Author Topic: Ju87 attcking B-17?  (Read 2985 times)

Offline oakranger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8380
      • http://www.slybirds.com/
Re: Ju87 attcking B-17?
« Reply #30 on: February 04, 2010, 07:22:37 PM »
Looking at the report . . . the only eyewitness reference to the JU-87 is in the part quoted above, from a radio operator.  No gunner claims, no other eyewitness reports of JU-87s.  And he describes the JU-87 as a "Stacey".  I have never heard of this term before.  

My take is that he was likely mistaken, but because the radio operator reported seeing JU-87 "Stacey dive bombers", it made it into the summary that JU-87s were present.

The claim is dubious IMO.

Vern L. Moncur is a Pilot. 
Oaktree

56th Fighter group

Offline E25280

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
      • http://125thspartanforums.com
Re: Ju87 attcking B-17?
« Reply #31 on: February 04, 2010, 07:30:44 PM »
Vern L. Moncur is a Pilot. 
Yes, and the heading before the paragraph mentioning the JU-87s says:

Quote
Comment from James S. Andrus, Moncur's Radio Operator
Brauno in a past life, followed by LTARget
SWtarget in current incarnation
Captain and Communications Officer~125th Spartans

"Proudly drawing fire so that my brothers may pass unharmed."

Offline oakranger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8380
      • http://www.slybirds.com/
Re: Ju87 attcking B-17?
« Reply #32 on: February 04, 2010, 07:32:12 PM »
here is 303rd BG web site. 

http://www.303rdbg.com/
Oaktree

56th Fighter group

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: Ju87 attcking B-17?
« Reply #33 on: February 04, 2010, 08:20:18 PM »
Looking at the report . . . the only eyewitness reference to the JU-87 is in the part quoted above, from a radio operator.  No gunner claims, no other eyewitness reports of JU-87s.  And he describes the JU-87 as a "Stacey".  I have never heard of this term before.  

My take is that he was likely mistaken, but because the radio operator reported seeing JU-87 "Stacey dive bombers", it made it into the summary that JU-87s were present.

The claim is dubious IMO.

Never heard the Stuka referred to as a Stacey either, I think the radio operator was using Stacey in the phonetic to represent the S in Stuka. 

I still agree with you that the event described probably didn't happen and the some type of Luftwaffe plane was misidentified as a Stuka.  With the slow speed and relatively poor handling of the Stuka, especially at 20,000ft, you would have thought there would be at least some B-17 gunner reports of shooting down one or two Stukas but there isn't anything at all.  Even in the other crew reports from that mission, none report seeing Ju 87s, only that one bomber. 

I would like to see more verifiable evidence other than 'comments from the radio operator'.

ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline oakranger

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8380
      • http://www.slybirds.com/
Re: Ju87 attcking B-17?
« Reply #34 on: February 05, 2010, 01:21:34 AM »
Never heard the Stuka referred to as a Stacey either, I think the radio operator was using Stacey in the phonetic to represent the S in Stuka. 

I still agree with you that the event described probably didn't happen and the some type of Luftwaffe plane was misidentified as a Stuka.  With the slow speed and relatively poor handling of the Stuka, especially at 20,000ft, you would have thought there would be at least some B-17 gunner reports of shooting down one or two Stukas but there isn't anything at all.  Even in the other crew reports from that mission, none report seeing Ju 87s, only that one bomber. 

I would like to see more verifiable evidence other than 'comments from the radio operator'.

ack-ack

There are two witness report on the JU 87.
Oaktree

56th Fighter group

Offline E25280

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3475
      • http://125thspartanforums.com
Re: Ju87 attcking B-17?
« Reply #35 on: February 05, 2010, 05:57:56 PM »
There are two witness report on the JU 87.
Where is the other one, then?
Brauno in a past life, followed by LTARget
SWtarget in current incarnation
Captain and Communications Officer~125th Spartans

"Proudly drawing fire so that my brothers may pass unharmed."

Offline Vulcan

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9911
Re: Ju87 attcking B-17?
« Reply #36 on: February 11, 2010, 07:47:08 PM »
Didn't Stuka also refer to the JU-88? As in the Stuka was a generic term for dive bombers, both JU-87 and JU-88?

Offline Ack-Ack

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 25260
      • FlameWarriors
Re: Ju87 attcking B-17?
« Reply #37 on: February 11, 2010, 08:51:47 PM »
Not sure, at least I've never read the dive bomber varient of the Ju 88 being referred to as a "Stuka" but I have read in various publications that the C varient was given the generic name for heavy fighters "Zerstörer".  So it may have been that the dive bombing varient was also referred to as "Stuka" in some circles.


ack-ack
"If Jesus came back as an airplane, he would be a P-38." - WW2 P-38 pilot
Elite Top Aces +1 Mexican Official Squadron Song

Offline Charge

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3414
Re: Ju87 attcking B-17?
« Reply #38 on: February 12, 2010, 05:37:33 AM »
"Didn't Stuka also refer to the JU-88?"

Yes. Ju88 was the big Stuka and Ju87 was the little Stuka. Ju88 was build as a divebomber which it could do with StuVi divebomb sight. Without the weight from structural requirement to withstand the pull-up forces it would have been a very fast medium bomber. Even with the structural strength it had 80 degree dives were eventually prohibited because the wings could not take the stress.

-C+
"When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a giant meteor hurtling to the earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much screwed no matter what you wish for. Unless of course, it's death by meteorite."

Offline Wmaker

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5743
      • Lentolaivue 34 website
Re: Ju87 attcking B-17?
« Reply #39 on: February 12, 2010, 07:27:18 AM »
Yeh, Stuka is an acronym that comes from the word Sturzkampfflugzeug which means "divebomber" in english. Ju-88 and Ju-87 were both divebombers while at the same time, depending on the equipment on board, Ju-88 could also level bomb.
Wmaker
Lentolaivue 34

Thank you for the Brewster HTC!

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: Ju87 attcking B-17?
« Reply #40 on: February 15, 2010, 02:54:22 AM »
Never heard the allies use "Stuka" for anything but the JU87.
That Heinkel theory is perhaps worth a look. It is a much faster aircraft than the Stuka, and was around till 1944, mainly being used for the training role. It looks like this:


It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)