Junkers Ju 88 A-4 and C-6 in 3D

[edNorth]

This thread here has info on code, R4+LS.
http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showth...ighlight=Tober
I belive the Squadron book has the "myth".
-Ed

[Skyraider3D]

Originally Posted by edNorth

I read code different there, it says R4+AS, Right?

I agree the gondola is inconclusive, that's why I consulted other aircraft as well. Every C-6 night fighter without gondola has Schräge Musik installed (but not the other way around). This does suggest, though admittedly doesn't confirm, there is a link between the two.

[edNorth]

Originally Posted by Skyraider3D

Every C-6 night fighter without gondola has Schräge Musik installed (but not the other way around). This does suggest, though admittedly doesn't confirm, there is a link between the two.

http://crimso.msk.ru/Images6/MM/MM-100/0252-03-1-4.jpg

Not shure if that sentance makes much sense. Here "link" between Gondola and "Schrägebewaffnung", seems be the airframe of Ju 88 C-6 W.Nr. 088/751008 DU+GO (or I think it is this plane).

However since tonight I have been wondering on that "4R+AS" photo(s) (in the Squadron book, dismissing their origin - Manfred Griehl ) or if this really is an aircraft "crashed 100%" on Sunday 30 January 1944, when the pilot baled out and the two other crew was killed, as Tobers crew is reported in Michael Balss "Deutsche Nachtjagd" (likely info from WASt NVM).

But this "4R+AS" appears not 100% destroyed, and completly burned Ju 88s aircraft, where the tail only remained were "only" 95-99% destroyed. My take on it (this one in the picture) be maximum 50% damaged of airframe value. Fuselage appears certainly repairable. Also I see no (none whatsoever) .50 Cal strikes (no bullet holes at all? - if shot down by P-47 it must have been a very neat job.) In them other fotos, is that two crew wandering about? They certainly do look like aircrew. Not dead or injured then?

Taking good conservative look at left side photo. There seems be +ES on fuselage. And there is no "A" on nose. "Dirt triangle" is where nose cone plates parts joined. Dirt by the metal seams. On Flame Baffler plate left side look like digits 45 14xx, but too dark to tell realy. "A5 14xx" but then 14xx does not make sense. Also they do not make any sense at all related to any Ju 88 C-6 W.Nr. - Possibly fitting for an A-4, but barely. Question: "Fritz kann ich Ihre Flamme Dämpfer Platte leihen". Answer: "Ja".

Anyways. On Sunday 30. January 1944, the III/NJG 2 lost them R4+BS 751003, R4+CT 751017, R4+OT 750693, R4+LS 750811 (Tobers plane came down at "Wielen, south-east of Hardenberg" - if that is in Holland, Belgium or Germany, I am not entierly shure of) and R4+DS 70% damaged, all to USAAF P-47 Thunderbolts´s. Units base was in Gilze-Rijen, Venlo, so place of crash then in eastern Holland or Belgium?

Weather that day in northern Germany was: Sunshine: 0,0 hours in Hamburg area (and Germaniy in general), but some two-three hours in extreme west - Aachen area - Else the figures are explained in lower left coner. Tmax, Tmedium, Tmin, Rain, Snow etc.
http://i39.tinypic.com/2nc3rt1.jpg Obtained from here... http://www.wetterzentrale.de/topkarten/fskldwd.html

Well according Wikipedia "Jazz Musik" was just coming into service, already tested in Do 217 and others, like He 219, I suppose Bf 110 had them also but in Summer 1944 there was Intelligance coup as RAF found one in France.
Only DU+GO was planned delivered two days after "4R+AS" was expended in daylight combat. How stubit was that?
Well, details of DU+GO conversion were this: "2 x Jumo 211 J, planned for “Schrägbewaffnung (´Jazz´ upward firing armament) of 2 x MG 151, Plan for delivery (KdE Tarnewitz) about 01.02.44, in conversion to mid 03.1944, then to be used in testing to end of 06.1944 (rep as G-6 751008 in Lieferplan 225/2, dated 24.04.44)
Here the typist made error. Version was C-6 (not G-6, as them only appearing in June 1944) as the type of engines (Jumo 211 J) confirm. I gather this was one of the prototypes for Ju 88 C-6 for the armament?
At least this one is the earliest I have found referred to with this installation.
Was there a hoard of Ju 88´s with Jazz Musik already available in January 1944? Is that really "4R+AS"? We know for a fact code on the NJG 2 Ju 88 C-6´s was R4+ untill summer 1944 (not 4R+ ) so, is that text below that photo reliable at all. Was this realy Tobers plane, or another crashed later?

-Ed

[Skyraider3D]

Ed, I'm not sure what you're trying to say. This crash site is well documented so there is little doubt it shows Tober's 4R+AS. The time of year and location matches with what's documented (rural village in east of Holland in winter).

I received a better version of the scan with the flame damper and it seems to be AS ??, not the full aircraft code I thought it was and how I've currently represented it. There exists a Flugzeug drawing on the Ju 88, showing a C-6 with 4R+AS on the fuselage and a code on the flame damper but the scan I have of this is too small to make out what it says. Maybe someone has this drawing and can confirm what's written on that flame damper.

Dirt triangle? Is this a dirt triangle too (colour photo below)? I honestly don't know what you are talking about, but there is no doubt on my mind that Tober's aircraft was coded "AS".

I'm not claiming my model is perfect, I know for a fact it isn't (for example I need to rework the armoured windshield as the proportions are off, plus it still lacks curtains). But I find it difficult to understand what your point is exactly, other than casting doubt on various features of this aircraft?

[edNorth]

Originally Posted by Skyraider3D

I am sorry to see you are not understanding. I have spoken my thoughts on this subject, and thought my English was good enough and my knowledge of the type´s versions, be fair or a little abowe average. If not, I am sorry.
But do you have the basics behind Ju 88 C-6 airframe clear enough, enough dimensional data and such. Does it really surprise you to get critique on your work, or did you not post this here for that purpose.
And it does not work showing photo of yet another version, an Ju 88 G-6, and mirrored at that, or did you not know that either.
-Ed

[Skyraider3D]

Quite the contrary, I welcome critique on my work and I appreciate you taking the time to write your findings here. However so far, from my point of view, they merely serve to cast doubt on what I've done and do not help in any way to improve my work. So rather than just speaking your thoughts, please tell me, or if possible show me, what I should change to arrive at an accurate representation of the aircraft shown in the photos I posted.

Yes, that photo shows a G-6 and it's mirorred, as the crew access door and Jumo 213 intakes appear on the wrong sides. When I create a 3D model of an aircraft, I start with a lot of research, so I know what I'm dealing with, but thanks for your concern. I posted this photo as I merely wanted to show you the 'A' on the nose, just like there's one on Tober's machine. I could've easily unmirrored it, but I chose to simply link the original location (not my site) instead, as this was quicker.

There appears to be no scarcity of Ju 88 experts, but concrete answers are hard to come by. So, based on photos and data available to me, I conclude that Tober's machine was WNr 750811, 4R+AS, and this is the machine shown in the three photos I posted. There appears a code on the flame dampers which hold a clue to the identity, but is as yet unclear. Likewise it's not certain if there was a gondola. The A on the nose is clear enough to confirm the identity for me. You evidently disagree with my findings, but I simply do not understand your reasoning. I'd appreciate if you could explain again, in Icelandic if you prefer; I've an Icelandic friend with excellent control of the English language who could translate. Thanks Ed!

[edNorth]

Reading up on FuG 202 / 220 Lichtenstein antennas, this might finally prove to someone that the photo of "4R+AS" was taken in Spring 1944 or later.

From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lichtenstein_radar
""By late 1943, the Luftwaffe was starting to deploy the greatly improved FuG 220 Lichtenstein SN-2, operating on a longer-wavelength of 90 MHz (lower end of the US VHF FM broadcast band) frequency which was far less affected by electronic jamming, but this required the much larger "Hirschgeweih" (stag's antlers) antennas, with only eight dipole elements, looking like a much-enlarged version of what occupied the forward end of each one of the earlier quadruple Matratze masts. This aerial setup also produced tremendous drag and slowed the operating aircraft by up to 50 km/h (30 mph). The first SN-2 set had a problem with a huge minimum range of 500 meters, initially requiring the retention of a supplementary B/C or C-1 set with its full set of four Matratze masts, but the alarming drag that full sets of both types of antennas caused, from both radars being installed, later changed the requirement to only a "one-quarter" subset of the earlier Matratze array at the end of a single mast, centrally mounted on the nose of the aircraft when the BC or C-1 UHF radar remained installed. Improvements in spring 1944 led to newer SN-2 versions with lower minimum range, which allowed the older UHF radar system to be removed entirely. In July 1944, the newest version of the SN-2 radar fell into Allied hands when a fully equipped Ju 88 G-1, of 7 Staffel/NJG 2, flew the wrong way on a landing beacon and landed in England by accident, with the crew not realising the mistake until it was too late to destroy the radar or IFF gear. This led to successful jamming of several frequency bands of the FuG 220 (I to III, 72, 81 and 90 MHz), and a partial adoption of the use of the low-to-mid VHF band FuG 216 and 217 Neptun radar set, but several other bands that the SN-2 used were still operational. After the Allied jammings the FuG 220 antenna setup was optimized for the still operational bands, the 90-degree vertical dipole setup was changed to a 45-degree diagonal setup.""

What does this red marked sentence indicate? I say it indicates (but not entierly proves, as exact dates are not yet found), the date of them photos taken, might be later than stated. Rememer the photo of "4R+AS" nose and its FuG 220 Lichtenstein SN-2 antennas.
http://www.digitalaviationart.com/fo...Jan1944_02.jpg
Single older antenna has been removed. No doupt there. Removing this and having an "Jazz Musik" installed, the minimum range problem (500 m) must have been solved by the time this photo was taken. This (smallish) detail and "Jazz Musik" installation indicate to me, them fotos are possibly taken in spring 1944 or later.
-Ed

Further reading on FuG 202 / 220 as flown to Switzerland in spring 1944. Older antennas (on Bf 110) were still in use by March/April 1944.
http://www.cdvandt.org/Lichtenstein%20radars.pdf (Note: slow loading, give it time)

[Skyraider3D]

Originally Posted by edNorth

From Wikipedia:

I don't put too much trust in what's written on Wikipedia. The crash scene looks like one in winter in Holland to me.

And perhaps Tober's aircraft was equipped with a pre-production version?

I'm familiar with the PDF you linked, which is a useful document indeed.


But you may well be right, maybe this isn't Tober's aircraft. It's said Tober bailed out and his crew died. So indeed a wreck "completely burned", "where the tail only remained" seems more likely than a neatly belly landed wreck which the photos I posted appear to show. John Manrho also mentioned a high-impact crash. So let's forget about Tober and let's try to find out what aircraft these photo really show, because that's the aircraft I've modelled. Date is most likely first quarter 1944, given the bare state of the land (in spring it'd get green). Location looks very much like the Netherlands, north, east or south. I've checked both Hardenberg and Gilze-Rijen surroundings and both are possibilities. Just typical Dutch countryside, which doesn't narrow down the search much.

[Skyraider3D]

Ed, on a decal sheet associated with 4R+AS the Werknummer 750451 comes up (the airplane being credited to Tober in 1943!). Does this number ring any bells with regard to accidents/losses? The set is PD Decals 48-002.

[Clint Mitchell]

This decal sheet here.