Quote:
Originally Posted by odybvig
Well you both denying the obvious fact. One BMW and one Jumo engine on this bird. Sorry guys. Photo don't lie
|
Err... no. Only trying be polite and explaining; using "findings" from my own research. Also you have not stated one practical reason to have different types of engines on this plane. Also how many Jumo 213 A-1s had been produced in April 1944? Very few, and the Ju 188 A-2/D-2 (Jumo 213 A-1) were only starting to appear from the production lines. And did 1.(F)/120 get Jumo 213 A-1´s equipped Ju 188´s in April 1944. No. They only got the first (two) Ju 188 D-2 two~three months later (and one Ju 188 F-1 assigned from other unit on dates 23/24.07.1944, see below). Besides comparing this "loss" against other known losses, I tend to think the Ju 188 F-1 2802xx (A6)+CH accident was in May 1944, not April.
http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/aufkl/b1ag120.html
RL 2 III/619 (Image 012 - Dayly aircraft assignments to the Air Fleets)
http://i44.tinypic.com/63r3ur.jpg
Only instance´s I remember of different types of engines on Ju 88/188/388 family is having a additional Jumo slung under the fuselage - i.e. when on Jumo 004 jet-engine testing. And no, I have no referances to the designation Ju 88/3m ;-)
Frankly, I do not see different engines on that picture, quite the contrary. As ClinA-78 points out: The plane has
bent VDM props (Aluminum) and has Cooling-Fans
on both engines, whereas the Jumo 213 A-1 did not have these cooling fans, and VS 111 Wood-prop blades were much "thicker" in appearance, and these usually did break on swing/groundloop like this.
Regards
-Ed