Rarely has a warplane with such obsolescence, vulnerability, and technological simplicity inflicted as much damage on its enemies as the Junkers Ju-87 Stuka did. Even during Germany’s invasion of Poland, which triggered World War II, the Ministry of Aviation (RLM) was already working on a replacement for its dive bomber, with the early Ju-87B intended to be the final model produced.
It’s not uncommon for an air force to commence development of the next-generation aircraft as soon as the current one enters service. Despite their efforts, the Germans failed to devise a successor to the Stuka. Thus, the angular, outdated “little bomber,” as the Luftwaffe dubbed it, was the aircraft responsible for dropping the first bombs of the war on September 1, 1939, and conducting the final Luftwaffe ground-assault mission on May 4, 1945.
The final propaganda film produced by the Luftwaffe depicted Stukas attacking Soviet tanks on the outskirts of Berlin, emitting smoke from their substantial antitank cannons. Despite criticisms labeling it as primitive, slow, and vulnerable, the Stuka endured 5½ years of continuous combat, enduring scrutiny even before the war commenced.
Certainly, there have been aircraft with less appealing designs, yet akin to many utilitarian airplanes tailored for specific missions—such as the Consolidated PBY—the Ju-87’s aesthetics grow more appealing upon closer inspection of its sturdy form. One admirer likened it to “a flying swastika,” attributing its angularity and ruggedness.
Nonetheless, this simplicity facilitated the Stuka’s manufacturing, maintenance, and repair processes. Who requires elliptical wings, sleek P-51 radiator housings, or retractable landing gear on a bomber designed to reach targets within the pilot’s line of sight, perform its duty, and return home?
The Stuka gained a negative reputation partly due to its association with bombing raids on Warsaw and the Low Countries, often depicted in newsreels with its distinctive sirens. While a few Ju-87s were deployed in the Spanish Civil War, they were used sparingly and with caution. Even Spanish Nationalist pilots were kept away from them due to their classified status as potential secret weapons. The bombing of Guernica, famously depicted in Picasso’s antiwar painting, involved horizontal bombers like the Heinkel He-111s and Junkers Ju-52s, which indiscriminately targeted civilians with carpet-bombing tactics, a role not typically assigned to the Stuka.
It’s difficult to justify the actions of any bomber, but the Ju-87 was specifically designed for targeting and destroying military objectives, not civilian populations. If Stukas had been deployed to bomb the crucial bridge, which was the main objective of the attack, the tragic events of Guernica might have faded into obscurity long ago.
The Spanish Civil War highlighted the effectiveness of the Ju-87 as a formidable weapon. With the arrival of Bf-109Bs, the Nationalist forces swiftly gained air superiority. Due to the rudimentary nature of Republican anti-aircraft defenses, the Stukas operated with impunity, achieving remarkable precision in their bombing runs—exactly as they were designed to. Even the least accurate strikes typically fell within a distance of less than 100 feet from the target, while successful hits were either directly on target or no more than 15 feet off-center.
The concept of dive bombing did not originate with the Germans, although they perfected it to an unprecedented level. During World War I, the British were the first to experiment with moderate-dive-angle attacks, while both the U.S. and Japan also explored diving delivery tactics in the interwar period. Interestingly, it was Japan’s interest in dive bombing that prompted them to commission Heinkel to develop a dive bomber to compete with the American Curtiss F8C Helldiver, resulting in the creation of the He-50 biplane.
Before World War II, the Japanese conducted tests with two Ju-87s, but did not proceed with further orders, likely because their own Heinkel-influenced Aichi D3A1 “Val” dive bomber was already highly effective, as demonstrated by the events at Pearl Harbor.
Legend has it that during the 1935 Cleveland Air Races, WWI ace Ernst Udet, then a civilian, witnessed the impressive performance of some U.S. Navy Curtiss F11C-2 Goshawk biplane dive bombers. Hermann Göring, aiming to lure Udet back into the revived Luftwaffe, imported two export-version Hawk IIs for him. According to the tale, Udet conducted divebombing demonstrations during German airshows, allegedly convincing the Luftwaffe of its tactical utility and earning credit as the “father” of the Stuka.
However, as the saying goes, “not exactly,” as the Stuka design had already been finalized in mock-up form before Udet’s admiration for the Curtiss planes. He never performed airshow bombing, only enthusiastic aerobatics. Nonetheless, Udet advocated for vertical bombing, and his crucial role in the Stuka’s development came when he assumed the position of RLM Technical Director after Wolfram von Richthofen canceled the Ju-87 program. Richthofen believed the slow, cumbersome Stuka, despite its diving capabilities, would not survive anti-aircraft fire. Udet, inheriting Richthofen’s role, promptly reversed the decision, thus ensuring the survival of the Stuka.
“Stuka” became the Ju-87’s colloquial designation, although it’s technically a generic term. Stuka is derived from the German compound word “Sturzkampfflugzeug,” meaning “diving combat aircraft.” So, referring to a Ju-87 as a Stuka is akin to labeling the P-51 as “Fighter” or the B-17 as “Bomber.” Yet, such distinctions matter little; the Ju-87 will forever be known as the Stuka.
In historical narratives of Ju-87 raids, mention is often made of the aircraft’s sirens, wind-driven devices located on the front of each landing gear leg, known as Jericho’s Trumpets by the Germans. These devices were propelled by simple wooden props, capable of being engaged and disengaged electro-hydraulically—a quintessential example of German meticulous engineering. What did they sound like? Well, picture the iconic noise from every classic Hollywood film depicting an airplane’s dramatic final dive towards destruction—an escalating, grating wail reminiscent of an engine pushed beyond its limits. Interestingly, this noise proved as vexing to Stuka pilots as it did to the troops enduring bombardment. Consequently, many units opted to forgo the added drag and complexity of the trumpets, although reports of their sporadic use persisted into 1943.
The Germans eventually opted to equip wind-whistles onto the fins of Stuka bombs, a modification also favored by the film industry. In cinematic portrayals, all bombs emit a whistling sound. However, in reality, only certain bombs dropped from Stukas produced that distinctive whistle.
Less widely recognized is the role of the peace-loving Swedes, traditionally neutral during Europe’s conflicts, in the development of the Stuka. To evade the stringent constraints of the Versailles Treaty, Hugo Junkers established an aircraft factory in Sweden. While the facility was not clandestine, it provided a venue for operations beyond the reach of treaty inspectors, who lacked authority in Sweden. There, Junkers pioneered the K.47, a robustly structured radial engine monoplane (in contrast to contemporary biplanes) tailored for dive bombing. It featured Junkers dive brakes and the precursor to the Ju-87’s automatic pullout mechanism.
Although the K.47’s contribution to the prototype that evolved into the Stuka was minimal, Swedish test pilots enthusiastically conducted numerous dives with it, refining diving techniques and procedures. Hermann Pohlmann developed the K.47 under the guidance of Karl Plauth, a WWI fighter pilot. Following Plauth’s death in the crash of a Junkers prototype, Pohlmann continued to engineer the Ju-87.
The primary advantage of dive bombing lies in its precision. Picture sprinting across a golf course at top speed while attempting to drop a ball into the hole from eye level. Now envision standing directly above the hole, aligning the ball with the target, and then releasing it. The former scenario represents traditional horizontal bombing, reliant on a bombsight that calculates various factors to generate the correct trajectory from the bomb bay to the target. In contrast, the latter depicts dive bombing, where, if executed with a truly vertical descent, the bomb’s trajectory mirrors that of the aircraft, striking whatever the airplane is aimed at—a tank, a ship, a bunker, or a building.
The Ju-87 was among the few dive bombers capable of executing a vertical dive without exceeding V NE— never-exceed speed. While most dive bombers could only achieve a nose-down angle of about 70 degrees, the Vultee Vengeance was also reputed for its near-vertical bombing capabilities. The Stuka’s under-wing dive brakes, an innovation by Hugo Junkers, proved remarkably effective despite their modest size and simplicity. Additionally, the aircraft’s design features such as the bluff chin radiator, large wheel pants, upright greenhouse, and the deliberate avoidance of drag reduction measures were sufficient to sustain a vertical dive speed of 375 mph. Later models could even reach speeds of up to 405 mph during dives.
Some Stuka pilots initiated dives by half-rolling the aircraft onto its back before applying positive Gs to descend, while others simply transitioned from level flight into the dive. Maintaining control by standing on the rudder pedals to avoid impacting the instrument panel was challenging, even with the assistance of a shoulder harness. However, aiming at a target amidst anti-aircraft fire added an extra layer of complexity to an already demanding task.
British test pilot Eric “Winkle” Brown flew a captured Ju-87D for an hour and later described the experience: “A dive angle of 90 degrees is quite exhilarating, as it always feels like the aircraft is beyond vertical and is nosing down, while the ground rushes closer with alarming speed. Typically, specialized dive bombers don’t exceed 70 degrees in a dive, but the Ju-87 was capable of a genuine 90-degree dive… the Ju-87 handled well in a steep dive, accelerating to 335 mph in about 4,500 feet, with speed gradually increasing to the maximum permitted limit of 375 mph. Unlike most other dive bombers, there was no sensation of being on an out-of-control roller coaster. I must admit, I found the hour of dive-bombing practice with the Ju-87D more enjoyable than with any other aircraft of its type. It seemed that the Junkers truly excelled in steep dives, thanks in part to its fixed undercarriage and large-span dive brakes, which provided effective drag.”
Ju-87s were equipped with “Stuka-vizier” gyro-stabilized bombsights developed by Zeiss, a renowned German optical company; these were essentially modified gunsights for vertical guidance. Stuka pilots also had red angle lines etched into the right-hand canopy window, allowing them to match the horizon and determine their dive angles. Another distinctive feature of the Stuka was a large window in its belly, positioned between the pilot’s feet, to maintain sight of the target during the dive. Unfortunately, this window was often obscured by engine oil leakage, rendering it mostly useless.
During its era, the Ju-87 boasted an innovative automatic pullout mechanism, designed to prevent pilots from succumbing to target fixation or being incapacitated during high-G pullouts. This mechanism, a straightforward hydraulic device, activated after the pilot had adjusted the trim for the dive and counteracted the increased airspeed. Upon releasing the ordnance, it reset the trim setting and initiated a pullout typically reaching between 5 and 6 Gs. In those times, when G-suits and techniques to counteract G-forces were scarce, even the most resilient Stuka pilots and gunners occasionally experienced graying out, yet the Stuka effectively handled the maneuvering.
However, not all Ju-87 pilots embraced the automatic pullout feature. Despite its introduction, many preferred to maintain control themselves. During training exercises against a floating target in the Baltic shortly after its implementation, at least three Stukas plunged into the sea, fostering skepticism among pilots toward the device.
The vulnerability of Stukas during their pullout phase was evident, as their speed was their main defense while they climbed for altitude in a predictable manner, unable to maneuver effectively. Allied pilots, instead of attempting to intercept them during the dive, waited until the Germans released their bombs and began their ascent. Stukas were originally meant to operate in conditions of complete air superiority, conducting bomb runs without facing opposition from formidable fighters like the Spitfires and Hurricanes.
In the Battle of Britain, Stukas faced heavy losses while attempting strategic bombing missions for which they were ill-suited. Despite being designed as ground-support aircraft to work alongside tanks, they were not a significant factor in the decisive tank battle of El Alamein in North Africa. By then, RAF and South African Air Force Kittyhawks had gained superiority over the Luftwaffe’s Me-109s and Italian Macchi MC.202s, due in part to fuel shortages.
Despite the limited success of Stukas in North Africa, they still played a role in boosting morale among troops. According to Alan Moorehead’s account in The Desert War, even though there were few dive bombers available, their psychological impact made them valuable assets in the Middle East theater, especially when there was a shortage of fighter aircraft.
Following the Battle of Britain, the RAF declared that the Stuka had been rendered ineffective as an offensive weapon, outmatched by Spitfires and Hurricanes. This notion has become ingrained in Stuka history and is a contributing factor to why, as noted by a British historian, “More misinformation has been circulated about the Stuka than any other aircraft in history.” However, in the five years following the Battle of Britain and the RAF’s confident assertion, the substantial sinking of merchant ships and war vessels, along with the destruction of thousands of Soviet tanks, demonstrated that the Ju-87 remained capable of accomplishing its missions.
Similar to the methodical yet lethal Douglas SBD, the Stuka proved to be highly effective against enemy shipping. Stuka pilots swiftly adapted tactics, opting to approach from behind to easily track a ship’s maneuvers. They frequently initiated their attacks with a 45-degree dive, utilizing machine gun fire as a precursor. “As soon as our bullets began striking the water ahead of the ship’s bow, we released the bombs,” recounted a former Stuka pilot cited in Peter C. Smith’s work, “Junkers Ju 87 Stuka.” Smith elaborated that employing this Stuka tactic left little chance for survival for merchant ships of significant size.
While the RAF discounted the significance of the Stuka following its disappointing performance in the Battle of Britain, Ju-87s effectively decimated the Royal Navy’s Mediterranean fleet. RAF Air Marshal Arthur Tedder remarked, “Our fighter pilots weep for joy when they see [Stukas].” He made this statement while reassuring Royal Navy Admiral Andrew Cunningham, whose armored-deck aircraft carrier HMS Illustrious, along with its support ships, would soon suffer severe damage from Stukas off Malta, rendering it inoperable for nearly a year. Stukas also forced the Royal Navy out of Norwegian waters.
Tedder’s assessment wasn’t far from reality. Luftwaffe Messerschmitt and Focke Wulf pilots dubbed Ju-87s “fighter magnets,” and depending on their preference for a peaceful demise or a collection of Iron Crosses, they either dreaded or relished being assigned to escort Stukas. Two Ju-87 tactics proved highly effective in the Vietnam War. One involved the utilization of forward air controllers (FACs), a strategy pioneered by the Germans during the Polish blitzkrieg. Stuka UHF radios were installed in tanks or other armored vehicles, manned by Luftwaffe officers trained in ground-support tactics, who directed Stuka strikes against any obstacles hindering the panzers’ advance.
The other tactic was the use of what is now known as the daisy-cutter—a bomb that detonates several feet above the ground rather than burrowing into the earth, maximizing its impact on personnel. The Germans devised a simple method of fuzing the bomb to explode at this height: attaching a 3-foot-long metal rod to the impact fuze in the bomb’s nose, triggering it upon ground contact. Initially, the rods failed to detonate the bomb when penetrating soft ground, prompting the addition of a 3-inch-diameter disk to the tip. This same technique was later adopted by the U.S. Air Force 25 years later.
Many people assume that because the Stuka was primarily used for bombing, it must have handled like one. However, former Ju-87 pilots attest to its delightful, light, and responsive flying characteristics. It was easy to handle, simple to land, and notably lacked any major flaws. Despite its nose-heavy design, Allied pilots who flew captured Stukas found that the aircraft felt perfectly balanced when diving vertically. One RAF pilot even remarked on its responsiveness, noting a tendency to overcontrol due to its light handling, possibly influenced by its unique Junkers-design floating ailerons and flaps. Additionally, the involvement of women pilots such as Hanna Reitsch and Countess Melitta Schenk von Stauffenberg in preproduction testing challenges the perception of the Stuka as exclusively a man’s aircraft.
The Ju-87 underwent several iterations, each requiring more power, range, and bomb-carrying capability. The Ju-87B, with its distinct features like large wheel pants and a squared-away greenhouse, is considered the classic version. It saw action during the early blitzkreigs and the Battle of Britain, capable of carrying a hefty 1,100-pound main bomb. Preceded by the underpowered Ju-87A, the Ju-87B marked a significant improvement in combat readiness.
The later variant of the Ju-87, known as the “Dora,” featured upgraded engines and improved aerodynamics, including a streamlined canopy and a twin-gun rolling turret instead of the single gun found on the earlier “Bertha” model. Additionally, the Dora had its engine-coolant radiators relocated to underwing positions, with only an oil cooler remaining under the nose. This version was capable of carrying a bomb weighing nearly 3,900 pounds, which the Luftwaffe deemed necessary for penetrating major fortifications.
Between the Bertha and the Dora existed the Ju-87C, often referred to as “the Stuka that never was.” Designed as a navalized version with tail-hook and folding wings for potential carrier use, the Ju-87C was ultimately cancelled when work on the Graf Zeppelin carrier ceased. Interestingly, the Ju-87C featured wings that folded aft with leading edges pointing downward, similar to the Wildcat’s twist-and-fold wings. Despite the Wildcat’s first flight predating the folding-wing Ju-87C by almost nine months, it is unlikely that either company was aware of the other’s development.
A notable feature of the Ju-87C was its landing gear struts equipped with explosive bolts, allowing for their detachment to facilitate ditching without risking the aircraft flipping over due to fixed gear. This feature was retained in the Dora, presumably to enhance the aircraft’s chances of a successful belly landing on rough terrain. Additionally, the Dora was equipped with four air-filled flotation bags—two in the fuselage and one in each wing—intended to keep the aircraft afloat for up to three days after ditching.
The Ju-87R, denoted by “R” for “Reichtweite” meaning range, was an extended-range version of the Ju-87B. Its additional wing tanks, increasing the range from 340 to 875 miles, became a standard feature in subsequent Stuka variants. Some Ju-87Rs were adapted for towing gliders, not for troop transport but rather to carry maintenance supplies, tools, and spares for Stuka units.
The Ju-87G, regarded as one of the most effective Stuka models, underwent a significant transformation, no longer functioning as a dive bomber and lacking dive brakes altogether. Instead, the G variant was equipped with formidable 37mm, 12-round anti-tank cannons mounted beneath each wing. These cannons, utilizing components from a bulky flak gun dating back to World War I, proved highly effective against Soviet T-34 tanks. Operating such weaponry necessitated skilled gunners, as each tungsten-cored explosive round had to be fired with precision. Notably proficient marksmen like Hans-Ulrich Rudel, credited with destroying 519 Soviet tanks, could exploit the vulnerable rear aspect of T-34s, aiming for the unprotected space between the turret and the top of the heavily armored hull to devastating effect. The top 58 Stuka pilots on the Russian Front collectively neutralized approximately 3,700 Soviet tanks. However, the sheer scale of Soviet tank production, with roughly the same number of T-34s being manufactured every three months in 1943, underscored the limited impact of Stukas in the conflict.
Not all Stukas deployed on the Eastern Front were solely focused on tank warfare. Sergeant Hermann Dibbel, part of a specialized group of Stuka pilots, undertook an unconventional role as a skywriter. Regularly flying over Soviet lines in his Ju-87, Dibbel used augmented exhaust smoke to display messages urging the Russians to surrender. Despite his prior achievements, including the sinking of a British cruiser and destruction of 30 Soviet tanks, the effectiveness of Dibbel’s smoky appeals remains uncertain. Nevertheless, this unique duty ultimately led Dibbel to pursue a post-war career as a skywriting instructor.
The Stuka’s utility was waning as World War II progressed. Initially, a Ju-87 had an average operational lifespan of 10½ months. However, by 1941, this had decreased to little more than half, and with Soviet fighters becoming increasingly adept after the initial setbacks of Operation Barbarossa, the survival expectancy of a Stuka in combat was reduced to just over four days.
Only two intact Stukas remain—one housed in the Chicago Museum of Industry and the other in the RAF Museum at Hendon. Neither is airworthy, though during the production of the 1969 film Battle of Britain, there were plans to restore the Hendon Ju-87 for use in the movie. Vivian Bellamy, a pilot from the film company, reportedly attempted to start the museum Stuka, and to everyone’s surprise, it roared to life after a few cranks of its engine. However, the project proved too expensive even for a film studio’s budget. Instead, three Percival Proctor lightplanes were modified to resemble Stukas and earned the nickname “the Proctukas,” evoking images of some fearsome medical instrument. Regrettably, they became infamous for their perilous flight characteristics and were eventually scrapped, replaced by radio-controlled models.
It was an ironic twist that the last operational Ju-87s in the world were two survivors utilized as trainers post-war by Czechoslovakia, once one of the Reich’s first conquests, now a Soviet satellite.
