Are any of you familiar with a website that claims a Nazi airplane landed at Raco airfield in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan during the war? Supposedly it was to prove to the Nazi leadership that a bombing attack could be accomplished. I don't believe this is true, but would like others input. Thanks. Scott
Nazi plane landing in Michigan
- Thread starter sstermer
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
ThomasP
Chief Master Sergeant
It did not happen.
D
Deleted member 82436
Guest
As a lifelong Michigander, it never happened. While Raco Army Airfield was real, it was just a refueling base hosting no combat aviation units during WWII.
MIflyer
Captain
But quite a few of them landed at Seymour, Indiana.
And the USAAF captured a Ju88 in North Africa and flew it across the Atlantic, a challenging task made more difficult by the engine's dislike of 100 octane fuel, and the 90 octane fuel they had been assured was available on Ascension Island had just sort of disappeared. After evaluating the 88 they sent it on a War Bond drive, ending up in downtown Los Angeles where a streetcar hit one of the propellers and broke off a blade; the blades were wooden.
So some guys from Wright Field went out to L.A. to retrieve the JU88. They hauled it to Mines Field (LAX) glued the broken blade back on (!!!), gassed it up and headed back home. They still had the German radios installed and could only listen, at best, and not talk. On approach to Albuquerque they heard over the radio a DC-3 airliner informing the tower there was a German bomber inbound. Crossing a gunnery range in Kansas, a passing B-24 thought it would be fun to shoot up the ground around the 88. They made it back to Seymour Okay.
And the USAAF captured a Ju88 in North Africa and flew it across the Atlantic, a challenging task made more difficult by the engine's dislike of 100 octane fuel, and the 90 octane fuel they had been assured was available on Ascension Island had just sort of disappeared. After evaluating the 88 they sent it on a War Bond drive, ending up in downtown Los Angeles where a streetcar hit one of the propellers and broke off a blade; the blades were wooden.
So some guys from Wright Field went out to L.A. to retrieve the JU88. They hauled it to Mines Field (LAX) glued the broken blade back on (!!!), gassed it up and headed back home. They still had the German radios installed and could only listen, at best, and not talk. On approach to Albuquerque they heard over the radio a DC-3 airliner informing the tower there was a German bomber inbound. Crossing a gunnery range in Kansas, a passing B-24 thought it would be fun to shoot up the ground around the 88. They made it back to Seymour Okay.
Last edited:
Hi,
I am interested in the quoted details about the problems with the engines and propeller. Can you give more info please?
Cheers
Eng
MIflyer
Captain
Nope. Read an article some time ago in the USAF Museum, Newsletter. That is all I know.
Thanks,
I am surprised by both the quoted points though. Notwithstanding that there are specific issues with fuel grades, there is not usually a major problem with running gasoline engines on a better Octane rated fuel than the minimum. There was the case of the 1940 version of German C3 fuel that had a high boiling point fraction that caused excessive dilution of the oil in DB 601 N engines, leading to engine failure, but that is unusual. Furthermore, some Aviation Gasoline was heavily leaded, and this could lead to lead fowling of the sparkplugs.
The oceanic distances to Ascension from Africa, and to Recife are over 1200Nm each, so I cannot think that there was some actual problem with the 100/130 fuel, other than it might have required some plug cleaning? Certainly, the engines were obviously in good condition after the trip!
As regards "glueing a prop blade back on and flying", this sounds far-fetched. More likely, is that a blade tip was damaged and either the tips were cropped, or possibly repaired in a minor way.
Cheers
Eng
MIflyer
Captain
Except that the larger amount of lead in the higher octane fuels is not good for the spark plugs or valves. For example, 100LL has three times the amount of lead that 87 Octane does. Back when there was not so large price difference between 100LL and auto fuel, I used 100LL a lot in my airplane and the effects of the lead were very noticeable. The engine originally was certified to use 73 Octane, so the difference between that and 100LL was even greater.
For a while after leaving Ascension Island they thought they were going to have to shut down one engine.
I have been told that there are ignition adjustments on the Ju88 Jumo engines to compensate for the higher octane but I guess the USAAF did not have a Junkers maintenance manual handy.
Last edited:
Yes, I mentioned the lead aspect.
For more detail, the dose of TEL in the 100/130 Allied fuel was about twice that of the German B4 (87 Octane). Of course, the Allied fuel was also treated with Ethylene-Bromide scavenger to help reduce the deposits of conducting lead-oxide that could short-out sparkplugs after periods of lower power operation. Usually, periodic full power operation would burn off the lead sparkplug deposits, and this procedure was part of the solution for engines that had to run with higher TEL fuel. Notwithstanding the sparkplug deposit issues (which I suspect was the issue for this Ju 88), the chemical effects on the engine from the scavenger compounds were damaging to Bronze and Copper. This could be very bad for engines with bronze valve seats or guides and aircooled bronze alloy heads!
Overall, a great story. I have flown out of Ascension myself and there is a lot of distance to anywhere else, so that Ju 88 did very well!
Eng
Hi
Flying via Ascension Island the Ju88 would have been using the 'South Atlantic Bridge' and would have made many refuelling stops from North Africa to the USA. I have doubts that they had no means of communicating between the air and ground throughout the trip as mentioned.
(Source: 'Forged in War, A History of Royal Air Force Transport Command 1943-1967' by Humphrey Wynn.)
Mike
Flying via Ascension Island the Ju88 would have been using the 'South Atlantic Bridge' and would have made many refuelling stops from North Africa to the USA. I have doubts that they had no means of communicating between the air and ground throughout the trip as mentioned.
(Source: 'Forged in War, A History of Royal Air Force Transport Command 1943-1967' by Humphrey Wynn.)
Mike
Yes, that route really would need at least D/F capability. We need a WW2 radio expert to tell us what the interoperability was between the German and Allied Comm/Nav equipment was like?
Cheers
Eng
MIflyer
Captain
I believe they did install some US radio equipment in the Ju88 for the trip but on the ferry flight back from Los Angeles they had no radio operator on board, just the pilot and a US soldier who was catching a hop while on leave. The pilot considered the Ju88 to be "his" airplane and had feared if he left it in LA they would scrap it.
MIflyer
Captain
Here is a little write up I did years ago that describes how control towers in the US operated.
In the 1940's the standard aircraft radio navaid system in the U.S. was the AN Range. The AN Range predated the widespread use of Automatic Direction Finding receivers and used the 200-400 KHZ aircraft navigation band. Use of the system only required an ordinary AM receiver tuned to the band. Pilots would tune in the station that best corresponded with their destination, listen to the signal, and hear either the Morse code signal "A" which indicated they were to the left of the desired course, the Morse code signal "N" that indicated they were to the right of the desired course, or a continuous tone, which indicated they were right on course. Everyone with an aircraft sophisticated enough to have a radio used the AN Range, and so many light aircraft were equipped with only receivers for the 200-400 frequency that most control towers were set up to transmit on 278 KHZ for the purpose of giving landing and takeoff clearances to aircraft. For this reason, when the USAAF adopted the SCR-274N "Command Set" receivers and transmitters early in WWII, a standard equipment set consisted of a BC-453 receiver for 190-550 KHZ, a BC-454 receiver covering 3-6 MHZ and a BC-455 for 6-9.1 MHZ, together with a couple of transmitters, enabling coverage of both the AN Range as well as the standard control tower frequencies and other required military communications.
When the USAAF got to Europe, it found that the RAF had adopted VHF for fighter aircraft communications, using a crystal controlled set known as the TR1143. The Americans had to be compatible with the British when it came to fighters, and VHF gave far superior short range communications anyway, so the U.S. built the British set as the SCR-522, and adopted it as the standard radio for fighters, at least in Europe.
VHF was a big advancement but it caused a bit of a dilemma, especially for fighters operating in the U.S., which had to still use the AN Range for navigation. Overseas, low frequency beacons were less available and a lost fighter pilot would call for DF steer from a ground station. But fighters flown in the U.S., at least, had to have the low frequency receiving capability. Problem was, the SCR-522, while no more bulky than the SCR-274N receivers, transmitters, and modulator, still took up virtually all of the available room in the aircraft. Also, the fighters deployed to Europe would not necessarily require the low frequency capability, so an easy add-on capability was desirable to keep things as standard as possible.
The answer to this problem were the two cutest aircraft radios ever built; the Detrola Model 438 and the BC-1206.
Both the Detrola and the BC-1206 were designed to operate directly from 24VDC, without a dynamotor, and to be set up so that they could fit into a standard aircraft 3 inch instrument panel hole. They were small enough to be mounted directly in the cockpit with no more than a power lead and an antenna connection. Using their headphone jack, the sets could be plugged directly into the same audio circuit used by the SCR-522, so switching between radios was not required. They could be installed or removed within minutes without affecting the VHF installation.
The Detrola went into the later model P-38, P-51, P-47, and some P-63's, fitting right into the cockpit, possible because the remarkably small receivers were only about twice the size of the control boxes used for the larger radios. The P-51 and P-47 had the little set right next to the pilot's seat, facing upward at an angle, while on the P-38 it was to the right of the pilot's seat, almost resting on the floor, facing up. On the P-61 it was in a rather strange installation behind pilot's right shoulder, the dial facing forward. The P-63 manual I have describes the Detrola as a "portable" installation, even though it is bolted down under the main radio panel at the bottom of the instrument panel and the P-38 manual says the Detrola "may still be installed." Presumably this indicates the possibility that the set was yanked out when the aircraft was deployed overseas. Interestingly enough, none of these installations used the set's ability to be installed in an instrument panel hole. All installations used long wire antennas; on the P-51D, the Detrola antenna is the long wire coming through the hole in the top of the bubble canopy and stringing back to the tail.
In contrast to the Detrola use and installations, the only manual I have found that mentions the BC-1206 shows it installed in a side instrument panel hole in a P-80A, the early model Shooting Star jet fighter.
The two sets fulfilled an identical function and were clearly made to identical specs, but are actually quite different electronically. I have always assumed the Detrola and BC-1206 were just related models of the same radio but recently found out they are very different. The Detrola Model 438 was made by the Detrola Company, and employs five standard WWII type octal tubes, including a VT150 oscillator/mixer and a couple of 6L6's for audio output. The BC-1206 was built by Setchell Carlson and uses five 14 volt loctal tubes like the 14A7 and 14J7 and a 28D7 output tube. Both have an unusual antenna spring loaded lead socket on the left lower side near the front, use a combined volume/on/off switch, and have a ¼ inch headphone jack on the front. While the tuning knob on the Detrola simply operates a geared pointer against a frequency dial painted on the face of the set, the BC-1206 has a window over a dial to show the selected frequency.
While the Detrola was used extensively in the U.S., I don't know if it actually went to combat. However, the period photos of P-51's in Europe show the long wire antenna, even though an SCR-522 usually can be seen behind the pilot, so one would presume those wire antennas were hooked to something
Postwar, the Detrola and BC-1206 were replaced in refitted WWII aircraft and the newer jets by the BC-453 and/or the new ADFs such as the ARN-6 and ARN-7. No doubt the larger sets were much better receivers, - but they were not half as cute!
The Cutest Aircraft Radios They Ever Made: The Detrola Model 438 and the BC-1206
In the 1940's the standard aircraft radio navaid system in the U.S. was the AN Range. The AN Range predated the widespread use of Automatic Direction Finding receivers and used the 200-400 KHZ aircraft navigation band. Use of the system only required an ordinary AM receiver tuned to the band. Pilots would tune in the station that best corresponded with their destination, listen to the signal, and hear either the Morse code signal "A" which indicated they were to the left of the desired course, the Morse code signal "N" that indicated they were to the right of the desired course, or a continuous tone, which indicated they were right on course. Everyone with an aircraft sophisticated enough to have a radio used the AN Range, and so many light aircraft were equipped with only receivers for the 200-400 frequency that most control towers were set up to transmit on 278 KHZ for the purpose of giving landing and takeoff clearances to aircraft. For this reason, when the USAAF adopted the SCR-274N "Command Set" receivers and transmitters early in WWII, a standard equipment set consisted of a BC-453 receiver for 190-550 KHZ, a BC-454 receiver covering 3-6 MHZ and a BC-455 for 6-9.1 MHZ, together with a couple of transmitters, enabling coverage of both the AN Range as well as the standard control tower frequencies and other required military communications.
When the USAAF got to Europe, it found that the RAF had adopted VHF for fighter aircraft communications, using a crystal controlled set known as the TR1143. The Americans had to be compatible with the British when it came to fighters, and VHF gave far superior short range communications anyway, so the U.S. built the British set as the SCR-522, and adopted it as the standard radio for fighters, at least in Europe.
VHF was a big advancement but it caused a bit of a dilemma, especially for fighters operating in the U.S., which had to still use the AN Range for navigation. Overseas, low frequency beacons were less available and a lost fighter pilot would call for DF steer from a ground station. But fighters flown in the U.S., at least, had to have the low frequency receiving capability. Problem was, the SCR-522, while no more bulky than the SCR-274N receivers, transmitters, and modulator, still took up virtually all of the available room in the aircraft. Also, the fighters deployed to Europe would not necessarily require the low frequency capability, so an easy add-on capability was desirable to keep things as standard as possible.
The answer to this problem were the two cutest aircraft radios ever built; the Detrola Model 438 and the BC-1206.
Both the Detrola and the BC-1206 were designed to operate directly from 24VDC, without a dynamotor, and to be set up so that they could fit into a standard aircraft 3 inch instrument panel hole. They were small enough to be mounted directly in the cockpit with no more than a power lead and an antenna connection. Using their headphone jack, the sets could be plugged directly into the same audio circuit used by the SCR-522, so switching between radios was not required. They could be installed or removed within minutes without affecting the VHF installation.
The Detrola went into the later model P-38, P-51, P-47, and some P-63's, fitting right into the cockpit, possible because the remarkably small receivers were only about twice the size of the control boxes used for the larger radios. The P-51 and P-47 had the little set right next to the pilot's seat, facing upward at an angle, while on the P-38 it was to the right of the pilot's seat, almost resting on the floor, facing up. On the P-61 it was in a rather strange installation behind pilot's right shoulder, the dial facing forward. The P-63 manual I have describes the Detrola as a "portable" installation, even though it is bolted down under the main radio panel at the bottom of the instrument panel and the P-38 manual says the Detrola "may still be installed." Presumably this indicates the possibility that the set was yanked out when the aircraft was deployed overseas. Interestingly enough, none of these installations used the set's ability to be installed in an instrument panel hole. All installations used long wire antennas; on the P-51D, the Detrola antenna is the long wire coming through the hole in the top of the bubble canopy and stringing back to the tail.
In contrast to the Detrola use and installations, the only manual I have found that mentions the BC-1206 shows it installed in a side instrument panel hole in a P-80A, the early model Shooting Star jet fighter.
The two sets fulfilled an identical function and were clearly made to identical specs, but are actually quite different electronically. I have always assumed the Detrola and BC-1206 were just related models of the same radio but recently found out they are very different. The Detrola Model 438 was made by the Detrola Company, and employs five standard WWII type octal tubes, including a VT150 oscillator/mixer and a couple of 6L6's for audio output. The BC-1206 was built by Setchell Carlson and uses five 14 volt loctal tubes like the 14A7 and 14J7 and a 28D7 output tube. Both have an unusual antenna spring loaded lead socket on the left lower side near the front, use a combined volume/on/off switch, and have a ¼ inch headphone jack on the front. While the tuning knob on the Detrola simply operates a geared pointer against a frequency dial painted on the face of the set, the BC-1206 has a window over a dial to show the selected frequency.
While the Detrola was used extensively in the U.S., I don't know if it actually went to combat. However, the period photos of P-51's in Europe show the long wire antenna, even though an SCR-522 usually can be seen behind the pilot, so one would presume those wire antennas were hooked to something
Postwar, the Detrola and BC-1206 were replaced in refitted WWII aircraft and the newer jets by the BC-453 and/or the new ADFs such as the ARN-6 and ARN-7. No doubt the larger sets were much better receivers, - but they were not half as cute!
