Landing and /or stall speed for Junkers 87 g ?

dieseltaylor · 08-11-2005, 01:50 PM

Any airspeed information on this version of the Stuka would be appreciated. This information for any variant might still be useful . Thanks

FLYBOYJ · 08-11-2005, 06:33 PM

You can but a flight manual for the JU-87 online (probably a repro). I would guess landing speeds would be about 90 mph, I would guess the thing would stall between 75 - 80 mph.

lesofprimus · 08-11-2005, 07:06 PM

As some fodder for the masses, here is a vid clip of a Ju-87G firing those sweet 37's...

Not really flying at stalling speed is he???

dieseltaylor · 08-12-2005, 02:00 AM

Thanks for the link. That really is brilliant stuff. Rudel said low speed was primary so I personally think it's not Rudel flying! and it is very late war in wooded terrain when things may have changed considerably from the days on the steppes.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 08-12-2005, 08:00 AM

Good video. I like it.

dieseltaylor · 08-12-2005, 09:24 AM

An amateur pilot has given a best guess speed of 100 knots - about 180kph.
It just looks fast : ).

As for the ability to hit small targets - the vulnerable bits of tanks etc that is still up for debate. I am conscious that some pilots are substantially better than average so I reconcile myself to eventually finding some info on hitting smallish targets from low and slow planes.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 08-12-2005, 10:40 AM

You would want to be slower in my opinion. I doubt the Stukas landing speed was 100 knots. I would think it would be slower.

lesofprimus · 08-12-2005, 04:04 PM

Here is a piece of an interview of one of the earliest Stuka pilots to serve in a specialized tank-destroying Staffel....

His name is Hermann Neumann.... In an interview with Ed McCaul, Neumann described some of his 368 combat missions, during which he was credited with destroying 68 Russian tanks and was recommended for the Ritterkreuz (Knight's Cross).....

I N T E R V I E W

TANK-BUSTING STUKA PILOT

By Ed McCaul

MH: How much danger was there at 100 meters if the tank would blow up? Would you not have to fly through the debris?

Neumann: After we fired out cannons, we would go to the right or left, but we did not directly fly over the tank. One time a Sergeant Ott was shooting at a Russian Klimenti Voroshilov KV-2 heavy tank that was in between a farm house and a barn. The KV-2 had a big square turret and heavy armor. Ott went down and shot but nothing happened. So he said, "OK, if it does not explode I will make so many holes in it that it will not be any good anymore!" So he went down again and when he was very close to the tank it exploded. The turret flew over his canopy. When we got back to the base he was shaking and kept saying, "I saw the turret over the top of my canopy!"

MH: How low would you have to fly to destroy a tank?

Neumann: For the Stalin we had to fly at 20 or 30 feet...(at) about 300 kilometers per hour. We would be flying that low for maybe five to 10 seconds. If you got them in your sights you only really needed a second or two. Remember, for the Stalin, our guns were adjusted for 100 meters. So, we had to get close to them.

MH: How was the morale in the unit when you arrived in December 1943?

Neumann: It was fine. We knew for what we were fighting. Ever tank I destroyed was one less tank that could possibly get to Germany. It was a fight to the end.

plan_D · 08-12-2005, 09:10 PM

That's amazing. A great piece of history there, les. I'm quite astounded by the KV-2 blowing apart and it's turret above his canopy! Those things had a maximum of 152 mm armour protection.

FLYBOYJ · 08-12-2005, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dieseltaylor

An amateur pilot has given a best guess speed of 100 knots - about 180kph.
It just looks fast : ).

I'm not an amateur pilot, I'm a flight instructor - sometimes I do get paid to fly.....

Quote:

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

You would want to be slower in my opinion. I doubt the Stukas landing speed was 100 knots. I would think it would be slower.

Based on the size of the Stuka, it's weight and engine HP - I would compare it to a T-6 in normal operations, take off, level turns landings (although the Stuka had about 600 more HP both of them had a top speed at abut 240 mph). A T-6 stalls at 65 MPH - so you're slowest final approach would be 1.3 times that (1.3xVs1) of stall speed. which means the T-6 landed at about 85 mph and it weighed close to 6,000 lbs. The Stuka in some models weighed over 10,000 lbs - that's a lot of mass even when using full flaps....

In comparison - the P-51s land at about 100 mph, F-86, at about 105 mph, P-38 about 105 mph.

I really don't think 90 mph is unreasonable at landing, that would give a stall speed of 70 mph - pretty slow for a plane that weighs 10,000 lbs........

lesofprimus · 08-13-2005, 06:09 AM

So someone tell me how fast in mph is 300kts, which was the attack speed generally used for the Ju-87G..........

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 08-13-2005, 07:25 AM

No I agree with you FBJ. I was just saying slower than 100 knots.

evangilder · 08-13-2005, 08:14 AM

You mean 300 kph, Les? That is what he said in the quote above. Anyway 300 km/hr is about 186 MPH.

300 kts would be about 345 MPH.

DerAdlerIstGelandet · 08-13-2005, 08:22 AM

FLYBOYJ · 08-13-2005, 11:12 AM

Ditto! - In a dive I would guess the Stuka would pull 345 mph (300 knots) easily