Author Topic: Junkers Ju85, Ju88, Ju288, Ju388 and Ju488... Ideas and Inspiration (Read 28516 times)

GTX_Admin · « **on:** December 15, 2011, 05:49:40 PM »

How about a Canberra-eske Ju-88:

Regards,

Greg

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #1 on:** December 17, 2011, 06:58:45 AM »

Tri-motor Ju88:

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #2 on:** December 17, 2011, 06:59:31 AM »

Ju488 derived from Ju88A:

dy031101 · « **Reply #3 on:** December 17, 2011, 12:31:32 PM »

I don't know why, but Warhammer 40K Marauder and Marauder Destroyer keep on getting me to think of basing real-life counterparts upon Ju 288 and 388...... and to wonder what the biggest machine cannon would be that could be used on a flexible gun mount......

Maverick · « **Reply #4 on:** December 17, 2011, 12:38:08 PM »

A Wellington bomber was tested with 40mm armed turrets, but I'd think that as a turretted weapon, 40mm would be about the most reasonable.

Regards,

John

dy031101 · « **Reply #5 on:** December 17, 2011, 12:46:58 PM »

I wonder how Flak M43 37mm would do since navweaps.com describes it as a modified MK 103...... :want:

Maverick · « **Reply #6 on:** December 17, 2011, 01:44:00 PM »

The Mk 103 was of comparable weight to the Vickers S gun. Interesting in itself with the former being 30mm whilst the latter was a 40mm weapon. I suspect a Flak gun would be substantially heavier due to its ground mount. For a turreted weapon, I shouldn't think the refinements of the Flak gun would be necessary and a Mk 103 would be sufficient. The more important question would be if the weapon had the ability to be slewed about for efficient anti-fighter work, which I suspect wouldn't be the case.

Regards,

John

BadersBusCompany · « **Reply #7 on:** December 17, 2011, 10:01:51 PM »

Quote from: GTX_Admin on December 17, 2011, 06:58:45 AM

Tri-motor Ju88:

:in-love: :in-love: :in-love:

dy031101 · « **Reply #8 on:** December 18, 2011, 03:57:50 AM »

Quote from: Maverick on December 17, 2011, 01:44:00 PM

The Mk 103 was of comparable weight to the Vickers S gun. Interesting in itself with the former being 30mm whilst the latter was a 40mm weapon.

To its credit the Vickers S does seem lighter than the Flak M43 (I don't know the exact extent of the modification done to fire the heavier 37mm round, but the gun seems scaled up from the original MK 103).

Quote from: Maverick on December 17, 2011, 01:44:00 PM

I suspect a Flak gun would be substantially heavier due to its ground mount. For a turreted weapon, I shouldn't think the refinements of the Flak gun would be necessary and a Mk 103 would be sufficient. The more important question would be if the weapon had the ability to be slewed about for efficient anti-fighter work, which I suspect wouldn't be the case.

Flak M43 on its lightest naval mount can be trained by shoulder stirrup but elevated via a handwheel (probably to keep the stirrup on the operator's shoulders during high-angle firing). Granted that still doesn't quite telll us about how fast the gun can swing.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #9 on:** December 18, 2011, 04:28:04 AM »

Bah! Let's not worry about the physics/practicalities! Model it!

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #10 on:** December 18, 2011, 04:29:26 AM »

Does anyone know of any Ju288 kits in 1/48?

As one of the biggest programs during the war (Bomber B), there is surprisingly little published on it and even less in the way of models.

Regards,

Greg

dy031101 · « **Reply #11 on:** December 18, 2011, 04:30:55 AM »

Here is what I think the Games Workshop configurations can be translated into......

"Marauder Imitation" (basic medium bomber and air-to-ground interdiction version):

1 x 37mm M43 (at least modified for belt feed?) on the nose position (counterpart to the turreted twin lascannon)

1 x twin MG 151/20 or MG 213 on the dorsal position (counterpart to the turreted twin heavy bolter)

1 x twin MG 151/20 or MG 213 on the tail position (counterpart to the turreted twin heavy bolter)

"Marauder Destroyer Imitation" (CAS version):

4 x MK 103, fixed forward-firing in the nose (counterpart to the six fixed autocannons)

1 x twin MG 151/20 or MG 213 on the dorsal position (counterpart to the turreted twin heavy bolter)

1 x twin MK 108 on the tail position (counterpart to the turreted twin assault cannon; these are intended not primarily to fend off pursuing enemy fighters but to "hose down" the enemy and make them keep their heads down after an attack pass)

And twin tail as well as maybe jet conversion for both.

ChernayaAkula · « **Reply #12 on:** December 28, 2011, 04:29:22 PM »

Adaptation of Greg's Ju 488 - the Ju 488Z-1:

finsrin · « **Reply #13 on:** December 29, 2011, 12:55:41 PM »

All those illustrations are inspiring.
Feeds into my idea processor where things get kinda jumbled. As will be evident when current bomber bash rolls out of the factory for photographs.
Thanks for posting them. Do appreciate it.

Bill

stevegallacci · « **Reply #14 on:** December 30, 2011, 01:53:02 AM »

No good art for it yet, but I've been thinking about a turbo-prop version of the Ju88 and/or '388. Part of the problem is the lack of a credible engine. I want to avoid the HeS011-based versions, as the engine would never really pan out in RL. A quick fix whiff could be a second turbine stage on the 003 or 004 jets to drive a prop. Or, for more whiffery, a development out of the 006, using the idea of the variable turbine stator, use it for a second turbine stage instead to take advantage of the potential variable power output. The 006 would be an interesting engine in general. Smaller in diameter and lighter than the 004 but with nearly the same power, at least potentially.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #15 on:** May 09, 2012, 02:21:20 PM »

Random idea: Ju88 or Ju188 floatplane as a replacement for the He-115.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #16 on:** May 16, 2012, 12:27:23 PM »

Quote from: GTX_Admin on May 09, 2012, 02:21:20 PM

Random idea: Ju88 or Ju188 floatplane as a replacement for the He-115.

Can anyone recommend a solution for the floats for this idea...in 1/48?

elmayerle · « **Reply #17 on:** May 16, 2012, 12:34:30 PM »

Well, does anyone do a conversion for the C-47 floatplane in 1/48? Methinks that'd be close enough to work.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #18 on:** May 16, 2012, 12:45:01 PM »

A Ju-52 float plane conversion would also work....and I just found a supplier of a Ju-52 floatplane conversion in 1/48!!!

Brian da Basher · « **Reply #19 on:** June 07, 2012, 03:28:04 AM »

Have you considered a Ju-88 airliner? It'd look great in Ansett livery.

Brian da Basher

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #20 on:** June 07, 2012, 06:35:30 PM »

Quote from: Brian da Basher on June 07, 2012, 03:28:04 AM

Have you considered a Ju-88 airliner? It'd look great in Ansett livery.

Brian da Basher

That's actually an interesting idea...maybe post war using a 188?

Brian da Basher · « **Reply #21 on:** June 08, 2012, 03:23:26 AM »

Quote from: GTX_Admin on June 07, 2012, 06:35:30 PM

Quote from: Brian da Basher on June 07, 2012, 03:28:04 AM
Have you considered a Ju-88 airliner? It'd look great in Ansett livery.

Brian da Basher

That's actually an interesting idea...maybe post war using a 188?

You know, the larger, glazed nose of a 188 would be perfect! Fly Ansett and really see Australia!

Brian da Basher

apophenia · « **Reply #22 on:** June 08, 2012, 06:27:41 AM »

Well, the later Ju-88 series became known for those marsupial-pouch belly panniers. How about going the whole hog (or, perhaps, wombat) ...

Brian da Basher · « **Reply #23 on:** June 08, 2012, 07:25:01 AM »

Brilliant, apophenia! Add the sleek sstreamlining of spats and Bob's your uncle!

I really like the Junkers Australia logo. Those guys really got around.

Brian da Basher

raafif · « **Reply #24 on:** June 08, 2012, 08:32:35 AM »

RV Resins used to do an "airliner" in 1/72nd -- 2 early Ju-88s (the V-2 & V-6) were modded to test the new -188 nose design & had a glass fuselage roof for the flight-technicians.

Kit build ...
http://www.internetmodeler.com/2003/april/aviation/Ju88.htm

apophenia · « **Reply #25 on:** June 09, 2012, 10:42:35 AM »

That is too cool! I'd heard about those testbeds but never seen them depicted. I certainly would never have guessed that techies got shoe-horned into the old cockpit position! Cheers raafif!

Daryl J. · « **Reply #26 on:** June 09, 2012, 10:56:08 PM »

Take Cyberhobby's Ju-88, revert it back to twin tails and put it in USAF-Vietnam service along with a radarless ground attack He-219.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #27 on:** June 10, 2012, 03:58:30 AM »

One could use the Ju88 prototype as a starting point for an airliner derivative...

Maverick · « **Reply #28 on:** August 21, 2012, 06:49:06 AM »

I've recently read about the initial RLM requirement for the Ju-388J heavy fighter to be an anti-B-29 aircraft as the Germans were apparently concerned that the Superforts would be deployed to Europe. This was also the impetus for the Ta-152H series as high-altitude fighters.

Always thought the 388 was dead sexy in its various incarnations, but this adds a new sheen of mystique to the type.

Geoff · « **Reply #29 on:** August 21, 2012, 11:25:40 PM »

Also Wiki (OK not the most reliable) recon the Japanese were interested in it and had a copy of the plans.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #30 on:** August 22, 2012, 02:44:55 AM »

A backup profile for Die Staudammbrecher...based upon Ju388 Mistel

Weaver · « **Reply #31 on:** August 22, 2012, 07:20:26 AM »

Quote from: apophenia on June 08, 2012, 06:27:41 AM

Well, the later Ju-88 series became known for those marsupial-pouch belly panniers. How about going the whole hog (or, perhaps, wombat) ...

Could see that doing Grand Canyon tours as well.....

Perhaps it could be converted to nosewheel configuration? Extend the engine pods aft of the wing to provide a new, aft mounting point for the long, retractable gear, then put the nosewheel in the base of the pod, either fixed (and spatted, of course

) or retractable. You could use a similar configuration for cargo with a "tin" pod with a rear door.

Like GTX's Tri-motor too.

sequoiaranger · « **Reply #32 on:** August 23, 2012, 03:18:20 AM »

I like to model torpedo-bombers. I "fell in love" with the Lindberg Ju-88 way back in the 60's (the one with the retractable landing gear and movable control surfaces) and I wanted to do a Ju-88-style torpedo bomber, but always liked the Ju-388 *LOOK* so...on my "project list" is a Ju-388 torpedo bomber. I am "told" that the 388 was a high-altitude fighter not "worthy" of being wasted on low-level missions. Bronx Cheer!!

I love the sleek look and the tail gun(s). My airbrush is not fine enough for the "wave-mirror" camo I would like to put on it, but since it is down the list a ways, I will have time to mull over what camo would be do-able.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #33 on:** August 23, 2012, 02:17:50 PM »

Quote from: sequoiaranger on August 23, 2012, 03:18:20 AM

I like to model torpedo-bombers. I "fell in love" with the Lindberg Ju-88 way back in the 60's (the one with the retractable landing gear and movable control surfaces) and I wanted to do a Ju-88-style torpedo bomber, but always liked the Ju-388 *LOOK* so...on my "project list" is a Ju-388 torpedo bomber.

According to the big book of all things Ju388 (see below), the Ju388M was to be a torpedo bomber version...

Mind you, that should not stop you.

Geoff · « **Reply #34 on:** August 23, 2012, 09:29:48 PM »

"...was to be". That magic phrase in Wif world!

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #35 on:** October 16, 2013, 02:11:16 PM »

Simple idea:

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #36 on:** November 01, 2013, 12:15:17 PM »

Ju-88 liner

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #37 on:** November 02, 2013, 02:41:14 AM »

Different...

I would perhaps base one on the prototypes:

or even something crazier such as this:

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #38 on:** November 02, 2013, 02:57:11 AM »

^^^^^
Was that an actual project?

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #39 on:** November 02, 2013, 03:23:47 AM »

raafif · « **Reply #40 on:** November 02, 2013, 04:56:56 AM »

Quote from: ysi_maniac on November 02, 2013, 02:57:11 AM

^^^^^
Was that an actual project?

the glasshouse was to house engineers for testing the aircraft, not a transport/ airliner version ....... but I also had ideas for Lufthansa when the kit was released years ago

Rickshaw · « **Reply #41 on:** November 02, 2013, 10:38:53 PM »

I assume it was one of the Versuches machines for the development of the Ju288?

apophenia · « **Reply #42 on:** November 03, 2013, 05:09:32 AM »

It was ... but far weirder-ooking than written descriptions of the Ju 88 V5 conversion seemed to imply $:-\$ Thanks for posting that Greg :)

Daryl J. · « **Reply #43 on:** November 03, 2013, 05:36:08 AM »

Some Dragon Ju-88G-6's were picked up cheap with the thought of putting BMW radials on the kit and modifying it for USAF Vietnam ground attack. Possibly their Ju-188 kit would work too.

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #44 on:** October 21, 2017, 01:55:34 AM »

Heavy bomber based on Ju-88 (this appears for comparison)

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #45 on:** October 21, 2017, 02:21:21 AM »

finsrin · « **Reply #46 on:** October 21, 2017, 11:05:20 AM »

Heavy bomber based on Ju-88 is sooooo inspiring

Story · « **Reply #47 on:** April 04, 2018, 09:41:30 PM »

Bare-metal finish, and in pre-war USAAF markings.
Close enough for y'all to get the jist.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #48 on:** April 05, 2018, 01:41:51 AM »

Some further inspiration for a BMF Ju88

Plus these:

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #49 on:** April 02, 2019, 01:46:20 AM »

Random idea: DB603 powered Ju88 or Ju188,

Old Wombat · « **Reply #50 on:** April 02, 2019, 10:27:32 AM »

Which US engines would you use to power the Ju 88?

The Allison V-1710 with the annular radiator or a radial?

If going radial, I'd suggest the P&W R-1535 for pre-/early production followed by the R-1830 for later production.

(Merlins, the only other really viable inline option in the pre-war era, wouldn't be on the radar in the US at this time.)

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #51 on:** April 03, 2019, 01:33:24 AM »

Hadn't thought that far. Maybe Allison V-1710s as suggested for the inline versions or R-2600s for the radial versions.

Old Wombat · « **Reply #52 on:** April 03, 2019, 05:55:11 PM »

The R-2600s offer a significant increase in power over the Jumos but this is somewhat offset by a significant increase in weight (from my very rough mental guesstimates) & the diameter seems to be significantly greater, too.

I suggested the Wasps because their diameter seems to be not overly dissimilar to the Jumo 211 & they're in the same power output range, & their weights kinda fit the rough Jumo+cooling guesstimate I made.

The Allisons are a fairly good fit; smaller frontal area, only about 50kg/105lb heavier & up to 500hp/365kW more power, each - the length could be a bit of an issue, though, as they're longer by about 42cm/16.5".

Sorry, waffling.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #53 on:** April 04, 2019, 01:52:03 AM »

As mentioned, I was only looking at the R-2600 as a replacement for the BMW 801 powered variants, not the Jumo powered variants. BTW, here is a quick comparison of radial engines"

BMW 801

Type: 14-cylinder two-row air-cooled radial engine
Length: 2,006 mm (79 in)
Diameter: 1,290 mm (51 in)
Dry weight: 1,012 kg (2,231 lb)
Power output: 1,560 PS (1,539 hp, 1,147 kW) at 2,700 rpm for takeoff at sea level
[Later versions up to 2,000 PS (1,973 hp, 1,471 kW)]
Power-to-weight ratio: 1.13 kW/kg (0.69 hp/lb)

R-2600

Type: 14-cylinder two-row air-cooled radial engine
Length: 62.06 in (1,576 mm)
Diameter: 55 in (1,397 mm)
Dry weight: 2,045 lb (930 kg
1,750 hp (1,305 kW) at 2,600 rpm at 3,200 ft (975 m) military power
1,450 hp (1,080 kW) at 2,600 rpm at 15,000 ft (4,575 m) military power
Power-to-weight ratio: 0.86 hp/lb (1.40 kW/kg))

R-1830

Type: 14-cylinder two-row air-cooled radial engine
Length: 59.06 in (1,500 mm)
Diameter: 48.03 in (1,220 mm)
Dry weight: 1,250 lb (567 kg)
1,200 hp (895 kW) at 2,700 rpm for takeoff
700 hp (522 kW) at 2,325 rpm cruise power at 13,120 ft (4,000 m)
Power-to-weight ratio: 0.96 hp/lb (1.58 kW/kg)

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #54 on:** July 20, 2019, 04:25:24 AM »

Interesting version:

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #55 on:** November 23, 2019, 08:28:25 PM »

Quote from: ysi_maniac on November 01, 2013, 12:15:17 PM

Ju-88 liner

I was not happy:

jcf · « **Reply #56 on:** November 26, 2019, 08:41:39 AM »

Vehicle a 1980 concept by Czech architect Jan Kaplicky for an air-portable vacation home.
Kaplicky had an interesting career, and up until his death he made the drawings of his concepts
with standard drafting tools, no CADD.

The book Drawings accompanied a show of his drawings back in 2015 at the London Architectural Association.
I have a copy and it's stunning.

https://www.bmiaa.com/jan-kaplicky-drawings-drawings-aa-london/

https://www.amazon.com/Jan-Kaplický-Drawings-Richard-Rogers/dp/0993072100

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #57 on:** November 27, 2019, 01:45:41 AM »

Has a scifi look.

apophenia · « **Reply #58 on:** November 27, 2019, 10:33:01 AM »

Indeed. In Kaplický's exhibit illustrations, even where familiar things are included - like a Hughes helicopter - it still looks like sci-fi!

Cool stuff but gotta love Jon's Ju 388 vacation home

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #59 on:** October 09, 2021, 10:16:25 PM »

Has this config ever existed in RW? I mean squared tail with early nose and canopy.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #60 on:** October 10, 2021, 02:57:14 AM »

I don't believe so.

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #61 on:** October 10, 2021, 05:10:06 AM »

This can be a scaleorama project with a 1/72 Ju-88 and a 1/48 Ju-87

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #62 on:** October 11, 2021, 01:37:01 AM »

No need to re-scale...some Ju88s did carry twin 37mm cannon:

I'm not sure if one can get a kit or a conversion of it though.

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #63 on:** October 11, 2021, 04:48:51 AM »

^^^^^
The point is COOLNESS.

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #64 on:** October 11, 2021, 04:49:30 AM »

Now with retractable undercarriage.

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #65 on:** October 15, 2021, 01:08:23 PM »

On top, original Do-17 and Ju-88. The rest are some ideas merging these designs.

What are your favourites? :thumbsup:

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #66 on:** November 22, 2022, 03:09:37 AM »

2 alternative Ju-388

apophenia · « **Reply #67 on:** November 23, 2022, 04:03:12 AM »

Something similar:

https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=351.msg157347#msg157347
https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=351.msg157442#msg157442
https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=351.msg157525#msg157525


Swords to Plowshares GB Now Open!!

News:

Author Topic: Junkers Ju85, Ju88, Ju288, Ju388 and Ju488... Ideas and Inspiration (Read 28516 times)