tc2324 Posted March 11, 2010 Author Share Posted March 11, 2010 That's so wrong but right!What scheme are you going to use? MH Think I`m going for a dark green top and grey underside. Need to do a bit of research on that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tc2324 Posted March 11, 2010 Author Share Posted March 11, 2010 Looks... erm... unusual One thing - you seem to have put the jet engine pods on bottom backwards - does that matter in this context? Bl00dy well hope not. Checked model in a panic, (cheers for that) , and they are the correct way round. It may be that they are upside down that gives them a weird look?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 poo-poo yeah! You're right... I think you could be right about why I thought that too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 Is it going to be a RAAF bird then :-) ? Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tc2324 Posted March 11, 2010 Author Share Posted March 11, 2010 Is it going to be a RAAF bird then :-) ?Dan Nah, Luftwaffe late 1943. Why did you think it would be RAAF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troffa Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 That looks fantastic, and very authentic as well, the old maxim "if it looks right, it flies right" comes to mind. I can believe that that aircraft actually exists in a parallel universe! (In which incidently I am Bill Gates and married to Grace Park and Charlize Theron- poligamy is all the rage in the 26th Dimension!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Headroom Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 Nah, Luftwaffe late 1943. Why did you think it would be RAAF? captured by the Aussies in North Africa? MH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 Nah, Luftwaffe late 1943. Why did you think it would be RAAF? It's upside down! Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 looks funny... jet engines, but still fixed gear. If you add some big rivets, brass fittings and pipes, it would fix the steampunk group build Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tc2324 Posted March 12, 2010 Author Share Posted March 12, 2010 It's upside down!Dan Dan, you was obviously more awake than I was last night....... Cheers for the comments gents and now I`ve looked at it this morning, it does have a certain `Westland Whirwind` look about it...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wkennerley Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 Damn you nicked my idea for the Whiff GB, kinda. I hadn't planned on using a stuka but I did acquire 262 engines. Oh well I will still do mine I doubt my back story or 'probability' will be as good as yours. I do like your idea though. cheers wayne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hypnobear Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 Well, it's definitely not what I imagined it to look like! Looks almost like a Whirlwind fighter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tc2324 Posted March 14, 2010 Author Share Posted March 14, 2010 Finished product and backstory...., Enjoy. Junkers Ju 87`S` `Bodenkampfflug Dusenfugzeug` By May 1943 General der Schlachtflieger (General of Close-Support Aviation) Ernst Kupfer had announced that further development of the Junkers Ju 87 would "hardly bring any further tactical value". Due to the age of the design and it`s now apparent vulnerability to more modern fighter types and air defences the `Stuka` production line began to decline to around 200 units a month. In a bid to win new favour with the Luftwaffe and Erhard Milch, Hermann Pohlmann of the Junkers company looked into various ideas of extending the Junkers Ju 87 production life. He first looked at why the Ju 87 had started to suffer heavy losses and after listening to various story`s from aircrew returning from the Eastern Front, speed seemed to be the main contributing factor. Coupled with the fact that `new` jet engines had started to become available to potential designers and the Ju 87 `G` had started to prove an effective `tank buster` on the Eastern Front, Pohlmann contacted the Junkers Jet Engineering division and requested two Junkers Jumo 004 B-1 turbojets to be delivered to his `workshop`. On 3rd December 1943 he revealed the Junkers Ju 87 `S` as his latest creation to Milch and other high ranking officials as an alternative to more advanced and complex ground attack redesigns. His argument was simple. Other than some basic modifications, most of the production line already existed for 90% of the new aircraft. Where the `Propeller` Ju 87 failed, the `jet` Ju 87 excelled. Speed was the key. The idea was to `speed cruise` to the target area at an average 450 mph, once on target, reduce the throttle to carry out the attack, then when the attack was over, open the throttles again and use speed to escape. The design, the airframe and jet combination was never built for continued high speed manouvering, but as a means of getting the aircraft to the target in quick time and avoid enemy fighters. The two 37mm canon were taken from the wings and now placed where the propeller engine use to be housed. This made the guns more stable and also the test pilots felt it was easier to `point and shoot` at targets. Each gun could now hold around 90 rounds each and the front intakes were now used to cool the weapons instead of the engine. The crew gunner was removed as rear defence was now deemed irrelevent. One interesting design of note were the engines which were placed on top of the wings. Two reasons for this were that is was noted that Foerign Object Damage was easier to get ingested in to jet engines placed under wings and as the aircraft was designed as a Ground Attack aircraft having the engines on top of the wings provided them with some form of protection. (Forty years later Fairchild Republic would copy and use a similar philosophy when designing their legendary A-10 Warthog). Impressed, (although some reports indicate that it was more out of sympathy for a loyal German aircraft designer), Milch ordered 15 test flights to see how effective this aircraft could be. Unfortunatly, on February 26th 1944 during it`s twelth test flight during a firing test of it`s main weapons, the Ju 87 `S` lost a wing in a shallow dive and crashed with the loss of it`s test pilot. Afterwards it was concluded that the stesses on the wing by the engine and firing of the canons caused what we now know as micro fractures in the main wing spar. Despite many pilots reporting the aircraft to handle well at speed, in a dive, acruate firing aim and a good payload, it had got to that time of the war where Germany could not spare any more Jumo Jet engines and a second Ju 87 `S` was never complted. Below are the only images to remain of this little known chapter of the Junkers Company history. (Colour pics availiable if you want them....) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex Posted March 14, 2010 Share Posted March 14, 2010 looks funny to be a bit nitpicking: I would have removed the cooler and air intakes in the front region, it makes it a bit more elegant, and after all, they're not needed anymore. Nice idea and well executed! Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hypnobear Posted March 14, 2010 Share Posted March 14, 2010 Very nice and unusual! Going to do the ME 262 prop version now? I'd like to see some colour pics too, please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tc2324 Posted March 14, 2010 Author Share Posted March 14, 2010 (edited) Cheers chaps. 262 on `hold` for now until I get some smaller props.... As requested a few colour shots...... Edited March 14, 2010 by tc2324 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-32 Posted March 15, 2010 Share Posted March 15, 2010 Sweet as, that looks really..................real! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now