Photos 10-3 +

[edNorth]

Peter, Checked "Teil O", and yes, I see your point.
Interesting twist. This manual is dated before Ju 188 torpedo testing (A-3 PL+TS & BT+HQ), but NJ+TS and Ju 188 V10 260156 were used earlier (autum 1943).
This one (NJ+.. linked) was possibly once an E version. Look there has been overpainted areas where the dive brakes were, or is this perhaps NJ+TS from the F series, but then again an F series fitted with E series wings, an E-3 ... eh?)
http://www.airwar.ru/image/idop/bww2...e/ju188e-7.jpg

Frank,
Thanks. Yes, unfortunately I know there many such mistakes in Modern books.

Also thanks to Ed for the eBay listings.

[edwest]

You're welcome Ed (no relation)





Ed

[Peter Achs]

Hi ed (very)north,

your photo shows the Ju 188 V10 (260156) with the STK NJ+TS. There was only one Ju 188 with BMW 801 and torpedo installation. Werknummer and STK are confirmed by several flight logbooks. The torpedo tests began in September 1943. Oddly, the plane in original documents was called A-3.

The subtype E-2 was originally planned as a bomber with Jumo 213, as it was later built as A-2. Take a look in the programs 1942 and early 1943.

Remi:
The book is a work in progress.

Regards
Peter

[edNorth]

Peter. Yes, I have LP 225 page stating Ju 188 V10 260156 was "A-3" version with BMW 801 G engines, but thought this was perhaps garbled Werk-Nr. (as its not actually an A-3 if it had BMW 801 engines).
Also need check better on late 1943/1944 plans.

BTW, The same Ju 188 photo (linked before and again below) is labelled “Ju 188 E-3” in AJ-Press Monograph Lotnicze 33 by Robert Michulec “Junkers Ju 188 & 388 Pt.I” P.21

Two photos of Torpedo equipped Ju 188 {JFM Photos # S3 J.48177 and S J.48165} are in Christoph Vernaleken & Martin Handig “Junkers Ju 388” P.75 likely show this same one close up. They also have NJ+TS as "E-3" on page 380.

This modelmaker markets this as "E-1 / F-2" version.
http://www.mojehobby.pl/zdjecia/3/1/...2_BIL927_1.jpg
and A-3 / E-2 version ...
http://www.model-making.eu/zdjecia/8...2_BIL959_1.jpg
http://www.oupsmodel.com/images/prod...acher-1-72.jpg

And here is stated an "E-2" ...
http://bw-hilchenbach.de/Ju__188.jpg
found here ...
http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=98376

and this "E-2"
http://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-3y...2520188E-2.jpg

So many errors out there .... this is just sample of what Google brought up. Have nice weekend.
-ed

[ChrisS]

Doubtless Peter's book will be the final word in correcting all these errors. Look forward to it.

[Stig Jarlevik]

All

I don't think the French called them anything but Ju 188, and with just four of them being delivered, I don't even think they bothered which sub-type it was. J-P Dubois does not quote any French document where the actual sub-type is stated. Neither did A.A.B. give any formal type designation to either the Ju 88 nor Ju 188. They were known/referred to in official documents as either Ju 88 and Ju 188.

Just one comment to Franck's list of No 3. J-P Dubois is not 100% clear when No 3 actually arrived. Reason is that he refers to the quarter of the year (trimestre).

The code 10.S-12 was initially applied to No 2 (arrived 30.8.1946) and it carried that code in/beginning of the fourth quarter of 1946.
The code 10.S-12 is known to have been applied to No 3 in the second quarter of 1947. J-P Dubois is not entirely clear but it may be possible that upon arrival to 10S No 3 actually carried the code 10.S-13.

I will have to ask him if he can expand on this subject
One final point, the 'code' F-YCJG in 1947 was a radio call sign only and the aircraft carried its 10.S-12 on the fuselage all the time.

Cheers
Stig

[ouidjat]

Originally Posted by Stig Jarlevik

All

I don't think the French called them anything but Ju 188, and with just four of them being delivered, I don't even think they bothered which sub-type it was. J-P Dubois does not quote any French document where the actual sub-type is stated. Neither did A.A.B. give any formal type designation to either the Ju 88 nor Ju 188. They were known/referred to in official documents as either Ju 88 and Ju 188.

Just one comment to Franck's list of No 3. J-P Dubois is not 100% clear when No 3 actually arrived. Reason is that he refers to the quarter of the year (trimestre).

The code 10.S-12 was initially applied to No 2 (arrived 30.8.1946) and it carried that code in/beginning of the fourth quarter of 1946.
The code 10.S-12 is known to have been applied to No 3 in the second quarter of 1947. J-P Dubois is not entirely clear but it may be possible that upon arrival to 10S No 3 actually carried the code 10.S-13.

I will have to ask him if he can expand on this subject
One final point, the 'code' F-YCJG in 1947 was a radio call sign only and the aircraft carried its 10.S-12 on the fuselage all the time.

Cheers
Stig

Hello Stig,

All what I quote is coming from Dumollard book. JP Dubois is quoted in "thanks" list for his help...

That being said.
- No doubt you're right about the way these planes were called in unit.
- For call sign ... of course. I thought it was obvious.
- As for 10.S coding:
They received the code following reception order ... But - Dumollard - writes that during first quarter of 1947 they were recoded following serie order.
Last - still quoting Dumollard - N°3 came on 28/10/1946.

Regards, Franck.

[edNorth]

Originally Posted by Peter Achs

There was only one Ju 188 with BMW 801 and torpedo installation. Werknummer and STK are confirmed by several flight logbooks. The torpedo tests began in September 1943. Oddly, the plane in original documents was called A-3. The subtype E-2 was originally planned as a bomber with Jumo 213, as it was later built as A-2. Take a look in the programs 1942 and early 1943.

Not wanting readers be let down, but time has been rather tight attending to this specific problem. Nothing is only black or white in Junkers 88/188/388 series, rather many shades of Grey. Having Jumo 213 engines in the Ju 188 E-2 looks strange to me, just as writing up an plane with BMW 801 as an "A-3". I have not yet traced these planned Ju 188 E-2´s (with or without Jumo 213 engines) in the RLM C-Amt Production Plans (Lieferplane) or JFM pre-plan study´s (Entwurf) from 1942 or 1943. These mostly (always) turning up as G-2, H-2, M-1, D/H etc. I even found the Ju 88 N-1 (Jumo 213) Nightfighters in one plan. Maybe I missed the correct one.

But there is one reference (below) with the "Ju 188 A-3" "Torpedo" (total 364 examples), but curiously these were split in two by Anmerkung! (to 177 and 187 respectevely) ...

"Ju 188 A-3 (Jumo 213) Lt-Flg".
but appears "struck out" (with pencil) over E-3 designation only
"Ju 188 E-3 (BMW 801) Lt-Flg."

Ref: Plan JFM E 184, FTH-Pl 43 520, that dealt only with the Ju 188 and Ju 88, dated 3.12.43. (This was "Grundplane für LP 225 1.12.43") Only page for the Ju 188 is shown below.

http://i42.tinypic.com/rwjjw1.jpg

This likely is the (wrong) reference I remembered about "Ju 188 E-2 Torpedo-Bombers". I apologize not finding this earlier; There were lot of interim plans and pre-plans (Entwurf) that contained sub-variants that did not see much light of day. Cancelled in short. I even read somewhere, there was planned to re-engine some Ju 188 A-3 with BMW 801´s. If these then became E-3´s will not be stated. Maybe someone will pull the real E-2 or E-3´s out of his hat.

Regards
-Ed