Commentary on relative performance by
Captain Eric M. Brown, RN
So
what makes this CFS aircraft unique and worthy of your hangar?
Time for that cup of coffee or tea again!
Once upon a time, not so long ago, I took a good look around to
see what CFS German bombers might be available which would be suitable for the
bomber run scenarios which have become increasingly popular for multiplayer
missions within the CFS community.
There are some examples out there, but I felt there was
need for a specific kind of bomber unseen by me, at least!
To be suitable for this application, the bomber must be
“authentic,” and yet comparable in performance to the popular RAF bombers
recently introduced and gaining in popularity.
The aircraft should not fly so fast as to be very difficult to
catch by the Allied fighters currently in widespread use. Yet it should be fast enough to give them a
good run for their money! It should be
more agile than a heavy bomber, but it most definitely should not handle like a
single-engine fighter.
And it must be fun to fly!
All of the above lead me to the Junkers Ju 188E-1
Well I found a reasonably good airframe (MDL) to work with. I animated what I could, which was only the
flaps and landing gear. Thank you
Konstantin Kukushkin!
For whatever reason, the German bomber has been neglected so far
as artists with Aircraft Factory 99 capability is concerned. Aside from the paint job, there isn’t a lot
of typical JamCraft “eye candy” in this bird.
Still, I think you will be pleased with the result.
The Damage Profile was designed from the “ground up” by yours
truly. You are going to surprise a few
virtual pilots who come up on your six while flying this aircraft! The single nose cannon is pretty effective
as well.
I redid the damage boxes to be vaguely consistent with a G4m1
Betty or a B-25 Mitchell, similar size and purpose aircraft sculpting them as
necessary.
The Flight Dynamics were done largely from the ground up as
well. I started with a Bruno Duffort
“Betty” air file, because I know very little about propeller characteristics at
this point and he recommended my starting with his work. All the appropriate static parameters were
changed and I installed the BMW 801D-2 engines as furnished with the stock
Microsoft Fw-190a (A8) aircraft.
That was only the beginning, as many hours of work and tuning were
required to get a near-perfect speed at altitude curve with appropriate climb
rate.
A lot of testing was done by the Chaps Squadron Test Pilot Team
and most especially, Greg Armstrong,
CH_LoneGunman. Thanks also to
CH_ Red_One , CH_Arkangel and CH_Avenger.
The result of all our work is now on your hard disk drive.
Please take the additional time required to read the background
information and the credits. A hearty “Thank
you” from me to the other fine artists whose products were used in this
project. I would greatly appreciate
your reading the Credits and Copyright section.
German Bombers – A Background Discussion
Ever wonder why there were so very few heavy German
bombers during WW II when compared with the big four-engine Allied bombers – at
least until the war was nearly at an end?
The bombers that were available to Germany at the outbreak of the war were an expression of the philosophy of the pre-war military leadership and this philosophy and direction remained in effect until it was virtually too late to change it.
The
Germans favored the tactical over the strategic throughout the war. Some of the reasons for this emphasis and
its consequences are contained in the following discussion.
Based
upon experience gained during WW I and later during the Spanish Civil War, the
Germans had developed the “Schlacht” concept.
The aircraft were to be used to support the advance of ground troops and
consequently were built to carry automatic weapons and small bombs. A primary specification that survived well
into World War II, was that a German bomber must be a dive bomber.
It
was a cousin of The Red Baron, Oberst Wolfram von Rictofen, who carried this
bias into 1937 when he recommended concentration on the development of ground
attack aircraft. At the outbreak of the war, Germany was focused on these
Schlacht oriented designs.
Back
in 1936, a visionary named Oberst Walther Wever began to shift bomber
development and production to the long-range strategic bomber in the form of
the Do 19 and Ju 89, unfortunately for Germany, he was killed in an accident
and his replacement, General Albert Kesselring cancelled both heavy four-engine
projects due to shortages in production engines and reverted to the medium
bomber concept.
Back
to the pre - 1936 specification!
So
then, the German bomber should be a relatively short-range aircraft aimed at
cowing Germany’s immediate neighbors.
With
these short-term goals in mind, please excuse the pun, four design goals
emerged prior to the war.
The
order of priority was bomb load, speed, defensive armament and range. Three designs were seen to have met these
goals: the Dornier Do 17, Heinkel He
111 and the Junkers Ju-86, the Junkers later pulled due to the unreliability of
its diesel engines.
If
the Germans did not anticipate the need for heavy long-range bombers soon
enough, they did lead the way in perception that bombers must be all-weather
aircraft, reflecting the earlier vision of Milch, at the head of Lufthansa
Airlines. So every Luftwaffe aircraft
had radio direction finding equipment and an extensive network of beacons
existed throughout pre-war Germany.
There had to be room for the pilots and a navigator and then a gunner or
two as well.
The
RAF on the other hand, were slow to establish a beacon network and to provide
RDF equipment and trained navigators.
Part
of the explanation of the requirement for dive-bombing capability stems from the
rather poor bombsite technology of the time.
The later “heavy” bomber requirement still expressed the need for
dive-bombing, but with a heavier bomb load.
This capability had to be retained in the Ju-87 design and in the later
Ju-88, Do 217 and even the four-engine He 177.
It
was the requirement that the aircraft must be able to attack at a dive angle of
60 degrees that probably plagued the German heavy bomber development more than
any other single factor.
Although
Goering had cancelled that requirement for the He 177, his orders never made it
through Udet to the engineering level – as incredible as that may seem! Even in 1939, the dive-bombing requirement
was only suspended for certain aircraft such as the Do 217.
Another
pre-war concept that made it into the design specification for the World War II
period was the dual role requirement for the bombers to also be reconnaissance
aircraft. For this reason, most German
bombers retained the “greenhouse” look to the cockpit design. So long as the German bomber could outpace
the enemy fighter of the day, this was not to be a problem. As the Allies modernized their fighter force
by mid-war, the German bomber became extremely challenged by the faster enemy
fighters.
The greatest victim of this dilemma was the Do 17. Eventually it could neither outrun nor outfight its adversaries.
We
will save a discussion of the origin of the specification for the Bf-110 and
the state of affairs of the German fighter force to another time and
place. It’s an interesting story in
itself.
After
the Battle of Britain, the Luftwaffe learned a powerful lesson. They needed faster bombers with better
protection and they needed more fighters with greater range.
The
result of the lack of proper aircraft capability resulted in the changeover
from daytime bombing to night attacks, often with unsustainable losses due to
increased accident rates.
I
know what you are thinking by now! Hey
Joe, when are you going to tell me about the Junkers Ju-188 E-1? We’re getting there!
While Goering had professed a belief in the He 177
heavy bomber concept and the high-speed Me 210 as early as 1939, he
consistently ordered production of the pre-existing types and their
upgrades. This meant the Do 17 and the
Do 217 improved variant and the Ju 88 and the Ju 188, its improved
descendent. Only Heinkel was able to
develop a new “heavy,” the He 177, but was only able to deliver 261 units
before the Krupp works of Essen were destroyed.
By
this point in time, the RAF had managed 330 Lancasters, 237 Wellingtons, 214
Hallifaxes, 147 Short Sterlings and 74 Mosquitos in its Squadrons.
The Ju 188E-1
As
indicated during the background discussion, the Ju 188 was to be an updated and
more effective replacement for the Ju 88.
It had a larger crew compartment, more efficient wings and a new tail
design. Because the newer and more
powerful Jumo 213 engines were not ready, the Ju 188 was introduced employing
the BMW 801D-2 rotary engines which developed 1700 horsepower at an altitude of
19,685 feet while achieving a speed of 315 MPH.
The
early Ju 188 was the E-1 version as represented in this Combat Flight Simulator
aircraft package. By mid 1943, 120 E-1s
were built as well as some E-2 reconnaissance aircraft and a few “F” models
before the first Ju 188A series came out with the Jumo engines.
E-1
Specifications:
Empty
Weight: 21,825 lbs.
Loaded
Weight: 31,967 lbs.
Bomb
Weight: 6,614 lbs.
Armament: Nose Cannon; MG 151/20 20 mm
cannon
Dorsal Turret;
MG 151/20 20 mm cannon
Dorsal Fixed; MG
131/13 13 mm machine gun
Ventral; single
MG131/13 (alternatively, two MG 81 7.92 mm)
Dimensions: span 72 feet, 2 inches; length 49
feet, 1 inch; height 16 feet.
Performance: 315 MPH at 29,685 feet; Service
ceiling at 31,170 feet.
A
total of 120 Ju 188E-1s were produced with the BMW engines and a few additional
Ju 188E-2 reconnaissance aircraft and a few “F” series.
As
the Jumo 213 engine became ready, The Ju 188A series made it debut. Approximately 1100 Ju 188 series were produced
in all, ending with the high-speed Ju 188S series capable of 435 MPH, some
aircraft having remote controlled tail guns as well.
Although
nightfighter versions were planned, only night reconnaissance aircraft were
delivered. There were no successful
nightfighter variants put into service.
Bibliography – Source
Material:
Historical
material on the background of the German bomber campaign came from Aircraft
of the Second Word War by Philip Jarrett.
Specifications
and additional material came from Fighting Aircraft of World War II by
Bill Gunston.
Comparative
anecdotal information from Duels in the Sky by Captain Eric M. Brown, RN
Web-based information:
Lots of good information; follow the link below:
http://cbr.nc.us.mensa.org/homepages/hzoe/ju_aircf.htm
On
the Junkers Ju 88 series:
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/ju88g7.html
and
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/ju88c6.html
The
Warbirds Resource Group Luftwaffe page is located at:
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/index.html
Visit
the Superb website maintained by the Combat Flight Simulator Enthusiasts of the
Nachtjagdgeschwader 7 or NG-7 uns gehoert die nacht (We have heard the call of the night?) at:
http://www.combatflight.de/7th/
and
the Luftwaffe Resource page at:
http://home4.inet.tele.dk/mholm/
Copyright Information and Credits:
The
black and white photograph has been used by permission of the Simviation site
management and is from a collection of Charles Bain. Please see:
http://www.simviation.com/index.htm
Fine
Flight Simulator and CFS add-ons of all sorts may be found on this wonderful
site!
At
the time of introduction of this package, I have been unable to determine the identity
of the creator of this mdl file. It may
have been done by Chris Lampard? If
anyone can help in the origin, I would appreciate it greatly. It is always my intention to credit the
artist or originator and to respect all copyright restrictions.
The Flight Model, Damage
Profile and the Texture Art.
The
flight model (Ju188E-1.air), the Damage Profile (Ju188E-1.dp) and the textures
are owned by the author, J. P. Amodea and may not be used or combined in any
other way except by express permission of the author.
Animated
gear and flaps by Joe Amodea using Aircraft Animator by Konstantin Kukushkin.
The
sound files are copyrighted by Mike Hambly and were originally intended for the
Jumo engines. They add a distinctive “flavor”
or feel to the aircraft as a whole.
Mike is a flight simulator sound file artist of the highest caliber and
most of his sound packages can be found at www.flightsim.com.
The
high visibility panel included in this package was done for this aircraft
specifically by yours truly, J. P. Amodea.
It would be equally suitable for any Ju 88/188 series aircraft. I have attempted to cause the panel to “feel
vaguely authentic” to the Junkers in terms of visibility and some of the gauge
placement. I have compromised by adding
some modern instrumentation, including an autopilot and omni bearing indicator
to facilitate on line or multiplayer bomber scenarios.
If
you should desire to use this panel for a Jumo-engined aircraft, you will need
to substitute a throttle-mixture-prop lever arrangement in place of the thrust
levers that are appropriate to the “E-1.”
Thanks
to much help received from Doug Attrell over at Simviation, the panel is now “3D.” I was unaware of the “2D” versus “3D” issue
until Doug was kind enough to give me a primer and then help me get it
right. Essentially, a “3D” panel is not
really three-dimensional, of course.
Instead, it uses the video 3D rendering capability to dramatically speed
up the video processing when you alter the view. If you press the “W” key, the “S” key or toggle views with the “HAT.”
The responsiveness from a 3D panel is virtually instantaneous. With a 2D panel there is lag - and very
considerable lag from slower processors and systems with “average” video cards. With 2D there is also a tendency for black
bands to appear while changing views. I
am a convert!
A
text file is included which discusses credits for the gauges.
If
true authentic photorealism is what you crave, I suggest that you obtain a very
fine panel done by Michael Vader of Pegasus Aviation Design entitled “Real Ju
188 Panel. The package can be found at www.flightsim.com. The panel is based closely on photographs of
a Ju 188 cockpit. The identity of this
file is rju188pn.zip.
Simply unzip the package directly into your MS Combat Flight Simulator aircraft folder if you have not already done so!
After
doing the above, you will need locate the gauges_188_3D.zip
file and unzip the gauges directly into your Combat Flight Simulator gauges
folder. This folder is usually found
in:
C:\Program
files\Microsoft Games\Combat Flight Simulator\gauges.
That’s
it! Enjoy!
It
is certainly my intention to completely respect the rights of all creators and
authors. Any possible violation of any
copyright is unintentional.
I
have been reasonably diligent in testing this package and I believe no harm
will be done to your computer if you use it.
However, use at your own risk!
I
accept no liability whatsoever for any problem that may be experienced upon use
of this product!
Now,
by all means, enjoy yourself!
Joe
Amodea
CH_Jam
February,
2000
There
may be an upgrade package for this aircraft in the future or I may reissue it
as version 2.0. If this is the case,
why not wait a bit; why issue version 1.0 at all?
Issues
that may require an upgrade or reissue:
At
the time that this aircraft package was issued, the original author of the MDL
was unknown to me, though I suspect the model was done by Chris Lampard. I cannot consult with someone whose identity
is uncertainn, but consultation is my desire.
If I can obtain the original afx files for this model, I would like to
try my hand at animating the rudder, ailerons and elevator control
surfaces. If it is not too daunting, I
may also like to try my hand at putting some real glass in the cockpit and
turret. So this is an open question
then as of March, 2000.
Second Issue, flight dynamics or air file.
This
is my first “scratch built” air file.
Although I began by basing some of the parameters on a Bruno Duffort
G4M1 “Betty” file and I had a lot of help directly and indirectly from Gregory
Pierson and Pentti Kurkinen, and although there was really extensive
pre-release testing on the part of the CHAPS Flight Test Team, I still believe
there may be room for improvement.
I
believe most of the static parameters, engine parameters, drag settings and
overall performance to be “spot on,” or I would not release the aircraft. I know the climb rate is reasonable and the
speed at altitude curve is as good in terms of accuracy as the better CFS
aircraft out there. After all, I have
had help from the best.
But
there is subjectivity in the roll rate and rate of turn. There almost always is anyway.
I
have located some extensive documentation on German aircraft, but have not
received or reviewed much of this as yet, and upon review and further input
from CFS pilots who come to fly this aircraft, I may adjust these two
performance factors.
So
how did I determine rate of turn and roll rate to begin with in the absence of
good information?
I
was subjective to be sure.
I
examined two aircraft closely. I
examined Bruno Duffort’s B-25c Mitchell and I examined the RAF-662 Bristol
Beaufighter. Originally I thought I
would make the aircraft less maneuverable than the Beaufighter and about the
same as the Mitchell.
Couldn’t
do that!
The
Mitchell is more maneuverable than the Beaufighter, so possibly one is off
relative to the other.
For
now, I have chosen to make the Junkers more maneuverable than the Beaufighter,
but less maneuverable than the B-25c Mitchell.
It may not be perfect, but it is a good place to start and it may be a
good place to finish as well. The plane
has to be fun to fly. It must be less
maneuverable than any single-engine fighter and about as maneuverable as an
average medium bomber. I think I
accomplished this? I invite input from
you!
The
comments of Captain Eric M. Brown concerning the Ju 88 would tend to indicate
that the aircraft was relatively maneuverable.
The
only color photographic evidence I have of a Ju 188 at this time is actually a
Ju 188D-2. The markings here are of
that D-2 which was based in Norway and used in a reconnaissance role. If I obtain good information on an
historical E-1, the reissue is virtually guaranteed with the other Issues being
covered at the time as well.
Summary:
A
reissue may be likely in the future if all of the above “planets” align to
prompt me to do so. But I think I have
produced a fine CFS aircraft package as it is and I hope you do agree with me. By all means let me know!
Joe
Amodea, March 9, 2000.
Version
1.1
If
you haven’t read Eric Brown’s Duels in the Sky as yet, you had better
get to it! Very readable and full of commentary
on the relative performance World War II aircraft – emphasis on naval equipment
- supported by some hard evidence and coupled with a good helping of creative
speculation.
Here
are a couple of direct quotations:
“Once
airborne, the Ju 88A-4 handled beautifully, with rudder and ailerons light
throughout the entire speed range.”
And
later: “The Ju88A-4 was an aircraft that fulfilled multifarious roles and
excelled in all of them.”
When
comparing the Junkers with the Fairey Fulmar
. . .
“The
Ju 88A-4 was one of the outstanding aircraft of World War II and as a bomber
had a speed comparable to that of contemporary fighters. It was also well armed and maneuverable for
its size.”
Here
is Brown’s assessment of a match-up between the Ju-88A-4 and the Hawker Sea
Hurricane:
“Here
the situation was similar to the previous one [Sea Hurricane versus a
Messerschmitt 110C] except that the Ju 88A-4 was better armed for rear
defense. Consequently a head-on or beam
attack would be the best tactic for the Hurricane. With almost the maneuverability of a fighter, the Ju 88A-4 could
make things difficult for the Hurricane, but the outcome was weighted in the
latter’s favor, provided it kept out of the astern cone of the bomber’s fire.
Verdict: The Hurricane had a good edge over the Ju
88A-4, but not as much as it had over the Me 110C.”
Bear in mind that the Ju 88 was less powerful
than the Ju 188 and consequently had a slower climb rate and slower top speed.
1
– It is relatively fast for a bomber and will give the fighters a run for their
money, but the Spitfires and the Mustangs will catch it. They’ll have to work!
2
– It has a real nasty surprise in store for anyone who comes up behind it
provided that the pilot practices using the rear armament coupled with the
turret view. The 20 mm nose cannon is
not too shabby either.
3
– It handles reasonably well for a bomber.
4
– It comes equipped with a really fine high visibilty “3D” panel that should
make it fun to fly continually in the cockpit mode.
5
– There are wonderful engine sounds as furnished by Mike Hambly.
So
enjoy!