombing role, thus the lack of such heavy bombers. The He 177, planned as a kind of hybrid wasn't really one either, and ultimately failed at that role. Later in the war, when the lack of a long range "heavy" was felt, it was too late (both in terms of time as well as resources) to design and introduce one. There were a few prototypes and studies (most notable the He 277, He 274, Ju 288, Ju 488 and Me 264) but that's it.

Germany's main bombers during the war:
He 111
Do 17
Do 217
Ju 88
Ju 188
He 177

All but the 177 were merely medium bombers by Allied standards, though the Luftwaffe considered the Do 217 to be a "heavy" one by their own standards, particularly before the introduction of the He 177.

[Simba]

Give 'em the He177, just so long as its engines catch fire as easily and as often as they did in real life. Ju290, anybody?

Hoho, yet another caller for a proper fuel-burn rate in the MAs - watch out for the Furballers' Chorus of 'wadda ya want that for?' that I got last time I proposed it.

 

[KayBayRay]

I think if Germany had produced a Long Range Heavy Bomber in numbers during the war it would most likely be represented here. However they only produced Light to Medium Bombers in numbers and early in the war. So I dont really see any reason to have a model of a rare bird being represented in the game. If we do that where does it go, and where does it stop? We going to look for every prototype AC of WWII? I hope not. But these are just my thoughts on this topic. If the community wants to go there, then by all means lets go.

Later,
KayBay

[AWwrgwy]

Hoho, yet another caller for a proper fuel-burn rate in the MAs - watch out for the Furballers' Chorus of 'wadda ya want that for?' that I got last time I proposed it.

 

How about 100% fuel required as well?  How about realistically spaced bases or missions? 

The only reason for having a 1 to 1 fuel burn would be so you could take 25% or 50% fuel, and less weight, to do what you do now with 100% fuel.

Do you really think the "furballers" would complain about that?



wrongway

[VonKost]

I think if Germany had produced a Long Range Heavy Bomber in numbers during the war it would most likely be represented here. However they only produced Light to Medium Bombers in numbers and early in the war. So I dont really see any reason to have a model of a rare bird being represented in the game. If we do that where does it go, and where does it stop? We going to look for every prototype AC of WWII? I hope not. But these are just my thoughts on this topic. If the community wants to go there, then by all means lets go.

Later,
KayBay

There were about 1200 He177's produced. Compared to some of the rarer (47M, Ta152) birds we already have that is a lot. Just sayin..... 

[Glasses]

There were about 1200 He177's produced. Compared to some of the rarer (47M, Ta152) birds we already have that is a lot. Just sayin..... 

From Fail=o=pedia

Starting with the He 177 A-3/R2, a modified engine nacelle with a new engine, the Daimler-Benz DB 610 which consisted of a pair of Daimler-Benz DB 605's, was used to eliminate the tendency for engine fires.[16]  With the introduction of the DB 610 came several improvements including the relocation of the engine oil tank, the lengthening of the engine mountings by 20 cm (8 in), the complete redesign of the exhaust system which also facilitated the installation of exhaust dampers for night missions, and the setting of a power limitation on the engines which resulted in greater reliability. These modifications were successful as far as engine fires were concerned but other minor problems with the transfer gearbox between the two engines and their shared propeller remained.

[Kenne]

Our new "policy" is that we will fly B17s for these missions based on the KG200 history (though they were not used in such a capacity), until we can get a German Bomber that has range.Papa

what about using the 25 or 26 instead of the 17...do the US med buffs have better range?
this wood at least put u in the realm of realistic (just a hare) by u using twin eng AC.

[Rino]

Depends on how you define "range"

But first, the FW 200 was no bomber, and it was never used that way. It was a commercial airliner made into a maritime recon plane with the capability of carrying some bombs along... but it's success in that role (for a limited time though) wasn't really a result of the designs strengths as a bomber (or even combat plane)

<shortened for brevity>

     Hmm...so the FW-200 never dropped bombs on allied shipping?  I really don't care what it was designed as.
The Ju-52, Do-17 and He-111 were all "designed" for another role originally.  Yet all 3 performed as bombers at
one point in their careers.

     I think 1920 miles qualifies as "range", not sure what your definition is.

     I was just disputing the point that they had no bombers with range.  Don't really care what birds they add, any
addition is a good thing.

[Krusty]

You claim the Ju88s have short range? It's also stupid to claim they were removed from service during the BOB because of their vulnerability. In fact, they served on until the end of the war, ever modified, ever improved.

Ju88s have plenty of range when you take full fuel. Fancy that, actually taking enough gas for a mission!! Keep in mind the FTH is around 17 or 18k. You won't get much difference between full throttle and max cruise at 20k because the engines cannot reach full power to begin with. You WILL notice it at 17k or below.

Wanting something else is all well and good. I want other german bombers as well. But wanting it because the Ju88 "doesn't have any range"????

That's just dumb. There are many reasons to want other german bombers. This is not one of them.

[ACE]

 

[Lusche]

    Hmm...so the FW-200 never dropped bombs on allied shipping?  I really don't care what it was designed as.

They dropped bombs at allied shippings as long a they had the opportunity to do so.... as a secondary feature to their martime recon roles.

However, that still doesn't make them bombers. They were never used as genuine bombers by the Luftwaffe, they neber tried to drop any bombs on land targets at all, they did not even venture close to land because they would have been highly vulnerable.

 The Ju-52, Do-17 and He-111 were all "designed" for another role originally.  Yet all 3 performed as bombers at
one point in their careers.

Both the Do-17 as well as the He-111 were designed with bomber requirements in mind from the start. Both were designed after respective requirements by the RVM / Heereswaffenamt.  Unlike the Ju-52 and Fw 200, they weren't converted with a lot of trouble to be used as a kind of stop-gap plane.

[Pannono]

Why not use the 234, that has nice range if you take full fuel and throttle back a little. It still has great range at full speed/high alt. The higher and faster you go, the lower the burn rate is if I remember correctly. Also, it has 9,900 lbs with a formation.  I routinely used it to find carriers on that map with P86 and C87 where people would hide the CV in the upper corner. 20 sectors i think on full fuel.

[papjohns]

You claim the Ju88s have short range? It's also stupid to claim they were removed from service during the BOB because of their vulnerability. In fact, they served on until the end of the war, ever modified, ever improved.

Ju88s have plenty of range when you take full fuel. Fancy that, actually taking enough gas for a mission!! Keep in mind the FTH is around 17 or 18k. You won't get much difference between full throttle and max cruise at 20k because the engines cannot reach full power to begin with. You WILL notice it at 17k or below.

Wanting something else is all well and good. I want other german bombers as well. But wanting it because the Ju88 "doesn't have any range"????

That's just dumb. There are many reasons to want other german bombers. This is not one of them.

Sure if I want to go inside every DAR ring at 18K it has plenty of range....or maybe I can actually attempt to plan a mission that would make sense from a tactical standpoint.

Did you see what I typed, we tried this, 100% fuel (apparently you didn't read that part)...we diverted due to range issues. So yes, this is a reason...either that or give the 1xfuel burn back....240 miles is a joke for a "medium" bomber. This truely is an issue, just because you don't see it as such doesn't mean others don't...I have 8 squad mates that would agree with me based on our attempted strategic bombing missions using the German Bomber available to us. And no, this was not on a huge map by any stretch of the imagination.

So saying that because we want to use aircraft due to historical reasons (as a german squad) and not being able to use them due to a lack of reach to a strategic center of gravity and the lack of the german bombers such as the HE177 is not a good reason...well to each his own I guess.

Oh and thanks for calling me stupid. I like you skins, and you have obviously contributed alot to this community; but the tone of your post frankly sucks.

[Lusche]

So yes, this is a reason...either that or give the 1xfuel burn back....240 miles is a joke for a "medium" bomber.

Not on maps that are only 250 (small) resp 500 (large) miles across. Medium bombers had range limits in RL, and so they have in AH.