Ju-287 Jet Bomber

Discussion in 'Aviation' started by Kiwikid, Oct 25, 2006.

  1. Kiwikid

    Kiwikid Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Airline catering
    Location:
    Wellington, New Zealand
    I've repeated my post from another thread here because I'd like to hear other people's views. I also think it is a subject worth exploring on it's own. I previously wrote:

     
  2. DerAdlerIstGelandet

    DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crew Chief
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    41,768
    Likes Received:
    684
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    A&P - Aircraft Technician
    Location:
    USA/Germany
    My take on it is this:

    Interesting design. Too late to do anything and would never have been more than a stop gap until something better came along. It was pieced together my too many parts from too many aircraft.

    The 17 test flights flown by the V-1 proved the aircraft handled extremely well.

    The V-2 was later flown by the Russians and the V-3 never got off the drawing board.
     
  3. Smokey

    Smokey Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2004
    Messages:
    532
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
  4. delcyros

    delcyros Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,037
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Berlin (Kreuzberg)
    My two cents on this matter:

    It´s a deathtrap.
    Sorry, as much as I like the idea of design, it simply was way beyond the technical possibilities of Germany (esspeccially with the shortages of high grade materials Germany was subjected to in mind)

    The technical reasons for this are the following:
    1.) engines: The Jumo-012 wasn´t avaiable (not even in prototype stage), it would take until late 46 that series of them become avaiable. The Jumo-004, even in it´s late war improved -D high altitude subvariant, doesn´t has the lifetime to be servicable for the -287: Two longtime sorties and You will need to replace all six engines!
    The BMW-003, esspeccially the -003D with better fuel consumption does has the lifetime to be servicable but it lacks the thrust output. A Nuke loaden -287 requires 6-8 (!) -003´s to take off, even with RATO. The slower six engined variant envisioned triangular fittings (The V-3 had them, actually it left the drawing boards, there are photo´s about the wing section of the V-3 with three BMW-003 around here...), which turned out to be prone to violent vibrations, so no acceptable possibility.

    2.) Structural reasons:
    Despite having some benefitial effects in high speed and low speed handling respectively, the swept forward wing had very negative effects on the aeroelastics of the whole wingsection, questioning the design. This also was the reason why the USSR, despite test results, refused to adopt the swept forward idea. Indeed the X-29 solved this problem with compound construction and high grade synthetic materials. Unbeloved truth is that high aspect ratio wings do have a very low critical G-number. In case of the Ju-287 V1 it was forbidden to sustain 3 g-loadings for a longer period.
    Another problem showed the Ju-287 V2 in Russia: At high speeds the wingtips suffered violent stalls. This effect is relative to the higher elasticity of the wooden/metal wingstructure. Higher elasticity in this respect is negative. It would require a steel wing to overcome this, but such construction would impose unsuited weights as well.



    And as a sidenote: The Tu-16 is an independent development which is partly influenced by some prelimenary design sketches of Heinkel, Baade and TUPOLEV. Tupeolevs proposals actually was choosen for beeing modified to the Tu-16. Neither Fuselage nor wing nor engines were copied or based on german design. Complete new design, perhaps it is allowed to say that some of the theoretical background for the technical works were heavily influenced by the swept wing concept of A. Busemann, but that´s very general and also true for other nations.
     
  5. Kiwikid

    Kiwikid Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Airline catering
    Location:
    Wellington, New Zealand
    I was aware of the lineage to the EF-140 when I posted and I think it's fair to say the Il-28 was the ultimate progeny of the Ju-287.

    What I ment by reference to the Tu-16 is the Ju-287 was the antecedent of the EF132 which if you look at that aircraft, clearly led to the Tu-16:

    Junkers Ju EF 132 Luft '46 entry

    Marek Rys's Junkers Ju EF132 Luft Art Images

    Yes it was cobbled together quickly as a proof of concept vehicle. Yes it was superceded by the V2 and V3 designs. That fact however by itself does not disqualify it, nor the possible intended use. Hindsight is 20:20 and easy for us to say now, unaware of the pressures it's designers were under.

    The aeroelasticity problem you refer to with the V2 aircraft did not arise with the slower Ju-287 V1. It was slow because of it's fixed undercarriage but still a relatively fast bomber in other terms. It wasn't intended to manouver like a fighter plane.

    Re the wing flex problems of foward swept wings. Sure, carbon fibre wings and digital fly by wire relaxed stability would have helped heaps in 1944, but as a fast bomber how likely was it to need 3G manouvering ?

    As near as I can estimate the aircraft would have required about 3,000kg of fuel per hour. A return flight from Amsterdam to London required just over an hour. A mission over London if performed at night, I doubt many night fighters would have interdicted it, even in 1945.

    For a distance as short as London it would have managed a 4,000kg bomb load. In other words the weight of a typical uranium A-bomb from that era.

    If the mission were important enough the 20-25 hour TBO of the Jumo 004B engine was all that was needed. as for RATO the Ju-287 did have a pair of jettisonable Walter rockets. With these Walter RATO packs, it had roughly the take off thrust of it's progeny the IL-28.

    It was cobbled together in haste... far from perfect, but it could have done the job. It was faster than the He-177 V38, the type previously intended to bomb London.
     
  6. delcyros

    delcyros Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,037
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Berlin (Kreuzberg)
    You do show contradictions here:

    1.) technical part:
    The V-1 showed little (not none!) aeroelastic problems because it is slower than the V-2, which suffered from them. True. The V-2 reached 814 Km/h (506mp/h) @ 3000m (~10000ft), while the V-1 hardly exceeded 559 Km/h (347 mp/h) at 6.000m altitude. I expect according to my equitation table that the Ju-287 would be rated at 6.000m altitude with ~850 Km/h (528 mp/h) +-10 mp/h (Mach 0.75). So You really suggest to use the slower V-1 instead of the V-2 to operate over England because of the aeroelastic problems? I can tell You that even the He-177 is faster than the V-1, questioning the use of the Ju-287V1 over England. The faster V-2 has aeroelastic issues...no way.
    The problem with the G-loadings is that 3G is a very usual load (you need that for recovering from a shallow dive f.e.), even with some safety margin, each out of order flight condition may cause considerable damage to the airframe, no to speak about damage related to gunfire in dogfights.

    calculation of the fuel needs of the Ju-287 V2:
    payload: 4000Kg
    empty weight: 12.000 Kg
    equipment: 1.250 Kg (including crew and non removable equipment)
    fuel: max. 5250Kg (at this configuration)
    take off weight: 22.500 Kg
    engines: 6* BMW 003 A2 (800 Kp thrust each, specific fuel consumption: 1.32 Kg/Kp/h at sea level, 0.657 Kg/Kp/h at 7000m)
    cruise speed, loaden(estimated): 740 Km/h @ 7000m @ 80% thrust setting
    cruise speed, unloaden(estimated): 780 Km/h @ 7000m @ 80%
    distance to target: 770 Km (London from Thuringia)
    time to target: 62.4 min.
    time back: 59.2 min.
    time to reach altitude: 18 min. @ 100%
    fuel for engine test, taxiing and start: 420 Kg
    ------------------------------------------------------
    Fuel burned for taxiing, start climb to altitude: 1850 Kg
    Fuel burned at cruise speed altitude per minute: 42 Kg
    (2620 Kg + 2486 Kg = 5106 Kg)
    Conclusion: 6956 Kg fuel would be needed with 7500 Kg beeing necessary to operate with reserve for the Ju-287V-2 to reach London. So either You reduce the payload to 2250 Kg (excluding the use of a nuke) or You reduce the distance to target or increase the cruising altitude, otherwise London is out of range. Reducing the cruising speed is no option due to the heavy air defense.
     
  7. DerAdlerIstGelandet

    DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crew Chief
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    41,768
    Likes Received:
    684
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    A&P - Aircraft Technician
    Location:
    USA/Germany
    Im with the delycros on this and it was nothing more than a deathtrap. As both me and delycros said it was patched together by parts from other aircraft.

    Now having been given time, I think the design could have been developed into a great aircraft.
     
  8. Kiwikid

    Kiwikid Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Airline catering
    Location:
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Yes the V2 would have been better suited to that mission. The V1 was clearly a design conceived when the V38 was no longer a capable candidate.

    The He-177 according to every source i can find flew a maximum 276 knots:

    Heinkel He 177 - QuickSeek Encyclopedia

    Heinkel He 177 War Bomber World Heavy Nacelle Long-range Reich

    Aircraft Engines of World War II

    Delcyross said:

    I am a pilot Dalycros... 3G is a fairly heavy manouvere.

    5-6G is about the top of what a fighter pilot without a modern G-suit could manage. A fairly tight turn in a GA aircraft might pull 1.5G-2G, but 3G is the sort of turn you'd pull in extremis.

    Why are you so fixed on the need for dogfights, or dive manouveres ?

    In my last post i talked about operating at night at speed. I ment as a level bomber. When you open bomb bay doors you need to reduce speed slightly if anything. If it's an A-bomb you don't need huge accuracy. If flying at night and faster than the night fighters of the era, then you will not need to manovere.

    The Mosquito night fighter's top speed of 327 Knots was less than the Ju-287 V1's top speed.

    I stand by what I said. It could have done the mission.

    Incidentally V38 had two sisters. I hear the Ju-287 V2 was being built from an He-177 fuselage too. What are the odds this was the fate of the second missing sister to the V38 fuselage ?
     
  9. delcyros

    delcyros Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,037
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Berlin (Kreuzberg)
    Not really. Ok- the Mosquito did 327 knots, but the Ju-287 V1 did not exceed 300 knots due to the fixed gear, so it is slower than the RAF Nightfighter (remember, unloaden condition!). Beside of this, the Ju-287V1 does not have the range to strike London from central Germany with a 4t. payload (very much alike the Ju-287V2 as shown above).

    So, now You need at least the V-2 (better the V3 design), which suffered from aeroelastic issues. And that exactly also is the problem:
    If You are pilot, You surely know what happens in a sprial dive. Excessive loads to the airframe. (easily exceeding 4,5 and more G)
    The problem of the swept forward wing with high elasticity is that at high speeds (preferably also, but to a lesser degree, at high Mach numbers= high altitudes), the wingtips may induce a high angle of attack cause of the high elasticity under certain circumstances (for our example let´s say asymetric thrust caused by an engine stall typical for Jumo-004B and BMW-003A at high altitudes). A wingtip stall, forcing the plane to enter a spiral dive. Not much of a problem in a normal plane, but once You fly a bomb loaden plane at high altitude restricted to <3g sustainable loads it becomes a real issue!
    From a technical point of view, I expect that it would require either a new, steel enforced wing to overcome the problems or a reduced aspect ratio with much reduced spanwidth. The problem with the first is that steel was going to be short in 1945 and with the second that both, service ceiling and payload will reduce heavily but also take off speed and distance would increase. Not much of an option at all, I think. Steel wings are also quite heavy and require more powerful jet engines, with again increased fuel consumption and reduced weight left for payload...
    It´s too much of an issue for the 1945 techn. environment, hence Junkers returned to the swept back wing in it´s last designs (Junkers EF 132, which really is the best jet powered bomber design of Junkers ever and competetive to anything around in the late 40´s).
     
  10. johnbr

    johnbr Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,508
    Likes Received:
    380
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    London Ontario Canada
    I agre the EF 132 was a lot better bomber.I now that junkers looked at the 004f and 004h to power the Ju-287.
     
  11. Kiwikid

    Kiwikid Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Occupation:
    Airline catering
    Location:
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Nobody is arguing that the Ef-132 was a superb plane and a better choice. I am talking about the options available in 1944 to fly that mission. The Nazi A-bomb project was capitulated in secret deals between the SS and the OSS, brokered at the Vatican where Werner von Braun's brother Sigsmund was a Nazi diplomatic attache. The mission the Ju-287 V1 was intended for was in effect cancelled whilst the aircraft started test flying.

    3G limitations

    I still don't know why you are talking spiral dives etc ?

    Why when the Gloster Meteor could fly faster by day would one ever risk daylight raids ?

    Logic dictates a night raid and that dispenses with a need for 3G manouveres.

    Intended mission/purpose of V1 aircraft

    Whilst with the gift of hindsight we can look back and say hey the Ju-287 V1 was not particularly suited to the idea of an A-bomb raid on London, what we cannot do is peer into the minds of it's designers in early 1944 and disqualify their motives, nor can we know what specifications or missions they were pressured to acheive, except by deduction of the facts. 20:20 hindsight is a wonderful thing.

    Fuel reserve requirement

    Goering stipulated a 15% fuel reserve. The KG200 Leonidas Staffel on the other hand which flew many suicide raids late in the war required no reserves.

    I reject the fuel estimate you give as it assumes the raid would have to fly from Thuringia far back inside german territory rather than forward refueling bases at say say Holland, or Shleiswig-Holstein.

    A flight from any of these areas woulf permit both the carriage of an A-bomb and return to Axis territory. We are also talking about a one off mission here where merely bailing out over Holland was perhaps a viable option for the KG200 Leonidas staffel.

    Wing aeroelasticity

    This is pure bunkum about needing steel reinforced wings. The Germans were meticulous about test flying and certifying performance of their aircraft. The Reichs Luft Ministerium at Reichlin test flew all these planes before service and the Ju-287 was flown extensively.

    It was certified to lift off at MTOW with the wings it was given.

    It was certified to fly at max speed with the wings it was given and with the fixed undercarriage too.

    If anything the forward swept wings assisted take off from smaller airfields at lower speeds and therefore in supreme confidence with a heavy bomb and fuel load.

    The aeroelasticity problem is one which comes into play at speeds above the operating range of the V1. Put succinctly, at High G, or very high speed the outer wing flexes down causing pitch instability.

    What comic did you read that in ?

    Yeah I've spun and spiral dived a number of aircraft, so I am familiar with high G's and difficulties with it. Until you get into quite extreme aerobatics, one does not encounter 3G. If I ever pulled 3G coming out of a spiral dive, I would be ashamed. Pilots learn recovery from such manouveres and how to impose the least airframe stress in recovery.

    You can't learn flying just from playing on Flight Simulator.

    I have personally felt more G's in severe turbulence than in spiral, or spin manouveres. You would need to be flying as an aerobatics display pilot to experience 4-5G and be thrashing the aircraft at that.

    Your supposition however assumes this Ju-287 V-1 would somehow need to dogfight it's way over Britain. It's just not true.

    Engine shortcomings

    The aircraft was certified to fly up to 9,700 metres with the Jumo 004. engine stalls on a jet engine normally relates to fast throttle movements. Unlikely in a fast cruise. I have already addressed the unlikey need for manouvering.

    Let me tell you about why jets would stall spin at altitude. First of all the higher the altitude the narower the margin between maximum speed VNE and VMC (minimum control speed and this is called the "Mach Box." Even today jet airliners fall out of mach box, so a lot is known about it.

    The Gol Air 737-800 which crashed over the Amazon fell out of Mach Box and went down in a flat spin from 28,000ft.

    The real danger which you are referring to is of losing an engine in this Mach Box. Two points: These are military pilots and were expected to undertake risky missions. The fanatical KG200 Leonidas Staffel specialised in dangerous suicide missions.

    Next point: The Ju-287 was certified to fly at 36,600ft at it’s certified speeds and weights. The Mosquito night fighter could not exceed 34,500 ft. until nearly the end of the war. Nor is interception merely a matter of relative speeds. Just finding a target, even with radar vectoring and a small narrow beam radar in the Mosquito is a mission in itself. It can be likened to walking around inside a warehouse with a small torch whilst someone shouts instructions in the distance. The closing speed is relatively slow and therefore the chance of interception is very low in this scenario.
     
  12. delcyros

    delcyros Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,037
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Berlin (Kreuzberg)
    At first I would like to say that I personally enjoi a well argued debate. So no needs for beeing unpolite, ok?

    Actually I am not a military pilot, my main profession is science. But I do enjoi to use simulators and I do enjoi to fly glider planes (real ones). From this experience with high aspect ratio wings, I know what happens in a spiral dive. The loads are excessive. Don´t mix it with a spin, which usually has moderate loads.
    "A spin and a spiral dive are completely different beasts – in a real spin the true airspeed is low and constant, the vertical speed is relatively low [2000 - 3000 fpm] and the rotation is fast; while in a spiral dive the airspeed and height loss are both increasing fairly rapidly but the rate of rotation is slower because of the wider turn radius.

    In the lateral stability section the possibility of entering a spiral dive condition was mentioned. In a well developed steep spiral dive – the 'graveyard spiral' – the lift being generated by the wings (and thus the wing loading) to provide the centripetal force for the high speed diving turn, is very high. The pilot must be very careful in the recovery from a fully established spiral dive, or excessive structural loads will be imposed. See recovery from a spiral dive.
    " -from Control

    So let´s adress Your points:

    A) 3 G limitations:
    It´s only You who cares about daylight sorties with maneuvering. But even at night, the Mosquito is FASTER than the Ju-287V1! Maximum speed was 559 Km/h at 6000 m (302 Kts), the late Mosquito goes around 100 Km/h faster at this altitude (close enough).

    B) Range:
    The max. range of the Ju-287 at high alt and 80% thrust setting (implying a speed well BELOW that of the He-177!!!) is 1.500 Km (809 nm or 932 static miles), WITHOUT PAYLOAD! Adding a 4 t. payload reduces the range by more than 35%. Thuringia is a reasonable place to start from (Dessau plants, developing bureaus, etc.), but even from Schleswig Holstein, that are ~ 1.400 Km to London and back, this is possible only WITHOUT PAYLOAD.
    From Holland this may be possible but not even Göring would consider to move such a large (and slow) airplane that far away under exposure of ground attack E/A. This is nonsense.
    You cannot ignore these facts

    C) engine shortcomings:
    I am not referring to engine stall induced by rapid throttle changes. This is an issue for the Jumo-004B at throttle changes below 6000 rpm but not so much for the BMW-003A.
    I am referring to high altitude engine stally typical for both engines. The Jumo-004B also suffered more from this, because of the fuel injections system.
    A gear driven pump that produced a linear amount of fuel proportion to the engines rpm, the pilots throttle was directly connected to a bypass valve that would recirculate unwanted fuel. Fuel then passed to a centrifugal speed governer that operated another bypass valve. The pilots throttle also was connected to a governor by a pressure spring and would regulate the governers rpm setpoint this way. At full throttle, for example, the rpm of a Jumo-004 B4 was at 8875 rpm.
    The problem was that the amount of fuel was relative to engine rpm and not airflow. At low speeds it was easy to burn out the blades by excessive heats if too much fuel entered the chamber (the governor also worked only at higher rpm´s than 6000). At high altitudes (lower airflow than at low atlitudes due to lower airdensity) on the other side it could also happen that too much fuel entered at high cruise speed (high rpm) the chamber and cause a flameout. This problem soon was realized and the B-4 subvariant had a regulator for better high altitude performance with some further improvements into the Jumo-004D-4.
    The BMW-003 had a similar layout but in addition a device that consisted of an aneorid capsule across the compressor stages. This "accelerator valve" regulated the fuel flow in correspondence to the air flow (by pressure) and the governeor had less importance. In the end the actual air flow and spool up time was taken into account, so that the BMW-003 throttle could be handled less gingerly. The Jumo-004 on the other hand had a more sophisticated system to regulate the exhaust nozzle, while the BMW-003 exhaust nozzle was manually controlled.
    A high altitude engine stall may also happen in case very high subsonic speeds are encountered (this certainly isn´t the case in the Ju-287V1).
    However, it remained an issue for the Jumo-004B driven Ju-287V1.

    At last, I would like to ask why do You insist of taking the Ju-287, a testbed, for this role?
    If You want a high altitude fast bomber, take one of the few produced Ju-288 prototypes. They had a max. 4t. payload (usually 3t.) at much greater range (2500 Km / 1550 mls. at this config.) and reasonable speed (651 Km/h / 404mp/h / 350 Kts max with 565 Km/h / 350 mp/h / 305 Kts loaden) and service ceiling (34.000 ft). Even the Ju-388K, altough not that fast, could bring this payload to 43000+ ft. altitude, this qualifies them all more than the Ju-287V1 with all it´s shortcomings.
     
  13. Twitch

    Twitch Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2006
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Occupation:
    historical combat aviation writer
    Location:
    City of the Angels California
    Here's most of the info I've amassed on the Junkers if it is helpful to anyone....
    JU 287
    The Ju 287 was the real deal. Hans Wocke had the initial task of developing a high-speed heavy bomber to elude Allied interceptors with sheer speed in 1943. Knowing the advantages of sweep on wings for speed, the down side was poor low speed characteristics. This is where forward sweep came in.

    Put together from an He 177 fuselage and the tail of a Ju 388 plus some assorted scavenged parts the V1 took to the air in August 1944 with four 1,984 lb. thrust Jumo 004B-1s for power with three jettison-able 2,645 lb. thrust Walter 501 RATO (rocket pack to assist takeoff). Two of the engines attached to the rear lower wing and two at the “chin” alongside and forward on the fuselage.

    Flight tests revealed that forward mount of the wing engines would be better and Ju 287 V2 was an all-new plane with no borrowed parts. Originally, four 2,866 lb. thrust He S 011s on the wings were to be used but there were delays in getting them in mid-1944 so six 1,760 lb. thrust BMW 003A-1s were used- four under the forward wing edge and two along the forward fuselage. Flight test details are lost to history but the outcome spurred the Air Ministry to order building of the V3 prototype and production to commence quickly. The V3 was to carry an 8,818-pound bomb load.

    Projected development called for the use of two the forthcoming BMW 018A with 7,497 lbs. thrust in the Ju 287B-2. The V3 meanwhile was finishing completion when Russian forces captured the Junkers facilities. The Junkers estimates temporarily using six He S 011 engines were realistic enough. Estimated top speeds of 537 MPH at 16,400 feet and 487 MPH at 36,100 feet were expected with a range of 985 miles with 8,818 lbs of bombs. With a bomb load of 4,400 lbs. 1,325 miles could be flown. Time to 19,700 feet was to be 10.5 minutes while 32,800 feet would take 33.0 minutes. A ceiling of 47,398 feet could be reached.

    The wings spanned 66 feet and the fuselage was 61 feet long including a tail barbette with two remotely fired 13 mm MG 131s. All up weight of the 3-seater was 47,398 lbs. while empty it weighed 26,278 lbs. It should be noted that a configuration with two pods of three engines below the wings was another possible arrangement projected.

    As mentioned before, the Russians partially rebuilt the Junker Dessau complex to test their booty and later shipped it all to Moscow. They piddled with the V3 for years forth but did fly it in 1946 though with only four 004Bs making for a top speed of just 347 MPH and a ceiling of 35,433 feet. The German Professor Brunolf Baade’s USSR work on the V3, called the Type 131, placed two 7,055 lb. thrust Lulko jets copied from the Rolls-Royce-Nene from Britain. Performance of the plane, which sported tanks at the tips of the forward swept wings, is unknown. Baade redesigned it with swept-back wings and it became the Type 140 and Type 150.

    Looking at these designs illustrates the basis for every Soviet jet bomber decades hence. They are all continuations of the venerable Ju 287. A glance at the 1947 IL-28, though not swept-wing, with two 6,040 lb. thrust Klimovs, drives it home. Its 580 MPH top speed and 41,000-foot ceiling in a 44,000-pound plane proves the Ju 287’s potential was real. In a longer war the Ju 287 bomber would have reached production status.
    EF130
    The EF130 was designed as a replacement for the “temporary” Ju 287 bomber, which was in final assembly stages. Such was the state of affairs in the Reich in 1945- one plane was being projected for the next generation before its predecessor flew. Hertel, Woche and Zindel thought it would feasibly fly in mid-1946

    The EF130 was an all-wing design with a span of 78.8 feet and length of 36 feet weighing 89,000 lbs. at takeoff. Four upgraded HeS 011s with 3,307 lbs. thrust each mounted all together at the extreme rear wing edge. The construction was to be all metal with wooden outer wing sections. A crew of two or three sat well forward in a pressurized cockpit. The landing gear was to be of tricycle type. Bomb load was calculated at 8,818 lbs. but no defensive armament was considered with a speed of 615 MPH anticipated. Ceiling is unknown but range was to be 3,728 miles for targets beyond the Urals in Russia

    The Junkers Company as a leader in German airline transport viewed the EF.130 as a proposed 80-passenger commercial airliner to fly in 1948. This was a very logical plane
    EF132
    Looking so much like the post-war Comet airliner the Junkers EF.132 culminated the Ju 287 design work begun in 1942. With 106.3-foot anhedral wings swept 35-degrees angle six 5,500 lb. thrust Jumo 012 jet engines were completely buried in the wing roots eliminating drag entirely. With the placement of the wings high on the fuselage a 39.3-foot bomb bay ran through the center of the fuselage. The tail was swept and it looks quite in place with for early-era jetliner. The pressurized cockpit housed a 5-man crew in the sleek 101-foot fuselage

    Maximum takeoff weight was over 143,000 lbs. but the big pane could cruise at 528 MPH and top out at 578 MPH. A ceiling of 33,792 feet was estimated with a range of 2,200 miles. Up to 11,023 lbs. of bombs could be carried and defensive armament consisted of three, remote fired twin MG 151 20 mm cannon turrets.

    A wind tunnel model was tested in early 1945, and a smaller scale mockup was also built. The development was well along when the Soviets overran the Dessau complex and took possession of it all of the Junkers designs and components. The Soviets partially rebuilt the factory, engine test stations and wind tunnels. The whole complex was later packed up and shipped to Russia along with unwilling Junkers employees in late 1946. Labor had commenced a glider to test the flight characteristics. They were said to be excellent. Actual construction work was initiated on the EF132 but was soon canceled.

    While Junkers had plans for post-war airliners, the Soviets had visions of jet bombers.
    THE RUSSIANS
    The experience of the Junkers engineering and the basic Ju287 design was used at Podberesje for further developments through the following years. The EF140 was based on the EF131. The EF131V1 prototype was converted and got two Soviet Mikulin AM2 engines. The first flight was performed on 09-30-1948 and the EF140 was further developed as a reconaissance aircraft under the designator I40-R. Due to severe vibration problems, the EF140 design was later abandoned. Further development steps at Podberesje are not documented, but the final work of the Junkers working group at Podberesje was the EF150, which became available in May 1951. This aircraft had a back swept wing, a T-tail unit, a tandem center undercarriage with supporting wheels at the wing tips and two Soviet Ljulka AL-5 engines. Two prototypes of the EF150 were built and flown in 1951/52. Nevertheless, the Tupolew Tu-16 was put into serial production instead of the EF150. The EF150 finally marked the end of a development line in Russia, which had been started in 1944 with the Ju287. Between 1950 and 1953 most of the Junkers employees at Podberesje returned to Germany.

    But still yet in Germany, some aircraft designs were influenced by the Ju287 design. Baade returned to the German Democratic Republic in 1953. Here he became responsible for the development of Germany's first jet airliner at Dresden, which was later named Baade 152. Of course this aircraft did not have much similarity with the Ju287, but a lot of design features were directly taken from the EF150.

    Hans Wocke moved to West Germany and became the responsible design engineer at Hamburger Flugzeugbau. Here he designed the HFB320 business jet, which was characterized by its forward swept wing. This wing design of course was directly influenced by the Ju287 design, which Wocke had started at Dessau in 1944 and which was continued 20 years later with the HFB320.

    Beyond the actual people, the Sovs made off with enough blueprints to wallpaper the Kremlin. It is a basic and well known for the times of the 50s-60s that these blueprints and many German designers made the rounds of the Soviet air industry after the war. Both humans and papers were passed around like whiskey at a brothel.

    When the Russians had milked the other Germans dry they allowed them to return home in 1954.
    EF140
    Junkers was also in the Amerika Bomber fray with their early 1945 tailless design. After the debacle of attempting to force the Hortens to put a vertical fin on their Ho P18A in a committee designed bomber the Hortens had pulled out of the team effort to do their own thing. Junkers designers quickly came up with their spin on what the Amerika Bomber should be like. But they had another purpose in mind. The EF140 was again done with an eye on commercial air travel after the war and it could seat 80 passengers once converted.

    The desired vertical fin with rudder was there above the sharply swept 138-foot wing. Length overall was 62.3 feet. The 6-man crew would have a pressurized cabin. Six Jumo 004s or BMW 003s buried in the rear part of the wing would power it. Each had 2,200 lbs. thrust. These engines were in service so no projected arrival of next generation power plants had to be dealt with. These jets would be good for 559 MPH maximum with cruise of 528 MPH expected. The required range of 6,835 miles was achieve-able along with a 52,492-foot ceiling. Two 30 mm Mk 108 cannon would fire forward with two more aiming rearward. The required 8,818 lbs. of bombs could be carried.

    Since Reimar Horten went directly to Göring and got the Ho 18 approved for construction the EF140 never progressed further than design. Would have made a cool airliner though! The second Ju 287 prototype was already under construction in Russia, but was later scrapped and used for the construction of the EF140.
     
  14. DerAdlerIstGelandet

    DerAdlerIstGelandet Der Crew Chief
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    41,768
    Likes Received:
    684
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    A&P - Aircraft Technician
    Location:
    USA/Germany
    Well I can say this has been a very interesting conversation. I have enjoyed reading and have learned some things from both of you.
     
  15. Henk

    Henk Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,826
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Distribution of Magazines and driver
    Location:
    George - South Africa
    Great info Twitch mate.
     
  16. delcyros

    delcyros Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,037
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Berlin (Kreuzberg)
    An epic post, twitch, well done!
     
  17. Twitch

    Twitch Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2006
    Messages:
    809
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Occupation:
    historical combat aviation writer
    Location:
    City of the Angels California
    Huh? Yeah well you too, delcyros Amazing how so much info on an esoteric plane can be put forth.
     
  18. Henk

    Henk Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,826
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Occupation:
    Distribution of Magazines and driver
    Location:
    George - South Africa
    Yup, never knew there were so much info on her.
     
Loading...

Share This Page