Junkers 52 "Tante Ju" /Lisunov Li2/C47 ❤️Fan Club & Help

[JG4_Retnek 292]

Just a note pointing on the potential of the Ju-52-design - the first models had the same dimensions as the later tri-engine-version, but just ONE engine:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Ju_52/1m

http://www.royalaviationmuseum.com/1022/junkers-ju-52-cf-arm/

 

Try to fly the (empty) Ju-52 with the one center-engine ;-)

[Dakpilot 1972]

I always liked the DC-2 more than the DC-3. Cleaner Lines, faster while less powerful and less bloated. Also the best Prepar3D/FSX Payware Aircraft I ever owned. 

 

 

I can't ever forgive the DC-2 for giving birth to this...

 

 

Interestingly the Wight cyclone 1820's of the DC-2 were licenced in Russia as the Shvetsov M-25 which with small mods turned into the Ash M-62

 

Which was used on the Lisunov  Li-2

 

To complete the circle there is also the Ts-62, a US built DC-3 with Ash M-62 fitted by Soviets due to shortage of spare P&W 1830's (do not know date of this conversion)

 

there is a remaining one preserved in China, which leads to the question I do not know the answer to

 

How many US built DC-3/C-47's were used by VVS

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell 1736]

This is a really great thread

 

Dakpilot, from what I know there were no lend-lease C-47/DC-3 deliveries to the Soviet Union. However, since 1936 around 30-40 had been operated by Aeroflot before the Douglas-Lisunov production deal was set in motion, so I'd guess the conversion you mentioned is based onto these older airframes.

[Dakpilot 1972]

Lend lease C-47 is a hard subject for any research, and at first seems did not happen, however

 

Nil posted this article

 

http://www.dc3history.org/aircraftmilitary/russianpilotsww11.html

 

From sources I have only found figures supporting 20-21  civilian DC-3 bought by Russia prior to the War, C-47 only produced from Dec 41

 

In various sources I have seen figure of 813 non combat aircraft delivered by LL during WWII, or at least sent, but never an actual breakdown of types

 

I have also read articles suggesting that during "Northern Route' ferry flights of fighters, C-47's were used as 'lead' aircraft and remained in Russia after the trip

 

In 1942  200 Armstrong Whitworth Albemarle were ordered from RAF and training base for Russian crew set up in scotland, in use it proved an unsatisfactory transport and the order was cancelled, the order being said to have been changed to C-47, although this would have been delivered later early 44 ish

 

of course a lot of these figures are difficult to prove so many should be taken with an open mind unless confirmed 

 

**EDIT**

 

I hesitate to include figures from Wikipedia,   but often these do come from valid info which even though without documented source have to have come from somewhere

 

In list of Russian WWII aircraft used by VVS, it says 707 LL US C-47, along with the other non combat LL aircraft

 

This does get close to the 813 non combat LL aircraft supplied I have seen as a figure in other documents.

 

12 Albemarle

82 Texan T6 trainer

1 C-46

19 Curtiss O-52 Owl

 

especially if you leave out the Albemarle as it can be classified as a bomber

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited December 26, 2016 by Dakpilot

[DD_Arthur 1711]

Great thread Nil and a big   to McKvack for banging on about a flyable Ju52 for months now!!

 

 

[6./ZG26_McKvack 490]

to you too!

 

It took some time but now we finally got this magnificent bird

[Nil 713]

Hi guys! Thank you for your love and your contributions!

 

Few shots.

Thank you ! Contribution added in "screenshot" section.

 

Guys this thread is literally killing me, being away from my sticks for the holidays... Merry Christmas all! Looking forward to flying Tante Ju again in a few long days...

I am glad our Love for Tante Ju/Dc3 is making people Happy!

 

I will join the club

You are welcome! 

 

Sorry, you can´t, you have not shown appropriate enthusiastic appreciation for the JU 52. 

Kidding ( in this site everything is taken seriously so sorry I just had my bit of fun

 

I always liked the DC-2 more than the DC-3. Cleaner Lines, faster while less powerful and less bloated. Also the best Prepar3D/FSX Payware Aircraft I ever owned. 

The Dc2 or Dc3 is a question of love and passion!  I love both and I think the Dc3 is indeed an outstanding upgrade of the DC3.

 

Just a note pointing on the potential of the Ju-52-design - the first models had the same dimensions as the later tri-engine-version, but just ONE engine:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Ju_52/1m

http://www.royalaviationmuseum.com/1022/junkers-ju-52-cf-arm/

 

Try to fly the (empty) Ju-52 with the one center-engine ;-)

So nice to see that one of the first model is well preserved. Its canopy is king of funny. See the difference with the Ju52 3e?

 

I can't ever forgive the DC-2 for giving birth to this...

 

Douglas_B-18_Bolo.jpg

 

Interestingly the Wight cyclone 1820's of the DC-2 were licenced in Russia as the Shvetsov M-25 which with small mods turned into the Ash M-62

 

Which was used on the Lisunov  Li-2

 

To complete the circle there is also the Ts-62, a US built DC-3 with Ash M-62 fitted by Soviets due to shortage of spare P&W 1830's (do not know date of this conversion)

 

there is a remaining one preserved in China, which leads to the question I do not know the answer to

 

How many US built DC-3/C-47's were used by VVS

 

Cheers Dakpilot

That explain why Li2 engine are less powerful than C47 engines, and why the Li2 has less playload than C47

For the question "How many US built DC3/C47 were used by VVS"... well it is a good question

 

This is a really great thread

Thank you Lucas From Hell, that is the spirit of this thread!

 

Lend lease C-47 is a hard subject for any research, and at first seems did not happen, however

 

Nil posted this article

 

http://www.dc3history.org/aircraftmilitary/russianpilotsww11.html

 

From sources I have only found figures supporting 20-21  civilian DC-3 bought by Russia prior to the War, C-47 only produced from Dec 41

 

In various sources I have seen figure of 813 non combat aircraft delivered by LL during WWII, or at least sent, but never an actual breakdown of types

 

I have also read articles suggesting that during "Northern Route' ferry flights of fighters, C-47's were used as 'lead' aircraft and remained in Russia after the trip

 

In 1942  200 Armstrong Whitworth Albemarle were ordered from RAF and training base for Russian crew set up in scotland, in use it proved an unsatisfactory transport and the order was cancelled, the order being said to have been changed to C-47, although this would have been delivered later early 44 ish

 

of course a lot of these figures are difficult to prove so many should be taken with an open mind unless confirmed 

 

**EDIT**

 

I hesitate to include figures from Wikipedia,   but often these do come from valid info which even though without documented source have to have come from somewhere

 

In list of Russian WWII aircraft used by VVS, it says 707 LL US C-47, along with the other non combat LL aircraft

 

This does get close to the 813 non combat LL aircraft supplied I have seen as a figure in other documents.

 

12 Albemarle

82 Texan T6 trainer

1 C-46

19 Curtiss O-52 Owl

 

especially if you leave out the Albemarle as it can be classified as a bomber

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

Thank you for your research Dakpilot! So probably 707 Lend Lease C47 for Russia?

 

Great thread Nil and a big   to McKvack for banging on about a flyable Ju52 for months now!!

 

 

Thank you McKvack! and the other of course.

 

to you too!

 

It took some time but now we finally got this magnificent bird

I could not believe we will get Tante Ju during these 4 months of waiting... it so... unreal to get that kind of bird in a WW2 sim? but there is a beginning in everything and  we are truly in the golden age of WW2 simulations.

Edited December 27, 2016 by Nil

[Nil 713]

Here is a funny mission I made in Random Expert, taking a Russian Tante Ju.

I dropped my para, and then on the way back I saw a Tante Ju coming the other way with 3 fighters escorting her! so...

"Why not flying in formation with her" (I fly the Russian skin Tante Ju, but players do not have this skin, so confusion...my new buddy use the special skin so less confusion: written in Russian on it, and all pilot can see it)

He dropped his paratropper!

 

Engaged by a 109, but our mighty escort will take car of it soon!

 

Now the funny thing: Engaged by a Lagg3 (??) who do not know what "logic" means: attacking a plane escorted by friendlies , and the gunner is not defending against him!

 

An another pass, because he is a good Pilot, he likes to finish his job 

 

He is a very good Pilot, and helping me to go faster by removing my landing gear!

 

1 engine dead, But Still flying in formation with my buddy!    I love flying in formation, what about you guys??

 

Flying like that during 30km.... amazing!

Home now! Epic mission!

 

 

Share yours as well! with screen or not!

Edited December 30, 2016 by Nil

[curiousGamblerr 947]

Great thread Nil and a big   to McKvack for banging on about a flyable Ju52 for months now!!

 

 

 

Next time please include Star Wars music in the background

[Seacondor 6]

Love this Ju52 as I thought I would. It is much more than I was expecting.

How do you do new skins for it? I would like a plain green one

like they used in Crete. The Spanish war skin is really nice. 

Edited December 27, 2016 by Seacondor

[Haza 671]

JU52 Porn

 

[307_Tomcat 732]

Good that we have this crate onboard, jolly fun to fly!

[6./ZG26_Loke 204]

Para drops in Norway.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AgTMjoEosgE

 

Hmm, make me wish for a BoN "Battle of Norway" :-D.

I know. It's a keep on dreaming wish!

[Censored_Space_Ghost 1959]

Another big dream would be Crete 1941.One of the great moments in WW2 for "Tante Ju".But I fear we have to wait veeeeery long for a mediterranean map!

 

What would be even better is if 777 sent TFS their Ju52 to combine with their North Africa assets to bring us something like Crete.

 

Then TFS could send back their Hurricane and 777 can dress it up for the Eastern Front.

[curiousGamblerr 947]

Watching this while eating dinner: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQzX5_7XpSI

 

Edit: Don't be fooled by the Hs-129 image, it's all about transports and paras, mostly Ju-52 

Edited December 30, 2016 by 19.GIAP//curiousGamblerr

[Gambit21 3634]

Pelican flight and an early morning supply drop near the lines

[Mikojad 15]

Affirmative Klaus! UIVER is one my absolute favourites in my FS10/FSX era! 

 

that brought tears to my eyes 

 

I always liked the DC-2 more than the DC-3. Cleaner Lines, faster while less powerful and less bloated. Also the best Prepar3D/FSX Payware Aircraft I ever owned. 

 

 

 

[Nil 713]

Thank you for ALL your contribution Guys and your Passion!   

I add them

@Gambit21: Love your screens! please share more of them, always with your nice comment!

 

I add this tutorial

[6./ZG26_McKvack 490]

Pelican flight and an early morning supply drop near the lines

 

That looks really good

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann 1538]

We are thinking of actually creating a Pure Ju-52 Coop, at night, over Stalingrad, supplying the 6th Army in their Pocket. Most likely no or almost no Opposition, just a big Operation on small Airfields. Basically an Airbridge. 

Once we can host a Server again that is. 

Edited December 30, 2016 by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

[AeroAce 844]

any reason my first engine throttle never goes above 19 percent??????????????

[No601_Swallow 603]

We are thinking of actually creating a Pure Ju-52 Coop, at night, over Stalingrad, supplying the 6th Army in their Pocket. Most likely no or almost no Opposition, just a big Operation on small Airfields. Basically an Airbridge. 

Once we can host a Server again that is. 

 

Please do! I'll try to get the members of my squadron that have a soul (sadly some have a type of attention deficit disorder and think any aircraft that doesn't have a one, a zero and a nine (in any order) in its name is "boring") to turn up. With an NDB at Tatsinskya or Moro-thingy, say, Ju52s could use the reciprocal (? I think...) heading to find their different airfields. Adverse weather conditions (including strong winds and poor visibility) would ensure white knuckles all round! Indeed, you could designate an airfield  controller for the larger airfields, etc, etc. 

 

Eek! I'm getting excited! Time for a cold shower, or a quick roll in the snow... 

Edited December 30, 2016 by No601_Swallow

[AeroAce 844]

any reason my first engine throttle never goes above 19 percent??????????????

 

as soon as im on the ground i cant control my engines past 19% (or at least all of them)! Im a 52 noob! can anyone help please?

Edited December 30, 2016 by AeroAce

[AeroAce 844]

as soon as im on the ground i cant control my engines past 19% (or at least all of them)! Im a 52 noob! can anyone help please?

 

SOLVED 

 

My toe breaks were interacting with the throttles!!! The solution was to delete the bindings for right/left break and then.... tad tar it worked!!!!!!!! 

 

The down side is now I have to reconfigure my settings each time! 

 

DEVS SORT THIS OUT 

 

PS what is strange is that it only had an effect on the ground? In the air it worked fine no matter what level of toe break i put in???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Edited December 30, 2016 by AeroAce

[216th_Jordan 944]

SOLVED

 

My toe breaks were interacting with the throttles!!! The solution was to delete the bindings for right/left break and then.... tad tar it worked!!!!!!!!

 

The down side is now I have to reconfigure my settings each time!

 

DEVS SORT THIS OUT

 

PS what is strange is that it only had an effect on the ground? In the air it worked fine no matter what level of toe break i put in???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

I have the brakes on my rudder pedals too and no problem. sounds like a calibration/no deadzone issue on your end. And less questionmarks don't hurt

[AeroAce 844]

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? what do u mean?????????????????????????????????????

 

But on a serious note, I have the same set up as u but plus the MFG CrossWinds!

 

I think the problem is with the whole set up which make me have a head ache

[Gambit21 3634]

A peek out the window while taxiing, watching the rest of the flight form up behind.

Just a cargo drop this morning - milk run. Hopefully.

 

[6./ZG26_5tuka 1808]

PS what is strange is that it only had an effect on the ground? In the air it worked fine no matter what level of toe break i put in???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Brakes and cargo doors can only be toggled on ground so you can't trigger them mistacenly whilst airborne.

[Jade_Monkey 2667]

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? what do u mean?????????????????????????????????????

 

But on a serious note, I have the same set up as u but plus the MFG CrossWinds!

 

I think the problem is with the whole set up which make me have a head ache

I also have the same toebrake issue. You just have to line up the olabe and makr sure youndont hit the toebrake on takeoff.

 

Maybe a small initial deadzone is a good idea.

[Gambit21 3634]

A crewman peers out of the doorway on the way to a 300 meter cargo drop

[Monostripezebra 1124]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_x19vGqEfs

[Nil 713]

Thank you to all subscribers who are kindly following this topic:

=FI= Blue2

No601_Swallow

ADorante

310_cibule

BlitzPig_EL

Pilotpierre

216th_Retnek

and Papaflo

 

I give a +1 to almost every message in this topic to support you Guys!

 

I am constantly updating my post. Thank you for all your contributions.

 

Now , I need your help, if you can help me to answer these 3 questions to make a "history" section in this topic to better know our beloved Tante Ju and Dc3

 

1- Why the Junkers 52 is so special? (Why Tante Ju was so beloved during the war?)

2- What are the differences between the C47 and Tante Ju ?

3- Why Tante Ju was used and produced during the war and even after the war (used until 1980 by Swiss Air) despite she was outdated and slow? 

 

 

You can give links, pictures.... whatever you want.

 

I am enjoying to fly this bird so much (especially in solo campaign without GPS), more than I expected.

I am so excited to read you Guys!!

 

Here are some Screen I made!

Edited January 4, 2017 by Nil

[6./ZG26_McKvack 490]

Nice pics Nil

 

I think the reason why so many liked them was because they took people to safety and supplied the friendly forces

 

Everyone must love a medevac that are comming for them

[Freycinet 724]

For me the charm of the Ju-52 is very much connected with its iconic looks. It is the epitome of a crucial period in aviation. The very earliest days of metal aircraft construction. Basically all aircraft were wood, string and canvas before Junkers embarked on his revolutionary design route. A few early pioneers dabbled in metal airplanes around the time of Junkers, but he was the first who wholeheartedly made the jump into the future. Fokker and Dornier also played important rôles in the early years, but it was Junkers aircraft that really got 'heavy metal' off the ground on a global scale.

 

It is probably hard for us to realise, from a post-Concorde perspective, how totally futuristic and modern Junkers' planes seemed in his day. For a world used to double-deckers and 'flying stringbags' his planes were positively space age. His corrugated iron construction, which seems so quaint today, oozed of speed and sleekness. Hitler flew the Ju-52 around Germany to show the people that he was a future man and not the usual steam train politician.

 

Other aviation designers quickly improved on Junkers' work, introducing stressed-skin and monocoque construction techniques, flushed rivets, etc, etc, but exactly because aviation forged ahead his designs remain unique and iconic for an age in aviation. The Ju-52 is its own, it isinimitable, a lumbering teutonic square box with built-in headwind, almost indestructible by the forces of nature, solid and dependable... Yeah, well, there is a lot to like isn't there?

[Gambit21 3634]

I think I need to lower the transit altitude of my Ju flights in the campaign. Anyone have references on average operational altitude. Not for drops, but ingress/egress?

[heltaskelter 95]

Great thread guys, and a great airframe.

 

Pilot 'Haza' kindly bought me the ju52 but I only managed 20 minutes in it before I went overseas. Managed to figure out the stabilizer/flap controls in that time however.

 

I can't wait to get some more time in this airframe!

Edited January 6, 2017 by B0SS

[Monostripezebra 1124]

It is probably hard for us to realise, from a post-Concorde perspective, how totally futuristic and modern Junkers' planes seemed in his day. For a world used to double-deckers and 'flying stringbags' his planes were positively space age. His corrugated iron construction, which seems so quaint today, oozed of speed and sleekness. Hitler flew the Ju-52 around Germany to show the people that he was a future man and not the usual steam train politician.

 

 

Naa. Really not. By the time Hitler flew around in a Ju-52, the Ju-52 was "old iron" and Junkers said so himself. It was the last plane in a line of thought that did put reliability and ease of use over everything else, planes built to be operated without much infrastructre. By the late 1930ies Junkers had allready other, more airport-infrastructure dependent and more modern airliners like the Ju-60, Ju 86 or later the Ju-90.

 

What did keep the Ju-52 in service was reliabilty. If you consider the european weather and the difficulties of early IFR-flights, the dependability and course stability even on any 2 engines ment that the junkers still had a good place for airline use... it was slow, but it got there no matter what, safely. And it still could service any field...Structural ruggedness and slow speed as well with takeoff rolls less then 200m ment it still had some military uses, too. French, post war built Ju-52s actually saw use in Indochine. All because it was a plane that could offer more dependability under extreme conditions then most of the more modern counterparts.

 

Kind of like the DC-3 which still flies the arctic as Basler turboprop conversions, today.

Edited January 6, 2017 by Monostripezebra

[heltaskelter 95]

I think I need to lower the transit altitude of my Ju flights in the campaign. Anyone have references on average operational altitude. Not for drops, but ingress/egress?

On that topic, what's the ceiling for this airframe guys?

Edited January 6, 2017 by B0SS

[Nil 713]

Thank you MonoStipeZebra

I think the reason why so many liked them was because they took people to safety and supplied the friendly forces

Everyone must love a medevac that are comming for them

Sure, thank you

 

For me the charm of the Ju-52 is very much connected with its iconic looks. It is the epitome of a crucial period in aviation. The very earliest days of metal aircraft construction. Basically all aircraft were wood, string and canvas before Junkers embarked on his revolutionary design route. A few early pioneers dabbled in metal airplanes around the time of Junkers, but he was the first who wholeheartedly made the jump into the future. Fokker and Dornier also played important rôles in the early years, but it was Junkers aircraft that really got 'heavy metal' off the ground on a global scale.

It is probably hard for us to realise, from a post-Concorde perspective, how totally futuristic and modern Junkers' planes seemed in his day. For a world used to double-deckers and 'flying stringbags' his planes were positively space age. His corrugated iron construction, which seems so quaint today, oozed of speed and sleekness. Hitler flew the Ju-52 around Germany to show the people that he was a future man and not the usual steam train politician.

Other aviation designers quickly improved on Junkers' work, introducing stressed-skin and monocoque construction techniques, flushed rivets, etc, etc, but exactly because aviation forged ahead his designs remain unique and iconic for an age in aviation. The Ju-52 is its own, it isinimitable, a lumbering teutonic square box with built-in headwind, almost indestructible by the forces of nature, solid and dependable... Yeah, well, there is a lot to like isn't there?

 

 

Thank you Freycinet

 

I think I need to lower the transit altitude of my Ju flights in the campaign. Anyone have references on average operational altitude. Not for drops, but ingress/egress?

Sorry no clues yet.

 

Great thread guys, and a great airframe.

Pilot Haza kindly bought me the ju52 but I only managed 20 minutes in it before I went overseas. Managed to figure out the stabilizer/flap controls in that time however.

I can't wait to get some more time in this airframe!

 

French military used it until 1960, veterans have a good souvenir of it:

Slow, Simple, Very reliable with no major breakdown, Be able to operate on unprepared airstrip with short landing and take off capability (more "off road" plane than C47)

 

Getting the job done: 

French used to drop paras at 170km/h 120-300 meters ground height 

[Red_Cat 631]

I think I need to lower the transit altitude of my Ju flights in the campaign. Anyone have references on average operational altitude. Not for drops, but ingress/egress?

 

From what I remember reading, below the clouds in bad weather and an operational altitude of 2000 feet / 610 m in clear? Not 100% sure though as I can't find any sources at the moment - I might have imagined it!

Cheers.