Interesting Ju 87D-7/G-1

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Revi16

No idea if or how accurate. http://hugojunkers.bplaced.net/junke...tion-list.html

100323, Ju87 D7
LUFTWAFFE, ??+??, ??.??.?? to Mai.45, captured by US forces at Stuttgart

141286, Ju87 D8
LUFTWAFFE, ??+??, ??.??.?? to Mai.45, captured at Nuremberg by US forces

There are many examples of the 100… series as D-3 Werk Nummern (e.g. Ju 87 D-3, 100396, E8+KL of 3./NSG 9). Similarly 141… series as D-5 (e.g. Ju 87 D-5 141018, E8+JH 1./NSG 9). Obviously that doesn't exclude the examples you give being something different but I'd like to know on what basis they were identified as D-7 or D-8? By a plate found on the aircraft itself, by a postwar interpretation of a photo?

What I've never seen explained is the kind of designation seen in some Luftflotte 6 loss reports, e.g. 2./NSGr. 4's Ju 87 D-5 Nacht VII W.Nr. 100040, 1K+CK or 10.(Pz.)/SG 77's Ju 87 G-2 VII-C, W.Nr. 491201, S2+NX.

[RT]

Also G-2 XIV given

[Broncazonk]

Does anyone know if this night-adapted G-1 was actually used at night?

Or was this an improvised, late-war expedient to convert a night attack aircraft to a daytime anti-armor mission? (Seems like they would have removed those exhaust tubes though.)

Bronc

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Broncazonk

Does anyone know if this night-adapted G-1 was actually used at night?

Bronc

Hunting tanks at night and at low level doesn’t sound like a practical idea, but you never know.

[Broncazonk]

Originally Posted by Nick Beale

Hunting tanks at night and at low level doesn’t sound like a practical idea, but you never know.

Yeah, it seems dangerous, doesn't it.

In it's own way, the Stuka was quite beautiful, wasn't it? Especially with the extra-long wing tip extensions.

Bronc

[brewerjerry]

Hi
I find the issues with copyright difficult, seems many photos were passed around, and the best method of claiming the copyright is having the original negative, not just a ww2 era prinnted photo
although it does also depend on whose camera, whose film and if you were in paid employment at the time
cheers
jerry

[edwest2]

The problem with the internet is radicals and those with little or no knowledge of copyright law who think they can take an image from anywhere, copy it, and post it without permission. And they think they can get away with it because they use a fake name. Not long ago, the Japanese company that owns the rights to Godzilla succeeded in shutting down numerous sites. And I'll just add that German copyright law regarding wartime images differs from America copyright law.


Best,
Ed

[Broncazonk]

At least in the United States, every photo posted on this forum falls under the 'Fair Use' exception to copyright law.

Everything.

The law is so clearcut the issue is not even debatable.

https://www.lib.purdue.edu/uco/Copyr...use.html#first


Bronc

[Denniss]

not every photo as fair use implicates its use as "just for illustration". Large size images are not considered "just for illustration".

[rof120]

Broncazonc:

" Serious question: how come the Luftwaffe never experimented with/adopted MK 108s in the wings instead of those useless MG 17s? "

This is just an improvised reply - nothing highly scientific or historical:

A MK 108 (calibre 3 cm to Germans, 30 mm to others) was a very powerful gun and not really small. I doubt that it was possible at all to have it incorporated into any aircraft wing. Just look at the well-known 37 mm Flak used under each wing of anti-tank Stukas. The 7 extra mm in calibre do make a significant difference in size but such pictures show how fast the gun size grows with its calibre. After all 37 mm is less than twice the classic 20 mm but the size is enormously bigger. Add the ammo...

The 37 mm guns on Stukas were added as complete units including ammo, certainly (I'm not an expert at this) with effective recoil reduction. I guess it was not possible to add "only" 30 mm guns inside the wings.

What's more, these wings would probably not have withstood (or not after several missions involving firing the guns) the powerful recoil even with recoil reduction equipment.

I don't know of ANY example of a 30 mm gun mounted in a wing. They always were mounted on the engine (Me 109 G or K etc.) or in the nose (Me 262). I have to admit that I don't know about Fw 190s: I guess they never carried 30 mm guns but "only" 4 x 20 mm in the wings plus 2 MGs on the engine.

One more explanation could be that they didn't have got enough MK 108s (yet). Every single Me 262 had got four (plus reserves) - MK 108s and MK 103s IIRC. There was a large supply of 3,7 cm Flak, which was used 1939 already.