Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Best Multi-Purpose Aircraft ?

Discussion in 'Weapons & Technology in WWII' started by JCFalkenbergIII, Jan 26, 2008.

  1. TA152

    TA152 Ace

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2002
    Messages:
    3,423
    Likes Received:
    120
    I have never heard of the Swordfish being used as a dive bomber. Can you find some examples on the web for us to read about ?

    I am not putting the Swordfish down as I like the plane too. :cool:
     
  2. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Aquila non capit muscas

    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Messages:
    8,809
    Likes Received:
    372
    Location:
    Portugal
    So a Jack of All Trades. Master of how many and for how long?

    Look at the A-20 Boston. It even acted as a flying searchlight. So what?
     
  3. JCFalkenbergIII

    JCFalkenbergIII Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    10,480
    Likes Received:
    426
    OH Gee. I dunno. I thought it was an interesting question for a discussion forum on WWII. :)
     
  4. JCFalkenbergIII

    JCFalkenbergIII Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    10,480
    Likes Received:
    426
    For some reason people think of an aircraft doing all the "Best" at all the roles performed. Are there any others that performed more roles then what it was originally designed for during the war? How many roles did the A-20 fufill? And yes the JU-88 was a "Jack of all Trades". Did it do them all well? No of course not. But it did preform more then many other aircraft that were similar to it.
     
  5. Erich

    Erich Alte Hase

    Joined:
    May 13, 2001
    Messages:
    14,439
    Likes Received:
    617
    Ju 88 as a medium range bomber it was excellent, as a night fighter the G-6 was only surpassed by the Mossie XXX, it was an excellent train buster on the Ost front which is very little known; it performed the torpedo/recon roles very effectively.

    the design was in place although outdated the LW seemed to get it right amidst all the silly experimentation of A/C styles and shapes, and used it till it was a worn out relic by wars end...

    yes it did it's job....

    [​IMG]
     
  6. T. A. Gardner

    T. A. Gardner Genuine Chief

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Messages:
    6,205
    Likes Received:
    933
    Location:
    Phoenix Arizona
    On the speed issue: The Mosquito was hardly immune from interception. The day operations variants got intercepted with some regularity. The night operations versions flew primarily as pathfinders carrying relatively light loads and flying at very high altitudes giving them more speed.
    In both cases the Luftwaffe was to a great degree limited also by availability of aircraft for interception. Much like the Japanese, the Luftwaffe often forewent intercepting some aircraft even when they might simply because they lacked the fuel or aircraft to perform the mission.
    Certainly German aircraft, including such models as the Ju 88S when used in similar roles to the Mosquito proved just as difficult to intercept for the Allies. So, this issue is largely mute.
    As for a Mosquito replacement: While I am not overly familiar with all British prototype aircraft I have little doubt something in their designs would have sufficed. Even if not, the US A-26 Invader, an A-20 upgraded, even the P-38 had potential to take over many Mosquito roles. In others, the US P-61 and Beaufighter would have sufficed as replacements. Arguing that these are not always equal in some performance measure or that they could not fufill every role is specious. The point is that there were other aircraft that could have fufilled the Mosquito's roles had it not appeared on the scene.
    This, in fact, is true about most WW 2 aircraft, the Ju 88 included.
    My argument to date on this issue has been one of flexibility of design and sutability of purpose in a particular role. No one can deny that the Ju 88 made a decent bomber. It proved an excellent nightfighter. In the attack and day fighter role it was acceptable. In maritime strike and patrol it was a good aircraft. It showed far more adaptability than any other WW 2 era design I can think of. What other aircraft was redesigned using basically the same components from a twin engined aircraft into a four engined aircraft? The US B-18 using C-47 wings and tail with a new fuselage goes part way towards this but, it too is an exception as well as proving marginal in its new role; something the Ju 488 was likely not to do.
     
  7. uksubs

    uksubs Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    Messages:
    547
    Likes Received:
    36
    The Mosquito in the Night bomber role were carrying 4000 pound Cookie bombs to Berlin most nights
    If you compare the Ju88 V the Mosquito job for job the Mosquito did it better & did it right till the end of the war


    The Germans were using Me 262 to shot down the Mosquito , i don't think the Allies had the same problem with the Ju88
     
  8. Drucius

    Drucius Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2008
    Messages:
    185
    Likes Received:
    16
    Well, Swordfish were bombers, long-range ocean patrollers and night-time sub hunters and all sorts of other stuff too... I don't think there are many aircraft that weren't used as test platforms or target tugs at some point. You might as well include "scrap" as one of your roles.
     
  9. tikilal

    tikilal Ace

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    66
    While I think that this whole discussion is rubbish, my opinion, I would like to point out that the JU-88 was used to test and validate mid-air refueling too.

    I think the Mosquito is better looking too.

    We are also comparing planes from two different generations. The 88 was first flown in 36 and entered service in 39 the Mosquito first flew in 40 and entered service in 41. Yes generally the Mos was 100mph (150kph) faster but this is no big suprise.

    The reason I doint think this discusion adds anything is because you can have a plane and make it do a million things it was not intended for, remeber the dogfight in the pacific between the two 4-engined bombers. The plane may do well at them which is simply good engineering with a little luck. But most times when something is made to do what it was not designed to do it is not that good at it. I think that about covers it and thats all I have to say about that.
     
  10. JCFalkenbergIII

    JCFalkenbergIII Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    10,480
    Likes Received:
    426
    Well sorry you feel that way. Obviously some others think differently LOL :). Though this became a Ju-88 vs Mossie discussion that was not the intention. I was wonding if there were any other aircraft that basically did more then it was designed for. I put out the JU-88 as an example of one such aircraft.
     
  11. Seadog

    Seadog Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    11
    The Ju-88 didn't do all that much towards aerial refueling. Barnstormers and record setters had done a lot of it two decades before. And as much as I like the mossie, it could have been replaced by other aircraft.
     
  12. TA152

    TA152 Ace

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2002
    Messages:
    3,423
    Likes Received:
    120
    It is really hard to design a multi purpose aircraft even in peace time and a big budget. The Tornado was designed as multi purpose but I have never read any great reviews about it's performance. The F-4 seemed to cover alot of roles and served many years. NATO picked the Fiat G-91 but that was doomed from the start. Perhaps the F-18, however it has had a 30+ year gestation period and is not the same aircraft as the YF-17 of 1975.
     
  13. Kai-Petri

    Kai-Petri Kenraali

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Messages:
    26,469
    Likes Received:
    2,208
    I read the British were testing a new wing type at least for the Hurricane ca. 1940 which could be fixed to use the plane for various roles. Also i recall reading the wing system was meant to be used for the Spitfire later on? What happened to the wing system or was it easier to make different planes for their roles? Thanx for any info!
     
  14. TA152

    TA152 Ace

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2002
    Messages:
    3,423
    Likes Received:
    120
  15. JCFalkenbergIII

    JCFalkenbergIII Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    10,480
    Likes Received:
    426
  16. T. A. Gardner

    T. A. Gardner Genuine Chief

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Messages:
    6,205
    Likes Received:
    933
    Location:
    Phoenix Arizona

    Only the British could come up with such a retarded, backwards invention as turning a monoplane fighter into a pathetically worse biplane one with the extra wing designed to come off in flight and potentially take out the aircraft itself. The designer must have been titled royality. Any normal person would have found the concept insane!
     
  17. Kai-Petri

    Kai-Petri Kenraali

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Messages:
    26,469
    Likes Received:
    2,208

    Did find its name, well nothing exceptional there: multi-purpose wing....
     
  18. JCFalkenbergIII

    JCFalkenbergIII Expert

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    10,480
    Likes Received:
    426
    Had this moved here. Thought it more apropos here :).
     
  19. P-Popsie

    P-Popsie Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    Messages:
    86
    Likes Received:
    4
    Not so much an engineering feat as following already established manufacturing processes or didn't the Lancaster start as the Manchester
     
  20. P-Popsie

    P-Popsie Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2008
    Messages:
    86
    Likes Received:
    4
    As i understand it the requirements for the Ju88 were on design as a light support bomber whereas the DH 98 was initially intended as a fast high altitude bomber. The Ju 88 underwent so many changes due to nessecity whereas the DH 98 was just that versitile the airframe could lend itself to many roles without a large degree of modification.


    I suspect the coastal command boys may have a different opinion.


    Again i have to apologize here as i have none of my reference material with me but i bekeive the Cross Atlantic record for a piston driven A/C is still held by a MkXXVII DH 98 flown by H.B. "Mickey" Martin. { Hopefully Martin Bull will be able to help me here?} so if thats not long range what is also DH 98's were air delivered from Canada.

    The Ju 88 remained in service long after its use by date due. as you correctly mentioned due to lack of German resources and no it would of been impossible for the Lufftwaffe to of removed it from service. The DH 98 too fulfilled a role in many cases that no other A/C could fulfill one example are the series of shuttle raids in mid to late 43 all the way to Berlin and back with the same payload as a B17 at 150mph faster, nothing in the Allies arsenal could do that and certainly there was nothing in the Axis Armoury to compare.
     

Share This Page