Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums
 



Go Back   Aircraft of World War II - Warbird Forums > World War II - Aviation > Aviation

Aviation Discussion on the aircraft of WWII.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-15-2008, 04:36 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
rochie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: billingham nr middlesbrough uk
Posts: 3,107
ju 87 undercarridge

i've just watched a show on the ju 87 and it left me wondering why was the stuka built with fixed undercarridge, would it have been a better and longer lived front line weapon if it could raise it wheels or would it have been impossible to have raised wheels on a ju 87
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Ju87-90+.jpg (10.9 KB, 46 views)
__________________

"We're not easily frightened.
Also we know how hard it is for an army to cross the Channel — the last little corporal to try it came a cropper.
So don't threaten or dictate to us until you're marching up Whitehall! ...and even then we won't listen!"
quote from B.O.B movie



Last edited by rochie; 07-15-2008 at 04:39 PM.
rochie is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2008, 04:45 PM   #2
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 55
Ju-87 undercarriage

Quote:
Originally Posted by rochie View Post
i've just watched a show on the ju 87 and it left me wondering why was the stuka built with fixed undercarridge, would it have been a better and longer lived front line weapon if it could raise it wheels or would it have been impossible to have raised wheels on a ju 87
The Luftwaffe had plans to replace the Ju-87 Stuka with the Ju-187, which had retractable landing gear and the famous bent wings, but the Ju-187 didn't have a sufficient performance advantage to make production worthwhile. (The Ju-187's speed was only 249 m.p.h.) Personally, I don't know that giving the Ju-87 retractable gear would have done much good; it still wouldn't have been able to elude enemy fighters which would still have a 100 m.p.h. advantage; IMO some World War II aircraft that had fixed landing gear (like the Japanese Aichi D3A Val dive bomber) didn't need retractable gear.
Jerry W. Loper is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2008, 04:49 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
rochie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: billingham nr middlesbrough uk
Posts: 3,107
and i imagine the fw 190 could do all the attack work that was needed so why spend the time, money and material for little or no gain in performance
__________________

"We're not easily frightened.
Also we know how hard it is for an army to cross the Channel — the last little corporal to try it came a cropper.
So don't threaten or dictate to us until you're marching up Whitehall! ...and even then we won't listen!"
quote from B.O.B movie


rochie is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2008, 04:54 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Aquincum, Pannonia Prima
Posts: 784
Fixed landing wheels are rather useful for a dive bomber (which is why they typically kept it), they limit the speed of the dive and probably it is structurally also beneficial (no need to weaken the wing structure with wheel bays etc).

And indeed JaBo versions of the FW 190s replaced to Stukas to considerable extent later in the war.
__________________
__________________________________________________

http://kurfurst.org
http://kurfurst.freeforums.org/index.php
Kurfürst is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-2008, 04:58 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
rochie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: billingham nr middlesbrough uk
Posts: 3,107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurfürst View Post
Fixed landing wheels are rather useful for a dive bomber (which is why they typically kept it), they limit the speed of the dive and probably it is structurally also beneficial (no need to weaken the wing structure with wheel bays etc).

And indeed JaBo versions of the FW 190s replaced to Stukas to considerable extent later in the war.
i never thought of the wheels as simple dive brakes cheers Kurfürst
__________________

"We're not easily frightened.
Also we know how hard it is for an army to cross the Channel — the last little corporal to try it came a cropper.
So don't threaten or dictate to us until you're marching up Whitehall! ...and even then we won't listen!"
quote from B.O.B movie


rochie is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Spurl this Post!Reddit! Wong this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:55 PM.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0
Ad Management plugin by RedTyger
Design by HTWoRKS


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118