Ju 390 in flight refuelling

Discussions on all (non-biographical) aspects of the Luftwaffe air units and general discussions on the Luftwaffe.
User avatar
Davide Pastore
Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 26 Nov 2005 22:05
Location: Germagnano, Italy

Re: Re:

Postby Davide Pastore » 02 Mar 2008 10:21

Davide Pastore wrote:Or, maybe, the entire second picture is a hoax?

On closer inspection, Ju 390V2 seems to defy the Law of Perspective :o 8O

Image

Possibly this is a side effect of the wonderful sci-fi gizmos it was carrying onboard (space distortion or something like that) :P

User avatar
Davide Pastore
Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 26 Nov 2005 22:05
Location: Germagnano, Italy

Re: Ju-390 in flight refuelling

Postby Davide Pastore » 02 Mar 2008 10:47

The more one looks, the more one finds :P

The fuselage of 390V2 seems longer than 390V1, but it isn't :idea:

See the length of the fuselage compared to the width of the tailplane and with the length of the engine gondola:

Image

Note: the lines are not perfectly straight since I could not obtain two perfectly identical lengths of fuselage. However they are straight enough to clearly show the two fuselages doesn't differ much in length (although the engine, along with the wing, looks like having been "translated" a few meters).

Of course, those sci-fi gizmos are heavy things, and so the designer had to move the aircraft CG by unbolting the wings and rebolting them a few meters back - an easy enough task, no doubt :wink:

P.S. for those impervious to irony: the picture of Ju 390V2 RC+DA is a (very badly-made) hoax :P

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Ju 390 in flight refuelling

Postby phylo_roadking » 02 Mar 2008 14:51

Perhaps they had come up with a way of dealing with the longstanding FW 200 Condor issue of sections dropping out of the fuselage between the tail and fuselage on landing by actually reassembling the fuselage inflight???

User avatar
Davide Pastore
Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 26 Nov 2005 22:05
Location: Germagnano, Italy

Re: Ju-390 in flight refuelling

Postby Davide Pastore » 02 Mar 2008 14:57

Don't forget the wonderful devices described by Mr. Witowski: it's just space distortion, remember :wink:

Simon Gunson
Member
Posts: 503
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 00:25
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: Ju-390 in flight refuelling

Postby Simon Gunson » 02 Mar 2008 22:21

On closer inspection, Ju 390V2 seems to defy the Law of Perspective


I happen to be an artist who paints photo realistic paintings of seascapes so I know a bit about perspectives.

The law of perspectives is that whilst you can distort angles (such as wide angle lenses) you can't distort ratios.

If you want to compare wing chords or engine to trailing edges then compare like with like. The ratio from the trap door hinge line to the wing trailing edge is different and thus these are two different aircraft. It's that simple.

Don't forget the wonderful devices described by Mr. Witowski: it's just space distortion, remember


You'd have to explain to me how that works. I haven't read Mr Witowski's books yet. I know of his work through correspondence with another author.

Perhaps someone will explain why one aircraft has a gondola and the other does not ?

Given that Kössler/ Ott in "Die großen Dessauer" got so much else wrong in their book about Ju-390 performance, I would like to see their original picture of RC+DA with different markings or did they just doctor it ?

In my opinion, it wouldn't be the first time authors have made, or repeated bogus claims to justify a personal agenda.

The real owner of the RC+DA photo is Ron Wylie. If Ron Wylie has the original then the so called mirror image of RC+DA using GH+UK markings is not an original photo.

If such a photo exists please don't be shy and post it here for all of us.

Simon Gunson
Member
Posts: 503
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 00:25
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: Ju 390 in flight refuelling

Postby Simon Gunson » 02 Mar 2008 23:48

BTW I find more than a bit strange that, while the central part of the wing and the tailplane are quite dark, the external part of the wings are lighted (to better show the markings :? )


David the Ju-390 wing had cranked anhedral outboard of the engines. In plain English the wings bent upwards outside of the engines and thus reflected light differently. That is a natural effect. The lower wing is reflecting light bounced from the sea whilst the upper wing is reflecting light from the sky.

If they are the same aircraft then why has GH+UK got staining aft of the outboard engines which RC+DA has no staining ?

I think people are clutching at straws here. In a criminal court the term they use is proved beyond reasonable doubt.

When the doubts become unreasonable, it basically suggests that some people will never be satisfied by the facts. If the photos were faked then please prove it by showing the trail. Ron Wylie owns the original photo and it is not doctored.

In terms of reasonable doubt please explain the entry in Oberluetnant Joachim Eisenmann's logbooks for the Ju 390 V2.
Please explain multiple documented sightings of a second Ju 390 in 1945 when one Ju-390 was abandoned without propellers at Dessau from November 1945 ?

If you deny that then the doubt is in the realms of unreasonable doubt.

User avatar
phylo_roadking
Member
Posts: 17478
Joined: 30 Apr 2006 23:31
Location: Belfast

Re: Ju 390 in flight refuelling

Postby phylo_roadking » 02 Mar 2008 23:55

Ron Wylie owns the original photo and it is not doctored


He may own the picture, but it may not be the original picture

Just because he has a picture does not guaratee it has been impervious to manipulation, usually by brush and artist's ink on a blown-up screen projection, and re-photographed. It was a VERY common technique for most of the twentieth century.

Here's a 1937 example - see the nice artist's advertsing illustration?

Image

No. It's a photo heavily worked over with brush and ink. Shot against a white sheet background, the resultant pic enlarged, retouched 100%, then photographed again.

We are SO used to digital manipulation we forget how old photographic manipulation really is, as old as Victorian fairies on a glass plate...

Simon Gunson
Member
Posts: 503
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 00:25
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: Ju 390 in flight refuelling

Postby Simon Gunson » 16 Sep 2008 11:11

The only people trying to doctor the truth here are the nay-sayers who are trying to deny photographs, who produce no evidence that photos were doctored and who ignore log book entries of Ju 390 pilots, WW2 reports of interrogations and then think themselves smart because they twisted truth.

These nay sayers themselves were never there.... Voss Hirschfeld, Speer and Eisenmann were.

Do Davide Pastore and phylo_roadking suggest all these people were wrong or lying ?

Dr Wilhem Voss was there and saw a Ju390 operating in April 1945 3 months after the Ju 390 was destroyed at dessau in an Allied air attack. Gosh that's a great voodoo trick.

Wolfgang Hirschfeld was there and wrote in his book "Atlantik Farewell: Das Letzte U-boot" about the Ju 390 flying to Japan in 1945 after the destruction of the Ju 390 at Dessau.

Albert Speer was there and wrote in his memoirs after the war about the Ju 390 flight to Japan. He only happened to be one of the most important and well informed men in Germany. I suppose he was wrong too ?

Oberleutnant Eisenmann only happened to have two flights in the Ju-390 in his logbook for 9 February 1945 a month after the destruction of a Ju 390 laying derelicty at Dessau since November.

Igor Witkowski only happened to find at the Berlin Document Centre, authentic SS reports from 1945 of the Ju-390's flights in April 1945 and just because Davide Pastore and phylo_roadking say so these reports must be untrue ... now that's getting way psychotic.

The Ju 390 did not suffer from structural weakness. The Ju 90 V6 which it was converted from was underpowered with four BMW132 engines of 660hp and wings much shorter than the standard Ju 290 wings which did not appear until the Ju-90 V8 airframe. As any pilot knows small wings equate high wing loading and high stall speeds. Coupled with weak engines, this also limited the Ju-90 V6's take off weight. Twits who have never in their lives been pilots have learned that the Ju 90 V6 was limited in take off weight and reinterpreted the information without grasping the aeronautical issues to falsely infer the aircraft was weak. the Ju 90 V6 was identical to the Ju 90 V7 in these photos below:

After Ju 90 V6 was converted to Ju 390 V1 and Ju 90 V11 was converted to Ju 390 V2, the wings were considerably enlarged and the engines were much more powerful BMW801D types with three times the power.

Image

Image
Last edited by Simon Gunson on 16 Sep 2008 12:29, edited 1 time in total.

Simon Gunson
Member
Posts: 503
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 00:25
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: Ju-390 in flight refuelling

Postby Simon Gunson » 16 Sep 2008 12:22

If the picture of RC+DA was a retouch then show us the original un-retouched photo. You assert this as if it is a fact. Fine then, if you know that to be a fact then you must have some evidence like an original photo in the same pose with GH+UK markings and i would expect you to show that the original was published some decades ago. Can you prove what you say ?

I bet you can't!
Just hot air.

So show us the motorbike picture before and after. I guarantee you that it did not retouch and distort ratios.

Okay Mr Pastore... run that perspective argument past me again.

I can see you're somewhat limited skills with photographs so I have rotated these pictures for you to make both airframes horizontal and blown up GH+UK to match wing chords at their roots.

As I told you before, you can distort angles with wide angle lenses, but you can't distort ratios. With the two wing roots side by side, now you explain how perspectives have tricked the eye ?

The truth is these are not photoshopped images to create RC+DA. They are two entirely different aircraft.

Image

Simon Gunson
Member
Posts: 503
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 00:25
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: Ju-390 in flight refuelling

Postby Simon Gunson » 16 Sep 2008 12:36

Don't think I am unappreciative David. The more people like you and R Leonard challenge me, the more we peel back the ignorance and false claims.

The more the facts are examined the weaker your arguments are becoming so thank you.

Simon Gunson
Member
Posts: 503
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 00:25
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: Ju 390 in flight refuelling

Postby Simon Gunson » 19 Oct 2008 02:27

Scarlet,

On page 2 you said the following:

None of the FW 200 or Ju 290 ever built is unaccounted for except FW 200 C-4 F8+JR No 0166. This aircraft belonged to 7./KG 40, was heavily damaged by flak during an attack on a convoy and made a forced landing October 15, 1943 at or near Santiago de Compostela in Spain. According to British sources the aircraft was repaired and used by IBERIA for some time after the war. There is no documentary evidence.


Not quite true. two FW 200 were aparently interned by the Spanish after so called emergency landings and later appeared to be flying in Spanish markings.

Image

Simon Gunson
Member
Posts: 503
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 00:25
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: Ju 390 in flight refuelling

Postby Simon Gunson » 19 Oct 2008 02:39

David Pastore wrote:

P.S. for those impervious to irony: the picture of Ju 390V2 RC+DA is a (very badly-made) hoax


I have not read their book. I understand from a post by someone who has (I think it was Scarlet) that Kossler and Ott's book shows the photo of RC+DA with markings GH+UK. Actually it is Kossler and OTT who have published a very badly made hoax.

I suggest to you David, that Kossler and Ott (whether deliberately or unwittingly) published a hoax photo in their book of RC+DA which was photo-shopped to pass it off as GH+UK. Someone has clearly sought to win their argument by foul means but the eye does not lie.

These aircraft have entirely different dimensions. I used the GIMP on my computer to flip RC+DA. Then I rotated both aircraft to get their fuselages level with each other. Not only is it clear that RC+DA has more fuselage ahead of the wing, it obviously has a shorter fuselage aft of the wing. You would think logically that if someone set out to create a hoax, they would at least begin with an identical airframe ?

What you see below is the result:

Image

User avatar
Ome_Joop
Member
Posts: 782
Joined: 10 May 2004 15:56
Location: Noordwijk(erhout)

Re: Ju 390 in flight refuelling

Postby Ome_Joop » 19 Oct 2008 23:45

Problem i have with these pictures is that they are of terrible quality (you can't tell if they are messed with or not).

I guess (know) that even in those days (censorship for instance) people were messing with fotographs too and it's not very hard to change a picture at all (even someone like me can do that in little time).

Just looking at the above aircraft i just get the feeling there is something funny about it (check the tail for instance and compare....it's much thicker and bended).
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by Ome_Joop on 20 Oct 2008 04:52, edited 1 time in total.

Simon Gunson
Member
Posts: 503
Joined: 23 Mar 2004 00:25
Location: Wellington, New Zealand

Re: Ju 390 in flight refuelling

Postby Simon Gunson » 20 Oct 2008 00:14

They're terrible quality because they're authentic wartime pictures and have been around for decades.

Long before anybody invented photo-shop.

I understand Kossler and Ott in their book Die Grosen Dessauer: Junkers Ju 89, 90, 290, 390 have published a juxtaposed to the original photo of RC+DA, another identical photo of it with markings GH+UK and asserted that the famous photo of RC+DA was actually a retouched photo of GH+UK.

That is revealed as untrue when you compare airframes side by side as I have shown in my post above.

I have not myself seen their book and do not speak German. If what I understand is true however, then in my opinion, in fact it is Kossler and Ott who have been publishing hoaxed photos, because one can clearly see that the airframes are different.

The airframes are clearly different and if RC+DA can't be trusted then neither can GH+UK and you may aswell stick your head in a bucket saying that there is no photographic evidence that World War 2 ever happened either.

User avatar
Ome_Joop
Member
Posts: 782
Joined: 10 May 2004 15:56
Location: Noordwijk(erhout)

Re: Ju 390 in flight refuelling

Postby Ome_Joop » 20 Oct 2008 01:08

They're terrible quality because they're authentic wartime pictures and have been around for decades.



That is not an excuse as there are many very good wartime pictures!

Long before anybody invented photo-shop.


retouching and manipulating photographs is as old as the photograph it self!

BTW what is the law of perpective anyway?
Distorted photo's can't be related to each other anyway (long focus lenses distort also it is not something wich only happens to wide angle lenses).


Return to “Luftwaffe air units and Luftwaffe in general”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot]