Use of Ju 90

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Luftwaffe air units and general discussions on the Luftwaffe.
Post Reply
User avatar
BDV
Member
Posts: 3704
Joined: 10 Apr 2009, 17:11

Use of Ju 90

#1

Post by BDV » 27 Jul 2014, 14:09

I was wondering what were the reasons for limited Luftwaffe use of the Ju 90.

While "Tante" Ju 52 is obviously much more rugged, the significantly higher carrying capacity of the Ju 90 and the faster speed make it superior for airdrops and transport to concrete runway airfields.

So why was Ju 90 underutilized?
Nobody expects the Fallschirm! Our chief weapon is surprise; surprise and fear; fear and surprise. Our 2 weapons are fear and surprise; and ruthless efficiency. Our *3* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency; and almost fanatical devotion

RandJS
Member
Posts: 324
Joined: 04 Oct 2008, 12:36

Re: Use of Ju 90

#2

Post by RandJS » 27 Jul 2014, 14:17

IMHO--Limited quantities of Ju 90 available (>18) vs. 4850 Ju 52.
Limited quantities of forward concrete runway airfields.

Hope this helps.
Rand


User avatar
BDV
Member
Posts: 3704
Joined: 10 Apr 2009, 17:11

Re: Use of Ju 90

#3

Post by BDV » 27 Jul 2014, 15:38

RandJS wrote:IMHO--Limited quantities of Ju 90 available (>18) vs. 4850 Ju 52.
Hence my question, why did the Wehrmacht/RLM not care for a plane that could carry 4 times the load, faster?

Limited quantities of forward concrete runway airfields.
That don't matter for airdrops, and for those spots with concrete airfields - a logistics bonanza!

P.S.
Does the 4850 figure double count the rebuilds?
Nobody expects the Fallschirm! Our chief weapon is surprise; surprise and fear; fear and surprise. Our 2 weapons are fear and surprise; and ruthless efficiency. Our *3* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency; and almost fanatical devotion

RandJS
Member
Posts: 324
Joined: 04 Oct 2008, 12:36

Re: Use of Ju 90

#4

Post by RandJS » 03 Aug 2014, 22:10

Hi,
Sorry for the late reply. I just added the post quickly, taking the figures from World War II Airplanes, Volume 1, Rand McNally Guide.
(As I said, a quick post!)

Rand

User avatar
Maxschnauzer
Financial supporter
Posts: 6003
Joined: 24 Jan 2014, 08:36
Location: Philippines

Re: Use of Ju 90

#5

Post by Maxschnauzer » 04 Aug 2014, 04:37

It may have been a matter of priorities. It was my impression that the resources of the Ju 90 program were fairly quickly absorbed into development of the Ju 290 which is why so few were produced, as Rand stated. Curiously only 65 Ju 290's were produced! They may have felt that they could "get by" with the Ju 52 which was a proven warhorse.

FYI Here is a table comparing the performance specs of the Ju 52 and Ju 90:
Source: http://www.lonesentry.com/manuals/airbo ... rison.html
Ju 52 vs Ju 90.jpg
Cheers,
Max

User avatar
Cantankerous
Member
Posts: 1277
Joined: 01 Sep 2019, 22:22
Location: Newport Coast

Re: Use of Ju 90

#6

Post by Cantankerous » 22 Sep 2023, 18:34

Maxschnauzer wrote:
04 Aug 2014, 04:37
It may have been a matter of priorities. It was my impression that the resources of the Ju 90 program were fairly quickly absorbed into development of the Ju 290 which is why so few were produced, as Rand stated. Curiously only 65 Ju 290's were produced! They may have felt that they could "get by" with the Ju 52 which was a proven warhorse.

FYI Here is a table comparing the performance specs of the Ju 52 and Ju 90:
Source: http://www.lonesentry.com/manuals/airbo ... rison.html

Ju 52 vs Ju 90.jpg
The Ju 90's fuselage wasn't wide enough to carry most of the German Army's most advanced fighting vehicles. The Messerschmitt Me 321 and Me 323 constituted the Luftwaffe's true means of heavy-lift capability because they could carry a far bigger military payload than the Ju 90.

Post Reply

Return to “Luftwaffe air units and Luftwaffe in general”