DC-2/DC-3 Bombers by Fokker

[Silencer1]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Hi, circle-5!

Thanks a lot for this drawings! It's clearly answered many my doubts and questions regarding the DC-3 bomber' model.
Please, express my thanks also to all folks on forums, who generoursly provide this rare pictures!

Cheers!

 

[Stargazer]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

One of the DC-2 plans has the caption "Bombardment aircraft" written in both Flemish (Bommenwerper, literally "bomb thrower") and French (Avion de bombardement). This is usually the sign of a Belgian program... Could it be that these bomber DC-2s were destined to the Belgian Air Force, not the Netherlands Air Force?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Glad you got some information you were after, but man, thats ugly

 

[borovik]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Hi!

Ah... those wacky Russians.
I would really see the face of Donald Douglas looking a things like that....

At least, there were license-built aircraft, instead of Tu-4 long-range bombers. So Mr. Douglas have the fair amount of money for this contract.

A quick note -
License to play the American plane Douglas DC-3, but with the translation into metric measures for all its size and thickness of the material and with careful recalculation of all elements of design by Soviet standards of strength.
Processing of drawings in relation to Russian technology and the transfer size from inches to millimeters managed V. Myasishchev, such work could not hold firm Fokker and Mitsubishi, also bought the license to produce the DC-3 aircraft and forced to build only aircraft from units imported from the United States.
circle-5!
Thanks a lot for this drawings!

 

[circle-5]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Another original Fokker drawing from Mathieu at nederlandseluchtvaart forums, showing a variety of DC-3 based projects, including:

1, Troop transport, for 27 men fully equipped, or 38 men without gear. Range: 850km.
2, Cargo transport, shown here with (Qty.4) Wright Cyclone radial engines on pallets.
3, Bomber conversion (the subject of this topic) shown here with its MG turret glazing.
4, Fuel carrier, with a custom 3500 liter fuselage tank/bladder.
5, Medevac with 16 litters.
6, 24-passenger floatplane, similar to EDO conversions here in the U.S.
7, And finally, the regular C-47 we all know and love.

Thanks again to Mathieu in Holland, for these rare documents.

 

[robunos]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Glad you got some information you were after, but man, thats ugly

Aircraft are never 'ugly', they are 'purposeful', or a case of 'form following function'........ ;D :

cheers,
Robin.

 

[circle-5]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Page 2 of an original Fokker document, describing the DC-3 bomber project. This material is dated December 18, 1935 and lists some of the equipment and characteristics of the proposed aircraft, including:

Bomb Load: 1350kg (~ 3,000lbs)
Fuel Capacity: 3100 liters
Oil Capacity: 260 liters total, located in engine nacelles

Instrumentation list:

2 pcs. RPM indicators: Weston Type 545
2 pcs. Oil Pressure Indicators: Pioneer Type 550B
2 pcs. Oil Temp Indicators: Weston Type 606
2 pcs. Altimeters: Kollsman Type 178.01
1 pc. Altimeter: Kollsman Type 176.01
1 pc. Turn & Bank Indicator: Pioneer Type 385 B
1 pc. Vertical Speed Indicator: Pioneer Type ?
1 pc. Airspeed Indicator: Pioneer Type 735
2 pcs. Fuel Pressure Indicators: Pioneer Type 751
1 pc. Compass: Pioneer Type 818
2 pcs. Manifold Pressure Indicators: Kollsman Type 62.01
2 pcs. Clocks: Pioneer Type Elgin
2 pcs. Air Temp Indicator: Weston Type 602
2 pcs. Exhaust Temp Indicator: Weston Type 606

Optional Equipment: Sperry Autopilot

Thanks to Mathieu and G-1 Reaper at nederlandseluchtvaart forums for this document and its translation.

 

[circle-5]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

The DC-3 bomber model's original finish likely featured the Fokker Douglas logo, as shown in the attached photo. A lot can happen in 74 years, and its Fokker origins may have been concealed if the model was displayed in the U.S. at some point.

Thanks again to Mathieu for this photo.

 

[Avimimus]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Some questions about the Li-2:
- How were the bombs sighted/aimed?
- I've heard of configurations with 2000kg bomb loads. How was this possible (internal bomb bays + external hard points)?
- What types of bombs were manually dropped from the cargo bay door?
- Where flares ever used to illuminate targets?
- Were RS series rockets ever equipped.

Thanks,

 

[Pepe Rezende]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Some questions about the Li-2:
- How were the bombs sighted/aimed?
- I've heard of configurations with 2000kg bomb loads. How was this possible (internal bomb bays + external hard points)?
- What types of bombs were manually dropped from the cargo bay door?
- Where flares ever used to illuminate targets?
- Were RS series rockets ever equipped.

Thanks,

As I know, all bombs were in external hard point. They used flares to iluminate targets and, as I know, no RS rocket were installed under the wing.

Cheers

Pepe

 

[Avimimus]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

That was my impression as well, but Borovik posted pictures of a variant with an internal bay (in addition to the external bomb racks).

I've heard of a conversion with two FAB-500s and also of four FAB-250s as a loadout, but I can't figure out how the airplane could carry 2000kg as an external load (without more racks). So, I'm guessing that there are other hard point configurations or that some of the bombs were held internally (either in the bomb bays Borovik posted or in the rear cargo door).

Thanks,

 

[Jos Heyman]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Note that the drawing displaying the various versions of the DC-3 proposed by Fokker is in the German language.....

I don't know what year the drawings was, but can you imagine what would have happened if the German's would have liked the idea and had ordered the DC-3 en masse from Fokker?

The mind shudders at the thought.........

 

[circle-5]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Actually, this document was part of a proposal package for Switzerland, all written in the German language. The other interested party was Sweden, another neutral country.

 

[Jos Heyman]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

OK, thanks for clearing this up.

 

[borovik]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Some questions about the Li-2:
- How were the bombs sighted/aimed?
- I've heard of configurations with 2000kg bomb loads. How was this possible (internal bomb bays + external hard points)?
- What types of bombs were manually dropped from the cargo bay door?
- Where flares ever used to illuminate targets?
- Were RS series rockets ever equipped.

Thanks,

Li-2 (PS-84NB)
For the bombing-up center-mounted truck axle with four locks. 4 racks can accommodate up to four FAB-500 (only for experienced crews and reduce stockpiles of fuel).
Li-2NB-option in 1943, prototype (№ 1845408)
Bomb load was placed in the fuselage of the three cfssetes and dropped through bomb-door. Cassettes are designed for 5 bombs each. Placed: two just behind cockpit, one in the rear cargo compartment. Maximum takeoff weight aircraft 11500kg, maximum bomb load / stored in external hard point /-2500kg, and with the reduction of stocks of fuel. Used sight NKPB-4. In other cases, we used the sight NKPB-7 or OPB-1.
When combat missions in the short-range goals crew could take a small bomb (AG-2; ZAG-1; AOB-25, etc.) in special boxes, made manually reset through the cargo door.
In addition to bomb racks, and sometimes aircraft are equipped eight underwing directing/launching ramp RO-82 to RS-82. (There are at least two sources indicate this fact.)

You should also mention the first sentence on the use of DC-3 for military purposes (the USSR), it belongs to N. Polikarpov and B. Shpitalny (preliminary design in November, 1936), PS-84-VS
It was proposed to arm: 2 - 37mm cannons K-37 (ShFK-37) in the root of the wing, 3 - 20mm ShVAK-20, 3 - 7,62 mm ShKAS, bombs - 500kg. The project was never realized.
In early 1945 returned to this theme, was tested Li-2 with two 45mm wing cannons NS-45. In connection with the termination of the war this option is not produced commercially.

 

[Avimimus]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Thank you!

Many questions:
1) You posted earlier a picture of a PS-84 with the eight FAB-100s on external bomb racks:
- What was the date of this plane?
- Do you know anything about the defensive armament?

2) The PS-84-VS:
- Where were the ShVAK and ShKAS mounted?
- Do you know how much ammunition they carried?
- How was the 500kg bomb-load carried?

3) Regarding the release of small bombs from the cargo doors:
- Can you give an idea of how many were carried and how many were released at one time?

4) Regarding the Li-2NB № 1845408:
- Am I correct to say that the maximum internal load was 15 FAB-100 bombs?
- Was the rear Cassette/bomb-bay mounted on the centre line or offset?

5) Regarding the Li-2 with the two NS-45 cannons:
- Do you know how much ammunition they had per gun?
- Can you give any more information about the positions of the guns (In both this aircraft and the the PS-84-VS the guns would have been shooting through the propeller disc if they were in the wing root).

I'm using this information to update the Lisunov-2 in Oleg Maddox's flight simulator "Il-2 Sturmovik". This makes me even thirstier for details than usual.

 

[borovik]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

1) You posted earlier a picture of a PS-84 with the eight FAB-100s on external bomb racks:
- What was the date of this plane?
- Do you know anything about the defensive armament?

PS-84K (November 1939)
Originally weapons did not exist.

2) The PS-84-VS:
- Where were the ShVAK and ShKAS mounted?
(In both this aircraft and the the PS-84-VS the guns would have been shooting through the propeller disc if they were in the wing root).

The project is a heavy attack aircraft Polikarpov and Shpitalny PS-1984-VS. I only have the description (no details) from another source, Vladimir Ivanov (archivist N. Polikarpov), instead of the 3 he mentioned four ShVAK. (Can we assume that all gun armament was directed forward in the same way as it was later realized in the plane VIT-1 -/ 100 ammunition barrel cannons and 560 machine guns in the / term in the root of the wing is not correct, right under the fuselage at the base of the wing.)

3) Regarding the release of small bombs from the cargo doors:
- Can you give an idea of how many were carried and how many were released at one time?

Details do not have (

4) Regarding the Li-2NB № 1845408:
- Am I correct to say that the maximum internal load was 15 FAB-100 bombs?

- 15 bombs FAB-100 and FAB-100MZ defensive weaponry remains standard - UTK-1 turret on top (ammunition 1,200 rounds), and two hatches in the side ShKAS two pivot units ShKU-1 (500 rounds of ammunition). Bow gun in this version has been eliminated.
5) Regarding the Li-2 with the two NS-45 cannons:
- Do you know how much ammunition they had per gun?
Details do not have (
Prospective mate's cabin modernized bomber Li-2NB, October 1942.

 

[Avimimus]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Thank you Borovik! It is a big help.

 

[airman]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

http://www.douglasdc3.com/li2/li2.htm

(about li-2)

 

[Jemiba]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

A little bit OT, but this DC 2 at least was ordered by Anthony Fokker for KLM in 1935,
presented to Finland by Count Carl Gustav von Rosen in 1940 and modified into a bomber
by installing a dorsal 0.3 inch defensive gun and bomb racks under the wing center section.
(Photos from RAF Flying Review March 1962)

 

[Avimimus]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Much more on topic than our Lisunov 2 discussions. Speaking of which: Does anyone know about the Fab-100MZ? Borovik, your post is the only reference I can find for it.

 

[borovik]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Much more on topic than our Lisunov 2 discussions. Speaking of which: Does anyone know about the Fab-100MZ? Borovik, your post is the only reference I can find for it.

reference: V. Kotelnikov "Transport aircraft Li-2 (page 14),
Aviakollektsiya number 3 / 2005

 

[Avimimus]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Ah... excellent. I like have the references so that I can list them if I ever reuse the information.
One piece of information is missing though: How does the FAB-100MZ work?

 

[hesham]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Attached are some original Fokker drawings of the DC-3 bomber study, along with a couple of DC-2 bomber variants. These drawings came from Mathieu at nederlandseluchtvaart forums, who also translated the following specs for the DC-3 bomber:

Engines: Wright Cyclone SGR 1820 F53
Max speed: 325 KM/H at 3350 m.
Range: 2220 km by 271 KM/H at 3350 m

Thanks to Mathieu in Holland and to Jos for suggesting nederlandseluchtvaart forums.

Also here is the Douglas DC-2 Bomber drawing.


http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?98434-Douglas-DC-2-Bomber

 

[hesham]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

From l'Aeronautique 1934,


in article about DC.2 bomber version,here is a comparison between DC.2 and Breguet
Br.460 in drawing.

 

[hesham]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Attached are some original Fokker drawings of the DC-3 bomber study, along with a couple of DC-2 bomber variants. These drawings came from Mathieu at nederlandseluchtvaart forums, who also translated the following specs for the DC-3 bomber:

Engines: Wright Cyclone SGR 1820 F53
Max speed: 325 KM/H at 3350 m.
Range: 2220 km by 271 KM/H at 3350 m

Thanks to Mathieu in Holland and to Jos for suggesting nederlandseluchtvaart forums.

A clearer view of DC-2 bomber version by Fokker.

 

[riggerrob]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Stock C-47 had racks under the wings for panniers used to supply paratroopers. When American and British paratroopers jumped into Northern Europe, their heavy weapons and ammo re-supply were dropped in cylindrical panniers less than a meter in diameter and a couple of meters long. After dropping their panniers, the C-47 still had spherical fairings hanging under the wings.

Post-war, some old C-47s might have had their pannier-racks re-activated and modified to drop bombs.

Only light bombs could be dropped from cargo doors, A: because of the difficulty man-handling them out the doors and B: because of the massive balance problems created by rolling and dropping cargo from that far aft of the wing. Balance problems would seriously ruin bombing accuracy.

Douglas (USA) also manufactured a couple bomber variants that saw service with the USAAF and RCAF. Early in WW2, Douglas Digby bombers patrolled the approaches to Halifax Harbour, scaring off U-boats. Digbys looked like DC-3s aft of the wings, but they sported bulged bomb bays under the wings. Their noses had two separate glazings, one specifically for a bombardier.

 

[bigvlada]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Stock C-47 had racks under the wings for panniers used to supply paratroopers. When American and British paratroopers jumped into Northern Europe, their heavy weapons and ammo re-supply were dropped in cylindrical panniers less than a meter in diameter and a couple of meters long. After dropping their panniers, the C-47 still had spherical fairings hanging under the wings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1UUdywWvkk&feature=player_detailpage#t=5689
1:35:49
Great movie btw.

 

[Stargazer]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

I believe this topic is really "DC-2 and DC-3 bombers by Fokker" rather than just DC-3...

 

[hesham]

Re: DC-3 Bomber by Fokker

Hi,

http://www.avia-it.com/act/biblioteca/periodici/PDF%20Riviste/Ala%20d'Italia/L'ALA%20D'ITALIA%201936%2008.pdf

 

[fredymac]

 

[Grey Havoc]

We got a callout!

 

[FXXII]

Note, that the Fokker drawings do not show the vertical fin with a dorsal fin (the extension on top of the cabin). The original design of the DC-3 in 1934 was without a dorsal fin, so these drawings are possibly based on the original design drawings by Douglas, and modified by Fokker. Anybody an explanation for this?

 

[riggerrob]

That huge ventral gondola reminds us of the gondolas hung under Dornier, Junkers and a few Bristol light/medium bombers. Heinkel 111 was originally designed as an airliner with a large volume passenger cabin. He-111 had to drop bombs tail-fins first to minimize the size of holes in passenger floor.

The Douglas bomber conversion of the DC-2 (B-18 Digby) had a much longer gondola that stretched from the nose all the way back to the tail. More like the baggage/bomb stowage on Lockheed Hudsons and Venturas. The larger American bomb bays kept bombs ice-free and out of the wind.
Douglas did built a batch of B-18 Digby bombers for the RCAF. Digbys primarily patrolled the approaches to Halifax harbour during early WW2. They had a distinctive bomber-aimer's position projecting forward, over the bow gunner's position.

I suspect that the Fokker conversion would need larger vertical stabilizer(s) to maintain yaw stability.

 

[taildragger]

That huge ventral gondola reminds us of the gondolas hung under Dornier, Junkers and a few Bristol light/medium bombers. Heinkle had to drop bombs tail-fits to minimise th soze of holes in passenger floors.

OK, how about some armchair engineering? Wouldn't the DC-3 bomber's addition of so much surface area so far forward require a compensating addition to the tail? None is evident. I'm not competent to do stability calculations, but if the DC-3 got the aerodynamics right (and I've never read any indication that the DC-3 was excessively stable in yaw) then the DC-3 bomber clearly would have had stability problems. I'd bet that, if built as modeled, the prototype would have made about 1 flight before returning to the plant to have more fin area grafted on. Its hard to imagine Fokker overlooking this, so maybe the DC-3 bomber was less a design than a business proposal which deferred the engineering for later. From a presentation point of view, it would make sense for the model to retain as much of the DC-3 shape as possible while still showing off the bomber mods even if the result would be unflyable - the necessary additional tail area (I think a B-25-style configuration would be a likely choice) would have made the airplane difficult to recognize as a DC-3 derivative.
I think it likely that, had the project proceded, the ventral gondola would have shrunk and been repositioned to something like that of the Fw-200 Condor. The likely stability problems of the model's configuration would have made the DC-3 bomber a major rebuild, or perhaps new-build only, program rather than a bolt-on modification that could have been undone later.

 

[hercules130]

This is quite fascinating. Thank you so much for sharing Circle-5. The line drawings help tremendously, with understanding the fuselage extension. With no modification of wing box and the addition of the vertical bomb bay and ventral turret a plug type extension was needed to accommodate space wise and perhaps for cg due to the additional weight forward. The turrets on the model appear to depict B-18 like turrets, also very interesting. The forward additional structure looks engineered to some what mimic the B-18A weaponeering section, with minimal structural change to the aircraft's civil use for ease of reconversion or perhaps concurrent or even quick change operations. So very interesting, I cannot thank you enough for sharing.

 

[HRV]

Recently I found a few Fokker 1 DC3’s in a 1935 movie about New York. Maybe this is interesting for this forum. In the video there are 2 DC’s (DC3?)parked in possibly the North Beach Air Service inc. (Hanger 8) at Floyd Bennett Field. On the tail section of one of the DC’s is painted (on the area where the stabilizers should be attached): “Fokker 1 / 39515 / demounted packed shipped by Bluefries-New York”. The other aircraft has an identical painted text of which at least “Fokker 1“ is readable. See attached screenshots and

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpXnEvW0XD0&t=4m18s

 

[HRV]

Just bumped into this Douglas aircraft on a 1935 KLM-poster (left), with “Fokker Douglas D.C.2” on the tail. Maybe the Fokker 1-DC3’s as I mentioned in my previous post (Jan.22), are DC2's...

 

[Grey Havoc]

Douglas DC-2: Resting Places (LXIII).

This DC-2-115E has some history behind it. It entered service with KLM as PH-AKH “Haan” in 1935. Later it was delivered by some Swedes to the Ilmavoimat (Finnish Air Force) on February …

elpoderdelasgalaxias.wordpress.com