did Germany make any attempt to improve this plane’s ability to fight another fighter?
or they simply treat it like a small bomber
As Flampanzer said, the only eficient way to protect a Stuka was with the fighter escort.
However there was plans to enhance the Stuka speed, armor , and defensive armament in a drastic measure, that was the ju-187.
where did u find that pic, cause ive never heard of that aircraft
where did u find that pic, cause ive never heard of that aircraft
Hummm…Did you check the link I ve posted ?
Once again – sorry for being late, honorable gentlemen. I shall try to compensate my objectively caused absence.
Yes, my dear Mr. Flampanzer – once again I do agree with you. The development potential of Bf 109 probably was near its end; however I think that some further chances still were available at least in 1945. This matter is, unfortunately, still insufficiently elaborated, but some preliminary investigations are suggesting that some highly intriguing solutions were developed in the final stage of WW2.
The Bf 109 S, for example, reportedly developed by Caudron-Renault in Paris, and submitted as a prototype Bf 109 V24, was designed with a completely new, revolutionary inventive system of compressed air boundary layer discharge. Essence of this indeed ingenious invention, later very commonly used - especially in 1960’s! - is a directional dissipation of compressed air that prevents the boundary layer on the upper surface of the wing from stagnating, thus improving lift. At low speeds the amount of air being delivered by this system - theoretically - could be a significant fraction of the overall airflow, effectively tricking the plane into artificially created flying at a higher speed. As we do know today, blown flaps are capable to improve the lift of a wing by two to three times. This highly inventive suggestion was near its finishing point at the time of France’s liberation. Just imagine a combination of a DB 605 L and this new wing, coupled with a new VDM four-blade spinner…
And now back to our main theme - Ju 87.
Often ridiculed as a slow and clumsy airplane, the Stuka actually was quite controllable, stable and surprisingly maneuverable aircraft, even a machine with certain aerobatic qualities. However, like many single-engine bombers, it performed poorly if confronted with rapid, undoubtedly superior enemy fighters. For example, here is an original, by Ju 87 crew taken photography of classicist, via large caliber bomb conducted tank-hunting action. Presented angle is fairly garrulous.
Ju 87 – tank-hunting action, France, 1940
Ju 87 was also quite strong and reliable machine, easy to operate and maintain on the muddy, poor-quality front airfields. This quite unknown photo of mud-covered combat airdrome speaks for itself too. I am completely certain that presented operating conditions would be more than sufficient to bring to a halt regular combat-activity of many other warplane types.
JU87s of III Gruppe Stukageschwader 51 – unknown field-airdrome
Structural rigidity of the Ju 87 airframe was appreciable too. Without doubt, a little bit old-fashioned product of “Junkers Ironworks” was able to survive appreciable amount of damage.
Fuselage damage on Ju 87 caused by enemy AAA fire
Regularly highlighted inverted gull wings of Ju 87 were not only capable to ensure stabile flight, but also to absorb startlingly severe damages.
Highly damaged left wing of the Ju 87
All in all, Ju 87 proved as an excellent and devastating weapon in the hands of well-trained, experienced aircrews, who knew how to use it.
When the air superiority in the areas of the conflict was assured, the Ju 87 Stuka was able to create more devastation than a great number of people would like to admit. Pin-point accuracy and complexity of AA artillery fire against bombers already in their dives, have made this airplane a thorn in side of Allied ground forces and navy.
Finally, a tiny personal reflection: perhaps the immortal achievements of an another, almost forgotten, this time allied combat air group that was also equipped with supposedly outdated and inadequate airplanes – those achievements accomplished by USN VB-6 and VS-6 led by Lieutenant Commander Clarence Wade McClusky - outfitted with equally immortal, outdated Douglas SBD Dauntless, will be able to permanently demonstrate that seemingly an obsolescent weapon with a mixture of technical virtues and flaws could be used to excellent effect by soldiers who knew how to make use of the virtues and how to deal with the flaws for the benefaction of their country.
Those previously mentioned, apparently outmoded planes, honorable ladies and gentlemen, were able to score in solely 6 minutes the biggest naval victory in the maritime WW2 history, with an completely inferior force inflicting a terrible defeat on a superior one because the virtues of the “Slow But Deadly” Dauntless were completely able to recompense for its defects.
The very same conclusion we could extract out of a Ju 87 story.
In the meantime, as always - all the best!
i wonder did other bombers end up making the sound like JU-87 when they dive, after all, those sound does makes a terrify effect on both military and civilians.
sorry for being late
You are more than forgiven, Nice gallery Librarian.
i wonder did other bombers end up making the sound like JU-87 when they dive, after all, those sound does makes a terrify effect on both military and civilians
I am not really sure if after 1941 the siren worked as in the early days, Is not very wise to tell th enemy when you are attacking. However some german commanders were delighted with the idea to had a siren in his combat machines, even I read a recomendation of a Flametrower tank commander to install sirens in thiers tanks…as late as october 1944.
Very interesting footage. Ju-87 as test bed for ejection seats.
some pics of this aircraft. you might guessed it - not from a real one …
it is the D-version with the two 3,7PAK guns. a nicely done model in metal, scale 1/72. I have to admit, I like the shape of this machine somehow, some regard it as an ugly bird, but I think the Ju 87 has at least some sex-appeal.
jens
Nice model, the cannon armed aircraft was the G variant.
oh, correct. I was only looking at the more streamlined canopy and thinking of the “D”.
jens
wonder did other bombers end up making the sound like JU-87 when they dive, after all, those sound does makes a terrify effect on both military and civilians
No my dear Mr. FW 190 Pilot, that sound was a unique one. However, I think that this specific issue deserves some further explanations.
As you know, each person has a different perception of the noise from an aircraft. The airplane noise a human being hears and the person’s perception and response to it depends on the characteristics of the noise source and the path the noise travels to reach that person.
Most noise is caused by the unsteady airflow over various components - wings, flaps and slats, horizontal and vertical tails, the edges and tips of various control surfaces, as well as by the specific and completely individual sound of an airplane engine used in a given type of airplane. Various aerodynamic surfaces on the airplane produce significant, unsteady flow of the air, which produces audible sound over a wide range of frequencies.
Human ears are more sensitive to sounds of certain frequencies, and airplanes are producing wide range of different frequencies, but they are all generally heard as a specific mix a low-frequency vibration, or rumbling of the vibrant aerodynamic surfaces, subjugated to the sound of the engine operating at full or less than full power, and by the high frequency output of the propeller at the front of the engine.
However, specific high-pitched sound of a diving plane is a factual result of a Doppler-effect generated change of a basic, complex frequency observed from a moving sound source. A good example of this is a siren from an ambulance car, which is the moving sound source that is coming toward the observer. As the sound source approaches the observer, the pitch is always higher. The faster the sound source is moving, the higher the pitch of sound is heard as it is moving toward the observer.
Initially, when diving with extended dive-brakes, Ju 87 had generated an awful screaming noise caused by the stream of air rushing over its body. Later, however, this specific but generally completely “natural” sound was augmented by miniature twin-bladed propellers fitted on the landing gear, which produced a siren effect.
German pursuit toward over-psychologization of a basically completely typical aerial combat conduct produced some quite peculiar solutions. For example, even some german standard bombs (typical example: SC 250) were equipped with additional shrieks, and subsequently they made an intense scream as they fell on their targets. This psychological warfare initially was effective, and helped to break the fighting spirit of the unprepared civil population or insufficiently trained allied soldiers, but later this solution was abandoned as completely ineffective.
Prepared SC 250 bombs outfitted with supplementary whistles, arranged for loading into the He 111 H 6 bomb bay
Source: Manfred Griehl – Luftwaffe at War, Lionel Leventhal Ltd, 1999.
However, as previously appropriately observed by Mr. Panzerknacker, this praxis has been only a palliative answer to the tactical problems. As we all know, honorable ladies and gentlemen, battlefields are usually quite noisy milieus. What if your enemy is stone-deaf because he is fighting in a thundering tank, for example? In that case a properly solution will be only a good aimed and sufficiently powerful explosive charge (for example 129 kg of Amatol-TNT 60/40 mix) fitted in a forged steel encasement. The fighting will of an enemy probably will be the same, but his tracks and sprockets surely will be devastated.
Anti-tank effect of SC 250 delivered by Ju 87, vicinity of Smolensk, July 1941.
BT 5 overturned by explosion of a SC 250, July 1941.
And if enemy was completely unprepared for attack by virtue of nonexistence of any anticipative signals ,success of the Luftwaffe was almost guaranteed. As you can see, the good old Ju 87 was completely able to effectuate even the intrinsic worth of a… really low-level bombing.
Low-level bombing conducted by Ju 87, Pervomaiskiy, Kharkov district, August 1941.
And thank you once again for your compliments, my dear mr. Panzerknacker. I shall try not to disappoint you in my successive post.
The germans just love to make noise. 
Anti-tank effect of SC 250 delivered by Ju 87, vicinity of Smolensk, July 1941.
Very nice pic, notice that this tank is one of the few T-34 equipped with a long 57mm gun.
thanks, Librarian. that is one of the best reply i ever get in a forum!
I think the screaming of the Stukas was only effective at teh start. Soon enough it was realised that as an aircraft they were at the mercy of others such as the Hurricane and Spitfire.
That and the bombs, although highly accurate (for the time), were quite small. One run was all they could manage before they had to go home.
yeah, but that one run is pretty precious hit though. you can see in previous post that it knocks out the russian tank. i dont think it can be done efficently with a bomber.
The sirens fitted to the Ju-87 were unofficially called ‘Jericho Horns’ and were an idea of Erhard Milch as a means to increase the psychological impact on enemy infantry in particular.
As a matter of interest the Ju-87 nearly did not reach service as Oberst Wolfram von Richthofen the then head of the Technische AMT cancelled the entire project. The very next day von Richthofen was replaced by Ernst Udet(an unabashed admirer of Stuka bombing) and the project was reinstated.
Another attempt to can the Ju-87 occured in 1939, but the success of the Ju-87 in Poland forced Goring to intercede and Ju-87 production was actually increased. Throuhout 1940 there were continued warnings from within the Luftwaffe the Ju-87 was obsolete and vunerable to enemy fighters.
The decimation of the Ju-87 force over Britain had a shattering effect on Goring.
Regards Digger.
Stukas also served in Spain, quite well. They were able to provide fire support to troops, well ahead of what conventional guns in teh Artillery were able.
Yes, they were able to destry tanks, but one hit was all you got. Then off home for tea and medals.
Certainly in the early days anyway.
thanks, Librarian. that is one of the best reply i ever get in a forum!
That is just Librarian style. 
If you happen to go to Normandy,
you must visit the Caen war memorial museum,
where they have reproduced a nice french countryside road. As you walk in, you start to hear the stuka siren diving at you !
I’ll tell you that you instinctively search for the ditches on the side of the road…
Ref the earlier question about the pilot blacking out.
The plane had no facility to gauge whether or not the pilot had blacked out.
The redesigned efforst (of which there were many) would probably have not been as good, for the very reasons that they were designed to be.
A faster, armoured and heavier aircraft wouldn’t have had the characteristics for dive bombing. It is strange that the modern A-10 was very similar to the Ju-87 in that although both were fearsome aggressors against ground targets, they were pitifully poor at Ait to Air.
The large calibre guns of the Ju 87G, and a few other aircraft, were used as base points for reasoning in fitting the fearsome 30 mm GAU-8/A Avenger Gatling gun in to the A10 as a primary weapon.
thanks, Librarian. that is one of the best reply i ever get in a forum!
Oh, thank you my dear Mr. FW190 Pilot. I felt that some kind of a scientifically based evaluation was really needed in this knotty issue.
Also thanks for the admiring comment my dear Mr. Panzerknacker. However, I have to admit that I am still a little bit uncertain about that possibility. Unfortunately, that German photographer who took this picture has picked an attractive, but from strictly technical point of view fairly discouraging angle – the most important component, that famous additional fitting ring, that was added to compensate different diameters of the 76 mm F-34 and the 57 mm ZIS-4 gun is completely imperceptible, because the complete frontal part of the gun mantlet is in shade. On the other hand, “our” barrel is somehow… short. In any case, I am not an expert in this field, so I’ll take your judgment for granted.
That and the bombs, although highly accurate (for the time), were quite small. One run was all they could manage before they had to go home… Yes, they were able to destry tanks, but one hit was all you got. Then off home for tea and medals.
Well, not obligatorily small, my dear Mr. 1000ydstare – JU 87 B, for example, was completely capable to expedite even that 1-ton monster SC 1000. Furthermore, that type was completely capable to carry and deliver also a deadly combination composed of one SC 250 and four SC 50, and Ju 87 D was even capable for carrying one SC 500 and two SC 250 bombs. If a bombing was carried out manually, then wing bombs were dropped firstly in pairs, and after that fuselage bomb was distributed too.
Here you have a fairly good presentation of those bomb-carrying potentials.
Ju 87 B with four wing-loaded SC 50 bombs, Royal Hungarian Air Force, 1942.
SC 500 loading onto Ju 87 D fuselage bomb-rack
Consequently, at least two bombing runs were completely possible in each action, my dear 1000ydstare.
And now something about bombing accuracy. Narrative descriptions are usually very boring material, but in our case we have some luck, i.e. German photographers were - by chance - quite agile in those times, so some additional photographs will be able to confirm pinpoint accuracy-bombing potentials of the Ju 87 Stuka in different types of combat actions.
Here you have almost unknown photographs of German attack on Soviet battleship Oktjabarskaja Revolucija, formerly known as Gangut. The date of action is September 21st, 1941 and action was carried out by Stukageschwader 2 Immelmann.
Soviet battleship Oktyabarskaya Revolutsia – direct hit of a SC 250 and two close missings of SC 50 bombs
Already heavily damaged Battleship Oktyabarskaya Revolutsia under attack – additional hits of two SC 50 bombs
I have to break my post here because I have received this massage:
You have included 13 images in your message. You are limited to using 4 images so please go back and correct the problem and then continue again.
I have to admit that this information is a little bit annoying, but no problem…
