B-25 vs. Ju-88

Twitch · 06-30-2006, 12:46 PM

If it's of any use in ballistics the 12.7 mm X 99 M2 had a 48.5 gram projectile that fired at 750 RPM and 870 meters per second muzzle velocity. The MG 131 was 13mm X 64 with a 34 gram bullet at 900 RPM and going 730 m/s at muzzle.

How about the Japanese "50s" which have even better stats?
Ho-103 (Type 1) 12.7 x 81 (38 g) 900 rpm 796 m/s
Type 2 13 x 64B (34 g) 900 rpm 720 m/s
Type 3 13.2 x 99 (52 g) 800 rpm 790 m/s

Soren · 06-30-2006, 01:10 PM

Twitch, the MG131's 34 gram HE round did 750m/s...

Jank · 06-30-2006, 01:51 PM

Soren, it's a little ridiculous to be raising a difference of 20 meters per second (about 65 feet per second).

Truth be told, if you were to take two brand new MG131's right off the factory line and shot them across chronographs, you would likely see similar velocity differences. One might be avweraging 720ms and the other might be averaging 750 ms.

The same holds true for sporting rifles which are manufactured with much tighter tolerances and quality control than mass produced, get them out as quick as you can, military arms.

I have read tests of two brand new 30/06 Remington rifles (same model) shoot with an average of about 40 feet per second difference.

There are also variations in the quality of ammunition rounds. A 30/06 rifle might experience a standard deviation of 25 feet per second from bullet to bullet from the very same box of ammunition. Sporting (hunting) ammunition is of very high quality compared to military ammunition even today let alone back in WWII.

Ever so slight variations in the chamber, throat, rifling, and barrel cause such differences in velocity when a cartridge sends a projectile out of the barrel in front of more than 50,000 psi of pressure.

Erich · 06-30-2006, 01:57 PM

Jank what fg does your Jug represent ?, name and the art on the cowling ?

nice touch !

Soren · 06-30-2006, 04:08 PM

Jank,

No its not ridiculous, its another 20m pr. sec.

Also if the weapons are made with the same tools and with the exact same specifications, then whatever deviation that might occur during firing is 99% contributed by the fired round itself. Relatively large variations in V0 caused by the weapons themselves occur only when we're talking two different made weapons, otherwise its ammo-inconsistency. (Or a faulty barrel ofcourse, but then you'll notice real quick cause then either accuracy will be appalling or the v0 will be really low !)

I have two K98k's myself, made in different factories in different years, and loaded with full power ammunition from S&B they don't ever vary more than 10 m/s between each other(Atleast I haven't experienced more than that the many time I've had them chrono'ed), and usually they don't vary at all really -there being only 1-3m/s between them.

So if there's a deviation from the official figure, which was the measured average for German weaponry back then (and still is), then its 99% ammo-inconsistency.

davparlr · 06-30-2006, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erich

at night ? ........... nope ! during the winter of early 44 daylight raids, yes, NJG 2 and 3 Ju 88C's were lost attacking B-17 formations.

your comments are noted, and my first statements STAND, bomber or recon Ju 88 vs B-25 Mitchell

That is a very good question since both of these planes were adapted to so many different missions. I tended to keep my research to bomber vs. bomber since comparison data is more handily available. Most other missions don't match up so well like the B-25 was not used as a night fighter (not due to lack of capability but rather to lack of need) or dive bomber (I'm not sure the Ju-88 was great at this anyway). However, the B-25 and Ju-88 did have an antishipping mission and I am interested in tonnage destroyed by each. Also, loss per mission on antishipping runs would also be interesting. Also, ground attack capability of both could be compared as both had success. The fact that both of these planes were so adaptable and capable, which made them great, inspires great discussions and debate.

Glider · 06-30-2006, 04:46 PM

I am wondering at some of the statements made in this forum in particular the concept of a B25 landing on a carrier without any arrestor gear. Landing a spit on the wasp was considered close to a miracle and it stopped I think it was 40 ft from the Bows. This was an RAF spit bound for Malta that had a fault with the drop tank.
Trying to do that with a B25 which is many times heavier and comes in much faster would be a one way trip into the ocean. Does anyone have any evidence to back up the claim.

The other statement that because the Ju88 didn't fight in the Pacific it couldn't of done I also find a little suprising. As far as I know and to the best of my recollection the Germans were not at war with Japan and had enough US and UK aircraft to fight on their own doorstep.

I suspect the Japs would have loved to have some JU88's in 1941. By Jap standards it was fast well protected and carried a large bombload.

Could a stripped down Ju88 take off from a carrier. Of course it could. It was lighter, had a better wing loading and a shorter take off run.

I have to agree with FJ in that the cockpit of the Ju88 was a bit of a mess. Most German twins from the early war period had messy cockpits. The 110 had some of the engine instruments mounted on the engine and the 111 was all over the place.

Erich · 06-30-2006, 05:04 PM

the Ju 88 cockpit was crap and crowded according to the Luftw. vets.

as to anti-shipping missions, Chris Goss dual book through Classic Pubs is a nice way to go although deliberately brief in it's concept. he has tons of stuff on anti-shipping for the Luftwaffe which I have tried to "push" him in that direction for a much larger work(s)

if anything the Ju 88 in it's later variants proved to be a skilled recon and of course the G was the ideal N.F. platform for the Luftw useage agasint the RAF, all other German proposals for night fighters were failures by 1945, even the proven Bf 110G-4 was being phased out with units other than NJG 1

Jank · 06-30-2006, 06:20 PM

Erich, it is Capt. Earl Miller's mount. 350th FG, 345th FS "Devilhawks" stationed in Italy.

Soren said, "Also if the weapons are made with the same tools and with the exact same specifications, then whatever deviation that might occur during firing is 99% contributed by the fired round itself."

No, you are wrong. Any variatons due to ammunition alone (99%)would not consistently favor one gun (1%) over another to the degree it does. Think about it.

"(At least I haven't experienced more than that the many time I've had them chrono'ed), and usually they don't vary at all really -there being only 1-3m/s between them."

With all due respect Soren, you are full of ****! Only 3 to 9 feet per second difference between the two? The standard deviation (SD) for the ammunition is much greater than that.

Do you know how the standard deviation is calculated in a statistical analysis? Even if the velocity differences attributed only to the guns amounted to 3-9 fps, a SD in the ammunition of even 25 feet per second would require you to fire and record the velocities of more than 100 rounds in each gun in order to factor it out. You do understand that don't you?

Something tells me that you have not undertaken such a experiment.

BTW - What the Hell is "full power ammunition"? As opposed to what? Do you know what the SAAMI specs are for the 8x57? (chuckling at Soren trying to sound like he knows what he's talking about)

syscom3 · 06-30-2006, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glider

I am wondering at some of the statements made in this forum in particular the concept of a B25 landing on a carrier without any arrestor gear. Landing a spit on the wasp was considered close to a miracle and it stopped I think it was 40 ft from the Bows. This was an RAF spit bound for Malta that had a fault with the drop tank.
Trying to do that with a B25 which is many times heavier and comes in much faster would be a one way trip into the ocean. Does anyone have any evidence to back up the claim.

In 1992 I talked with some of the Doolittle raiders at a print signing ceremony and one of them mentioned that there was an idea of flying them back to the carrier. Of course an arresting hook would have been needed. Nothing complex about installing one.

Quote:

The other statement that because the Ju88 didn't fight in the Pacific it couldn't of done I also find a little suprising. As far as I know and to the best of my recollection the Germans were not at war with Japan and had enough US and UK aircraft to fight on their own doorstep.

I didnt say it couldnt be done. I just said that liquid cooled engines have a tendency to get damaged at the very low levels they would have een expected to fight at. And then couple it with the long ranges it would have to fly back home to and the loss rate would have gone up.

Quote:

I suspect the Japs would have loved to have some JU88's in 1941. By Jap standards it was fast well protected and carried a large bombload.

The Japanese were more than happy with their aircraft in 1941

Quote:

Could a stripped down Ju88 take off from a carrier. Of course it could. It was lighter, had a better wing loading and a shorter take off run.

But did it have the acceleration required? What about being a tail dragger? That slows a plane down for a bit.

Soren · 06-30-2006, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jank

No, you are wrong. Any variatons due to ammunition alone (99%)would not consistently favor one gun (1%) over another to the degree it does. Think about it.

What gun are you talking about ?? And what ammunition ??

Quote:

With all due respect Soren, you are full of ****! Only 3 to 9 feet per second difference between the two? The standard deviation (SD) for the ammunition is much greater than that.

Why thank you Jank for that first remark of yours, I suggest you go try it though!

Try shooting the 8x57IS round from S&B, 5-10 at a time, record the results - there's nearly no difference! Or if your good at handloads that could be an option as-well...

Quote:

Do you know how the standard deviation is calculated in a statistical analysis? Even if the velocity differences attributed only to the guns amounted to 3-9 fps, a SD in the ammunition of even 25 feet per second would require you to fire and record the velocities of more than 100 rounds in each gun in order to factor it out. You do understand that don't you?

Something tells me that you have not undertaken such a experiment.

I didn't say I did scientific study did I now ?

All I'm saying is the V0 hasn't varied more than 10 m/s between my two guns during any chronograph test of mine, and *why* is simple - they are of the EXACT same design and specifications.

The S.D. of the S&B 196gr round is around 11 fps. - This is for properly stored ammunition however I feel I must add.

Quote:

BTW - What the Hell is "full power ammunition"? As opposed to what? Do you know what the SAAMI specs are for the 8x57? (chuckling at Soren trying to sound like he knows what he's talking about)

Hahaha !

You mean you don't know oh wise gun-expert ??

+50,000 CUP, std.German military load my friend, try it ! Heck it'll even go higher than a 30.06 at the top ! So scrap those pussie SAAMI loads !

A 12.8 gram projectile will hit around 795-800 m/s through the Karabiner Kurz at that pressure, now thats smoken !

Make sure its not a 1888 Mauser model you're firing the full-power 8mm ammunition through however, or it'll blow your face off - there's a reason SAAMI loads are so low, there's allot of dumb folks out there...

Jank · 06-30-2006, 08:59 PM

Soren,

The 99% figure came from you as in "Also if the weapons are made with the same tools and with the exact same specifications, then whatever deviation that might occur during firing is 99% contributed by the fired round itself."

So what gun and ammunition were you referring to? Sounds like you were making a sort of blanket statement in general.

I do handload. I have a Springfield M1A and an Armalite AR-15 and handload for both. I also handload for .45ACP and 12 GA shotgun.

"All I'm saying is the V0 hasn't varied more than 10 m/s between my two guns during any chronograph test of mine"

You said that "usually they don't vary at all really -there being only 1-3m/s between them."

I think usually means most of the time as in 10m/s would be out of the norm from the usual 1-3 m/s. As I have already said, you are full of crap. Since we're on the subject of crap though, where did you get your 11 fps SD on the 196 gr load at 2,600 fps -- cause that's crap too.

50,000cup is no different than a 30/06. The case capacity of the 8X57 is 5 grains less than the 30/06. No, it won't "go higher" than a 30/06. The limiting factor is the strength of the action and not the cartridge.

As you may know (although we both know you don't), the hotter you load a cartridge, the more radical the SD becomes. Again, you are full of **** if you are saying that your 2,600 foot per second load at 50,000cup is varying by only 11 feet per second.

Soren, why don't you just admit that you have never fired a real gun and at any rate, don't own a chronograph and don't handload.

lesofprimus · 06-30-2006, 10:30 PM

That last statement was alittle steep Jank... Ease up a bit and try to converse it through...

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 07-01-2006, 05:38 AM

Good post up there Glider and I agree with you on everything.

I too am interesting in Ju-88 shipping tonnage as well as B-25. I know that info is out there somewhere, maybe someone has it.

wmaxt · 07-01-2006, 12:37 PM

Actualy the B-25 could and did land on an aircraft carrier. The Navy did tests of several aircraft including B-25s for arrested landing trial and cat shots. The B-25s did great except for one occasion where the pilots seat was not locked and the seat moved during the launch.

I belive it was R Lenard who posted those pictures, and they are on this forum.

BTW: a C-130 was also landed WITHOUT arresting gear on a carrier (the Oriskany, I think) in the early '60s.

wmaxt