 | B-25 vs. Ju-88| Aviation Discuss B-25 vs. Ju-88 in the World War II - Aviation forums; A quick check of the specifications reveals these to were pretty close.... |
|
06-26-2006, 01:56 AM
|
#1 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 151
| B-25 vs. Ju-88
A quick check of the specifications reveals these to were pretty close. | 
|  | |
06-26-2006, 05:16 AM
|
#2 | | Master of Ewes
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19,959
Country:  | this's a very odd comparison? in what way do you mean? if they were dogfighting each other? or just comparing their stats in the bombing role? or the anti-shipping role? we're gonna need to know more about what you mean, however if it's a dogfight i'm gonna have to say Ju-88..........
__________________ 
"Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy." | |
| | |
06-26-2006, 05:30 AM
|
#3 | | Der Crewchief
Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 28,615
Country:  | These too aircraft were both very versatile but I think overall the Ju-88 has the edge. It is certainly one of the most versatile aircraft of WW2. If the two aircraft were to get into a Dogfight I would have to go with the Ju-88 as well. It was used as a night fighter and had experience in a fighter type role.
__________________  US Army Blackhawk Crewchief 2000-2006 Classic ww2aircraft.net quotes: fly boy said: "isn't that the first jet bomber? becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles" "wait what ok who made the b-2 crash come on people that messed up its a b-2" "ah yes the mistel those things are so annoying is games and in real life" | |
| | |
06-26-2006, 05:54 AM
|
#4 | | Master of Ewes
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 19,959
Country: | i don't think anyone can argue with the Ju-88 shooting the B-25 outta the sky... so what about say, anti-shipping? which would you back? do we go for a bog standard bomber 88 or soemthing with a large cannon or missiles?
__________________
"Reminds me of the time I sank the Tirpitz" comments a Spitfire pilot, "One pass of course, old boy." | |
| | |
06-26-2006, 09:54 AM
|
#5 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: City of the Angels California
Posts: 810
| The Ju 88 and the B-25 may have been equally versitle but the fact was exploited more so with the many variants of the Junkers.
__________________  | |
| | |
06-26-2006, 10:52 AM
|
#6 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 7,876
| I think the B25 gunship versions would be the one that could blow a JU88 out of the air. 10 .50's in the nose, two .50's's in the tail, two .50's in the upper turret and one .50 on each side would mean that no matter how well the -88 maneuvered (or where), someone on the B25 is going to get a shot at it.
They were two great medium bombers, but I would say the B25 had the edge on anti shipping and ground attack.
__________________
"Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?" | |
| | |
06-26-2006, 12:41 PM
|
#7 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Berlin (Kreuzberg)
Posts: 1,479
| The Ju-88 is a formidable anti shipping plane. One of the few to carry two torpedoes or a huge payload. But I think the B-25 carried at least some of the radar guided anti shipping missiles, didn´t they?
I am sure that the Ju-88 didn´t carry Fritz-X or Hs294 (He-177 and Do-217 did), so I would put it on a slight disadvantage here. Not decisively but worth to mention.
__________________
---delcyros--- | |
| | |
06-27-2006, 02:21 AM
|
#8 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 151
| They were both designed as medium level bombers, and comparing them as such reveals very similar performance. Both were to prove very versitle, the JU-88 being developed into night fighter and ground attack variants, and the B-25 as a ground attack and Navy patrol bomber. I believe there were instances of B-25's shooting down G4M and Ki-21 bombers. | |
| | |
06-27-2006, 02:33 AM
|
#9 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Texas
Posts: 970
Country:  | Probably, there were even reports of b-25's shooting down japanese fighters.
__________________ "I had ten rockets on board, and as I wasn't particularly fond of head-on attacks, I salvoed the whole lot at him. The rockets didn't hit him but but they must have scared the bejesus out of him, for he did a steep turn to starboard... I let him have the full blast, all eight fifty-calibers. I had never seen an aircraft completely disintegrate in the air the way this Me-110 did..."
Bill Dunn, 406th Fighter Group 
Matt | |
| | |
06-27-2006, 08:12 AM
|
#10 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Londonium
Posts: 610
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by Aggie08 Probably, there were even reports of b-25's shooting down japanese fighters. | Not surprising really with all that firepower including turrets and the Japanese fighters usually being contructed of petrol tanks wrapped with balsa wood and old newspapers. 
__________________
Never mistake knowledge for wisdom. One helps you make a living; the other helps you make a life. | |
| | |
06-27-2006, 11:58 AM
|
#11 | | Der Crewchief
Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 28,615
Country: | I think one would have to compare them in each roles and I think the Ju-88 has the B-25 in number of roles and most importanly maneuverability. So in that case teh Ju-88 wins.
I dont know if one can say the B-25 was better in the anti shipping roles. We would need statistics to prove this.
__________________ US Army Blackhawk Crewchief 2000-2006 Classic ww2aircraft.net quotes: fly boy said: "isn't that the first jet bomber? becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles" "wait what ok who made the b-2 crash come on people that messed up its a b-2" "ah yes the mistel those things are so annoying is games and in real life" | |
| | |
06-27-2006, 12:46 PM
|
#12 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,292
| Agreed Adler.
__________________  We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland | |
| | |
06-27-2006, 01:14 PM
|
#13 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 7,876
| The gunship B25's in the low level antishipping role would have the edge because of the massed .50's in the nose and the 75mm cannon.
I dont think the -88 had a weapons combo like that.
The -88 could carry torpedo's, but the Allies in the SW pacific found skip bombing to be more effective than torpedo attacks.
__________________
"Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?" | |
| | |
06-27-2006, 02:02 PM
|
#14 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,292
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by syscom3 The gunship B25's in the low level antishipping role would have the edge because of the massed .50's in the nose and the 75mm cannon. | Wasn't that the gun which would pull itself loose after just 1-2 shots, instantly rendering the weapon hopelessly inaccurate ? Quote: |
I dont think the -88 had a weapons combo like that.
| How about the Ju-88P-4 armed with one 75mm Pak40 anti-tank cannon plus or two 37mm Flak-38 cannons, or what about the G-1 armed with 6x20mm cannons, I'd say thats packing a punch ! Quote: |
The -88 could carry torpedo's, but the Allies in the SW pacific found skip bombing to be more effective than torpedo attacks.
| Allied torpedo's = crap.
Load up a Ju-88 with a T5 Zaunkönig torpedo and watch the fireworks!
__________________ We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland | |
| | |
06-27-2006, 02:15 PM
|
#15 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: London
Posts: 2,762
| I admit my vote is with the Ju88. | 
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:02 AM. | | |
