Author Topic: Junkers Ju-52  (Read 4951 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline GTX

  • Beyond The Sprues Guy
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 10817
  • "Princess"
    • www.beyondthesprues.com/Forum
Junkers Ju-52
« on: April 20, 2006, 05:11:33 pm »
Hi folks,

I'm sure many of you will be familiar with the turbo-prop conversion of the venerable Dakota:


What if more JJu 52/3ms had survived the war and had been kept in operational service around the world - could we have seen some turboprop conversions performed to result in some Turbo Tante Ju's?

Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline upnorth

  • I like Faireys
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 2071
Re: Junkers Ju-52
« Reply #1 on: April 20, 2006, 11:43:22 pm »
I'm certain it could have been done, but I'm rather sceptical that it would have been done.

The Ju-52 with its corrugated metal fuselage and fixed landing gear most most certainly a high drag airframe. While the Dakota was no speed demon herself, she did have the advantage of a smoother fuselage, better contours and was designed with retractable gear.

I rather doubt the full benefits of re-engining the JU-52 with turbo props would be effectively realized without radical redesign of the whole airframe including a redesigned undercarriage that would retract.

I have doubt that anyone in the post war era would be interested in sinking the kind of funds and time required into so many changes to a largely obsolete design just for the sake of effectively marrying turbo props up to her.

Uprated piston engines perhaps, but turbo props would be a waste without the massive redesign.
 

K5054NZ

  • Guest
Re: Junkers Ju-52
« Reply #2 on: April 21, 2006, 12:02:17 am »
Quote
Turbo props would be a waste without the massive redesign.
 ^_^  Consider it done.



As with the FAC Chipmunk, I would like to claim this idea for me to build upon. GTX, with your permission, I would like to build this Turbo Ju.

Offline Son of Damian

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 1305
Re: Junkers Ju-52
« Reply #3 on: April 21, 2006, 12:17:59 am »
Not to mention most German aircraft, even flyable ones, were scrapped. There were also a lot of cheap Dakotas around to, so..................

But with a large number still in service around the world in exotic locals, anythings possible. Not to mention I saw a photo of a Dornier flying boat that had retro fitted with trubos, I have to find it for y'all. I've also seen a photo some where of French C-47s and Ju 52s in Indochina. The Ju 52s having been taken from an airline in Asia that flew them.    
"They stand in the unbroken line of patriots who have dared to die that freedom might live, and grow, and increase its blessings. Freedom lives, and through it, they live–
in a way that humbles the undertakings of most men."

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

Offline Archibald

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 4984
Re: Junkers Ju-52
« Reply #4 on: April 21, 2006, 02:21:19 am »
Compared to the C-47, Ju-52 was really a crap... I red somewhere that the Ju-52 was the first airliner massively adopted by the companies... but the Dakota was the first who permit them EARN money, not losing it!
In France the Ju-52 was named Tante Ju (Ie Aunt Julia). AdA use some Ju-52 until 1960, to monitor the first nuclear tests in Reggane!
A Ju-52 with small turboprops would probably be  nice and i really want to see that (I think about Mamba or Dart  turboprops similar to Gannet or Alizée...)  
King Arthur: Can we come up and have a look?
French Soldier: Of course not. You're English types.
King Arthur: What are you then?
French Soldier: I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Well regardless I would rather take my chance out there on the ocean, that to stay here and die on this poo-hole island spending the rest of my life talking to a gosh darn VOLLEYBALL.

Offline famvburg

  • Scratchbuilds the entire model
  • ****
  • Posts: 605
Re: Junkers Ju-52
« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2006, 03:49:14 am »

     Considering the Ju-52 used essentially Geman built P & W R-1340s, which many cropdusters are & were powered by, as here in the USA. Many since the '70s have been converted to P & W PT-6 or Garrett turbo props, I can see a Ju-52 with the same turbo prop installations. Speed is not always the root of converting to turbo props. Many times it's the improved reliability & maintenance, as well as performance. An example is on the cropdusters, both the radial engine & PT-6 are 600 HP. In addition to the PT-6 allowing a much sleeker installation, an aerodynamic improvement itself, the PT-6 weighs about 1/4 of the radial. This equates to increased payload as well as improved performance & reliability. PT-6s also allow more flexibility in fuel choices. Jet Fuel, AvGas, Diesel, Gasoline & the like. The piston engine is limited to AvGas, or Gasoline at worst case. For PT-6s or Garretts, one could fair in the cowl assemblies from a Tucano.

Offline GTX

  • Beyond The Sprues Guy
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 10817
  • "Princess"
    • www.beyondthesprues.com/Forum
Re: Junkers Ju-52
« Reply #6 on: April 21, 2006, 12:55:32 pm »
Zac,

Quote
GTX, with your permission, I would like to build this Turbo Ju.

Go for it - I tend to generate more ideas than I have time to model anyway.  I can't wait to see the result.

Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline GTX

  • Beyond The Sprues Guy
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 10817
  • "Princess"
    • www.beyondthesprues.com/Forum
Re: Junkers Ju-52
« Reply #7 on: April 21, 2006, 10:01:45 pm »
Quote
I had also considered this application for the PBY Catalina using the same C-130 parts. I think that would look even better since it is such an ugly aircraft to start with.

Heresy!!! Stone that man now!!!
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline lancer

  • Has never been to Hull
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 10445
Re: Junkers Ju-52
« Reply #8 on: April 22, 2006, 10:07:40 am »
Quote
Guess it was a good thing that I didn't mention my idea about using the engines pods from a 1/48th scale A-10 to replace the radials on the Catalina... :ph34r:
Ohhhh good idea Jeff. I like it.  
If you love, love without reservation; If you fight, fight without fear - THAT is the way of the warrior

If you go into battle knowing you will die, then you will live. If you go into battle hoping to live, then you will die

Offline GTX

  • Beyond The Sprues Guy
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 10817
  • "Princess"
    • www.beyondthesprues.com/Forum
Re: Junkers Ju-52
« Reply #9 on: April 22, 2006, 01:41:09 pm »
Quote
Guess it was a good thing that I didn't mention my idea about using the engines pods from a 1/48th scale A-10 to replace the radials on the Catalina... ph34r.gif
Wait a minute - you didn't mention that.  There may be grounds for a reprieve afterall.  So long as you acknowledge that the Cat was/is one of the most beautiful creations ever to have flown and that it deserves to have something round on it's wings - be that radial engines (ooo..radials :wub:  :wub:  :wub: ) or Turbo fans mounted to give USB like an An-72/74 :wub:  :wub:  :wub: - now there's an idea!

Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline elmayerle

  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6406
Re: Junkers Ju-52
« Reply #10 on: April 23, 2006, 02:37:24 am »
Instead of re-engining the JU-52, how about doing the Ju-252 or -352 instead?  Lots of potential to work from there.
"Reality is the leading cause of stress amongst those in touch with it."
--Jane Wagner and Lily Tomlin

Offline Archibald

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 4984
Re: Junkers Ju-52
« Reply #11 on: April 23, 2006, 03:50:25 am »
Geoff the plane you describe exist : its the Pilatus PC-6 (there's also the PC-12, and the TBM-700...)
King Arthur: Can we come up and have a look?
French Soldier: Of course not. You're English types.
King Arthur: What are you then?
French Soldier: I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Well regardless I would rather take my chance out there on the ocean, that to stay here and die on this poo-hole island spending the rest of my life talking to a gosh darn VOLLEYBALL.

Offline Jeffry Fontaine

  • Don't need no stinking instructions
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 3376
  • What-If's "Uncle Jeffry"
    • http://www.facebook.com/jeffryfontaine
Re: Junkers Ju-52
« Reply #12 on: April 23, 2006, 01:11:51 pm »
Quote
Wait a minute - you didn't mention that.  There may be grounds for a reprieve afterall.  So long as you acknowledge that the Cat was/is one of the most beautiful creations ever to have flown and that it deserves to have something round on it's wings - be that radial engines (ooo..radials :wub:  :wub:  :wub: ) or Turbo fans mounted to give USB like an An-72/74 :wub:  :wub:  :wub: - now there's an idea!
Recant?  NEVER!  The Catalina is still one of the ugliest yet most functional aircraft ever designed, it will never be as pleasing to the eye as the Boeing 314 Clipper but it has all of the features I find alluring to me in that it flies as well as floats.  There is not a lot that can be done to improve upon what it was designed to do.  I also like the Mars, Mariner/Marlin, and the Shin Meiwa PS-1.  

Turbine engine powered Boeing 314 anyone?  
Unaffiliated Independent Subversive
----------------------------------
"Every day we hear about new studies 'revealing' what should have been obvious to sentient beings for generations; 'Research shows wolverines don't like to be teased" -- Jonah Goldberg