Don't forget to mention to the reader the hp difference of the early and late Ju-52 (3 x 550 or 3 x 830 hp).
O-J, I did, in that a power increase per model needs to keep step with any weight increase
. However...this was NOT always the case with the Ju52...
In mid-model run the Ju52/3mg8e had to have it's BMW 132T-2s swapped out for BMW 132Z radials. Similarly, the subsequent Ju52/3mg9e was powered by the same 3 × BMW 132Z radials, had a glider-towing coupling, and had a strenghtened landing gear...for a max take-off weight of 25,353 lb (11.500 kg) In other words, its
boosted to match the uprated MTOW.
And, as I said before..."the hp difference of the early and late Ju-52" won't have any input to landing
The still flying P&W Hornet Ju 52/3m will provide some information on the effect engine power had on Ju 52/3m take-off distance. With 600 hp Hornets it is ca. 500 m (cf. http://www.rundflug-nrw.de/rf11.html
) and with 725 hp take-off rated BMW 132 A it was 350 m (cf. http://www.ju52archiv.de/varianten.htm
); the 660 hp was 132 A's "combat" rating at 915 m, cf. "Flugzeug-Typenbuch" by Helmut Schneider. Both aircraft had the max. flying weight of 10 500 kg. A 20% increase in engine power for a given flying weight appears to have dramatic effect on the Alte Tante Ju's take-off distance.
Markus, this is quite correct; as I've just said about to Ome-Joop; however - taking off is only half[/] the story, as you do note...
or something like: "Due to the patented Junkers double wing the Ju 52/3m, at high flying weights also, had a short landing and take-off distance and even on unpaved landing strips could always be "talked into" a safe landing."
...taking a look round that Ju52archive page, that comment you translated seems to refer to its commercial airline performance, just like the centuryofflight source.
Historical events in Norway, Holland and Crete would indicate that they [i]couldn't
"always be talked into a safe landing". On the first hours of ops at Stavanger-Sola five were written off in take-off accidents and collisions; in the landings at Valkenburg in Holland,
"...the runway proved too soft for the weight of the troop transports carrying the infantry. The first wave sank up to their axles, blocking the way for those that followed and offering sitting targets for the Dutch. many were hit and started to burn. The remainder could only mill around helplessly overhead or divert to other landing zones."
MacDonald the Lost Battle
At Ockenburg and Ypenburg events were no better. The fields were soon clogged with burning aircraft as seventeen landing Ju52s were shot up, and others collided. "The Ju-52s had to come down wherever they could, on the Rotterdam-Hague motorway and even on the beaches", scattered as far out of range as Sandvoort, and the hard-packed sand there could maybe cope with racing at the Dutch TT
but couldn't handle the Ju52s. Between combat losses, and aircraft written off by landing accidents, collisions, and damage on landing "off-piste" -
"Of the 430 Ju52s engaged in the operation, two-thirds either never returned from Holland or were so badly damaged as to be write-offs. The special purpose squadron KGzbV2, during the landing attempts in The Hague area, lost ninety per cent of its aircraft. The Dutch airfields were littered with broken and burning wrecks."
The "combat" losses were only about a third of the total; the rest were landing and take-off accidents, and the damage suffered when coming down on "open-space" landing grounds.
For the problems the Ju52s suffered both at the makeshift Greece end of operations, and at Maleme on Crete - see the posts in the old Operation Ikarus What-If.