The Fw 200

not really the FW 200C was going to be the low flying sea bomber the Ju 290A's of FAGr 5 were to replace the Kondor as Sea Recon only though they did on a couple ops use the HS 293 bombs. 9 Ju 290 losses from FAGr 5 sounds like not much but it really is considering the mechanical issues and the operations of only 2 staffeln. the overall range of the Ju 290 surpassed that of the Kondor reaon enough to have the Kondor replced on long range sea-recon ops as early as late December 1943.

 

Just thought I would throw in my autographed photo of the Fw-200, signed by Hauptman Robert Kowalewski, Gruppenkommandeure of III/KG40 which used the FW200C

 

nice signed pic

and for that a Ju 290A from 2./FAGr 5, it was a big bird

 

Erich,

I was wondering if this photo was a FW200 is it? I think the JU290 has the twin plane tail unit. but now you have me wondering
thank you
Lacy

 

Lacy it does have a familiar face to a Kondor doesn't it but let me assure you no it is a Ju 290A from the 2nd staffel. here is their emblem



another pic for clarity, the Maritime camo finish was altered later in the war, and of course the pic reveals the engines have been torn up

9V+EK

 

Erich

sorry for the confusion in my question, due to how I wrote it, I just wanted to make sure the pic I posted, with the signature, was the FW200,

I can see with the photo you posted that there is quite a difference between them other than the tail, looks like the JU290 was much larger.

Did they use the JU290 for heavy bombing missions? If they did, did they use them very extensively or not that much? It seems a lot bigger than the HE111 or any of the other "usual" bombers I am used to seeing

I like the 2nd staffel's emblem.

 

Lacy

the 1st staffel emblem looks the same as the 2nd except the background colour is white.

no the Ju 290 was not used for heavy bombing missions the A-7 variant did carry the Hs 123 glide bomb on a couple of ops but again the unit was chiefly used in air-sea recon for KG 40 Kondors and for the U-Boot arm during late 43 into 44 before the trasnfer out into KG 200 and minor operations within the Reioch what is almost unknown are the Ar 234 jet recon trips out of Norway in 45 by the unit, think they had 3-4 Arados on hand.

 

duplicate

 

look at my above posting think you have your answer whether the Ju 290 was used for heavy bombing, the Ju was also used for convenient agent dropping behind enemy lines

 

The Fw-200 was an improvisation and worked well initially, but was not "military-tough", being derived from a decidedly civilian airliner (planes like the Ju-86 or He-111 were SUPPOSEDLY airliners, but were designed military-tough from the outset and only POSED as civilian aircraft to dodge restrictions on military aircraft development). It stemmed from a pre-war under-appreciation of naval aviation needs (note the Germans never completed their aircraft carrier, nor had a quasi-independent Fleet Air Arm or Coastal Command). It could find and shadow convoys, report their position to U-boats, or even take offensive action itself. However, their effective "happy time" was short-lived, as ANY long-range, overwater aircraft is very vulnerable to damage and disablement far from base. Once there was some air opposition (CAM-ship Hurricanes being a BRILLIANT countermeasure!) the effectiveness dropped off. I just SHUDDER to think of flying in one!!

 

...which sounds a lot - but if you think about it...90,000 tons in three months...COULD be only nine ships of 10,00 tons It's really one of those useless statistics without a proper breakdown!

Here's the problem however - all that upgunning added weight - the weight of the weapon, the weight of it's munitions...AND the weigth of a gunner! In some later models, powered turrets replaced gun positions, adding even more weight!

This was the real, major problem of the Condor...it's relatively inadequate Fafnir and Bramo motors; even when upmotored, most of the available extra power had to go to carrying extra weight, not improving actual performance! And SO much extra weight was constantly being added into the mix, that at one major revision, there was only 29 pounds' weight available for airframe strengthening

Also, just forward of the tail....and on at least two occasions....BOTH!

The Condor had OTHER serious problems. The complicated cantilever undercarriage "struts" were weak...and there were MAJOR problems with the brakes; they would "overcam" and lock on...and not release properly. Somewhat awkward when wheels with lining fires were raised into their housings in the engine nacelles! On landing...you could have the problem Hitler's Condor had when it landed in Finland for Mannerheim's birthday - the brake overcammed, sheared it's mounting bolts, rotated with the wheel and instantly ripped the brake lines...and the hot brake ignited the brake fluid!

This was a bugbear of the Condor; poor armouring for even light AA...and the entire fuselage was filled with a multitude of individual fuel tanks with a hellishly complicated fuel transfer system!

...BECAUSE the fuselage was full The ordnance was actually carried in in little bombbays in the engine nacelles...apart from a concrete test bomb carried in the gondola on take off from Brest...as in its Condor installation the Revi sight was so unreliable that it had to be calibrated on each mission.

So....how did the Condor actually go about sinking ships during its short career as a raider rather than a maritime recce plane if it carried such a small bomb load and its bombsights were pretty useless for hitting ships...let alone in the couple of seconds it took to pass over a ship?

Simple - they straddled a ship with 3-4 bombs at low level during a fast pass....and at least one would, by definition, be close enough to ONE side of the merchant ship to stave in its single skin of iron plates!

 

Recall a sailors written memory of being shadowed/attacked while on convoy duty by an anti-ship missile wielding Condor. That technology was very new back in the day. ..He was terrified (I'm sure) and the Condor, with it's stand off capability, seemed like the ultimate WW2 weapon upon reading that account back in the 70's...I also wondered, back then, why the Germans never used the 4 engined Condor to take the fight to America...Now I know better.

 

The condor was a recon airplane and not designed for bombing. It could carry some bombs. The main issue with the anti ship missile was it required the bomber to stand and guide the target making it very vulnerable

 

it was an anti-ship A/C first and foremost being fased out by the Ju 290 read my above posts please............

 

I think the story of the Kondor highlights just how desperately the Luftwaffe needed larger, longer ranged aircraft to fulfill various roles. Kondors should have been restricted from the outset to flying distinguished personages from point to point. They could have stripped the thing of unnecessary weight to stretch the range and airspeed, and used it only in controlled airspace.

The very fact so many were pressed into service speaks volumes for the shortcomings of production for the Luftwaffe, rather than anything special about the Kondor's themselves.

For Churchill to call the impact these aircraft had on the war "a scourge" is indicative of how desperate Britain was to avoid losses in this area of the war, rather than a testimonial to the performance of the said Kondors.