Salvage of JU87 (merged again) – 2006 Zombie

Temporary display at the opening of the new museum annex last year.

Dave

The angle is prob just to show it off in “dive mode”, looks pretty ordianry really

Angle

Apart from similarities to another recent photo :diablo: – is this airframe stored at this angle for some specific reason other than to save space? I see a lot of panels seem to have been removed from the underside of the wings – could it be that this is the best angle to rinse it through with fresh water or even rain?

Also I can’t see the remains of the wheels taking much weight so is the whole weight of the airframe supported on the rather flimsy looking wooden frame – strong winds must not be an issue here?!? 😮

Sorry, is it your photo? 😮

Nope.. I mean the photo reminds me of something else…..

Sorry, is it your photo? 😮

Where have I seen an image like that Stuka recently???:confused:

For an excellent “as found” museum display aircraft, look no further than the P-40 recovered from the beach at Anzio, Italy that was discussed recently on this forum (I don’t have the link to that discussion, but here is the link to a pic:

http://www.warbirdregistry.org/p40registry/p40-piana.html

Looks in great condition!!:)

Looks like it needs a trip to Germany or Paul Allen’s Luftwaffe workshop!

They are obviously not expecting much wind in the forseeable future, and they must have used super-reinforced toothpicks to prop it up!

It looks to be in quite decent condition considering it came from not so fresh water.
Hope they take it inside and start restoring it.
Cheers

Cees

A photograph from Flickr of Stuka S7+GM.

For an excellent “as found” museum display aircraft, look no further than the P-40 recovered from the beach at Anzio, Italy that was discussed recently on this forum (I don’t have the link to that discussion, but here is the link to a pic:

http://www.warbirdregistry.org/p40registry/p40-piana.html

Looking at the photographs of this aircraft, it is clear that there is a lot of sound structural material to base a highly original restoration upon. The fuselage looks straight, and absent serious corrosion. The center section is excellent as well. You just have to look at the wing joints to see how fine a condition the metal is in considering where it’s been, and for how long. Corrosion-wise, the Stuka looks in far better condition than the recent -190 recovered from Norway.

The items which need replacing on the aircraft constitute a fairly small percentage of overall structure. There are plenty of engines out there which could be restored to static condition for the project. The only complex parts to fabricate would be the engine cowlings, and wheel spats. I’ve worked on several restoration projects myself, and honestly, this aircraft represents a much better starting point than many I have seen. If it is restored to static, I would be surprised if less than 70% of it remains original. I honestly don’t understand why you don’t see it as a worthwhile endeavor, considering how many museum aircraft out there have started from the same beginnings, or worse. Even if they simply preserve what remains without refabricating anything it would serve as a fascinating and useful exhibit.

With regards to it being a wargrave; well, at the risk of stirring up another debate, I think it serves as a better memorial to the crew as a museum exhibit to be honest. There are many cases of aircraft being recovered where crew members died in the original accident. I personally don’t feel this is a dishonorable thing, provided that any remains are treated with respect and given proper burial should they be found. In this particular case, I doubt seriously if any remains were in the aircraft. I know if I had lost a relative in such a crash, and I have, I would be much happier seeing an exhibit than having no tangible link left at all. In any event, many world-class museums display the items, and even bodies, from ancient tombs and battlefields. What is so different between souls lost in the distant past, and those from 60 years ago?

I guess we should just agree to disagree on this.

Richard

I think this is a great recovery! A lot of the aircraft is still there and it is in very good condition for a salt water recovery. Looking forward to seeing it restored.

Personally, I feel that this aircraft falls into the same category as the Norwegian FW190. Try to restore it to museum quality condition, and you will lose it. By that I mean that you will replace so much that you end up with a new aeroplane.

This is an interesting recovery, and much can be learnt from it; I would display it in an ‘as found’ condition, suitably ‘preserved’.

Bruce

As stated, I really would love to be proven wrong on this one.
I’ve had a strong (familial lead) interest in Luftwaffe aircraft since childhood. But as someone said it needs “a new tail, and engine QEC, as well as wing tips and canopies” and with all the corsosion how much of the original Junkers airframe will be present for it to even stand on its undercarriage? Best wishes to the HAF museum, let’s prove me wrong.

Another point, I won’t say too much after this, and I am NOT trying to stir a ****-fight.
Why raise a wreck in such condition that is clearly a wargrave? The fuselage codes were clearly visible and reasearch showed there were fatalities when the Stuka went down. In my view not much will be gained from raising this one….

Look at how the Northrop Seaplane was recovered from Iceland and looks now on display at Gardermoen. Sheer hard work but with a fantastic result.
If you don’t try you don’t succeed.

Cees

Two chains of thought – leave it on the seabed and eventually it will be dissolved like an Asprin or recover it and do your best to preserve and complete her .
If it costs hardly anything to do because of military involvement and you don’t already have a JU87 and you consider the aircraft to be important in the events of your country why not!

Oh, come on guys. That Stuka has so much stuff missing I doubt it will ever be completed to museum static standard. Yes it has the partial shape of a Stuka but that’s about it.
I wish them all the best and would love to see another Stuka completed but……

So you know what the Greek Air Force Museum has in store , or has the ability to obtain do you? Do you know the HAF relationship with other European Museums, including Berlin? Do a bit of research before wildly speculating :rolleyes:

Dave

??!!! You obviously don’t pay much attention to what actually goes on in the restoration world these days. About 70 to 80% of the Stuka is actually there, and much of it looks to be in very good condition. Sure it needs a new tail, and engine QEC, as well as wing tips and canopies to be externally representative, but by most standards this is a very complete aircraft. It will require a lot of work, but can hardly be said to be unachievable to have a complete aircraft for static display. It actually even looks like a Stuka, which couldn’t really be said of previous recoveries. Since there are only two complete examples left in the world, why is it a waste of time to try and put together a third from a very substantial, and straight looking wreck?

Surely you must enjoy seeing the many hurricanes, spitfires and mustangs fly these days, not to mention the rarer types such as the nimrod. Did it ever occur to you that many of these aircraft are more or less totally built from new material, or cobbled together from several wrecks? Why is it a waste to go to the effort of recovering the Stuka? Ten years from now, it will probably be a very fine exhibit in the Greek Museum…. Do you expect all of the aircraft recovered to be perfectly complete before you consider them worthy of being bothered with??? I suppose the Halifaxes recovered from Norway were a waste of time too. Such logic defies belief. It’s like you expect your lunch to be handed to you for free every day, and gift-wrapped to boot.

Richard