Art Medcalf's Ju 88 book - discussion

[Jim P.]

This was supposed to be available in July. Has anyone heard anything about it?

[leonventer]

Hi Jim,

Check out the thread named "Ju-88, Volume One" on this page. (At the moment, it's just 9 threads below this one.)

If you sift through the crud, you'll find that some of the posts actually comment on the book itself. My copy arrived here in Virginia 3 weeks ago, and I'm very glad to have it.

Regards,
Leon Venter

[Del Davis]

Jim
It's been available from Amazon, Book Depository and Christian Schmidt since July. Not sure why it hasn't,t gotten to New Hampshire

[Jim P.]

Thanks Del and Leo - I'll have to look for it. I thought I'd pre-ordered it from Amazon.

[Stig Jarlevik]

Hi Guys

With reference to Artie Bob's book and that no errata page has yet been started up, I have the following questions.

a) On page 32 it is said (Picture) that D-ASCY was the V6, while in the table 4-1 on page 36 D-ASCY is said to have been the V8 and V6 was in fact D-AQKD. Which is correct?

b) Can someone explain the table 5-1 on page 45 with a breakdown of sub-types relating to the WNr?

c) The WNr listed basically correpond to the number built for all the various Contractors, EXCEPT for Junkers themselves. The Bernburg production listed starts with 0022 (not 0021 as given which is a printing error) and goes all the way to 0655, which makes 634 built A-models. However the total summary in the right hand column only list 282 + 334 which is 616. Can someone explain this please?

d) In table 5-1 Arado is given as manufacturing the WNr range 3001 - 3292
and Henschel the range 2001 - 2320, but looking at table 8-1 on page 99, Arado is constantly listed a builders of range 20xx aircraft and Henschel of 30xx aircraft. Which is correct?

Since I am for the first time trying to make something of a production list for the Ju 88A, it is a bit frustrating to try and do so with the help of this book.

I am not competent enough to evaluate the book as such, although I discover errors, but my main criticism at this stage, are three. They are my own and is more concerned with lay out then facts, which of course makes the very subjective....

- Why does every author so often try and "re-invent the Wheel"? Pages 1 - 22 could have been shortened to one maybee two pages. There are plenty of Junkers books out there and anyone generally interested can buy any of those.
- This is a book about the Ju 88, so why is the Ju 288 included? It has nothing to do with the topic. To a certain degree I can understand why the Ju 188 and 388 get included, but to my thinking it is a waste of space. The Ju 188 deserves a seperate book and we already have a valid book about the Ju 388.
- The chapter Comparison with Contemporaries is also far too long, does basically very little of what it states, since most of the pages are only desciptions of the other types and no real comparison at all. Again a waste of pages.

Cheers
Stig

[edNorth]

Stig,
I do not own this book, so can not really comment on it, but by having look at one advertizement on internet, I began seeing two errors. And that was only by looking at the rear cover. Not good in my view. I tend to agree with Mr. Anderson, in another locked revue thread here at TOCH! Best put this book on Nowarrra shelf, I have one myself, its near my dustbin.
You making an fair to accurate W.Nr. list yourself, ok, then perhaps five years should be enough, only becuse they get more and more complex as the war progressed, and I do not know how much spare time you have.
- Many years ago I suggested co-op with that author of the Ju 88 book, but he did nothing with that offer.

- I now have fairly accurate W.Nr´s list for all production series, compiled from "hard" (original) papers ( thanks to many individuals from USA, Finland, Norway, Sweden, England, Denmark, Ireland, France, Belgium, Holland, Faroes, Canada, besides Germany and Austria, ah, forgot Italy and Hungary, and probably many others) and now have far much more than a simple list by sub-versions, as so many authors fail by attempting, but include all aircraft of Ju 88/188/388/488 series, in nummerical order.
- I say 95 to 98% accurate or so by now, and it has taken 18+ years of collecting already. This is intended for a book, started from scratch, but a long time in progress, since about 2002, (due slower progress last four years), but lots of work, much more than most whould belive. Two years ago, I started own artwork, as all hereto drawings or artwork had more or less inaccurate aspects (many simply failing in the sub-variants and also mixing details between versions or sub-versions, and often omitting details that are (prime) recognition features for the version! Thats because no one has done this before, so far as I know. Same has happened in many books or monograps before, even recently, no wonder the Ju 88 has so many mistaken indenties; one author even showing a bunch of Ju 88 A-1/5 photos´s at same time as Anzio - in January 1944 - when these had been two years out of front line service - is unbelivable) and also on later pages writing in pictures text of Ju 88 A-1 (short wings) as "A-4" ; against when them (photos) actually date back from Battle of Britain (1940) or the Blitz (1940/1941).
Giving hint, these are in chapter marked "Summer 1943-May 1945".
- But Yes, initially (10.1939) the 088 2xxx series was Arado, 3xxx was Henschel, 4xxx was NDW, 5xxx was ATG, 6xxx was HWO, 7xxx was DOS, 8xxx was SFW. JFM theirselves did 0xxx and 1xxx (0001 to about 0890, and 1001 to 1780). The (10) Ju 88 B V series were W.Nr. 088 000 0023 to 0032 and were independant constuctions, made up from A-1, A-5 and A-4 "components" (periods) over a long time, adapted to Ju 88 B cockpits and BMW 801 engines, they were converted to Recce afterwards, but were built as Dive-Bombers. They were not a single batch, made from spring 1940 to early in 1942, covering A-1, A-5 and A-4 construction periods.
- V8 was ASCY, first "Stu.Ka. was V6, others before were Schnellbombers (not Stu.Ka. / Dive-Bombers), V7 was never Zerstörer, "Z15" and "Z19" were not valid equivilant of V numbers. V5 tested dive brakes for Ju 288, as were V1 and V2 involved in Ju 288 research, and two (at least) were fitted with "Ju 288 like cockpits" in front of their own ones. One reportedly was fitted with twin tail, but I have not found foto if it. V3 crashed 1938, the VA+EG was V4 and intended as museum aircraft, going to "ground instructional duties" and not flown after autumn 1939 (says Peter Achs).
- In October 1941, the JFM production series split into three (C-6 / R-1 0880360xxx, D-1/5 0880430xxx and A-4 0880140xxx ranges.) Other factories reverting slowly to similar series, all only doing Bombers, except Siebel doing 65 Zerstorers in 1943 (72x xxx series), 0880141xxx ATG, 0880142xxx SFW and 0880144xxx HFW) but some going back again to original series for brief period of extra aircraft (rebuilds?), before going to final Secret code series (at all factories only after mid 1943).

No, FZB (Bernburg) was not a "Production" site, assembly site from others made components - FSD did assemble them 0001 to 0021, but FZB assembled only from 0022 (but did not produce them coponents, so far as I can see, but nummerical sequnce is not all, some higher numbers appearing and flown month before others...), and Dessau "did not stop their Ju 88 production" at 0021, rather later, as I have found out (!) Cracking this detail was hard, but yelded satifactory resaults.

- Enough for one day?
Regards
-Ed

[edNorth]

Originally Posted by Stig Jarlevik

c) The WNr listed basically correpond to the number built for all the various Contractors, EXCEPT for Junkers themselves. The Bernburg production listed starts with 0022 (not 0021 as given which is a printing error) and goes all the way to 0655, which makes 634 built A-models. However the total summary in the right hand column only list 282 + 334 which is 616. Can someone explain this please?

Here is fallacy of attempting "make a simple list of JFM produced versions": the Ju 88 A-1, A-1 F, Ju 88 Z (C-1), C-2, C-3 (same one as the C-5), C-4, C-7, A-5, A-5 F, A-6 and D-2 (and more conversions) are all included if first 088 0xxx range - intermixed in such a way as no clear batches can be spoken of - generally the A-5 take over at 0361 - all surviours upgraded later! - only clearly seen (factory new) at 0401 onwards, and most were A-5 F (recce). And there were also C-2´s produced after the C-4´s - Becuse its C-4 only if an Recce airframe was used for the conversion, else it was C-2 (longer wings) made from A-1/5 Bomber airframe, but that C-2 or C-4 were even not "conversions" - rather they were assembled as such from the start (some later ones were attrition replacements).
So its even not possibly to say, that were A-1´s to about 0364, as there were also A-1 F, Ju 88 Z (C-1), C-2 and C-4 with lower numbers than 0364. Also there were (few) A-6 built out of later A-5 Bombers´s, and A-7 Trainers out of A-3 or A-5 (Bombers) complicate the matter also. They basically follow their original produced variants (by default), when reaching A-12 Dual-Control trainers´s they had wider cockpits and generally A-4´s like wings (but Jumo 211 G engines and VDM props).
However in 088 1001 to 1780 were no Zerstörers, but many D-1, D-1 trop and D-5 (Recce). Rest was A-4´s (many fitted out as torpedo-bombers, as were A-4´s from other ranges). Then to complicate matters, no clear cut can also be made of A-4, D-1 or D-5/trop (Tropical). I maybe making some errors too, as this is mostly from memory...

Regards
-ed

[Stig Jarlevik]

Thanks Ed

I think I got a little more than I bargained for....

a) OK, the V-8 was D-ASCY and I then take it you confirm the V-6 was D-AQKD.

b) Should I take it that any individual break down of A/C/D models into sub-types from 1939 to ca 1942 is very complicated? I suppose I was afraid of that.....

c) If I understand you right, we have 10 Ju 88B prototypes as 0023 to 0032 plus one I cannot place 0022, which makes 11 in all, but adding these 11 to 616 only give us 627. We are still short seven aircraft. Were any black out numbers used by Junkers or is the table simply wrong? Were all aircraft built from WNr 0033 to 0655? If yes, then the table must be wrong somewhere.

d) Thanks for confirming the table is wrong with regard to Arado and Henschel but I am a bit puzzled that you say ATG used two c/n ranges, both 50xx and 80xx. The table states Siebel was responsible for the 80xx range.

My aim was not to make a production list aircraft by aircraft but to try and ring in the WNr batches. Looks like I have to drop the exact sub-types since it is obvious that large numbers were either modified and/or rebuilt to other sub-types and even new models. I am not finished with William Medcalf's book yet since I had to stop at page 99 with my four questions.

Most probably I will be back with more questions later

Cheers
Stig

[edNorth]

I have sent you private email on this. Maybe oneday mr. Medcalf will break his silence.
-Ed

[Nick Beale]

"same time as Anzio, in autumn 1943"

Talking of mistakes, Ed ... Anzio was in January 1944. Did you perhaps mean Salerno?