Question on Stukas?

[radic202]

Hey my well educated History buff/brethren here on the Forums, have a question for you all:

Just finished watching "Fortress Brest" which is an incredibly well done Russian WW2 film and there is one scene that show Stukas bombing the Fortress. This I have seen plenty of times on Documentaries and other WW2 film but why is it that the Stukas ALWAYS have their wheels open and not tucked in? I thought that maybe they just are not designed to be folded in but would that not impeded them on their straight down bombing runs or machine gun fire runs?

[/img]

[/img]


If any of you have the answer I would truly appreciate it.

All the best and thanks in advance.

[Jevhaddah]

Stukas had a fixed non-retractable undercarriage [:)]

Cheers

Jev

[rwenstrup]

The Stukas were an early war design. The landing gear were permanently in place and did not retract...

[radic202]

Thanks gang! That is what I pretty much thought. But would that not cause air/wind interference or something in that genre when doing precise bombing runs? I know they were not designed to fight other aircraft but still.

Very much appreciate your help and answers.

[Aurelian]

In the case of the Val, it was felt that retractable gear was not worth the complication vis a vis reduced drag.

The chief designer of the Stuka focused on a simple and robust design. So I would imagine he felt the same way as the above.

Fixed gear also makes it easier to survive a rough landing or use on a rough landing strip.

[sullafelix]

They were all copies of an American plane,whose name and nomenclature escape me.

Udet fell in love with it when he was in the US and bought several to bring back to Germany.

[wodin]

The film was good..apart from the usual Russian portrayal of the Germans which are usually inept and utterly useless.

[Walloc]

ORIGINAL: sulla05

They were all copies of an American plane,whose name and nomenclature escape me.

Udet fell in love with it when he was in the US and bought several to bring back to Germany.

Curtiss Hawk II (export designation of the F11C-2 Goshawk Helldiver).

To OP: In some ways its an advantage to have a fair amount of drag in dive bombers, for lower speed/ higher accuracy, plus what was structurally sound in teh actual dive. Having a non-retractable undercarriage to some extend fixed what in other planes have to be done other wise.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dive_brake

[Josh]

As it so happens I was watching this Youtube doc about the Stuka, coverint the undercarriage and the US predecessor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0o0RbS3aEp4

[shunwick]

I have always had a soft spot for the Stuka.

It was the first model airplane I ever built when I was knee-high to a grasshopper. It took me and my dad about two weeks to build mainly because we had to wait to get the correct colours from the model shop. That was so many years ago... Happy memories....


Best wishes,
Steve

[Missouri_Rebel]

ORIGINAL: shunwick

I have always had a soft spot for the Stuka.

It was the first model airplane I ever built when I was knee-high to a grasshopper. It took me and my dad about two weeks to build mainly because we had to wait to get the correct colours from the model shop. That was so many years ago... Happy memories....


Best wishes,
Steve

Me too but it was when I first heard Pink Floyd The Wall as a 10 y.o.and my older brother explained to me about the siren.

[Capt. Harlock]

The Stukas were an early war design. The landing gear were permanently in place and did not retract...

Which made the Stukas much like the British "stringbag" torpedo bombers: highly potent if there were no enemy fighters in the area, and essentially deathtraps if there were. Even by the time of the Battle of Britain the Stukas were found too slow to survive against Hurricanes and Spitfires.

[radic202]

ORIGINAL: Josh

As it so happens I was watching this Youtube doc about the Stuka, coverint the undercarriage and the US predecessor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0o0RbS3aEp4

Thanks for the link. I ended up watching like 4 videos in their entirety on German Warplanes of WW2. They did mention that "noise" that Stukas make when dive bombing and how that alone would scare the "crap" out of any one that could hear it coming. Was that noise a deliberate added noise or simply the way it panned out?

Again thanks for the info.

[radic202]

ORIGINAL: Capt. Harlock

The Stukas were an early war design. The landing gear were permanently in place and did not retract...

Which made the Stukas much like the British "stringbag" torpedo bombers: highly potent if there were no enemy fighters in the area, and essentially deathtraps if there were. Even by the time of the Battle of Britain the Stukas were found too slow to survive against Hurricanes and Spitfires.

It's funny any main war films featuring Stukas usually are seen only in Eastern European battles and maybe 1 or 2 African battles. That Stuka you tube video explained how they were easily shot down by Fighters in the Battle of Britain, hence probably why they are never a real part of Western battles after the Allies started dominating the skies over England/France and the Benelux countries. I also had no idea that the Italian Airforce had acquired some but not to the same success.

[Mobeer]

ORIGINAL: radic202
Thanks for the link. I ended up watching like 4 videos in their entirety on German Warplanes of WW2. They did mention that "noise" that Stukas make when dive bombing and how that alone would scare the "crap" out of any one that could hear it coming. Was that noise a deliberate added noise or simply the way it panned out?
Again thanks for the info.

Some JU-87B carried air siren's called "Jericho Trumpets" that made the wailing sound, fitted on the undercarriage supports. Who invented the idea is unclear; Ernest Udet and Adolf Hitler have both been suggested. It seems likely there was some similar, quieter sound during a dive that inspired the siren idea. The bombs carried could also have cardboard whistles attached to add noise.

The siren's had an initial shock effect that wore off, and were later removed\no longer fitted as they reduced performance of an already slow plane.

[Fred98]

I built my first 1/72 scale Airfix Stuka when I was about 8 in about 1968.

After I "grew up" to the ripe old age of about 15 I scrapped it and built another using all the weathering techniques I had learnt from Military Modeler magazine.

The model has since disappeared but I still have many copies of Military Modeler magazine from the 1970's

(the software here seems to think I have mis-spelt "Modeler" but the July 1979 edition in front of me confirms the spelling)

[AbwehrX]

The model has since disappeared but I still have many copies of Military Modeler magazine from the 1970's

Would you care to part with some of those? $$$ [:D]