Ju-88 Discussion/Tips-and-tricks

[6./ZG26_McKvack]

Anyone know how much ammo the machine guns have(gunner)? I always run out of ammunition in a few seconds in the 87 that uses the same machine gun.

[III/JG53Frankyboy]

i am a little bit dissapointed........

no modifications/unlocks like:

- 1 MG131 replacing the upper two rearward MG81

- 1 MG/FF replacing the Lotfe sight (yes, that means no horicontal bombing....)

 

bombloads like

4x SC250

4x SC250 + 10 SC50

missing

[6./ZG26_McKvack]

Wish we got an MG131 and something like this:

 

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

At least they could have included the MG81Z gunpods since they're game assets already, but they probably didn't want it to be used as an attack aircraft. Maybe it's not all options that will arrive when it's final but I get the disappointment.

[xvii-Dietrich]

For the Ju 88 A-4, loadouts #5 and #8 are the heaviest and result in the same total (nominal) mass ...

 

  #5  --  6 x SC250  +  28 x SC50
  #8  --  4 x SC500  +  18 x SC50

 

... which is 2900 kg total each.

 

However the He 111 H-6 can have two lodaouts which have greater mass again. These are:

 

   SC2500 + SC1000 (= 3500 total) or

   2 x SC1800 (= 3600 total).

 

What that means is that for a single-target, a He 111 will get a bigger blast on that single point. The Ju 88 A-4, however, will have numerically more pieces, thus being a bit better for multiple-targets. Of course, it will be faster and more manoeuvrable as well. Seems like it will fit neatly between the Bf 110 and He 111 for its role.

 

 

That said, the way the loadout list was written makes it quite clear that there are no MG upgrades on offer. I doubt that they would be added in the "final cut" either, because no doubt that would require a fair amount of modelling work, and the dev team would surely know about that by now. That means we Ju 88 fans will have to wistfully hope for a Ju 88 C variant (or maybe G or R variants) with all the different night-fighter gun options. Or continue using the Bf 110.

[SOLIDKREATE]

I'd use the Ju-88A-4 as an airfield killer. Get three of those or four with that payload....and bam!

 

 

Armament

    Guns:
        1 × 7.92 mm MG 81J machine gun on flexible mount in front windscreen, firing forward with 1,000 rounds.[N 3]
        1 × 7.92 mm MG 81J machine gun on flexible mount in lower fuselage nose glazing, firing forward with 1,000 rounds.
        2 × 7.92 mm MG 81J machine guns on flexible mount in the rear of the cockpit canopy, firing aft with 1,000 rounds each.[66]
        1 × 7.92 mm MG 81Z twin machine gun on flexible mount in the rear ventral Bola position, firing aft with 1,000 rounds.[64][66]
    Bombs: Up to 1,400 kilograms (3,100 lb) of ordnance internally in two bomb bays rated at 900 kg (2,000 lb) and 500 kg (1,100 lb) or up to 3,000 kg (6,600 lb) externally. Carrying bombs externally increased weight and drag and impaired the aircraft's performance. Carrying the maximum load usually required rocket-assisted take-off.

Armament options

    Additional option for a pair of 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 15 machine guns on flexible "Donut" mountings firing laterally, one on each side of the cockpit canopy.
    A single 13 mm (.51 in) MG 131 machine gun was sometimes used instead of the 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 81J or MG 81Z machine guns in the A-Stand, B-Stand or ventral Bola positions.
    Aircraft may carry one 20 mm MG FF cannon in the nose for ground attack purposes, with 90 rounds of ammunition, in place of the Lotfernrohr 7 bombsight[66][67]
    A modification of the Ju 88 A-4, the Ju 88 A-13 could mount the Waffenbehälter WB 81A or WB 81B (firing with 15° downwards deflection) gun pods on the external bomb racks for ground attack duties, each "watering can" containing     three 7.92 mm (.312 in) MG 81Z twin machine guns, for strafing enemy troops.
 

 

 

 

I hope we get all this stuff!

[LukeFF]

 

 

I hope we get all this stuff!

 

Umm...we aren't. 

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

If we had a forward firing kit, considering the bomb load and belt fed mgs for defense, I would take a ju88 instead of a 110 on ground attack on regular servers.

 

That's what I am talking about:

 

Edited February 16, 2016 by 6.J/ZG26_Gielow

[Asgar]

Umm...we aren't. 

which is a bad joke. the Ju-88 is famous for being the most versatile plane of the Luftwaffe...and all we get is bombs. At this point the IL-2 1941 is the best fighter in game and the Ju-88 is the most boring plane.

[SYN_Ricky]

which is a bad joke. the Ju-88 is famous for being the most versatile plane of the Luftwaffe...and all we get is bombs. At this point the IL-2 1941 is the best fighter in game and the Ju-88 is the most boring plane.

 

I guess that during the period when the battle of Moscow took place, the JU-88 was mostly used as a bomber and reconaissance aircraft. He became a true multirole aircraft later on.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

That being said, even with those payload options combined with its manoeuvrability, speed and ability to dive it will be a formidable bomber and strike aircraft, which is what it was in 1941.

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

The point is if they don't make her versatile now, why do you think they will come back later to change her??

 

Now it's done for Moscow. But we can keep requesting changes for older planes in future expansions.

Edited February 16, 2016 by 6.J/ZG26_Gielow

[Asgar]

exactly we asked about MG 131 for He 111 and other modifications. and it's always the same answer...no plans. they never revisit plane mods once they're in game

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I think these come with later expansions, rather than the present ones. For example they will have to add torpedoes to both the 111 and 88 if a theatre calls for it, but not for Moscow or Stalingrad.

[Dutchvdm]

To be honest... I don't think a MG131 and a additional 20 mm MGFF is going to make a big difference. It was versatile because the C and G versions. Which in my opinion can be labeled as different aircraft. That said, i would really like an C6 version of the Ju-88 for the next installment.

 

Grt Martijn 

[[DBS]Prody]

I like the bomb-loads , it complements the He111 well, it does not have the same power if you want to concentrate on a single target but, with SC500-4 + SC50-18 , with 6x250kg + 28xSC50  or with the 44xSC50 bomb-loads i think you can bomb four targets in a single sortie .

Edited February 16, 2016 by [RO]ThePrody

[Asgar]

a stuvi is one thing that makes it more versatile. the Ju-88 is only allowed diving at 55° so a stuvi would greatly improve accuracy 

Edited February 16, 2016 by I./JG3_Asgar

[[DBS]Prody]

You need fighter cover for dive-bombing . In multiplayer you might get away with level-bombing from 5000m+ and moving along towards the next target since most of the action takes place 2000m  below you  but if you dive-bomb in a hot area it's like running with your pants down and asking for it

Edited February 16, 2016 by [RO]ThePrody

[6./ZG26_McKvack]

But the 20mm cannon that can be used on the 111, cant that one be used on the 88? Only thing needed to do then is a mount for it in the nose and then the "bombardier" can switch to it

 

On pictures the only thing that looks different on the 88 with the 20mm is a longer barrel

 

a stuvi is one thing that makes it more versatile. the Ju-88 is only allowed diving at 55° so a stuvi would greatly improve accuracy

But AFAIK we arent getting a stuvi Edited February 16, 2016 by 6./ZG26_McKvack

[7.GShAP/Silas]

You need fighter cover for dive-bombing . In multiplayer you might get away with level-bombing from 5000m+ and moving along towards the next target since most of the action takes place 2000m  below you  but if you dive-bomb in a hot area it's like running with your pants down and asking for it

 

 

The same operational conditions for ground attack typically apply in MP as they often did in reality.  Hopefully fighter cover is available, often not, and you must use the most effective method of destroying the objective so you dive, protect one another with gunners and hope not too many from your group are selected for sacrifice.

 

Operating in such conditions is the best part of flying ground attack in the sim.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Silas

[LukeFF]

I like the bomb-loads , it complements the He111 well, it does not have the same power if you want to concentrate on a single target but, with SC500-4 + SC50-18 , with 6x250kg + 28xSC50  or with the 44xSC50 bomb-loads i think you can bomb four targets in a single sortie .

 

...if you are flying as a lone bomber, yes. 

 

 

But the 20mm cannon that can be used on the 111, cant that one be used on the 88? Only thing needed to do then is a mount for it in the nose and then the "bombardier" can switch to it

 

On pictures the only thing that looks different on the 88 with the 20mm is a longer barrel

 

No, the bombsight was removed in such cases.  

[6./ZG26_McKvack]

No, the bombsight was removed in such cases.  

 

Fair enough but I still dont see a major problem.

As seen in the picture below only a mount is needed in the lower part of the cockpit and sure, lets remove the bombsight and add this as a modification

 

 

Or even just the MG81 gunpod which already exist on the Ju-87 as a modification? :D

It could be mounted under the wings or on the belly

 

Armament:                     3x MG81z (zwilling=twin)

Rate of fire:                   9000 rpm

Ammo count:                 1500 (in total)

Weight:                         ???

Used on:                       Ju87 D-1 (one under each wing)

                                     Ju88 A-4 (up to three under each wing)

                                     Do 217    (up to three under each wing)

 

                                     COULD BE MOUNTED ON ETC-500 & ETC-1800 BOMB RACKS

 

Source: 

http://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php?topic=13356.0

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MG_81_machine_gun

Edited February 16, 2016 by 6./ZG26_McKvack

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

You don't need bomb sight if you're going to dive bomb.

 

You don't need bomb sight for ship strike

 

You need cannons to make AAA gunners heads down.

 

Torpedoes are just a new payload not a modification to the plane.

 

Even if they release later a C or A14 model this not going to change the A4 situation.

 

I can understand using factory data to improve an inferior design while using captured planes data to balance a superior foe, but making a bomber inferior to its capabilities is completely wrong

Edited February 16, 2016 by 6.J/ZG26_Gielow

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Bottom line is though, was the Ju-88 used that way with the cannons in the advance on Moscow and subsequent Soviet counter-attacks? And if so, did this happen to an extent that makes it worth including? Because in 1941 and 1942 about 50 MiG-3s were fitted with AM-38 engines, some in the Moscow region, which made it a low-altitude beast. However, considering the small nature of the conversion there really was no point in including that. I feel that is the case here, and I doubt all Ju-88s that went diving were fitted with the 20mm cannons and so on back then.

[Juri_JS]

It would be regrettable if the BoM Ju-88 doesn't get a 20 mm MGFF as an unlock. Ju-88A often flew low level strafing attacks on the eastern front, especially against trains, airfields or vehicle columns. That's the reason why it was also possible to bring the 7.92 mm forward MG in a fixed position so it could be aimed and fired by the pilot. Only in 1943 Ju-88 Geschwader in the east received larger numbers of Ju-88C6 that partially replaced the A4 in the low level attack role.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Juri_JS

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

Give all engine, guns, kits , etc to players and let servers and mission builders do the job.

 

We don't need this nany state posture saying what we can have or not. Like I have said before we won't have a 88 A4 with cannons on this IL2 game generation. It is sad.

 

It's a bad design decision for a such important plane. Using history to justify it is wrong because the plane had it and making it available before the most correct time period does not influence game balance.

Edited February 16, 2016 by 6.J/ZG26_Gielow

[6./ZG26_McKvack]

Then again, the Stuka got the MG81 pods and 37mm cannons which were not used in Stalingrad. I dont even think the current stuka model can carry them at all. So I dont see a problem giving the 88 a little more options even if they were not used in Moscow but at least they could use it. Especially when the asset is already ingame(talking MG81 pod)

[7.GShAP/Silas]

Then again, the Stuka got the MG81 pods and 37mm cannons which were not used in Stalingrad. I dont even think the current stuka model can carry them at all. So I dont see a problem giving the 88 a little more options even if they were not used in Moscow but at least they could use it. Especially when the asset is already ingame(talking MG81 pod)

 

 

That's true, I forgot about the Stuka.

[Asgar]

you can't look at the Ju-88 and only think about it during the battle of moscow. we will use it in the skies over Stalingrad and more expansion are going to be added. and the plane will probably be used in all of them. Just like it was in real life. it was everywhere.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Then again, the Stuka got the MG81 pods and 37mm cannons which were not used in Stalingrad. I dont even think the current stuka model can carry them at all. So I dont see a problem giving the 88 a little more options even if they were not used in Moscow but at least they could use it. Especially when the asset is already ingame(talking MG81 pod)

It definetly could. G-1s and G-2s were slightly refit D-3's and D-5's with minor changes to the airframe (removal of dive breaks and sirens, additional armour), although conversions slightly differed form each other.

 

Another example would be the (BoS) Peshka's rear gunner upgrade making it a Ser.87, which didn't participate in the BoS at that time period. That's obviously not the decisive argument for the devs not to implement any of the Ju88's Rüstsätze.

[xvii-Dietrich]

I wonder if the loadouts are just a design decision to avoid overlap? If you give the Ju 88 A-4 decent MGs, there is no longer much point taking a Bf 110. I am guessing that the developers would like to see a mix of planes being used... not just the best one.

 

We simply have to regard the A-4 as a Schnellbomber and nothing more. Yes, the Ju 88 was a multi-purpose aircraft, but for the heavy-fighter, recon, ground-attack and night-fighter roles, we'll have to wait in hope for the C, D, G and R variants.

[Asgar]

ok...explain to me with your logic...why we have the 109 F-2 F-4 and G-2 than....

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Well than you can also remove bombs from all fighters because we already have attack aircraft. Also the 37mm upgrade for the Lagg-3 making it an effective tank buster, that's the job of the IL-2s.

 

The WB81s were no air to air weapons and don't transform it into a heavy fighter. They were used for ground strafing and were angled downward. Although I'm not sure to what extent they were used on the eastern front it was definetly possibel.

 

It won't be much of a Schnellbomber either if it's not getting the Jumo 211J with Ladeluftkühler (sry, don't know how to translate that). That would make it reach a nice topspeed of 475km/h at ~3000m, otherwise it's going to be well slower than the Pe-2 and Bf-110. As I assume it getting the Jumo 211F instead I don't expect it to be impressive. Yes, faster than a Heinkel, but overall still slow, sluggish and difficult to fly with full payload.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[LukeFF]

I can understand using factory data to improve an inferior design while using captured planes data to balance a superior foe, but making a bomber inferior to its capabilities is completely wrong

 

What in the world are you going on about? 

Give all engine, guns, kits , etc to players and let servers and mission builders do the job.

 

We don't need this nany state posture saying what we can have or not. Like I have said before we won't have a 88 A4 with cannons on this IL2 game generation. It is sad.

 

It's a bad design decision for a such important plane. Using history to justify it is wrong because the plane had it and making it available before the most correct time period does not influence game balance.

 

No, it's simply a matter of how much time (and money) they have to model such things. Do you really think are willfully holding back mods just because they can? Come on, get a grip.

Another example would be the (BoS) Peshka's rear gunner upgrade making it a Ser.87, which didn't participate in the BoS at that time period. That's obviously not the decisive argument for the devs not to implement any of the Ju88's Rüstsätze.

 

The rear gunner upgrade makes into a Series 110, and that most certainly saw action at Stalingrad. 

Edited February 16, 2016 by LukeFF

[Asgar]

No, it's simply a matter of how much time (and money) they have to model such things. Do you really think are willfully holding back mods just because they can? Come on, get a grip.

so basically we didn't get modifications for the Ju-88 because we needed mouse aim and tanks? ...great

[LukeFF]

so basically we didn't get modifications for the Ju-88 because we needed mouse aim and tanks? ...great

 

Umm...no. That is a major (and likely flawed) assumption. 

[xvii-Dietrich]

It won't be much of a Schnellbomber either if it's not getting the Jumo 211J with Ladeluftkühler (sry, don't know how to translate that).

 

It is unlikely to be a 211J.

 

The earliest example of this engine in use on the Eastern Front that I can find was in WkNr.3880, which was delivered on 10-Apr-1943 (Ref: Keskinen et. al. "Suomen Ilmavoimien Historia 9"). That is the delivery date; I do not have the first combat flight date.

 

If anyone can find an earlier example, please let us know the details (and include the reference!).

 

 

PS: Ladeluftkühler = Intercooler

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

On a less OT note, given the available payloads, what are the most effective ways to employ that? I believe with its speed compared to the 111 we can see more medium to low altitude tactical level bombing, no?

[6./ZG26_McKvack]

On a less OT note, given the available payloads, what are the most effective ways to employ that? I believe with its speed compared to the 111 we can see more medium to low altitude tactical level bombing, no?

 

Depends on AA. It will be faster than a 111 and will probably be able to take a bigger punch but its a big target. I'd saw medium/low and dive bombing will be the most effective since level bombing at high altitudes needs requires some good skills with the bombsight and it can be pretty hard depending on clouds and wind. 

 

 

 

 

No, it's simply a matter of how much time (and money) they have to model such things. Do you really think are willfully holding back mods just because they can? Come on, get a grip.

 

I agree with you about creating MG131, 20mm etc stuff however I dont see any reason why we cant get the MG81 gun pods

Edited February 16, 2016 by 6./ZG26_McKvack

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

How many years and how much million dollars do you think do they need to model a cannon??

[Edited] You are the one that need to get your grip and learn to tone down your manners here.

They made a design mistake about such important plane and now it is too late for Moscow release to be fixed.
 

What in the world are you going on about?


No, it's simply a matter of how much time (and money) they have to model such things. Do you really think are willfully holding back mods just because they can? Come on, get a grip.


The rear gunner upgrade makes into a Series 110, and that most certainly saw action at Stalingrad.

Edited February 16, 2016 by Bearcat