he-177 a-5 german bomber

[Karnak]

The idea of perking the failure that was the He177 because it is so much better than the B-17G, B-24J and Lancaster is absurd.

Even the the 610s its reliability and serviceability remained far, far below acceptable levels.

The single biggest thing I bet the He177 did for the Germans is present huge, tempting targets for Allied strafing attacks, sparing the more valuable Bf109s and Fw190s.

[Denniss]

The max internal load of the He 177 was 6t, don't know if there was capability for 1t more external loads.
The DB 610 was as reliable as two standard DB 605 after the oil foam problems were sorted out by DB.
The He 177 achieved the 550 km/h in 6.8 km altitude, that's FTH with climb and combat power rating, with ermercency power it would even be faster

[Lusche]

Even the the 610s its reliability and serviceability remained far, far below acceptable levels.

Just like the Jumo 004... 

[jag88]

Kinda the opposite actually.  We don't want to see a historical failure become the best bomber in the MA.  Others want that to happen just because it is German.

The Greif wasnt a failure, the A5 version solved the aircraft's problems and it saw action, but by then the Germans were out of fuel and had more pressing issues at hand (like being overrun by the Russians and the bombing campaign) so all bombers were grounded.  Calling it a failure is akin to calling the B-29 and many other aircraft failures just because their initial models were troublesome and their crews inadequately trained to handle them.

II/KG100 reported 90% serviceability for the type in mid-late 1944, you can find the reference on Griehl, pp 150.  It seems that training and the new engines made a big difference, with only pilots new to the type having problems, like any novice would.

Debrody, Griehl indicates 565 to 789 A5s built, depending on the sources.  I also recall that the DB-606 mas made of two DB-601s, not the later DB-603s which when coupled made the DB-613 and was considered as an alternative for the DB-610 and the 4 individual engine versions (He-177Bs).

Denniss the 7t figure comes from the Greifs manual, it could be an approximation since one of its load options was 4 x SC1700, that is 6,8t right there.


JAG

[Debrody]

Haha, allright Jag, i was just looking up the wiki... another example how "accurate" it is.

[matt]

i wish the he-177 a-5  german bomber was available in this game that has been around for 13 years and is fun to play....as per skuzzys request,lol....a late war german bomber would be soo nice to have....instead of the slow ju-88.   the he 177 a-5 was faster than b-24,carried more boms than the b-24,b-17 and lancs,and had equal or better defensive gunns...although NOT as good as the b-29...........a new german bomber from mid and late war period would be nice

were still waiting for the 410.. we might get the he-177 in a couple of years dont hold your breath.+1he-177

[Krusty]

When it finally dawned on them that they started a "World War" they wanted heavy bombers very much. Unfortunatly for them they simply didnt have the time or resources available to produce effective ones. Hitler loved the idea of bombers. They began to seriously discuss the idea even before the war started and by '42 had several designs ready, some of which made it to prototype. In Early summer of '41 the first of the huge city busting bomber raids began with Munster being the target. A year later Cologne was heavily damaged by over 1,000 bombers. But the real kicker was the utter destruction of Hamburg a year later during a week long campaign by Brit and Yank bombers.

They both needed and wanted them. They also waged a war that required them. Unfortunately for them they just werent prepared and by the time the Germans went into full wartime production it was to late.

That's not an accurate description at all. Not in the least.

[Debrody]

Then what, would you tell us?

Germany had serious restrictions after the WW1. They couldnt build a straight heavy bomber, even tho there were projects in the mid-late-'30s to spoof them as civil aircrafts.
Also their decription of the "heavy bomber" was a fast twin engined aircraft at that time: ju-88, do-17 etc. Why? Their conception was the Blitzkrieg: win the war quickly with panzer divisions and close air support, without destroying the victim's industry (they wanted to use it in the future). Heavyes arent so potent in divebombing on tanks...

As we know, the blitzkrieg failed at '41 December, under Moscow. The conception changed too: they had to play the russia's game, the one with better supplies wins. Of course they did everything to destroy the russian industries, but they were already moved behind the Ural. They needed and wanted an aircraft what can go that far with a large bombload, also do it quickly... And voila, in mid-42, the german heavy bomber arrives: He-177, a revolutionary conception, thrown into action as quickly as possible, with next to no testing and evaluation. How it could not be a complete failure?

It took a little bit more than a year to fix its engine problems, but after that, the aircraft worked just fine. Another question, as like someone said before, the complete allied air superiority made its life very hard.

For those who think, its just a german "hot rod"...
How many P47Ms were used in combat? What are the reports about their reliability? 

Im still on the Ju-188 side tho. Not only couse that was a better construction by nature, but it also was built in much larger numbers, was used widely in the war, and a much more flexible airframe, meaning one 3d model could be used on many very different sub-types.

[jag88]

The Germans wanted heavy bombers from the start, they had a heavy bomber program but its first iteration was abandoned when the types developed, and specially their engines, proved inadequate.  Then the general advocating a strategic force died and the strategic bomber projects went into the back burner and were eventually contaminated by "dive bombing" requirements, that crippled the project and prevented the fielding of an effective strategic force.  They knew they needed strategic bombers, they just wanted them to be versatile beyond practicality.

The Greif was a contemporary of the Manchester/Lancaster, when the Germans felt in 1943 the urgency the British felt in 1940 they also dispensed with the coupled engines and reverted to a 4 engine layout in the He-177B.  But by then the war had gone to hell and all Greifs went with it.

Debrody - It happens. 


JAG

[10thmd]

There is no "Axis" or "Allies" in the MA.  The Rooks, Knights and Bishops all have access to the B-17G, B-24J, B-29A and Lancaster Mk III.

My problem with it is that, by the numbers, it would dominate the B-17G, B-24J and Lancaster Mk III and be the best free bomber in the game.  That is what I dislike.  The idea that a historical failure would be utterly superior to three historically successful heavy bombers.

Maybe not by side but there are those of us like JG11 who fly nothing but German in the late war MA.

[Karnak]

The Germans wanted heavy bombers from the start, they had a heavy bomber program but its first iteration was abandoned when the types developed and specially their engines proved inadequate.  Then the general advocating a strategic force died and the strategic bomber projects went into the back burner and were eventually contaminated by "dive bombing" requirements, that crippled the project and preventing the fielding of an effective strategic force.  They knew they needed strategic bombers, they just wanted them to be versatile beyond practicality.

The Greif was a contemporary of the Manchester/Lancaster, when the Germans felt in 1943 the urgency the British felt in 1940 they also dispensed with the coupled engines and reverted to a 4 engine layout in the He-177B.  But by then the war had gone to hell and all Greifs went with it.

The Manchester/Lancaster and Halifax were both developed per Air Ministry Specification P.13/36 for a twin engined heavy bomber using the Rolls Royce Vulture or or Napier Saber engines and issued in 1936.  The RAF's decision to go to Heavy Bombers well predates the war.

Maybe not by side but there are those of us like JG11 who fly nothing but German in the late war MA.

That is a self limitation that does not warrant dev resources to cater to it.

[jag88]

The Manchester/Lancaster and Halifax were both developed per Air Ministry Specification P.13/36 for a twin engined heavy bomber using the Rolls Royce Vulture or or Napier Saber engines and issued in 1936.  The RAF's decision to go to Heavy Bombers well predates the war.That is a self limitation that does not warrant dev resources to cater to it.

"Bomber A" requirements were issued on June 3, 1936. That should make unnecessary to mention the 1934 "Ural Bomber" (Do-19 and Ju-89 4-engined heavies) program that predated "Bomber A" to settle the point.  The He-177 was developed in response to "Bomber A" and made its maiden flight in November 9th, 1939, 4 or so months after the Manchester.  As you can see the German requirement for a heavy bomber also predated the war and the German crate was developed along the Brit craft.  

In both countries the coupled engines were dropped when crap hit the fan, luckily for Britain the Germans turned on the Russians which allowed them to fully develop and field the Lancaster out of the Manchester fiasco; the Germans didnt get that chance, and the He-177B/He-277 was one of the first casualties when the Russians came knocking in 1944.

Have the Germans drop the coupled engines early on and the Luftwaffe could have fielded a capable strategic bomber in large numbers by 1942, just like the Lanc, and then the Germans would have had a capable maritime strike aircraft and a strategic bomber to hit at least some of the Russian factories instead of having to rely on modified airliners and obsolete He-111s.  But the top nazis in the Luftwaffe were just useless, so no heavy bombers and no Fw-187s to escort them either, only Zerstorer designs needlessly encumbered with extra crewmen.

This is an aircraft that saw combat in numbers and was free of most if not all of the problems faced by the earlier marks, there is no reason for it not be included given the game's criteria for inclusion.  Besides, a 1941 bomber as the only non-perked German bomber is just too little and too weak, either for the MA or as a sample of German bombers.

A Ju-188 would be nice too, but the He-177 is undoubtedly the big prize.


JAG

[Eric19]

+1 for the HE-177 we need a german heavy bomber the 88 is alright but just doesn't have the range

[Denniss]

German wikipedia has a complete list of how many He 177 were built (accepted by the RLM) by subversion and manufacturer.

[tunnelrat]

That's not an accurate description at all. Not in the least.

Actually, he's pretty much spot on.

How can you say "They didn't need" something?  THEY LOST THE WAR.

Look up the Amerika Bomber... that should be a great place for you to start reading on just how badly Germany wanted and/or needed strategic bombers.

Almost every single major player in politics, industry, or the military in Germany cited the allied strategic bombing campaign as their reason for losing the war.  If you wish, I can provide citations of direct quotes on this.