High Altitude Combat in WW2

[togor]

I found this one really interesting, as I thought the Ju-86 never amounted to much.


https://youtu.be/8WDkj0ZYuiA

[m1ashooter]

Thanks for sharing this.

[Sunray]

High altitude is a relative thing. The operational ceiling of a JU-86(diesel engines and pressurized cockpit. Both decidedly unusual.) was about 39,000 ft. with a screaming 186 MPH. Aircraft had to be modified to fly that high. Those were not normal altitudes for combat.

[phil441]

Very interesting video. Thanks

[blackhawknj]

Pressurized cockpit ? One bullet-especially a .50 caliber, and .....

[togor]

Pressurized cockpit ? One bullet-especially a .50 caliber, and .....

Which is why the Ju-86 pilot pre-emptively depressurized at the early sign of trouble.

[RED]

Just more BS and double talk. Even modern day fighter jets do not have pressurized cockpits. In the F-4 Phantom, our operational maximum altitude was 50,000 and that was the maximum altitude the crew could operate without a pressure suit. The WWII P-51 Mustang maximum altitude was over FL-400. In any event fighter planes that operate over 50,000 the crew must have a pressure suit, something the Navy didn't issue in the 1960's. Pressure breathing is required at extreme altitudes. The pressure in the oxygen mask is increased so the breather's lungs are automatically filled and the airman has to force the oxygen from the lungs, the reverse occurs at low altitudes, your lungs are filled by expanding the chest, then when you relax the air is exhaled.

[togor]

Red you're saying this encounter didn't happen? Including the reunion years later?

[RED]

Red you're saying this encounter didn't happen? Including the reunion years later?

I'm saying it was one combat instance that proved nothing. You are swanning over over the Ju-86 which had a meaningless pressurized cockpit for three guys. The Ju-86 had very little value in combat. Dropping gravity bombs from 40,000 feet was a waste of effort then and is still a waste today. You make this isolated, one time effort sound like the Nazis won the war and the JU-86 was the work of a genius.

If other Air Forces of the time adopted the pressurized cockpit and it made a difference in the war, that would be another issue.

[Roadkingtrax]

Red has never heard of a B-29?

[togor]

Red as the video states, it was uncontested aerial recon over enemy territory that on one occasion became contested. That both sides were using improvised equipment in wartime made it an interesting vignette. I don't see the problem here.

[lyman]

Red has never heard of a B-29?

apparently not,

and arguing just to be arguing,

[RED]

Red has never heard of a B-29?

OK, how many times have you been to 50,000 feet doing Mach 2.2?

Are you trying to tell us that I'm an idiot because I said modern jet fighters are not pressurized? B-29's were pressurized because they flew at high altitudes for hours. They are nowhere in the same class as the J-86. The B-29 could deliver 20, 1000 lb bombs and they were rarely if ever dropped at 40,000'. The J-86 could carry 2 or was it four 1,000 lb bombs.

So tell me again how important the J-86 was?

[Roadkingtrax]

If other Air Forces of the time adopted the pressurized cockpit and it made a difference in the war, that would be another issue.

Refer to your own statement. You are arguing with yourself.

[rayg]

[QUOTE=RED;572858]OK, how many times have you been to 50,000 feet doing Mach 2.2?



Good question! how many here have.......

[Roadkingtrax]

[QUOTE=RED;572858]OK, how many times have you been to 50,000 feet doing Mach 2.2?



Good question! how many here have.......

Not relevant to a JU-86, but only Lyman has seen the resume.

[rayg]

Well pardon me! I thought some of the post was about pressurized cockpits.......

[togor]

Again....the Ju-86 missions in this vid were high altitude recon with a few bombs dropped to annoy the Brits. The combo of diesel engines and pressurized crew compartment are unusual for this time/place and as a one-off kinda cool (to me at least). Don't really see the reason for anyone to go all-in on the Ju-86 being a mediocre bomber that was obsolete by September 1939 but hey it's a free country.

[lyman]

Well pardon me! I thought some of the post was about pressurized cockpits.......

no worries ray,
like I said, arguing just to be arguing,

funny part to me (and not in a haha way) is the belittling of an incident that happened,

[fguffey]

Red you're saying this encounter didn't happen? Including the reunion years later?

Togar, I had two neighbors that flew from England and Africa to Germany, one flew in B17s, the other in B24s. One wrote a book called "The Crew". My neighbors did not know each other until I took the book to the pilot of the B24. Boring stuff to most but I had a problem with a long recovery, during that time the crew member of the B17 furnished reading material, the first book was 'JOSEAPHES' and then a book about the crusades, I had time. Before he wrote the book he allowed me to read his diary, after he wrote the book he brought a copy over. The next day I went for a visit with questions about events he omitted in the book. It was difficult for him to explain why. I told him the only way he could put the reader in the plane was with the material he omitted.

This thread started with a blue Spitfire, there was a blue Spitfire, we flew them, not the exile squadron, Canadians or English, we flew the blue Spitfire. It has been said we could not support the heavy bombers to Germany until we developed the P51 etc. We flew the blue Spitfire to Germany and back on a daily bases.

It is said one of the Spitfires had a bad landing, because of black and white pictures, movies and photos the fact the Spitfire was blue went unnoticed until someone managed to get the identification numbers from the movie of the crash. In the pursuit of information the curious individual managed to track the numbers to the cameraman. He furnished the information about the crash, the curious one was surprised the Spitfire was blue.

He put enough information together to verify the use of the blue Spitfire and then found the pilot that crashed the plane. But still today the Spitfire did not have enough range to make it to Germany and back.

And then I thought of Wonder Woman and her invisible plane.

F. Guffey

[Dick Mayward]

Every U.S. jet aircraft since the F-80 has been pressurized. Fighter type aircraft are generally pressurized to a lesser differential than are cargo airplanes and passenger airplanes, but they are, in fact pressurized. The requirement to wear pressure suits when flying above 50,000 feet is for protection in case of loss of pressurization. It is also true that some aircraft oxygen systems deliver pressurized oxygen all the time, while others use a pressure demand system that only provides extra pressure when necessary or selected. One poster implied that a single penetration of a pressurized aircraft by a bullet would somehow lead to a catastrophic event, but that is not the case. Depending on the size of the hole, and the size of the pressurized compartment, a loss of pressurization would occur, either rapidly or slowly, but neither situation would necessarily disable the aircraft. As long as the flight crew could respond to the pressure loss in a satisfactory manner, the event could be handled without much difficulty.

[RED]

Every U.S. jet aircraft since the F-80 has been pressurized. Fighter type aircraft are generally pressurized to a lesser differential than are cargo airplanes and passenger airplanes, but they are, in fact pressurized. The requirement to wear pressure suits when flying above 50,000 feet is for protection in case of loss of pressurization. It is also true that some aircraft oxygen systems deliver pressurized oxygen all the time, while others use a pressure demand system that only provides extra pressure when necessary or selected. One poster implied that a single penetration of a pressurized aircraft by a bullet would somehow lead to a catastrophic event, but that is not the case. Depending on the size of the hole, and the size of the pressurized compartment, a loss of pressurization would occur, either rapidly or slowly, but neither situation would necessarily disable the aircraft. As long as the flight crew could respond to the pressure loss in a satisfactory manner, the event could be handled without much difficulty.


Please explain to me how the F-4 Phantoms that I flew in over 1,000 hours with over 500 carrier landings and over 200 night time traps were pressurized. I think I would I would know a bit about this... I was the "Aircraft Division Officer" in VF-31 aboard the USS Saratoga. The egress and environmental systems were part of my job...

Please explain how you are more informed than me?

[lyman]

hmmm


cannot copy the text, it is protected,
control F, pressurization,


https://theaviationgeekclub.com/former-f-4-phantom-driver-tells-the-story-of-an-exhilarating-mach-2-test-flight/


and

https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/10081/are-fighter-jet-cabins-pressurized


seems, according to various searches, cockpits on F4's are pressurized,, but not to the extent of an airliner,,,,

[togor]

Given the high vertical rates possible with jet fighters, I would think they would want to insulate the pilot against some altitude changes (eardrums effects etc) and therefore regulate the cockpit around some pressure, say 15K, with supplemental oxygen. Interesting design topic.