Camouflage and subtype for 4./TrGr186 Ju87 Stukas during the PC?6

[philippe1]

thats correct its dificult to deal with B/ pictures
i came across a book of osprey combat aircraft
stukageschwader 1937-41 written by John Weal
there are nice color plates
they are based on research from original sources

Larry, i have scanned them for you and emailed them to you
cheers
phil

[Graham Boak]

The patterns were standardised and very different: to my eye these are the patterns for the 70/71 scheme and not those of the 61/62/63, but this is from memory and not direct comparisons. Use of the patterns allows us to distinguish between the colour schemes without having to make use of colour interpetation from b+w photos. There are a number of features that point to the later scheme, apart from the lack of a third colour in either photo.

Although 70/71 were often very difficult to distinquish from one another in many prewar photos, with fresh fairly-glossy finishes, with use the 71 appears considerably lighter. This may also be a function of the film and the filters used, but the contrast presented is not untypical of that seen in many 1940 photos.

[Pieter H]

Larry, all,

I agrre with above observations on the color scheme, and indeed this is almost certainly standard 70-71 scheme. I have no evidence of any Stukas in the western campaign with different schemes.

Regarding the type, the picture of the J9+AM clearly does not show a C-version. In that case the original protrusion of the arrested hook fixation should be visible below the tail. So this is almost certainly a standard B-1 version.

The only question I have from my side is what happened with the C-0 and/or C-1 aircraft of the unit when they transfered to the Luftwaffe. I can't find how many C-types were in the end produced and effectively taken into operation. I have the impression it were not many, probably some prototypes only. I haven't seen any reports of C-type losses during the WC. But can anybody confirm?

Regards, Pieter

[Larry Hickey]

Hello all,

I'm now comfortable that J9+AM is a Ju87B-1, and not a Ju87C, although some of the reference sources on the Stuka say that some of the C's originally destined for the aircraft carrier graf Zepplin served with 4./186 even after it became clear that the carrier wasn't going to be finished. However, it isn't clear how many and exactly when. It wouldn't surprise me if the StaKap had one of them, but unless someone else jumps in here with different evidence, I consider that part of my query settled.

Regarding my second question, I don't yet consider that settled. I've worked with interpreting color in WW II B&W film, both of US and European manufacture, for about 40 years, and I'm very familiar with the problems caused by the different sensitivities to color between panchromatic and orthochromatic film. That could be the explanation for what bothers me about these photos.

However, since we know that part of the initial complement of Ju87s assigned to 4./186 were from an a/c batch intended for use on the abortive German a/c carrier graf Zeppelin, it makes a lot more sense to me that these a/c would have initially been camouflaged in a standard maritime camouflage of 72/73 uppersurfaces (two shades of gray) with 65 blue undersurfaces, rather than the two shades of green (70/71 uppersurfaces with 65 blue undersurfaces), which would be more appropriate for a land-based a/c. Two shades of gray would be much better for ship-based aircraft which would likely be flying over water much of the time, and green camouflage would serve no camouflage purposes whatsoever on the deck of an aircraft carrier. Since the photos that I posted from this unit show unusually high-contrast uppersurface segments, is is possible that maritime camouflaged Ju87s in use with 4./TrGr186 were pressed into service for the Polish Campaign? Or could these photos have even been taken showing a 72/73 camouflage sometime prior to the PC? I have no doubt that all the Stukas in I./TrGr186 were in 70/71 camouflage after 4 Staffel was expanded to a full Gruppe immediately after the PC. The problem is all in the timing.

To answer the question by Mateusz K., the two photos probably don't show the same a/c, but probably show two a/c of the same unit showing this problematic (for me) camouflage during this same time period.

I'd like to hear what Adam Thompson, David Wadman or Chris Goss thinks about this issue.

Regards,

[Pilot]

This side is interesting

[RolandF]

The starboard side seems to show a three-tone upper side camo imo.
All markings are definitely pre-war including the swasika overlapping tailfin and rudder. Most likely an overpainted white disc on a red tail band is hidden beneath the tail camo.
According to the sources six Ju87B-0 pre-production examples were built from Ju87A airframes. This variant featured the multi-tone pre-war camo. Maybe this particular machine is one of the B-0 examples.

Regards

Roland

[philippe1]

hello, pre-production series junkers JU 87B-0,D-IELX this machine still features old type of painting scheme-splintered pattern of RLM 61 Braun
RLM 62 grun and RLM 63 hellgrau with undersides in RLM 65 hellblau
black registration letters D-IELX are visible under wings .This machine was probably one of the only 3 JU87 Bs with old style camouflage typical of a ju87A
now about production of C-1
the RLM gave green light in jan 39 to start the production at weser's bremen facility .A pre-production batch of 10 aircraft was ordered on 1 april 1939 with deliveries planned between April and July 1940 .Deliveries of 120 examples of the C-1production variant were set to take place between july 40-and April 41
The JU87C-0 order was soon reduced to five aircraft , since that number was believed to be adequate for final testing prior to full-scale production .
suspension of work on the graf zeppelin aircraft carrier resulted in the RLM's decision of october 6,1939 to reduce the JU87 C-1 order from 120 to 30 examples
cheers
phil

[Bf 110]

Hello,

regarding the version of the Stuka there's some info in AirDOCs World War II Combat Aircraft Photo Archive ADC 005 - Junkers Ju 87 - Part 1 by Manfred Griehl. A quote from page 8 about "C" version:
"On August 10, 1937, the RLM issued the request for a carrier capable dive-bomber, the Ju 87 Tr. (C). [Tr. means Träger = carrier] The aircraft based on the Ju 87 B in its final version was to have rear folding wings, strengthened landing gear and arrestor hook. Initially, two Ju 87 B-0 were modified as Ju 87 C-0. On March 3, 1938, the Ju 87 V10 (WerkNr. 4928, ZK+HD) commenced the flight tests but only had fixed wings. The second trial aircraft, Ju 87 V11 (WerkNr. 4929, TV+OV) was built as C-1 with folding wings. The first five C-1s were completed in spring 1941."
If this is right, it's improbable that Caesars flew in PC.

Regards,
Bf 110

[Graham Boak]

From most comments and representations, 72/73 had a lower contrast than 70/71, so that's unlikely to be the explanation. However, if this is expanded to "experimental maritime colours" then there is no way of distinguishing between sensible comments and wild guesses. The Feiseler torpedo bomber was used for experimental schemes, but it seems unlike that conventional Stukas would have been added to the trials.

The key point I would make is not to guess at the colours, but look at the patterns. The intricate shape seen on the nose is not representative of the early scheme, which involved a large number of segments.

There is the unexplained existence of a rare interim scheme, apparently using the early colours but with fewer segments, less intricate than the 70/71 scheme. This is seen on He111Ps and export Ju52s, but has not been noted on Ju87s.

[Modeldad]

Larry;

I do not think that aircraft is a "C". Simply a B-1. Based on what I have been able to gather the couple of C-0s that existed were re-jiggered early B-1 models. The pictures I have of a C-0 (wearing civil code of possibly D-IIGM) also do not show a hook being added, but there does appear the point at which the hook attached to the fuselage. In your pictures, that attachment point does not seem to be there.The colors appear to be none other than 70/71, showing the same low contrast as other B-1s.

The C-1 appears to be a re-jiggered B-1 with the late style exhausts (as appeared also on the B-2). They clearly have a hook applied. Once again 70/71.

Another point about the C model was that there was a clear seam runnining around the wing at the very point that the landing gear attached to the wing. That was the point at which the wing folded. Shame there is no close up of that area in your pictures.

With regard to the color scheme, I'd say it was 70/71,I have found only one other picture in my collection with that degree of contrast. Most aircraft have a low contrast and even appear to be in a single dark green color. But the high contrast may be the effect of a filter. The photographer may have used a green filter. Green would have lightened greens. From an article on filters (don't have specific source): Many early pan films were over-sensitive not only to blue but also to red, leaving a dip for green in the sensitivity curve. Kodak Panatomic was originally of this type. So would it not be logical to keep down both the blue and the red simultaneously with a green filter? Many thought so, the filters were duly produced --- and discussed. No issue of a photo periodical in the 'thirties was complete without an article about 'the filter question', and especially the green filter question.





email me at modeldad@verizon.net if you need pictures of Bs and Cs, I have collected many.