Aircraft I/D required (redux)

[s.hyder]

infact scrap that i think its a dornier 217 lads

[Graham Boak]

Two very definite statements without any explanation for either.

I'm pretty sure that it isn't a Do217, because (I think) it lacks both the airbrake/airbrake stub mounting or the fairly sharp keel - although the photo isn't clear in this area. It may be a Do17 - the twin leg mounting for the undercarriage rules out a Bf110. The number does rather rule out any Luftwaffe combat type - somewhere I have the book on Yugoslavian Do17s so I shall have to dig it out to see if I can find a match. Edit: OK, the Yugoslavian Do17s did not carry such numbers either, and the camouflage went halfway down the fuselage. So it isn't one of their's.

What reasons are there that it absolutely has to be VVS? It does look it, yes, but no particular type appears to fit....

[researcher111]

Graham

Did you review all TU-2 details ? the camo paint and nr 4 style definitely fits the VVS or VMF planes , the shape of that wreck is very close to this of TU-2 tail section...is not a Yugoslavian or a ME-110

[waroff]

Originally Posted by researcher111

the shape of that wreck is very close to this of TU-2 tail section...0

I have difficulty to see the same shape on the Tu-2

And the "4", is really a four, or a cross with a tear in the skin that gives the impression of number four?

[s.hyder]

is it not possible that this is a captured german aircraft painted up with allied markings ?

[Graham Boak]

The ventral curve at the tip of the tail is clearly different from that of a Tu2, showing a greater radius, and the Tu2 also has a dihedral tailplane. The tip of the tail does indeed look like that of a Do17: or at least, more like that than any other suggestion so far.

[researcher111]

Graham and group, this debate may last forever unless Mr Bernard may enlighten us with a better resolution which at this point he may not have. The TU-2 yes, some models were with dihedrals elevators and some without, though the paint and the " 4 " matches with great certainty the VVS. Attached the YAK-2. One last thing, on the left corner right of the wings seems to be the engine intake nacelle...maybe someone can use this as further ID reference,

[waroff]

Yak 2


and no one of these russian a/c had a tail skid under fuselage (just behind the soldier sitting on the tail)

[Graham Boak]

I've just been discussing Tu2 production variations on the VVS website http://sovietwarplanes.com/board/ but at no time did the discussion bring out any difference in the dihedral of the tailplanes. A quick look back at photos show this was not present on any of the major variants right back to the original prototypes. I believe you are in error there.

[researcher111]

I have a book called Soviet Air Power in WW2, some 500 pages....do you by chance have this book ? all their developments are discussed in there.