Search results

He’s going to have to pick someone if Goering dies in a plane crash like Wever... It’s completely in the range of plausibility to discuss

Wever, Milch, and Udet always get brought up in these discussions, but what would the difference have been if someone competent replaced Goering in 1936?

Thoughts on the Do 217 and Bomber B Project?

Yep, it’s laughable and frustrating how they could never really manage a 2,000HP engine. Thanks for the recommendations, I’ll be sure to check them out. I was referring to the Panzer III/IV project, just 6-7 years earlier

Improved Luftwaffe TLs are fascinating to me (I need to get around to reading yours); there was quite a lot of unfulfilled potential both in the early war like you described, or late on the war. A 1943 Luftwaffe (POD being a successful Barbarossa?) equipped with Fw 190Cs, Ju 288s, He 280s, Ju...

Claims like these make me suspicious. It was “endemic” to the system, but was then resolved by the same system. Maybe I’m wrong, but to me it sounds like nothing necessarily prevented them being solved earlier. Also, what are some of these inefficiencies you’re referring to? I don’t see how the...

And why couldn’t those inefficiency’s been ironed out earlier? Doesn’t sound “maxed out” to me.

The Gondola was known as the “Sterbebett” for a reason. Clustering weapons together is much much more efficient. How many RAF planes were downed by German bombers?

Like I and other guy posted, those were field mods

Not good enough, especially since all those MGs were I isolated, non supporting positions. If they were clustered in 2-3 turrets then maybe.

Not quite sure which one. All it says is “Several He 111H-3 had the front gondola MG 15 replaced by a 20mm MG FF canon” but goes on to distinguish MG FFs placed in the nose as a field modification

Development only started in earnest in 1941, and even then it wasn’t all too serious (the components were created in France). First prototype was supposedly ready mid 1944. Keep in mind this is all going on while the war situation is quickly deteriorating and Heinkel was busy with the He 177 and...

Per Squadron’s Heinkel He 111 in action: Heinkel He 111H-3 had 1x MG 15 in nose, 1 in dorsal, 1 in central, and 1 on each beam position. Also 1x 20mm MG FF in Gondola H-1 had only 3x MG 15

It doesn’t matter if they get through if their losses are so heavy that they’re suspended from flying those unescorted missions in the first place. That sounds like it failed in it’s designed mission to me. I’m NOT saying that B-17s were a failure overall, but they certainly could not fly over...

But when B-17s actually flew in unescorted, they suffered badly. At that point better speed, payload, range, etc is more important. Thus the B-17 wasn't "quite a bit superior" but only even, if that. A case could be made that the B-29 was superior, but it depends on your metrics. If you go by...

I think part of the problem was that by the BoB, the German bombers were inadequately armed. 1x7.92 mg in a relatively fixed position is not enough to deter or down enemy fighters (think He 111). The Germans really needed heavier mg's and cannons in better positions (turrets). Just look at the...

I don't know, the He 177 and Me 264 were as good if not better than the B-17...the problem was finding the right engines though

I'm defining "best case scenario" with the assumption that the war is being fought, not prevented in the first place. That is, the best case scenario for the Axis to win the war.

Has your position in the past been that Barbarossa could be successful? Seems like better "best case scenario"

How/in what way?