In praise of the Ju-88C (and why we need more aircraft like it)

[BlitzPig_EL]

Like they say, if one engine fails on a twin engined aircraft, you have enough power left to get to the scene of the crash.

 

In all seriousness, your fuel load is the issue.  There isn't a map in the sim where a medium bomber would need over a 50 percent fuel load.

 

Edited March 22, 2022 by BlitzPig_EL
Clarity

[oc2209]

1 hour ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

In all seriousness, your fuel load is the issue.  There isn't a map in the sim where a medium bomber would need over a 50 percent fuel load.

 

I never fly with more than 50%. Typically 40-50%.

 

Pretty much the only planes in the sim, fighter or bomber, that you should be flying with full fuel are ones that have tiny tanks. 109, Spitfire, etc. Even then, with an especially short roundtrip mission, you could probably get away with an 80% start.

[CountZero]

26 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

 

I never fly with more than 50%. Typically 40-50%.

 

Pretty much the only planes in the sim, fighter or bomber, that you should be flying with full fuel are ones that have tiny tanks. 109, Spitfire, etc. Even then, with an especially short roundtrip mission, you could probably get away with an 80% start.

You are single player only player, how long sorties you usealy play ? 

[oc2209]

52 minutes ago, CountZero said:

You are single player only player, how long sorties you usealy play ? 

 

Depends on the theater. In most of Stalingrad and parts of the Moscow career, flight distances can be microscopic, as are flight times. Obviously Kuban and Bodenplatte are typically much longer.

 

*Edit: also, I'm talking fighter careers here. But when I fly a Ju-88C in quicks, I still take a 50% load to simulate that I've travelled X distance to reach a point in enemy territory where I'd be facing fighters.

Edited March 22, 2022 by oc2209

[unlikely_spider]

I'm playing the scripted campaign by saldy. The second mission in that campaign I don't even get to the target for 50 minutes. I'm not sure what fuel percentage is appropriate for that.

[oc2209]

25 minutes ago, unlikely_spider said:

I'm playing the scripted campaign by saldy. The second mission in that campaign I don't even get to the target for 50 minutes. I'm not sure what fuel percentage is appropriate for that.

Ew. That sounds long.

 

You have my condolences.

 

Seriously, I don't know how much fuel that would take. I'm almost certain it wouldn't necessitate anywhere near a full tank, but by how much, I can't say.

[Yogiflight]

5 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

Now, if/when we get the BMW801/Jumo 213 this airframe did have historically it would be way more useful

First I want the DB 601P engines for the Bf 110 E2 it was planned with instead of the weaker N-version it has in game.

44 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

Depends on the theater. In most of Stalingrad and parts of the Moscow career, flight distances can be microscopic, as are flight times. Obviously Kuban and Bodenplatte are typically much longer.

In my Moscow career with the 110, I had several missions, in which I was flying over 400km.

[CUJO_1970]

23 hours ago, =621=Samikatz said:

 

How common were these up-engined models compared to the standard C-6 we have in game?

 

From 1943 onward Ju-88 of all types (including Ju-188) were extremely common with BMW 801. Jumo 213 came a little later.

 

Here's a day bomber with BMW801 and external racks:

 

 

[Livai]

-> Three things we need first a Ju-88 loaded with 3500kg heavy explosive materials, second the 109 or 190 only players in MP, thrid the release button for them because it's not a partnership for eternity. 

[Yogiflight]

15 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

Here's a day bomber with BMW801 and external racks:

 

It is a Ju 188, though.

[Avimimus]

5 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

It is a Ju 188, though.

 

What's the problem? ?

[Carl_infar]

On 3/22/2022 at 10:34 PM, unlikely_spider said:

I'm playing the scripted campaign by saldy. The second mission in that campaign I don't even get to the target for 50 minutes. I'm not sure what fuel percentage is appropriate for that.

Depending on throttle settings , one engine uses between 250 and 350 liters per hour, so for 2 hours flight(50 min each way plus Reserve) as minimum i would take 1000l for 2win engine 110.

Some aircraft like For example 111 have a guage which shows actual consumption depending on engine settings

[CUJO_1970]

8 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

It is a Ju 188, though.

Yeah, and…? ?

[Lusekofte]

On 3/18/2022 at 1:57 PM, BlitzPig_EL said:

It's clear to us that the C6 is a very niche aircraft, that has a very narrow mission profile that would allow for survival, much less success.

In Finnish server with 30 opponents I had 100% survival rate with heavy clouds in 2 missions

With clear sky I died in both attempts before getting to the target.

As I expected with inferior speed there is absolute no chance if spotted. And the gunner say nothing before you are dead.

I will be flying Mosquito in MP  it might got the speed to at least reach the target. But the observer should be helpful when it comes to spotting. No matter what C 6 got 4 extra eyes we currently can not use. And that is a shame, and a mp killer

 

[Avimimus]

Hey, so with all of the aircraft released and the Battle of Normandy release coming up in the next week or two I just wanted to say:

 

The Ju-88 was perhaps the biggest surprise in the plan-set. I spend a lot of time touring in the Ar-234 to make use of the view, I enjoy aerobatics with the 'relaxed static stability' of the Me-410, I'm thrilled to have the Hawker Typhoon... and a lot of the other aircraft have charms, But I still suspect the Ju-88C-6 might be still be my favourite.

 

But there is something ergonomically charming about the Ju-88C-6... and I still fly it a lot.

 

So to whoever added it to the plane list - and to all of those who contributed the work to actually create it in the sim: Thank you.

[EAF19_Marsh]

On 3/18/2022 at 7:59 AM, dannytherat said:

I may be wrong, but I don't believe the Mosquito FB.VI carried Serrate. As far as I know that was only used on the Mosquito NF.II (and Beaufighters).

My memory - quite possibly incorrect - is that they used Perfectos to trigger the German IFF.

[FliegerAD]

On 8/29/2022 at 12:42 AM, Avimimus said:

So to whoever added it to the plane list - and to all of those who contributed the work to actually create it in the sim: Thank you.

 

Now that I have the module, I can only agree. It is a great addition.

 

But it is held back by the fact that we cannot fly all the missions this aircraft was used for. Hunting anti-sub-units over the Bay of Biscay would have been great. Still, I am having lots of fun with it.

 

The only bad thing is that I now want more variants of the Ju 88-Zerstörer. I want the Ju 88C5 (no gondola, stronger engines, really fast) and the R2 (gondola plus stronger engines, still quite fast). ?

[MAJ_stug41]

2 hours ago, FliegerAD said:

 

Now that I have the module, I can only agree. It is a great addition.

 

But it is held back by the fact that we cannot fly all the missions this aircraft was used for. Hunting anti-sub-units over the Bay of Biscay would have been great. Still, I am having lots of fun with it.

 

The only bad thing is that I now want more variants of the Ju 88-Zerstörer. I want the Ju 88C5 (no gondola, stronger engines, really fast) and the R2 (gondola plus stronger engines, still quite fast). ?

Help make some noise in this thread

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/80753-ju88c6-gondola-removal-option/

[FliegerAD]

Allow me to come back to the Ju 88 C-6...
As a huge fan of two-engined fighters I still love it. In fact, it is my favourite plane to fly. (SP only). I sometimes prefer it to the Me 410 and 110, although those are far more useful in game overall.
The Ju 88 in general has a certain charm, and it is easy to see why German aircrews were so confident in it.

 

The problem is that we cannot do all that much with it in Il2. The suicidal missions against Allied beachhead positions in Normandy are fun because they are so dangerous, and then there is trainbusting in the East.

And then?

 

It is a shame they cannot do what they were meant to do: hunt ASW-planes. Obviously we will never get a Sunderland and that is ok. But the other natural enemy of the Ju 88 was the Beaufighter.
Yeah, we have the Mosquito but that is more of a hard-counter to the Ju 88, at least as long as we lack R-2s.

 

And while I would appreciate the R-2 (easy to do, too), I hope we get the Beaufighter one day, and better ASW-simulation.

 

[MiGCap]

If the (human) fighter pilot acts dumb enough, You can even win dogfights in MP with the C-6 (last Saturday on Combat Box). The P-38 ended up burning on the ground: 

 

  

 

 

[Avimimus]

3 hours ago, FliegerAD said:

It is a shame they cannot do what they were meant to do: hunt ASW-planes. Obviously we will never get a Sunderland and that is ok. But the other natural enemy of the Ju 88 was the Beaufighter.
Yeah, we have the Mosquito but that is more of a hard-counter to the Ju 88, at least as long as we lack R-2s.

 

And while I would appreciate the R-2 (easy to do, too), I hope we get the Beaufighter one day, and better ASW-simulation.

 

Yes, it is a bit of an issue - not having much that is slow enough to catch. We'll have the Lisunov Li-2 soon. I agree that a Beaufighter or a British night bomber would be a great addition. This is a similar situation to Flying Circus Vol.III (where four fighters will lack two-seaters which are slow enough for them to actually catch, thus limiting gameplay).

 

Still, I think the Ju-88C6 adds a lot of value in terms of unique gameplay.

 

I think they've done a good job selecting the next Collector Planes - giving us a high performance late-war aircraft (Ta 152) for those that want that, a unique biplane fighter/ground-attack aircraft for the eastern modules (I-153), a variant that helps complete the Channel plane-set (Spit IXc early), and totally unique gameplay with the CG-4A glider (hopefully they'll give us a SG 38 training glider too - it'd be really easy to add). That kind of diversity sustains interest! I agree though (re: desiring slow enough targets, ASW targets etc.)  

[FliegerAD]

On 5/29/2023 at 9:56 PM, Avimimus said:

Still, I think the Ju-88C6 adds a lot of value in terms of unique gameplay.

 

Indeed, and I wish there were more such aircraft with unique mission profiles.

Just looking at the Ju 88-family, there is stuff like the A-13 ground attack aircraft with 16 MG17... probably not terribly effective but sounds like fun.

 

...which is why I fly the C-6 in the first place. But duelling a Beaufighter would be even better.

Also, flying a Beaufighter itself is another one of my wishes. Such an underrepresented aircraft...

[LuftManu]

We need more heavies! 

I can only imagine how fun would be with the A20G and it's nose guns. Also with some late war bombers like the Ju-88S or the Ju-188 / He-177. ?

[Avimimus]

15 hours ago, FliegerAD said:

Just looking at the Ju 88-family, there is stuff like the A-13 ground attack aircraft with 16 MG17... probably not terribly effective but sounds like fun.

 

Il-2 1946 has an A-13 (if you want to try it). I think you might need one of the later Team Daidalos patches (although there are also mods for the earlier versions too). The Waffenbehälter 81 gunpods are also already available for the Ju-87D (in IL-2 Sturmovik: Battle of Stalingrad), although without the oblique downward firing feature.

 

Interestingly, these gunpods were also used for improvised night-fighters in the East (e.g. Fw-58, He-111):

 

A night-fighter (or train-buster) conversion of the He-111 might actually make a pretty interesting Collector Plane.

 

 

14 hours ago, LuftManu said:

I can only imagine how fun would be with the A20G and it's nose guns. Also with some late war bombers like the Ju-88S or the Ju-188 / He-177. ?

 

I always thought the A-20G-1 with its 20mm Hispanos would be neat. Although the one I really want (as a counter-part to the Ju-88C) is the Petlyakov Pe-3. They were used very aggressively in the Battle of Moscow, before being shifted primarily to reconnaissance duties for the Battle of Stalingrad. It is a lot of fun attacking bombers in the Pe-2 - so having the up-armed version would be a fun Collector Plane.

Edited June 4, 2023 by Avimimus
Typed Fw-51 instead of Fw-58 for some reason

[Juri_JS]

11 hours ago, Avimimus said:

Interestingly, these gunpods were also used for improvised night-fighters in the East (e.g. Fw-51, He-111):

I did a lot of research on eastern front night fighting, but found no proof for gunpod use on improvised night fighters. There were He-111s with fixed 20 mm guns, but they were aircraft of train busting units.

 

What's really missing for the Ju-88 C-6 (and Me-410) are LC50 flare/illumination bombs. They were used for target illumination both by Ju-88 train busting and night fighter units. Units flying the Me-410 over England also used them for target marking during bomber raids.

[LuftManu]

15 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

I always thought the A-20G-1 with its 20mm Hispanos would be neat. Although the one I really want (as a counter-part to the Ju-88C) is the Petlyakov Pe-3. They were used very aggressively in the Battle of Moscow, before being shifted primarily to reconnaissance duties for the Battle of Stalingrad. It is a lot of fun attacking bombers in the Pe-2 - so having the up-armed version would be a fun Collector Plane.

Pe-3 could be an interesting aircraft indeed. They could be useful in two theaters.

 

Speaking again about heavy figthers and specialized tasks, this is always a great idea as there is room for many possibilities in types of missions and make career more interesting and varied.

 

?

[Avimimus]

2 hours ago, Juri_JS said:

I did a lot of research on eastern front night fighting, but found no proof for gunpod use on improvised night fighters. There were He-111s with fixed 20 mm guns, but they were aircraft of train busting units.

 

Interesting. What do you consider proof? Photographic evidence? Original documents? I've definitely read about attempts to use WB-81 in secondary sources, but those can be unreliable.

 

I agree that the fixed 20mm cannons were for train-busting. I've been assuming that one of the reasons why the He-111 night fighter crews were so effective was partly that they were using the flexible mount guns - they didn't have to risk collision with the U-2VS to bring the MG-FF/M to bear.

[Juri_JS]

1 hour ago, Avimimus said:

 

Interesting. What do you consider proof? Photographic evidence? Original documents? I've definitely read about attempts to use WB-81 in secondary sources, but those can be unreliable.

Usually I only trust photographic evidence and original documents. I've also read about installation of WB-81 in secondary sources, but all my attempts to find hard evidence for its operational use on the He-111 failed.

[Avimimus]

20 minutes ago, Juri_JS said:

Usually I only trust photographic evidence and original documents. I've also read about installation of WB-81 in secondary sources, but all my attempts to find hard evidence for its operational use on the He-111 failed.

 

Yes. I could imagine that someone attempted to fit a WB-81 pod onto the external bomb-racks, wired it up to something and tested it out prior to abandoning it. Even some purportedly successful field modifications seem to lack photographic evidence (e.g. I've never seen a photo of the Lisunov Li-2 with the two NS-45 45mm cannons). On the other hand, sometimes very obscure and failed field mods are well documented.

 

The case where it is plausible to me that they put in more effort is the Fw-58 - since finding a way to attach even one WB-81 would have been a substantial increase in firepower (considering it originally had 4xMG-17 - which is about 2/3rds of a single gunpod. If one could fit two WB-81 pods it would increase the firepower by 400%). I actually tried finding throttle and flap settings that would allow me to fly the Bf-110 as if it was a Fw-58 (crude approximation). It was actually a lot of fun to hunt the C-47, surprisingly so.

 

Anyway, what I find interesting is the fact that the attempt to repurpose these aircraft to hunt the U-2VS happened at all - and that some He-111 night-fighter crews achieved ace (or double ace) status on the plane.

[FliegerAD]

On 6/3/2023 at 11:36 PM, Avimimus said:

 

Although the one I really want (as a counter-part to the Ju-88C) is the Petlyakov Pe-3. They were used very aggressively in the Battle of Moscow, before being shifted primarily to reconnaissance duties for the Battle of Stalingrad. It is a lot of fun attacking bombers in the Pe-2 - so having the up-armed version would be a fun Collector Plane.

 

100% agreed. It is a beautiful airplane, too, so sleek.

 

Also, having a Soviet heavy fighter would be nice in and of itself since we have three German heavy fighters, and two for the western Allies already. It is time for the Soviets to catch up.

 

I wonder if there was much late war use of the Pe-3. I mean, if we ever return to the Eastern Front with a full module, its setting is probably 1944/45. 

[Avimimus]

1 hour ago, FliegerAD said:

I wonder if there was much late war use of the Pe-3. I mean, if we ever return to the Eastern Front with a full module, its setting is probably 1944/45. 

 

I gather that production was essentially ended early in 1943. I suspect the remaining aircraft continue in reconnaissance/patrol roles until they were used up. The original long-range fighter role would be filled by the Yak-9DD. The Tu-2 remained in production (and about twice as many were delivered during the war compared to the Pe-3) - so it might make more sense for the twin-engined Soviet aircraft in a '44-'45 module. It would certainly be nice to have the Pe-3 though!

[FliegerAD]

Well, yes. For a late war Eastern Front module, the Tu-2 would certainly be a more important aircraft, as might be a later series Pe-2. The bigger problem might be operational use as you mentioned.

 

From a cursory reading it seems to me the main field of operations for the Pe-3 during the later stages of WW2, besides recce, was protecting Arctic convoys. I found some fighter cover missions as late as 1945.

That use actually makes sense: that's where you need long range and the reliability of two engines, and the aircraft you are supposed to deal with are slow ASW units.

... a bit like the Ju 88 C-6 itself.

 

And while Norway and the battles in the north would be an interesting scenario, I unfortunately doubt it has much mass appeal. And that probably means the Pe-3 would have to be a collector's plane indeed.

[Yogiflight]

On 6/10/2023 at 10:02 PM, FliegerAD said:

we have three German heavy fighters

According to the developers, the Bf 110 E2 was purely a ground attack version, which is the reason why they introduced it with the preproduction engines, not with the more powerful engines, it was develpoed with IRL. TBH the AI, flying the Bf 110 E2 in career mode should act more the way it acts, when flying a two seater IL-2, when getting attacked by enemy fighters.

 

I would like to have a Bf 110 F2 together with the Pe-3. It would perfectly fit the Stalingrad career and should be even less work than the Pe-3.

[FeuerFliegen]

13 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

According to the developers, the Bf 110 E2 was purely a ground attack version, which is the reason why they introduced it with the preproduction engines, not with the more powerful engines, it was develpoed with IRL. TBH the AI, flying the Bf 110 E2 in career mode should act more the way it acts, when flying a two seater IL-2, when getting attacked by enemy fighters.

 

I would like to have a Bf 110 F2 together with the Pe-3. It would perfectly fit the Stalingrad career and should be even less work than the Pe-3.

 

What differences does the Bf 110 F2 have besides a newer engine?  Also, do you know how much more power it has?

[Aurora_Stealth]

16 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

According to the developers, the Bf 110 E2 was purely a ground attack version, which is the reason why they introduced it with the preproduction engines, not with the more powerful engines, it was develpoed with IRL. TBH the AI, flying the Bf 110 E2 in career mode should act more the way it acts, when flying a two seater IL-2, when getting attacked by enemy fighters.

 

I would like to have a Bf 110 F2 together with the Pe-3. It would perfectly fit the Stalingrad career and should be even less work than the Pe-3.

 

That's a great suggestion! that'd make a really great pair of collectors aircraft... the Bf 110 F-2 and Pe-3

 

They have a well preserved example of the Bf 110 F-2 at Deutsches Technikmuseum in Berlin which I remember seeing a few years ago. Such a great museum by the way, a lot of gems in there... and walking about the old train yard behind the back of the museum was like going back in time to the 30's - was just waiting for a steam train to turn up at the platform ?

 

3 hours ago, SCG_FeuerFliegen said:

 

What differences does the Bf 110 F2 have besides a newer engine?  Also, do you know how much more power it has?

 

Believe power output given of the Bf 110 E-2 we have in-game is 1,100 PS per engine (assuming DB601A), whereas the DB601F has 1,350 PS apparently.

 

So 250 PS extra per engine, 500 PS total additional power from the E-2... that'd be a really nice improvement! especially considering its entry into service

 

Not too familiar with the other changes, but I've heard this particular variant is in a particular sweet spot in terms of the aircraft's performance in its development cycle.

[FeuerFliegen]

17 hours ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

Believe power output given of the Bf 110 E-2 we have in-game is 1,100 PS per engine (assuming DB601A), whereas the DB601F has 1,350 PS apparently.

 

So 250 PS extra per engine, 500 PS total additional power from the E-2... that'd be a really nice improvement! especially considering its entry into service

 

Not too familiar with the other changes, but I've heard this particular variant is in a particular sweet spot in terms of the aircraft's performance in its development cycle.

 

 

Is that the same engine the later version of the E-2 has?

[Aurora_Stealth]

On 6/16/2023 at 4:11 AM, SCG_FeuerFliegen said:

 

 

Is that the same engine the later version of the E-2 has?

 

To answer your question simply - no the Bf 110 E-2 (or other E models) were never fitted with the DB 601 F (1,350 PS) from what I've read.

 

I'm also a little confused now, because a lot of websites state the Bf 110 E-2 should be fitted with the DB 601 P (which is essentially a DB601 N of 1,175 PS but with a gearbox modified for a twin engine aircraft)... not the DB601 A version (1,100 PS) we have in-game. So it appears from first glance there is a discrepancy with what is on our specification sheet in IL-2... or it has the wrong engine variant (!) for the E-2, but then again I can't verify how reliable the online sources are.

 

Hmm interesting. In either case, we could expect quite a significant upgrade in power with the Bf 110 F.

[Yogiflight]

3 hours ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

I'm also a little confused now, because a lot of websites state the Bf 110 E-2 should be fitted with the DB 601 P (which is essentially a DB601 N of 1,175 PS but with a gearbox modified for a twin engine aircraft)... not the DB601 A version (1,100 PS) we have in-game. So it appears from first glance there is a discrepancy with what is on our specification sheet in IL-2... or it has the wrong engine variant (!) for the E-2,

The E2 was fitted with the DB 601A at the beginning of the production, because there weren't enough engines of the P version available, (yet?), and the E2 was a pure ground attack version. The developers have a sheet, which approves that for january 1941. Now there are two opinions, (as noone was able to show reliable sources, so far), the developers are the opinion, that the E2 never was fitted with the DB 601 P engines, because it was purely a ground attack version, others, including me, but also one or more books, represent the opinion, that after the DB 601 P/N was in full production, the Bf 110 E2 was fitted with it and the book(s) also state(s), that the first produced E2s were even retrofitted with the P engines. 

[Aurora_Stealth]

11 hours ago, Yogiflight said:

The E2 was fitted with the DB 601A at the beginning of the production, because there weren't enough engines of the P version available, (yet?), and the E2 was a pure ground attack version. The developers have a sheet, which approves that for january 1941. Now there are two opinions, (as noone was able to show reliable sources, so far), the developers are the opinion, that the E2 never was fitted with the DB 601 P engines, because it was purely a ground attack version, others, including me, but also one or more books, represent the opinion, that after the DB 601 P/N was in full production, the Bf 110 E2 was fitted with it and the book(s) also state(s), that the first produced E2s were even retrofitted with the P engines. 

 

Ah I see, yes that makes sense - especially considering production of the DB601 N having been likely prioritised initially for the Bf 109 E-7.

 

It would be unusual if they decided not to fit, or not to retrofit the aircraft with the engine it was actually designed for. However then again if the Bf 110 F series followed very quickly the Bf 110 E in production... to make use of the upcoming DB601 F they could have skipped the P and upgraded the airframes and engines over time and through obsolescence.

 

Not sure how complex such a change would be to convert Bf 110 E to F though so just food for thought. 

Edited June 18, 2023 by Aurora_Stealth

[Yogiflight]

1 hour ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

especially considering production of the DB601 N having been likely prioritised initially for the Bf 109 E-7.

and the Bf 110 E-1, which was the Zerstörer version and therefore needed the better engines more urgently than a pure ground attack aircraft.

 

2 hours ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

to make use of the upcoming DB601 F they could have skipped the P

The Bf 109 F-2 also used the DB 601 P (as N version), so I guess it stayed in production for some time.

 

2 hours ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

to make use of the upcoming DB601 F they could have skipped the P and upgraded the airframes and engines over time and through obsolescence.

According to @LukeFF there were still E-2s flying at Stalingrad, like in the game, until December 1942, when the G version entered service.