Weird World War 2 Facts (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

This's quite remarkable, did you know that the highest known interception by an unpressurized, was made by G. Reynolds breathing only a conventional air supply, at 49,500ft!! This was in a "speacailly prepared" Spitfire VC operating from No.103MU near alexandria in august 1942, when he damaged a pressurised Ju-86P......
 
No the Ju-86P could not fly that high however the Ju-86R could. It may have been a Ju-86R which was built in limited production being only a few.

In January 1940 the Luftwaffe tested the new prototype Ju 86P that had a longer wing span, pressurized cabin, Jumo 207A diesel engines with twin turbochargers and only two man crew. The Ju 86P could fly at heights of 12,000 m, where it was safe from enemy fighters.

Some 40 old bombers were converted to Ju 86P-1 high altitude bombers and Ju 86P-2 photo reconnaissance aircraft. Those operated successfully for some years over Britain, the Soviet Union and North Africa. In August 1942 a modified Spitfire V shot one down over Egypt, and when two more were lost, Ju 86Ps were withdrawn from service 1943.

The Luftwaffe tried to develop the Ju 86R with even larger wings and prototype engines, that could have flown even higher, at 16,000 m, but production was limited to some prototypes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Ju_86
 
I dont know I have read conflicting reports on that, that say the Ju-86R could climb to 16000m which is about 48,000ft. I have also seen reports that say it was only about 45,000ft.
 
Well CC, the nice people at GUINNESS, the poeple that do all this record stuff, state only that the spitfire intercepted and destroyed a "Ju-86P-2 high altitude pressurised aircraft" and that the altitude the aircraft was intercepted at, 49,500ft, is eqivilant to 15,090m, and quite frankly, i trust them far more than i trust you..........

is it not also possible that the -86, if it was a P and not an R, was also flying higher than normall?? when an aircraft reaches the ceiling used in all the books, it won't suddenly stop, she will be able to gain altitude still.........
 
Not for very far though. My dad was in Germany with a Wessex and they went out for a buzz with the Luftwaffe SAR Hueys. And they climbed up the side of a mountain in their helicopters and the Wessex had to stop because it reached it's ceiling, the pilot sat one wheel down on the mountain while the Huey kept rising.

Anyway, I believe lanc because I've read reports of Spitfire VI and VII intercepting Ju-86s at altitudes from 45,000 feet to 50,000 feet.
 
Im going with Lanc and saying its true. Ive read before that the P and R could get upwards of 52000'!! These were books I was checking out in the library so I dont exactly remember what they were.

Just for example that the listed ceiling isnt the limit the highest flying B-29 was Frank Armstrongs Fluffy Fuzz IV, it went higher than 49000' when the listed ceiling for a B-29 was around 31000'. This was a basic run of the mill B-29 too.

Ive also talked to a few veterans who flew in B-36's during the Cold War. They had Featherweight III's and a few talked about going over 65000' and being required to wear pressure suits!
 
It's the same with the EE Lightning, it's always reported as having an altitude of 60,000 feet but that's only because it's altimeter only goes up to 60,000!
 
I think where the confusion lies here is what type of ceiling are we talking about. "Service Ceiling" is the maximum density altitude where the best rate-of climb airspeed will produce a 100 feet-per-minute climb at maximum weight while in a clean configuration with maximum continuous power. Now as you can see this definition is given in "Density Altitude" which changes with temperature and air pressure. I have found that many publications imply that this is the maximum altitude the aircraft could fly. NOT TRUE. If you notice the key is the ability of the aircraft to still produce 100' per minute in a climb. Now "Absolute Ceiling" is the height that an aircraft horizontal in flight can maintain and ususally this speed is just above the aircraft's stall speed providing the engine is still producing thrust. There's a big difference between the two. :-k
 
FLYBOYJ said:
I think where the confusion lies here is what type of ceiling are we talking about. "Service Ceiling" is the maximum density altitude where the best rate-of climb airspeed will produce a 100 feet-per-minute climb at maximum weight while in a clean configuration with maximum continuous power. Now as you can see this definition is given in "Density Altitude" which changes with temperature and air pressure. I have found that many publications imply that this is the maximum altitude the aircraft could fly. NOT TRUE. If you notice the key is the ability of the aircraft to still produce 100' per minute in a climb. Now "Absolute Ceiling" is the height that an aircraft horizontal in flight can maintain and ususally this speed is just above the aircraft's stall speed providing the engine is still producing thrust. There's a big difference between the two. :-k

Exactly right! Good explanation Flyboy.

wmaxt
 
wmaxt said:
FLYBOYJ said:
I think where the confusion lies here is what type of ceiling are we talking about. "Service Ceiling" is the maximum density altitude where the best rate-of climb airspeed will produce a 100 feet-per-minute climb at maximum weight while in a clean configuration with maximum continuous power. Now as you can see this definition is given in "Density Altitude" which changes with temperature and air pressure. I have found that many publications imply that this is the maximum altitude the aircraft could fly. NOT TRUE. If you notice the key is the ability of the aircraft to still produce 100' per minute in a climb. Now "Absolute Ceiling" is the height that an aircraft horizontal in flight can maintain and ususally this speed is just above the aircraft's stall speed providing the engine is still producing thrust. There's a big difference between the two. :-k

Exactly right! Good explanation Flyboy.

wmaxt

Thanks wmaxt! ;)
 
plan_D said:
It's the same with the EE Lightning, it's always reported as having an altitude of 60,000 feet but that's only because it's altimeter only goes up to 60,000!

The altimeter only goes up to 60,000 ft? Is that because the designers thought the fuel would run out before it reached 60,000 ft? ;)
 
It can reach 60,000 feet in just over one minute. Are you saying the EE Lightning can only fly for 2 minutes? ;)
 
Well, I heard the Lightning was a very thirsty bird :toothy5:
I also heard it could supercruise back in the 50s.
 
I never said I was not against Lanc, I am just going by the figures but as he stated in most cases an aircraft flies higher than what it says. It is completly possible what Lanc is saying.
 
FLYBOYJ said:
I think where the confusion lies here is what type of ceiling are we talking about. "Service Ceiling" is the maximum density altitude where the best rate-of climb airspeed will produce a 100 feet-per-minute climb at maximum weight while in a clean configuration with maximum continuous power. Now as you can see this definition is given in "Density Altitude" which changes with temperature and air pressure. I have found that many publications imply that this is the maximum altitude the aircraft could fly. NOT TRUE. If you notice the key is the ability of the aircraft to still produce 100' per minute in a climb. Now "Absolute Ceiling" is the height that an aircraft horizontal in flight can maintain and ususally this speed is just above the aircraft's stall speed providing the engine is still producing thrust. There's a big difference between the two. :-k

Viable explanation 8) The figures I was basing my point of view on were service ceiling. This explains it 8)
 
The EE Lightning was thirsty, it only achieved a combat radius of 450 miles. It wasn't designed to go any further, it was an interceptor. I've never heard of the Lightning achieving super-cruise. It's cruise speed was Mach 0.87 - if I remember correctly.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back