AHC: 1935-42 Luftwaffe 'sanity options'

[tomo pauk]

Nor will a He177, or anything else.

He 177 as-is certainly won't.
People were of opinion that France has the best military, but were proven wrong. Or that Germany can't be beaten, again proven wrong.

The Ju87 wasn't even technically intended as a tactical/CAS aircraft, rather a precision bomber for use against operational and even strategic targets near the German border. And I don't know anyone that would call the Do17 a strategic bomber...
...

I didn't said it was a good strategic bomber. Do 17E - range of 1500 km, later sunk down to 1160 km with more powerful engines and bigger bomb load. There was a reason why the Do 217 emerged, with triple the bombload vs. the Do-17Z.

 

[tomo pauk]

Are you referring to terror bombing? Studies have shown that it had too little impact on actual morale, and that Allied bombing campaigns failed to completely cripple German production. It is doubtful Germany could do this to Great Britain.

No terror bombing. There was enough of military targets in the UK, from military bases to factories.

 

[Wimble Toot]

No terror bombing. There was enough of military targets in the UK, from military bases to factories.

More target practice for Fighter Command, then. As far as I know only one factory was put out of commission by German bombing during the Battle of Britain. Supermarine at Woolston-Southampton.

Didn't exactly win the war for them.

 

[tomo pauk]

More target practice for Fighter Command, then. As far as I know only one factory was put out of commission by German bombing during the Battle of Britain. Supermarine at Woolston-Southampton.

Didn't exactly win the war for them.

Escort fighters were suggested several times just in this thread, so are better bombers.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

There was a reason why the Do 217 emerged, with triple the bombload vs. the Do-17Z.

It was designed as a naval bomber, only later transitioning into a 'heavy' twin engine bomber.

 

[Changundramon]

No terror bombing. There was enough of military targets in the UK, from military bases to factories.

Factory tools aren't easy to destroy, and high-altitude bombing is inaccurate- which means a lot of time is wasted. I guess a heavy bomber coiuld be used as a maritime recon, but then, only limited numbers of them are needed- the rest of the materials can go into submarines.
Meanwhile, German tank formations mainly need accurate bombing that ground attack aircraft can deliver. Even a strategic target like a bridge is best hit with low-flying planes.

 

[tomo pauk]

It was designed as a naval bomber, only later transitioning into a 'heavy' twin engine bomber.

I'm not sure that it was designed as naval bomber. Care to elaborate?

Factory tools aren't easy to destroy, and high-altitude bombing is inaccurate- which means a lot of time is wasted. I guess a heavy bomber coiuld be used as a maritime recon, but then, only limited numbers of them are needed- the rest of the materials can go into submarines.
Meanwhile, German tank formations mainly need accurate bombing that ground attack aircraft can deliver. Even a strategic target like a bridge is best hit with low-flying planes.

German tank formations already have had accurate bombers to help out, Ju 87 was as accurate as it gets.
German bombers haven't bombed from as high altitude as the USAF 4-engined bombers, talk ~15000 ft vs. ~25000 ft.

 

[Changundramon]

I'm not sure that it was designed as naval bomber. Care to elaborate?



German tank formations already have had accurate bombers to help out, Ju 87 was as accurate as it gets.
German bombers haven't bombed from as high altitude as the USAF 4-engined bombers, talk ~15000 ft vs. ~25000 ft.

I feel that more CAS would reduce armor casualties for the Germans, by reducing the overall number of threats each AFV faces. Imagine Citadel with 30% more CAS for Germans. Also, it is easier to go after trucks and smaller supply depots with CAS, than with lumbering strategic bombers. Those things take massive crews as well- something Germany actually should not be spending precious manpower on. I'm more in favor of a heavy transport- it can be so helpful in solidifying supply situation in Russia.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

I feel that more CAS would reduce armor casualties for the Germans, by reducing the overall number of threats each AFV faces. Imagine Citadel with 30% more CAS for Germans.

No need for that at Citadel, you need air superiority.

I'm not sure that it was designed as naval bomber. Care to elaborate?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dornier_Do_217#Development_and_design
I could really block quote 10 paragraphs, so read the article, but the final paragraph is here:

The production specifications were ratified on 8 July 1939, with the ultimate goal of the Do 217 having the capability of flying maritime and land operations armed with glide bombs. The four-seat aircraft was adaptable to both land and maritime operations wherein the tactical emphasis was on bombing from a 50-degree dive angle, and it had a maximum speed of 680 kilometres per hour (370 kn). In contrast with earlier specifications for a modified version of the Do 17M, the proposed Do 217E had a new nose section design in which the A-Stand position was armed with a MG 15 machine gun. Additional MG 15s were to be located in the B and C-Stand gun emplacements. The design teams configured the bomb bay to carry two SC 500 and 250 bombs or four SC 250 bomb loads. In addition a LMB II aerial mine, or an F5 Torpedo could be loaded.

It started as a replacement for the Do17 that would fill the need for a naval air arm aircraft with some land use and evolved over time once the Navy's demand for a long range dive bomber proved unworkable.

 

[ObssesedNuker]

More target practice for Fighter Command, then. As far as I know only one factory was put out of commission by German bombing during the Battle of Britain. Supermarine at Woolston-Southampton.

Didn't exactly win the war for them.

That’s partly because they hit it far too late. Timing is a pretty important aspect on these things.

 

[tomo pauk]

I feel that more CAS would reduce armor casualties for the Germans, by reducing the overall number of threats each AFV faces. Imagine Citadel with 30% more CAS for Germans. Also, it is easier to go after trucks and smaller supply depots with CAS, than with lumbering strategic bombers. Those things take massive crews as well- something Germany actually should not be spending precious manpower on. I'm more in favor of a heavy transport- it can be so helpful in solidifying supply situation in Russia.

Luftwaffe needed more of every aircraft, not just because German allies depended on German production. Italy included.
German aircraft need to go after Baku oil facilities in 1942, not wait until 1943 to do something. A 4-engined bomber is cheaper on manpower per ton of bomb carried than a 2-engined bomber (same engines used).

..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dornier_Do_217#Development_and_design
I could really block quote 10 paragraphs, so read the article, but the final paragraph is here:

It started as a replacement for the Do17 that would fill the need for a naval air arm aircraft with some land use and evolved over time once the Navy's demand for a long range dive bomber proved unworkable.

The way I'm reading is that Do 217 was designed as multipurpose bomber, maritime bomber being one of missions, not that maritime bomber was it's main mission envisioned. RAF specifications for heavy bombers also included provision for one to two torpedoes to be carried internally, thus useful bomb bays on Wellington, Manchester/Lancaster, Halifax and indeed the Do 217 as non-RAF bomber.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

The way I'm reading is that Do 217 was designed as multipurpose bomber, maritime bomber being one of missions, not that maritime bomber was it's main mission envisioned. RAF specifications for heavy bombers also included provision for one to two torpedoes to be carried internally, thus useful bomb bays on Wellington, Manchester/Lancaster, Halifax and indeed the Do 217 as non-RAF bomber.

AFAIK it was the only Luftwaffe bomber designed to and capable of carrying torpedoes and naval mines internally. It was also supposed to dive bomb to meet navy spec; of course it was multi-role, but it's primary design role was to meet the Navy/Luftwaffe demand for a purpose designed naval bomber

 

[thaddeus]

AFAIK it was the only Luftwaffe bomber designed to and capable of carrying torpedoes and naval mines internally. It was also supposed to dive bomb to meet navy spec; of course it was multi-role, but it's primary design role was to meet the Navy/Luftwaffe demand for a purpose designed naval bomber

what was reason for JU-88 operating so many maritime patrols later, just numbers and/or need for DO-217 elsewhere?

 

[Deleted member 1487]

what was reason for JU-88 operating so many maritime patrols later, just numbers and/or need for DO-217 elsewhere?

Not enough Do217s, plus greater speed IIRC.

 

[tomo pauk]

A good deal of the Ju 88s employed in long range over-water operations were fighter versions.

 

[Deleted member 1487]

A good deal of the Ju 88s employed in long range over-water operations were fighter versions.

Guarding the Bay of Biscay. But there were also any number of torpedo bombers with external torpedos

 

[tomo pauk]

...
Vajda & Dancey claim that Udet cancelled the DB603 engine, but development was re-started later. They claim that had development not been halted the Luftwaffe could have had aircraft powered by that engine in the Battle of Britain. Was their claim correct?
...

The engine would've probably been available. On what A/C to install it, and how many will be produced? The power of 1940 vintage DB 603 will not be the same as with 1943 OTL version.

 

[Wimble Toot]

German aircraft need to go after Baku oil facilities in 1942, not wait until 1943 to do something. A 4-engined bomber is cheaper on manpower per ton of bomb carried than a 2-engined bomber

Oil facilities are exceptionally hard to hit with any kind of bombers, irrespective of the number of engines the attacking aircraft may have. Laser-guided bombs are a minimum requirement.

The number of sorties required to destroy Merseberg-Leuna, and to fail to destroy Ploesti, and the number of aircrew KIA/MIA will tell you that.

The advantage is always with the defenders.

 

[marathag]

Oil facilities are exceptionally hard to hit with any kind of bombers, irrespective of the number of engines the attacking aircraft may have. Laser-guided bombs are a minimum requirement.

The number of sorties required to destroy Merseberg-Leuna, and to fail to destroy Ploesti, and the number of aircrew KIA/MIA will tell you that.

The advantage is always with the defenders.

Except those locations weren't using open air pools for oil storage, and plentiful numbers of old school wooden oil derricks still in operation. In the US, most of those were gone by the start of WWI

 

[Deleted member 1487]

The number of sorties required to destroy Merseberg-Leuna, and to fail to destroy Ploesti, and the number of aircrew KIA/MIA will tell you that.

You are aware of how well defended they were, right? Both might have been tied for the well defended target in Europe, more so than Berlin even.