The POD might've looked like this - during the BoB, LW realizes that Ju-87 is vulnerable without fighter escort. Thus a decision is made to produce bombers that might not rely so much on fighter protection, while carrying a worthwhile gun- & bomb-load per horsepower installed and crew used, along with meaningful protection. How might've the proposals looked like (apart from the OTL proposal of Ju 187)? A reasonably short development time is required, with Jumo 211 engines preferred but not a strict requirement.
AHC: as good as possible succesor the Ju-87 Stuka
- Thread starter tomo pauk
- Start date
Sorry folks. I got miss-lead by a page on the Luft '46 website which linked Junkers 187 and 287 on the same page.
More accurate descriptions have 187 as an evolution of Junkers 87 Stuka dive-bomber, that never progressed beyond mock-ups. OTOH Junkers 287 was a completely different jet bomber prototype. Only 2 Ju 287 were built.
Over on the Luft '46 you can see images of the proposed Junkers 187 plus a dozen other attempts at replacing the Stuka as a front-line dive bomber. Luft'46 includes a few assymetric concepts sketched by Blohm und Voss! There are even a few sketches of proposed jet-powered fighters that were much faster than Russian interceptors or AAA gunners.
Junkers 187 is what you would expect in evolutionary improvements to the venerable Ju-87 Stuka: retractable gear, inset control surfaces, and a 2-gun turret. Ju-187's most unusual feature was a vertical tail that pivoted up for landing, but down to clear the field-of-fire needed by the gun turret. Why 187 retained a - slightly - (inverted) gull wing is a mystery????? Since projected Ju 187 performance was not significantly better than Ju 87, the proposed dive-bomber never got beyond a mockup.
In practice the Luftwaffe bombed-up FW-190s whose greater speed allowed them to bomb-and-scoot with minimal casualties.
Russia designed the best Stuka replacement: IL-2 Sturmovic, which resembled Ju-187 in many ways but hid its radiator inside an armoured box buried in the Center fuselage.
More accurate descriptions have 187 as an evolution of Junkers 87 Stuka dive-bomber, that never progressed beyond mock-ups. OTOH Junkers 287 was a completely different jet bomber prototype. Only 2 Ju 287 were built.
Over on the Luft '46 you can see images of the proposed Junkers 187 plus a dozen other attempts at replacing the Stuka as a front-line dive bomber. Luft'46 includes a few assymetric concepts sketched by Blohm und Voss! There are even a few sketches of proposed jet-powered fighters that were much faster than Russian interceptors or AAA gunners.
Junkers 187 is what you would expect in evolutionary improvements to the venerable Ju-87 Stuka: retractable gear, inset control surfaces, and a 2-gun turret. Ju-187's most unusual feature was a vertical tail that pivoted up for landing, but down to clear the field-of-fire needed by the gun turret. Why 187 retained a - slightly - (inverted) gull wing is a mystery????? Since projected Ju 187 performance was not significantly better than Ju 87, the proposed dive-bomber never got beyond a mockup.
In practice the Luftwaffe bombed-up FW-190s whose greater speed allowed them to bomb-and-scoot with minimal casualties.
Russia designed the best Stuka replacement: IL-2 Sturmovic, which resembled Ju-187 in many ways but hid its radiator inside an armoured box buried in the Center fuselage.
Last edited:
So the issue is to create a useful Luftwaffe bomber, available in 1940? Why look any further than the Ju-88, one of the most versatile aircraft of the war? Or must it be a single engine aircraft?
Archibald
Banned
FW-190 followed by Ju-88. But a He-162, even improved ? forget it. Or the Me-163 as an air to ground piloted missile, dive at 600 mph on those pesky Sherman tanks and make a large hole in the ground out of them. The Luftwaffe later adopted the F-104, also known as "the missile with a man in it." and surely the F-104s made a lot of holes into Germany solid ground. So if F-104s did it on daily basis, a Me-163 can certainly do it. At least the 163s pilots would no longer die in vain: unlike a B-17, you can't miss crashing into the solid ground.
Yea. Sorta: we need a survivable day bomber, no too long range needed, that can pack a punch; we need it ASAP.
The Ju 187 was the 'super Stuka'. Ju 278 was the jet bomber with forward swept wings.
Sturmovik, for all it's qualities, was not able to emulate Ju 87 as a bomb truck, nor will survive well in a contested airspace.
Either single-engined or twin-engined.
Ju 88 does not have good marks in 'operates well in contested airspace' category, especially when carrying bombs under wings.
Several short-term proposals, and several long-term ones.
Let's look at the Focke Wulf stable. Dust off the Fw 187, install the Jumo 211F, later the better 211s as available, once 3cm cannons is around install it. Of course, bomb rack(s). Or (and?) Jumo 211 on the Fw 190, just two cannons (like it was done on the Fw 190Gs), two wing racks + fuselage rack (again similar to the OTL).
Long term proposals would've included something of shape & size of the Ta-154, but in metal, and with a bomb bay. As well as push-pull bomber, basically and early and less powerful Do 335 look-alike, but with a bit bigger bomb bay.
Let's look at the Focke Wulf stable. Dust off the Fw 187, install the Jumo 211F, later the better 211s as available, once 3cm cannons is around install it. Of course, bomb rack(s). Or (and?) Jumo 211 on the Fw 190, just two cannons (like it was done on the Fw 190Gs), two wing racks + fuselage rack (again similar to the OTL).
Long term proposals would've included something of shape & size of the Ta-154, but in metal, and with a bomb bay. As well as push-pull bomber, basically and early and less powerful Do 335 look-alike, but with a bit bigger bomb bay.
Deleted member 1487
Bf110. All those things, fast, heavier payload, and can use Jumo 211.
Don Quijote
Banned
Use the Fw 190. Half the force carries bombs, while the other half acts as an escort. There isn't a desperate need for a purpose designed dive bomber, as they were most effective against static targets, such as bunkers and fortresses. By the time any Stuka successor has arrived, the focus is going to have shifted to moving targets, which also tend to be softer skinned, so a fighter carry cluster bombs is the most effective solution. Of course the Germans tried this, but it's just a matter of building even more of the Fw 190 and SD2.
Deleted member 1487
Well for fighter bombers the R4M was the better choice, which is what the Germans figured out by the end of the war:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R4M
Also in terms of cluster munitions the SD1 was preferred over the SD2 once they realized they could just use their obsolete 50mm mortar shells with a different tail and get even better results:
http://www.bocn.co.uk/vbforum/threads/3924-SD1-Bomblet-German-WW2
Then for anti-tank use was the shaped charge SD4:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/Sd4.jpg
Sorry to one up you, but since we are talking about the weapons that would be most effective, it is really helpful just to look at what the Germans worked out as most effective in practice by the end of the war for ground attack/CAS work.
Don Quijote
Banned
Yes I was reading about this recently, and checking the book again I should have specified that I meant the SD4 in the antitank role. SD1 vs SD2 isn't so important, although if they had used the million plus 1kg bombs captured in France (rather than using them as a source of copper), then there would be a reduced need for SD1 production, allowing more flexibility overall.
Would like to suggest another kind of POD, as stated in the OP ... to still get a Ju 87 "STUKA" successor.
After Udet wrecked the prototype of the He 118, the Günther-brothers talk Heinkel into continuing its development "in privacy", being convinced about their areodynimcally much better design. Somehow they manage to convince someone at the RLM too, to cover it up AND to hand them over the "secrets" of the Junkers dive-bomb automatic, which enabled the Ju 87 to do its awesome steep dive-angle.
Work is done on a far part of the Heinkel facilities with the occasional testflights done without much publicity until ...
... in the BoB the Ju 87 too clearly shows its disadvantages.
But now Heinkel knocks on the door : "Erhmm, I have there something in my garage ..."
And that's after 4 more years of continued development a perfected version of the D4Y (including protection) :
WITH dive-bomb automatic, WITH structural problems sorted, WITH an reliable Jumo 211 mk F, maybe mk J to start with
After Udet wrecked the prototype of the He 118, the Günther-brothers talk Heinkel into continuing its development "in privacy", being convinced about their areodynimcally much better design. Somehow they manage to convince someone at the RLM too, to cover it up AND to hand them over the "secrets" of the Junkers dive-bomb automatic, which enabled the Ju 87 to do its awesome steep dive-angle.
Work is done on a far part of the Heinkel facilities with the occasional testflights done without much publicity until ...
... in the BoB the Ju 87 too clearly shows its disadvantages.
But now Heinkel knocks on the door : "Erhmm, I have there something in my garage ..."
And that's after 4 more years of continued development a perfected version of the D4Y (including protection) :
WITH dive-bomb automatic, WITH structural problems sorted, WITH an reliable Jumo 211 mk F, maybe mk J to start with
Deleted member 1487
Last edited by a moderator:
Fw 190 is/was simply a formidable machine, IMO (with far more potential than used up in OTL).
With that said - the issues with unreliable engine made it's introduction on the Eastern Front happen in late 1942, ie. a bit too late. The bread'n'butter Ju 211 cancels out the reliability issues from equation. Granted, 1300-1400 PS does not sound as fine as 1600-1700, but weight and drag saved are worth something. The 211 will also use less fuel, plus it can run well on B4 fuel.
All of this lead us to the thing noted in last sentence quoted - more Fw 190s might be available with engine other than BMW 801, eg. Jumo 211 was produced 5 times as much as the BMW 801 in 1941, and 3 times as much in 1942.
He 118 was supposed to do 390 km/h on 880 PS - not a sign of a performer in ww2 terms. It was with a wing 20% bigger than the Ju 87, and 100% as big as the Fw 190; the wing was thick, too, in same fashion with other Heinkel aircraft from mid 1930s.
Raw performance (speed, RoC, acceleration, dive) in it's 1st 2 years, rate of roll all the time, clear wiev cockpit, reasonable protection, great internal volume (especially when we recall it's small-ish size), capability to swallow bigger engines, fuel and armament without much of trouble. Payload as a bomber (1800 kg bomb, or a torpedo).
That RLM/LW failed to push for installation of a proper V12 on it in 1943/early 1944 (thus improving the performance) was their fault, not of the Tank's brainchild. Ditto for the initially problematic BMW 801.
Deleted member 1487
I'm not disputing it's exception performance, I mean how it's potential wasn't used, which I see is not adding in the DB603 or Jumo 213 early enough. Do you think the FW190C/D was better than the Fiat G.56?
I think they were evenly matched in performance; the 190 should be rolling faster, while the G.56 should be better in turn once started. Probably the only clear advantage of the Fw 190 was the suitability for mass production.
Re. unused potential - good fuel quantity matched with DB 601/605 -> long range fighter that can perform, plus it can be produced and used more. Let's kill off the Me 210 to get the 1st engines.
The big V12s are obvious, in order to keep performance compettitive for 1944, so we're also killing off the Me 410.