# Alternative German Fighters: Me-209, Me-309, He-100, etc.



## CharlesBronson (Mar 22, 2005)

Wich is his your opinion the best alternative for the BF-109/Fw-190 dinamic couple, also the development and caracteristics of those aircraft.


Me-609.


----------



## hellmaker (Mar 23, 2005)

Hey...now this model you posted is quite nice... It does resemble the P-51 from one side...doesn't it??? And a replacement for that couple coud have been the Me-262 if properly developed in time for the war...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 23, 2005)

An aircraft that I always thought was a great design and too bad it was not produced much ealier in the war was the Do-335. However here is a zwilling design of the Do-335 that was actually taken over by Junkers.

Do-635



> In mid-1944, Junkers inherited the Dornier 335Z long-range reconnaissance (Z for Zwilling, or twin) program from Heinkel, who were brought in to assist Dornier because they lacked the experience in building such aircraft. After meeting with engineers from Dornier and Heinkel, Professor Heinrich Hertel decided that it would be late 1945 before the first prototype of the Do 335Z would be ready. He then referred back to Project 1075.01-21/W 00304, which would involve a lot less redesign and modification, and gave the date of Febuary 1945 for the first prototype to be ready. After a few more modifications (new main wheels, lengthened fuselages and an increased center wing both in chord and length), the RLM authorized the use of the 635 number, thus becoming the Ju 635. A purchase order for four prototypes and six preproduction aircraft was received.
> The Ju 635 used two modified Do 335 fuselages, joined by a center wing section of constant chord. The outer wing panels were tapered back, and two 1200 liter drop tanks could be carried beneath the wings to increase range. Four Daimler Benz 603E-1 engines supplied the power, one in each forward fuselage pulling and two in each rear fuselage driving a pusher propeller via a long drive shaft. Fuel was to be carried in ten internal wing tanks (see diagram below), four in the fuselages and possibly one in each fuselage bay. The port fuselage bay carried the two Rb 50/30 cameras (or one camera and one 250 liter (66 gallon) tank for GM 1 power boost) and the starboard bay contained five 60 kg (132 lbs) marker bombs. A crew of three was envisioned, although this could be stretched to four eventually. The pilot and radio operator sat in the port fuselage and a second pilot sat in the starboard fuselage. The fourth crew member (navigator) was to also sit in the starboard fuselage. The landing gear was to consist of two nose wheels (one under each fuselage nose), two main wheels which were fitted with mud guards to protect the rear radiator intakes, and a jettisonable fifth wheel located beneath the center wing, which was fitted with a parachute for recovery. The main wheels were modified from the Ju 352 B-1 transport's wheels. Two Walter RATO (Rocket Assisted Take Off) units could be fitted to assist take off. A variety of radars were to be fitted also, and no armament was included due to the fact that this was a long-range reconnaissance aircraft and thus all weight was reserved for fuel and speed.
> Near the end of 1944, the German government approached the Japanese about certain aircraft designs, the Ju 635 among them. Although they were impressed with the Ju 635's capabilities, and were interested in the project, nothing came of the meeting. By early 1945, windtunnel models had been tested and cockpit mockups had been constructed (see photos below), but by Febuary 5, due to the worsening war situation, all further work on the Ju 635 was stopped.
> 
> ...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 23, 2005)

Ive always like the He-100.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Mar 23, 2005)

The 335 never was my favorite. 

The image above is the Messerschmitt Me-609 a proposed twin variant of the 309.

The 309 was a heavy fighter, in the the category of the P-47 wich flew in June 1942, the firt prototipe was equiped with a DB-603a-1 de 44 liters and 1750hp, then in a weird regretion, the oters 4 aircraft flew with the DB-605 1475 hp, wich deteriorated the performances very much.
Anyway this plane was heavily armed, the picture below, shows the V-4 wich has 2 Mg-131, 4 Mg-151 and a 30 mm gun.






I am not sure what are the purpose of those large bulges in wings.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 23, 2005)

proberly fuel, even extra ammo.........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 23, 2005)

The 335 was very advanced for its time and they even drew up plans to turn it into a hybrid jet/prop aircraft would have been neat to know the outcome of that.


----------



## Erich (Mar 23, 2005)

all would have been replaced by superior revamped Me 262's. this was planned for 1946 in the day time and night fighter roles with additions of smaller swept back winged Fw jets .........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 23, 2005)

That could be true, but they would still have to fix the engine problems.


----------



## Erich (Mar 23, 2005)

yes the engines were going to be placed more internally and the fuel shortages or at least the mix was being recitified at wars end


----------



## delcyros (Mar 23, 2005)

My choice would be either a He-162 D with swept back wings and V- tail or a Me-262 HG-III with 45 degrees swept back wings and the engines moved to the fuselage. That plane rocks! Better thrust:weight ratio, higher critical Mach number, simply great.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Mar 23, 2005)

Advaced aircraft, indeed , but it remained as project only.

ChCh mentioned the Heinkel He-100, well I think that this aircraft was the best and one of the early capable of replace the 109. This plane was the quick response of Heinkel factory after the He-112 was badly beaten by the new design of Bayerische Flugzeuwerke.

Originaly equiped with an internal radiator, wich use as evaporation surfaces the wings and fuselage of the aircraft itself. This save weigth and improve performance, mostly because the lack of external opening and low drag.

This system working well in the dedicated record aircraft He-100 V-8, but was insuitable for a truly combat aircraft. the V8 used a DB-601R engine wich was feeded by a special mixture of 90 % 100 octane fuel and 10% methanol, this allowed 1775 hp for short periods.

It take over the record at 746 km/h.






Eventually the evaporation sistem wich his intrincated pipes and electrical water pumps ( 22 to be precise) was to be abandoned because his hard maintenance and the always present risk for a combat aircraft of a failure, wich can be caused even by a single 7,7 mm bullet piercing wich would make entire sistem broke and make quick engine overheat wich bring down the plane sooner or later.

Anyway this sistem was put in the 3 D-0 series, then these Heinkels was send to japan.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 24, 2005)

my god what an ugly wing.........


----------



## pasoleati (Mar 24, 2005)

Erich said:


> all would have been replaced by superior revamped Me 262's. this was planned for 1946 in the day time and night fighter roles with additions of smaller swept back winged Fw jets .........



I doubt they could have made the Jumo 004 reliable and durable enough by that date. IMHO the Me 262 is the most overrate plane of WW two. And I hate jets anyway. The inventor of the jet should have been skinned alive and fed to rats.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 24, 2005)

hey that's a brit you're talking about................

and the jet engine is one of the greatest inventions off all time.........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 24, 2005)

pasoleati said:


> Erich said:
> 
> 
> > all would have been replaced by superior revamped Me 262's. this was planned for 1946 in the day time and night fighter roles with additions of smaller swept back winged Fw jets .........
> ...



And why is that? The invention of the Jet made everything from military aviation to civilian travel easier, more efficient, and better. The 262 was still better then anything else out there.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 24, 2005)

just imagine if your country was defended by piston engined aircraft whilst everyone else had jets?? i mean you'd be on a par with canada?? surely you'd want jets then??


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 24, 2005)

When did Finland get jets anyhow?


----------



## pasoleati (Mar 24, 2005)

Well, with the introduction of jets the costs started skyrocketing. This means that the chances of small nations in combat have diminished hugely as e.g. nation´s citizens soldierly qualities are less important. I.e. Finland survived 105 days against overwhelming odds during the Winter War. In jet era that would be impossible. 

What is more, jets personify bottomless greed. As jets are best suited for high speeds, they favour current social atmosphere in which everything must be done faster, faster and faster. Jets also favor higher altitude flying, thus the harmful emissions are released where they hurt the atmosphere far more seriously. Jets have also reduced foreign travel to quick boozing hops for the ignorant masses resulting in holidays after which the people complain "what a busy holiday, huh." Next time you hear how another company closes off and moves to China to make a few bucks more, understand that this is what jets personify. As for the efficiency of jets, which one is more efficient: a jet flying at Mach 0.9 at 33,000 ft or or a steam ship doing 12 knots at sea? I.e. which consumes more resources per passenger/cargo ton per kilometre? Jets are "efficient" only at high speeds but those very high speeds itself are wholly inefficient. I wish all civilian aircraft cruising at over 300 kts are banned as Molochians stealing the ever diminishing resources.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Mar 24, 2005)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> just imagine if your country was defended by piston engined aircraft whilst everyone else had jets?? i mean you'd be on a par with canada?? surely you'd want jets then??


Now he's a comedian.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 24, 2005)

thought you might like that one............


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 24, 2005)

pasoleati said:


> Well, with the introduction of jets the costs started skyrocketing. This means that the chances of small nations in combat have diminished hugely as e.g. nation´s citizens soldierly qualities are less important. I.e. Finland survived 105 days against overwhelming odds during the Winter War. In jet era that would be impossible.



Sounds to me like Finland needs to modernize there military then. 



pasoleati said:


> What is more, jets personify bottomless greed. As jets are best suited for high speeds, they favour current social atmosphere in which everything must be done faster, faster and faster. Jets also favor higher altitude flying, thus the harmful emissions are released where they hurt the atmosphere far more seriously. Jets have also reduced foreign travel to quick boozing hops for the ignorant masses resulting in holidays after which the people complain "what a busy holiday, huh." Next time you hear how another company closes off and moves to China to make a few bucks more, understand that this is what jets personify. As for the efficiency of jets, which one is more efficient: a jet flying at Mach 0.9 at 33,000 ft or or a steam ship doing 12 knots at sea? I.e. which consumes more resources per passenger/cargo ton per kilometre? Jets are "efficient" only at high speeds but those very high speeds itself are wholly inefficient. I wish all civilian aircraft cruising at over 300 kts are banned as Molochians stealing the ever diminishing resources.



Sounds to me like you dont want to live in the future, in the United States they are called Amish or Pennsylvania Dutch and they still drive around horse drawn carts and dont use electricity or TV or anything. They have never been in a plane. Maybe you should check them out.


----------



## delcyros (Mar 25, 2005)

I like the finnish very much, but jets are quite cool. So there is no need for that development? No need for rocketry? Ohh, Jumala!
By the way... replace Me-262 HG III with HG II (it was build, no project)...


----------



## CharlesBronson (Mar 25, 2005)

In the Luft46 site there is some nice art about the Me-262 HG












Really beatiful. 

http://www.luft46.com/dsart/lufartds.html


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 26, 2005)

nice shots..........


----------



## Gnomey (Mar 26, 2005)

some nice shots there!


----------



## CharlesBronson (Mar 26, 2005)

The definitive version of the Heinkel He-100, the D-1 serie. This serie finally throw away the evaporation sistem and used a retractable radiator instead.

This little aircraft ( 9,42 wingspan) was 50 km/h faster than Bf-109F2, it had 250 Km more range, the same armament of F-0 and F-1 (2x 7,9+1 MG-FF) and was available.... a year and a half earlier.  

Some prototipes was sold to Russia, ans it could be the inspiration for the early v-12 soviet fighters, perversely the Lagg-3 had exactly the same wingspan ( coincidence?)


----------



## CharlesBronson (Mar 28, 2005)

Technical description: 

HE-100D-1






ENGINE:
Model: Daimler-Benz DB 601N
Type: Inverted-vee-12 liquid-cooled
Number: One Horsepower: At take off 1200 hp at 4000 meters 1,175 hp

DIMENSIONS:
Span: 30 ft. 10¾ in. (9.41m)
Length: 26 ft. 10¾ in. (8.195m)
Height: 11 ft. 9¾ in. (3.60m)

WEIGHTS:
Empty: 1810kg (3,990 lbs.)
Maximum Loaded: 2500kg (5,512 lbs.)

PERFORMANCE:
Maximum speed: 670km/h (416mph)
Service Ceiling: 11,000m (36,090ft)
Range: 900km (559 Miles) at 450 Km/h

Only 12 aircraft were completed in late 1939.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 28, 2005)

You know what is funny about that He-100 there. I have an actuall picture of it from the Heinkel factory and it is labeled by them as a He-113. Here it is.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Mar 29, 2005)

This was the intended denomination for the He-100 until Ernst Heinkel make change it, for supersticion or another reason, wich I dont know.

Another denomination I have seen is He-112U, wich I think refers to Udet.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 30, 2005)

Actually I heard it had something to do with Allied intelligence and Goebbles had it advertised as the He-113 and mass produced to full them.



> However, in 1940, Goebbels publicised the He 100 to the extent that British intelligence reported the He 100 in large scale service as the He 113.
> http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/he100.html


----------



## Concorde247 (Mar 31, 2005)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> You know what is funny about that He-100 there. I have an actuall picture of it from the Heinkel factory and it is labeled by them as a He-113. Here it is.



I've seen that pic description before too only it was said that it was changed to 113 fo propaganda / secrecy reasons.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 1, 2005)

anyone got pics of the He-70?? i saw a model of it yesterday an it looks cool.......


----------



## CharlesBronson (Apr 1, 2005)

Link to pictures.

http://www.luftarchiv.de/flugzeuge/heinkel/he70.htm

This craft saw little service with Luftwaffe.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 2, 2005)

but what a beauty of a plane, and thanks for the link...........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 2, 2005)

Concorde247 said:


> DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
> 
> 
> > You know what is funny about that He-100 there. I have an actuall picture of it from the Heinkel factory and it is labeled by them as a He-113. Here it is.
> ...



Yeah that is what I have always heard.

And here is some pics of the He-70


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 2, 2005)

again thanks, any basic info??


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 2, 2005)

Heinkel He-70

Type: Reconnaissance bomber.
Origin:
He 70 He 270: Ernst Heinkel AG
He 170: Manfred Weiss Flugzeug und
Motorenfabrik, Budapest
Models: He 70, He 170, He 270
Crew: Three
First Flight: December 1, 1932
Service Delivery: 1934
Final Delivery: N/A
Number Produced:
He 70: 280 He 170: N/A He 270: 1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engine: 
He 70F:
Model: BMW VI 7.3
Type: 12-Cylinder water cooled vee
Number: One Horsepower: 750 hp

He 170:
Model: WM-K-14 (Licenced built GR 14K Mistral Major)
Type: 14-Cylinder radial
Number: One Horsepower: 910 hp

He 270:
Model: Daimler-Benz DB 601Aa
Type: 12-Cylinder water cooled inverted vee
Number: One Horsepower: 1,175 hp
Dimensions:
Wing span: 48 ft. 6.75 in. (14.80m)
Length: 39 ft. 4.5 in. (12.00m)
Height: 10 ft. 2 in. (3.10m)
Wing Surface Area: N/A

Weights: 
Empty:
He 70F-2: 5,203 lb. (2360 kg)
Loaded:
Recce configuration: 7,465 lb. (3386 kg)
Bomber configuration: 7,630 lb. (3460 kg)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Performance:
Maximum Speed: 224 mph (360 kph)
Initial Climb: N/A
Service Ceiling (Typical): N/A
Range on Internal Fuel: 559 miles (900 km)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armament: He 70F-2
One 7.92mm MG 15 machine gun aimed from rear cockpit

Payload:
Six 110 lb. (50 kg) or twenty four 22 lb. (10 kg) bombs internally

Avionics: N/A


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 2, 2005)

wow cheers.........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 2, 2005)

If you go to this website you can find some interesting info on Luftwaffe aircraft:

http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 2, 2005)

yeah thanks i already use that site..........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 2, 2005)

It is one of my favorites.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 2, 2005)

not great info with the pics however........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 2, 2005)

What do you mean.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 3, 2005)

well i only really visit the british part but i've found that the captions with pictures don't really give you much detail about the plane like serial number or squadron...........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 3, 2005)

That is just certain pictures. I know if you go to the Luftwaffe site it is very well detailed with many pictures. I believe they are still building up the US, British, and allied portion of the site.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 3, 2005)

yeah they've got allot of good info on american experimantal types as well...........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 3, 2005)

Yeah they do. The Japanese site aint that bad either.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Apr 5, 2005)

Lanc. You cannot be serious about the He-70.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 5, 2005)

oh i think you'll find i am.........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Apr 5, 2005)

He-70 - Bad.
He-170 - Ok
He-270 - Ok


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 5, 2005)

but look at the eliptical wings of the -70!!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Apr 5, 2005)

Yes, and MARVEL at the fact it appears to be flying upside down due to the Engine arrangement!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 5, 2005)

but it looks so good.........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Apr 5, 2005)

It would if it had a radial...Oh look, whaddaya know, the He-170 has a radial! :shock


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 6, 2005)

the -170 look stupid with the radial........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Apr 6, 2005)

Ok then, what about the He-270, with what looks like an inline, but an NORMAL looking inline?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 6, 2005)

I dont think the 70 was that bad of a looking plane. She had character.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 6, 2005)

axactily............


----------



## CharlesBronson (Apr 6, 2005)

Other good looking aircraft is this Arado Fighter, although a paper projekt only.







The engine should be a DB-603A


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 6, 2005)

ok does that look like an FW-190 to anyone else??


----------



## cheddar cheese (Apr 6, 2005)

Yes, but about 35 times uglier


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 6, 2005)

yeah the propeller hub's huge!!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Apr 6, 2005)

And flat  It looks like they took a 190A, stretched the front and instead of stretching the rear fuselage section too, they just gave up and went down the pub


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 6, 2005)

then came back to work on the prop. hub............


----------



## CharlesBronson (Apr 6, 2005)

The wings are diferent too.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Apr 6, 2005)

So they are 8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Apr 6, 2005)

not much though.............


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 7, 2005)

I think she was a beautiful plane and the performance on it would have probably been pretty good too. That is if it had been built.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Apr 10, 2005)

The last evolution of the heinkel He-100/113, was this, the Heinkel P.1076.

Equipped with 3x 30mm, and like Arado above powered by the powerful Mercedes DB-603G of 1900 hp, coupled with 3 blade double counterrotating propellers.

The projected speed was in excess 770 Km/h. Funny thing this aircraft returned to the evaporation cooling sistem.













http://www.luft46.com/heinkel/hep1076.html


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 10, 2005)

In late 1944, the Heinkel firm designed this project to meet a RLM specification for a fast piston-engined fighter with an good high altitude performance. Designer Siegfried Günter used the He 100 design (which briefly held the world speed record at 746.606 km/h (463 mph) on March 30, 1939) as his inspiration. The He P.1076 was thus designed to have a very smooth surface, and used a surface evaporation cooling system on the engine cowling and the entire fuselage rear section (see drawing below). The wing was slightly swept forward at 8 degrees and was constucted as a two-piece, two spar all metal structure. There were flaps on the entire wing trailing edge, with the outermost as ailerons and the inside ones as landing flaps. Three different engines were envisioned: the Daimler Benz DB 603M, Jumo 213E and Daimler Benz DB 603N (see table below). The landing gear retracted normally, the main gearinto the wing center section and the tail wheel into the rear fuselage. A single 700 liter (185 gallon) fuel tank was located in the fuselage behind the pilot's seat. The cockpit was pressurized and was supplied with a clear-vision canopy. Armament was to consist of one MK 103 30mm cannon firing through the propeller hub, and two wing-mounted MK 108 30mm cannon. Although this project did not see the light of day (although Siegfried Günter completed detailed drawings and plans for the Americans in mid-1945), it probably would have been one of the fastest piston-engined propeller aircraft ever built. 
Span: 11.0 m (36' 1") Length: 9.6 m (31' 6") Max. Speed: 880 km/h (546 mph) w/ DB 603N 
Note: the DB 603N engine supplied P.1076 had a longer wing span, and the Jumo 213E's length was 9.64 m (31' 7") 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


A diagram of the of the He P.1076
evaporation cooling system locations 
Engine Take-Off Power Power w/MW50 
Injection Boost 
Daimler Benz DB 603M 
twin supercharged 1825 HP 2100 HP 
Junkers Jumo 213E 
two-stage, three speed 
supercharger 1750 HP 2100 HP 
Daimler Benz DB 603N 
two-stage twin supercharger 
w/integrated heat exchange 
cooler and contra-rotating 
three blade VDM propellers 2750 HP N/A


----------



## CharlesBronson (Apr 12, 2005)

Another projekt, this time a fighter-bomber from Gotha:


----------



## cheddar cheese (Apr 13, 2005)

Looks pretty cool 8)


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 14, 2005)

Interesting design.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 20, 2005)

I got it ¡¡¡¡   

Pictures from the proyect Messerschmitt Me-309B.

This aircraft used a laminar flow profiles a winglets and was a prototipe for aerodinamic research , but some armnament was included in the form of 4 MG-151/20E.
















The tail seems the same as Me-262.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jun 20, 2005)

Compare it with the firs Me-309


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 20, 2005)

The 309 was not as good as was expected of it. The Bf-109G actually even outperformed it. The Gustav outturned it and with the addition of more armament the performance of the 309 dropped to unexpectable levels. Once the Fw-190 project was fully in swing the 309 was canceled.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 21, 2005)

That said the Me-309B looks sleeker and potentially more impressive than the first Me-309.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 21, 2005)

Tricycle Landing gear aircraft are easier to land, a plus for newer pilots, although they suffer when operating on soft surfaces.


----------



## Soren (Jun 21, 2005)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Tricycle Landing gear aircraft are easier to land, a plus for newer pilots, although they suffer when operating on soft surfaces.



Very true.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 21, 2005)

cheddar cheese said:


> That said the Me-309B looks sleeker and potentially more impressive than the first Me-309.



I agree, I personally believe if the Germans had wanted to the 309 could have been a good aircraft she just had to be developed more.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 22, 2005)

Yeah. It wasnt needed though, they had the Fw-190D's and late Bf-109's instead.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 23, 2005)

Agreed.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 23, 2005)

What do you know about the Me-209 Adler? Wasnt that just a racer that was designated as the 209 to boost morale or something?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 23, 2005)

No actually it was 2 projects itself.

The first one was the Me-209 which was a race plane but was never adopted for combat use. The Me-209-II was designed as a replacement for the Bf-109 but ofcourse this never happened.

*Me-209*



> Messerschmitt's designation Me 209 was actually used for two separate projects during World War II. The first, described below, was a record-setting single-engined race plane for which little or no consideration was given to adaptation for combat. The second, the Me 209-II was a proposal for an enhanced version of the highly successful Messerschmitt Bf 109 which served as the Luftwaffe's primary fighter throughout World War II.
> 
> The first Me 209 was in fact a completely new aircraft whose designation was used by Messerschmitt as a propaganda tool. Although the plane was designed only to break speed records, it was hoped that its name would associate it and its world-beating performance with the Bf 109 already in combat service.
> 
> ...



*General characteristics*
*Crew:* one, pilot 
*Length:* 7.24 m (23 ft 9 in) 
*Wingspan:* 7.80 m (25 ft 7 in) 
*Powerplant:* 1x Daimler-Benz DB 601ARJ, 1,342 kW (1,800 hp) 

*Performance*
*Maximum speed:* 755 km/h (470 mph) 


*Me-209-II*



> The second incarnation of the Me 209 project came in 1943 when Willy Messerschmitt proposed an heavily modified version of his extremely successful but aging Me 109. This Me 209 would compete against Focke-Wulf's high performance Fw 190D-9 and Ta 152 fighters. Like these enhanced versions of Kurt Tank's design, the new Me 209 would share most of its airframe with a proven model, in this case the Me 109G. This marked a departure from the first failed Me 209 and later Me 309 projects which had proposed completely new designs.
> 
> Unfortunately for the design team, the Me 209's proposed DB 603 engine was in short supply and they were forced to use the Jumo 213E engine which offered inferior performance. The Me 209 featured a new tail section, broad-track landing gear, a taller tail, and an annular radiator which gave the engine a superficial resemblance to a radial powerplant. As with the original 209 project, however, successive modifications undermined the original purpose of the plane, in this case to build a superior fighter as similar to the existing Me 109G as possible.
> 
> ...



*General characteristics*
*Crew: *one, pilot 
*Length: *9.74 m (31 ft 11 in) 
*Wingspan:* 10.95 m (35 ft 11 in) 
*Height:* 4.00 m (13 ft 1 in) 
*Wing area:* 17.2 m² (185 ft²) 
*Empty:* 3,339 kg (7,346 lb) 
*Loaded:* 4,085 kg (8,987 lb) 
*Maximum takeoff:* kg ( lb) 
*Powerplant:* 1x Db 603G, 1,397 kW (1,900 hp) 

*Performance*
*Maximum speed:* 678 km/h (423 mph) 
*Range:* 600 km (374 miles) 
*Service ceiling:* 11,000 m (36,080 ft) 
*Wing loading:* 238 kg/m² (49 lb/ft²) 
*Power/Mass:* 0.36 kW/kg (0.22 hp/lb) 

*Armament*
1x 30 mm MK 108 cannon 
2x 13 mm MG 131 machine guns


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 23, 2005)

Aha cool, thanks 8)


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 23, 2005)

Robert Johnson (P-47 ace) claimed many of his victories as ME-209s. I suspect he was actually seeing 109Gs?!?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 23, 2005)

Must have because not that many were built.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 23, 2005)

my god that looks nothing like a -109..........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 23, 2005)

The 209-II does.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 23, 2005)

but the -209 doesn't........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 23, 2005)

Well no, because it wasnt supposed to look like a 109


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 24, 2005)

Lanc it never was. It was a completely different plane from teh 109. It was never intended for combat and never was inteded to be anything like the 109. It was a world recored break9ing race plane.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 5, 2005)

*Me-209 V-1*






*Me-209 V-4*






*Profiles Me-209II A-1 and A-2*


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 5, 2005)

*The Messerschmitt/Blohm Voss Bv 155*

The saga of the BV 155 high altitude interceptor actually began at Messerschmitt in the spring of 1942. At that time, it was known under the designation of Me 155, and was a company proposal for a carrier-based single seat fighter. 

Originally named as *BF-109ST ausf II* ( ST meaning *schwere trägerflugzeugjager *or heavy carrierborne fighter) the new design was different enough to be denominated *Me-155*.

The Me 155 was intended to be based aboard the Graf Zeppelin aircraft carrier, then under construction. In the interest of economy and simplicity, the Me 155 was to use as many Bf 109 components as possible, being basically a navalized version of the earlier Messerschmitt fighter. The Me 155 was to be powered by a DB 605A-1 liquid-cooled engine of 1475 hp with anular radiator . The fuselage was more-or-less that of the standard Bf 109G, but with an entirely new wing. 

*Me-155 first draft (BF-109ST)*





The undercarriage retracted inwards into wing wells, providing the wider track required for safe carrier landings. Standard naval equipment such as folding wings, catapult spools, and arrester gear were to be fitted. Proposed armament was an engine mounted 20-mm MG 151 cannon and two 20-mm MG 151 cannon and two 13-mm MG 131 machine guns in wings. Estimated maximum speed of 403 mph.

Detail design of the Me 155 was complete by Sept 1942. However, the numerous delays in the Graf Zeppelin seemed to indicate that the launching of the carrier would be at least two years away. Messerschmitt was told to shelve the Me 155 project for the indefinite future. In the event, work on the Graf Zeppelin carrier was abandoned in favor of making more submarines

*Me-155A*

In order that all of that work on the Me 155 project not go entirely to waste, Messerschmitt adapted its design in November 1942 to fulfill a Luftwaffe requirement for a fast single seat bomber. A single 2205 lb SC 1000 bomb was to be carried. All of the carrier equipment and most of the armament was removed from the aircraft. Additional fuel cells were provided and an elongated, non- retractable tailwheel was added to provide ground clearance for the large bomb. The proposal was designated Me 155A.

*Me-155A*






*Making the high altitude Fighter:*

By the end of 1942, the increasing number of USAAF bombing raids and intelligence coming in about the new American B-29 bomber led the Luftwaffe to envisage a pressing need for an effective high-altitude interceptor. The Messerschmitt outfit adapted its design to this requirement under the designation Me 155B. The engine was to be the DB 628, which was basically a DB 605A with a two-stage mechanical supercharger with an induction cooler. A pressure cabin was to be provided. It was estimated that a service ceiling of 14100 metres (46,250 feet) could be attained.

A converted Bf 109G adapted to take the DB 628 engine flew in May 1942 and attained an amazing altitude of 15235 metres. However, the Technische Amt concluded that a DB 603A engine with an exhaust-driven turbosupercharger was more promising. The DB 603A provided 1610 hp for takeoff and 1450 hp at 49,210 feet

*Messerschmitt Bf-109 Versuchs 50 mit DB-628*






This engine change required that the fuselage be elongated in order to house the turbosupercharger aft of the pressure cabin. Exhaust gases were carried to the turbosupercharger via external ducts. Air was drawn in through via a ventral trough aft of the wing. Standard Bf 109G wings were to be fitted outboard of a new, long-span, untapered wing center section. Other parts were scavenged from existing Messerschmitt designs --- the vertical tail was from the Me 209, and the horizontal tail and the undercarriage were taken from the Bf 109G.

In August 1943, the Technische Amt decided that Messerschmitt was over-committed, and they decided to transfer the work on the design to the Blohm und Voss outfit.

to be continued....


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 6, 2005)

Yeap. The Me-155B was the high alltitude version of the Me-155A which was the Carrier based verson. The 155B was never intended to launch from Carriers. In 1943 when the Carrier program was canceled so was the Me-155A. The 155B continued but with no great priority. 

In August of 1943 the RLM transferred the development work to Blohm and Voss. BV was to undertake the work on Stage III and Messerschmitt was to continue work on Stage I. There was no Stage II allocated to anyone.

Under Blohm and Voss, Stage III became the Blohm and Voss BV-155 and underwent a certain amount of design changes. The name was not changed from Me-155B to BV-155B until the end of 1944 when the first prototype was completed. It first flew on 8 Feb. 1945.

Type: High-Altitude Interceptor
Origin:Blohm undVoss, Abt. Flugzeugbau
Models: A &B
First Flight: September 1, 1944
Service Delivery: None
Final Delivery: None

Engine:
Type: DB 603A with TKL 15 turbocharger
Horsepower: 1,450 hp at 49,210 ft. (15,000m)

Dimensions:
Wing span: 20.5m (67 ft. 3 in.)
Length: 12.00m (39ft. 4½ in.)
Height: 2.98m (9 ft. 9½ in.)
Wing Surface Area: N/A
Weights:
Empty: 10,734 lb. (4870 kg)
Maximum: 13,262 lb. (6016 kg)

Performance:
Maximum Speed: 429 mph (690km/h)
Initial climb: N/A
Range: 895 miles (1440km) at high altitude
Service Ceiling: N/A

Armament:
Heavy groups of 15, 20 or 30mm cannon proposed


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 6, 2005)

quite a good looking bird.........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 6, 2005)

I think that with the enormous wing radiators and inconsistant shape of the fuselage that its desperately ugly.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 6, 2005)

I agree the Me-155 looked pretty good but she was basically just a redesigned Me-109. However the BV-155B looked hidious.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 6, 2005)

Yeah the Me-155 is nice the the Bv-155 is foul.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 6, 2005)

I think the fuselage did not look to bad on her but the wings with the large radiaters and such as you said made it look horrible.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 6, 2005)

*Blohm und Voss BV 155A (V1)*








*Blohm und Voss BV 155B-1 (V2)*







Blohm und Voss BV 155C-1 mock-up


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 7, 2005)

If I recall from my reading the BV-155V-1 was still pretty much Messerschmitts design. They changed it on the V-2.


----------



## Chocks away! (Jul 9, 2005)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> An aircraft that I always thought was a great design and too bad it was not produced much ealier in the war was the Do-335. However here is a zwilling design of the Do-335 that was actually taken over by Junkers.
> 
> Do-635
> 
> ...


 Why are the two canopies different?


----------



## Chocks away! (Jul 9, 2005)

That Blohm and Voss looks amazing. Like a super 109


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 9, 2005)

This is the proyected *B&V 155C-0*:











It suposed to use the turbocharged equipped DB-603U and eliminated the Large wings radiators.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 9, 2005)

Nice! 8)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 9, 2005)

odd colour sheme though


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 10, 2005)

Chocks away! said:


> Why are the two canopies different?



I am not a hundred percent sure but it could have been because of the addition of other crew members. When Junkers took over the project and redesignated it Ju-635 they added a 3rd crewmember and then later a 4th crew member.


----------



## KraziKanuK (Jul 10, 2005)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Chocks away! said:
> 
> 
> > Why are the two canopies different?
> ...



Under the port canopy were 2 crew. The crew sat back to back. The Monogram-Monarch 335 book has a pic of the mockup.

The 635 was to be long range maritime recon a/c with a flight time of ~8 hours. So crew would be pilot, navigator and radar operator.

When the RLM sent a memo for the fitting of MG151s to Herr Zindel he replied that the 635 'should rely on its speed to elude the enemy like the Mosuito does'.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 10, 2005)

Another "ersatz" plane

*Bf 109X *

The Bf 109X was powered by a BMW 801 A-0 radial engine. The only aircraft built was used for testing and for competition with the Focke-Wulf Fw 190. The first flight was made on 2 September 1940, and it made other flights until the end of 1941.
















It was armed with 4 x 13mm.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 10, 2005)

Well that just ruined the look of the 109 for me.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 10, 2005)

Yeah, fat and ugly.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 10, 2005)

Agreed. The sleakness is what made the 109 look good.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 10, 2005)

Well in the black and white drawing it looks like a Ki-100


----------



## JCS (Jul 10, 2005)

Yea that just looks ugly. The top view of it doesnt look too bad though...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 10, 2005)

From that fiew it just looks like a 190.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 11, 2005)

yeah i agree, it's ugly!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 11, 2005)

The top view looks okay as it looks like a 190 but the rest of it just plane sucks.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 11, 2005)

How about this one not a development of the Bf-109 but I guess you can call it an alternative fighter.

Me-509


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 11, 2005)

Ahhhhh! Its like a P-39  (I know it doesnt look like one but its very Airabobra ish)


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 11, 2005)

actually you're right it down't look that different......


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 11, 2005)

I know, P-39 style undercarriage, mid engined, same air scoop on the side...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 11, 2005)

And the drive shaft went right under the pilot just like in a P-39 also.


----------



## GT (Jul 14, 2005)

Update.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 14, 2005)

Ive always loved that design, it looks so futuristic! Even now it would do IMo.


----------



## GT (Jul 14, 2005)

Update.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 14, 2005)

I love the computer generated art! From my other thread - you need to put a swept-wing -262 attacking a B-32 or a B-35!!!


----------



## Smokey (Jul 14, 2005)

> Mosquito vs Heinkel He P.1078C "Wilde Sau" would be a dogfight to witness!



The Mosquito wasn't really a dogfighter, it would have been a case of the Heinkel P1078 Wilde Sau intercepting the Mosquito

These are some of my faves, all from
http://www.luft46.com/luftart.html
http://www.luft46.com/






Messerschmitt "Libelle" single-seat fighter













Gareth Hector's Heinkel He 162D 

Other He-162 variants under consideration included the "He-162C", with the B-series fuselage, Heinkel-Hirth 011A engine, swept wing, and "vee" or "butterfly" tail assembly; and the "He-162D", with a similar configuration but a forward-swept wing. They were to me armed with twin MK-108 30 millimeter cannon, and a scheme was considered in which *the cannon could be pivoted upward from the horizontal, allowing the fighter to fire at a bomber while flying under it.*
(useful in a dogfight with a fighter as well)

The He-162C and He-162D got no farther than a half-completed prototype that could be fitted with interchangeable forward-swept or back-swept wings, discovered by the Allies when they occupied the plant at Schwechat.

The He162 is very impressive because it was so close to production; strong forward swept wings should give much improved turning ability.









Kyle Scott's Wesserflug P.1003/1













Focke-Wulf Fw 500 single seat heavy fighter "Kugelblitz"





Gino Marcomini's von Braun VTO images





Manuel Reza's Blohm Voss BV P.197

The Blohm Voss BV P.197 features
2 jet engines buried in fuselage
Swept flying surfaces
Cockpit in nose
Option for radar
Tricycle undercarriage

Many of the features of modern jet fighters!


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jul 14, 2005)

Those pictures are simply awesome!


----------



## plan_D (Jul 14, 2005)

Those Germans were f*cking nuts!


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 14, 2005)

plan_D said:


> Those Germans were f*cking nuts!


  

Nice pics! I'm still waiting for a swept wing -262 attacking a B-35.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 14, 2005)

This is NUT...







But this is *NICE*

FW-183







Me-262HG.


----------



## GT (Jul 15, 2005)

Update.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jul 15, 2005)

That's cool!


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 15, 2005)

Very Cool!


----------



## plan_D (Jul 15, 2005)

Very f*cking nuts.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 15, 2005)

Sweet! 8)

I love German secret projects..theyre just breathtaking that people were coming up with ideas like these!


----------



## Smokey (Jul 15, 2005)

Tim Cameron's Focke-Wulf Fw 1000x3 B Bomber




http://www.milairpix.com/planes/vulcan.htm




Kyle Scott's Junkers
"Ground Attack" Project




http://www.photovault.com/Link/Military/AirForce/Aircraft/A-10Thunderbolt.html


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 15, 2005)

Interesting! 8)


----------



## plan_D (Jul 15, 2005)

Except the fact that Britain was developing Delta-Wing aircraft before the end of the war, so the Vulcan wouldn't have been influenced by German design...


----------



## Smokey (Jul 15, 2005)

Correct, I think the Vulcan was designed in 44 or 45.
The A10 was probably entirely indepedent as well, but you never know


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 15, 2005)

well, the germans had crazy designs for just about every plane going, chances are there's a german plane that looks like any modern plane, that doesn't automatically mean they copied the design..........


----------



## Smokey (Jul 15, 2005)

Of course, but in one case didn't some Northrop designers visit a Horten in a museum whilst designing the B2?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 15, 2005)

Smokey said:


> Of course, but in one case didn't some Northrop designers visit a Horten in a museum whilst designing the B2?



Possibly - I know they also consulted with Jack Northrop before he died.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 15, 2005)

More on Hortens designs.

FMA IA-48







FMA IA-37.
















Gotha P.060






http://www.luft46.com/gotha/gop60a.html


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 15, 2005)

Charlie, those black and whit photos look like a 1950s science fiction movie shot!

Great stuff though!


----------



## KraziKanuK (Jul 15, 2005)

plan_D said:


> Except the fact that Britain was developing Delta-Wing aircraft before the end of the war, so the Vulcan wouldn't have been influenced by German design...



The wing of the HP Victor was based on the work of Kosin and Lehmann who had done at least 3 versions of the crescent wing for the Ar 234.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 15, 2005)

the HP victor wasn't a delta wing.........


----------



## Smokey (Jul 15, 2005)

The FMA IA 37 does look lie a space rocket plane
Heres some more

http://www.luft46.com/luftart.html





Skip Talbot's Messerschmitt Me P.1110 "Ente" single seat fighter





Marek Rys's EMW A-6





http://davidszondy.com/future/Thunderbirds/thunderbird1.htm
http://davidszondy.com/future/Flight/safeplane.htm <--Weird, interesting site





An Arado TEW 16-43/13 barely escapes a mid-air collision with a Davis Manta* fighter, while climbing vertically.
*The Manta was an American project for a long-range high-performance fighter, powered by a simple 1150 hp Allison engine driving a contra rotating prop. The patented Davis airfoil used on the Manta's wings enabled it to have an endurance of ten hours, making it an ideal escort fighter for bomber formations. The Manta project was canceled in 1943 under mysterious circumstances...





Davis Manta Fighter
http://home.wanadoo.nl/r.j.o/skyraider/aircraft1.htm
The Davis Manta Fighter was an American fighter design by David R. Davis of the Manta Aircraft Corporation, LA. It was supposed to act as a long-range bomber escort. Its sophisticated aerodynamics should've given it incredible performance. The design didn't pass beyond a full-scale mockup, built in 1942.





Daniel Uhr's Messerschmitt Me P.1110/I

Another modern looking design


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 15, 2005)

Nice! Thunderbird 1 was actually based on the EE Lightning though


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 15, 2005)

I LOVE THE THUNDERBIRDS!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 15, 2005)

Me too I feel like watching an episode now!


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 15, 2005)

Uhgggg! I want to watch the Thunderbirds! Did you ever see the episode when TB-1 get's shot down?


----------



## KraziKanuK (Jul 15, 2005)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> the HP victor wasn't a delta wing.........



Really? Only pointing out that the Brits did use German designs.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 15, 2005)

Yeah! Ive seen pretty much _all_ the episodes!


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jul 15, 2005)

cheddar cheese said:


> Yeah! Ive seen pretty much _all_ the episodes!



I'd like to get my hands on all of them on DVD


----------



## GT (Jul 15, 2005)

Update.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 15, 2005)

I really like this 3 view of Ho-229.



FLYBOYJ said:


> Charlie, those black and whit photos look like a 1950s science fiction movie shot!
> 
> Great stuff though!



Actually those are extracted from here:

http://www.geocities.com/bacosistemas01/Imagenes_2.html

you can see at list 3 german designs in there, can you name it ...?


----------



## delcyros (Jul 16, 2005)

Nice infos here.
Just two things to add:
The Horton Parabola wasn´t the Horten VI but a 1938 derivate of the Ho-III program (see Horten, flying wing, 5th ed. (Graz 1993), page 66f.), which never flew.
The Horton VI was a high performance glider, based on the Ho-IV with even more aspect ratio, wingspan and gliding abilities (1:45 compared to 1:36 of the Ho-IV), making it the best glider of it´s time and the next decades, too.
(see Horten, as above, page 109.)
It should be noted also that Northrop got his contract for his first flying wing just a week after the Times published a picture of the Ho-III (DG-10-125) flying and the title: "German flying wing over Berlin".
There truly was kind of cross influence from both sides, which allowed support for these risky designs.


----------



## plan_D (Jul 16, 2005)

I don't know if you've ever even seen a Handley Page Victor, KK - but what designs was it supposed to represent? 

It also had nothing to do with the Vulcan - since Britain was the first to fly a Delta-Wing aircraft. I do remember the time when you claimed that the Me-163 was Delta-Wing...


----------



## delcyros (Jul 16, 2005)

I must disagree, Plan_D.
Lippisch designed Deltawing planes prior to outbreak of ww2.
Some of the planes (regard them as tech demonstratorFS 39/40) even flew prior to outbreak of ww2.


----------



## plan_D (Jul 16, 2005)

Prove it - a full functional delta-wing aircraft? Pictures, information, dates...?


----------



## KraziKanuK (Jul 16, 2005)

I remember you claiming that a Tiger could be taken out easily by the guns of an a/c.  

Actually, I have some very nice detailed plans of the Victor drawn by A.L. Bentley.  

Well I can't help it you have trouble reading pD. The *crescent wing* of the Victor came from German research. See Versuchsflugel I, II and IV for the Ar234.







No doubt you will claim the DH108 was a completely original British design and the Me163 had no influence dispite the Air Ministry specification E 18/45 was not issued til early 1946.


----------



## KraziKanuK (Jul 16, 2005)

Notice 'delta' in the name of this Lippisch design, DFS40 Delta V, that flew in 1931.

http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/lippisch.html

No doubt pD will claim this is not a delta.


----------



## plan_D (Jul 16, 2005)

And you never disproved it - your claim against it was that rounds bounce at the same angle as they bounce in. Plus - it's a well known fact a Hispano Mk.II with penertration of *one* round being 21 mm could penertrate 25 mm with several rounds. 

The DH108 wasn't influenced by the Me-163 - it was a British prototype to discover the behaviour of the swept wing. That would mean it had been influenced by German swept-wing data - not just the Me-163. 

I know it's hard for you, KK, but stop being a pussy. Provide your evidence in your post if you want everyone to see how well you can type requests into Google - don't try and make me waste my time. 

del, the only information I have on Lippisch Delta-Wing designs was of a glider he flew in the 1940s. The patent of a Delta-Wing was granted in 1867 to J.W Butler and E. Edwards! 

The Avro Type 707, to my knowledge, was the first powered Delta-Wing to fly. I'd be happy to read otherwise.


----------



## plan_D (Jul 16, 2005)

No I won't, KK, because unlike you I don't come on here just to show off what I can get from the internet. But still British invention, 1867...


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jul 16, 2005)

plan_D said:


> But still British invention, 1867...


Let's not go here, alright? 
I've a feeling that in your quest to slam KK to the pavement you'd end up causing some unintended collateral damage.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 16, 2005)

wait a minute KK, i've just noticed something, look at these two pictures, if you look very closely, both planes have wings, but the -109 flew first, what does this mean?? the people that designed the harrier obviously stole the idea of using wings from the germans!! 

or perhaos they didn't, maybe, just possibly, this is one of many cases where designers came to the same conclusion to the same problem...........


----------



## plan_D (Jul 16, 2005)

And I don't follow what you mean, NS - but okay.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jul 16, 2005)

Then by all means, carry on. Just remember...*I'm Canadian too!* :-"


----------



## delcyros (Jul 16, 2005)

Then we need to define what a Deltwing plane is, my friend.
If you only accept jet driven...okey.
But even then, the Avro plane is much influenced by the theoretical work of Lippisch and Steyer. Both wrote dozens of articles to the RLM in order to prove their conceptional way. Lippisch was way more successive, we know. After VE-day, the US shared some of the papers with the UK. At the time, the Avro-707 was in concept phase, the Deltawing was not only known by researchers because of the work of Lippisch but he also made subsequent wind tunnel tests of models, prooving, that his design may reduce the drag in trans and subsonic speeds compared to normal or even swept wing layout.
Keep in mind that his DM-1 glider directly led to the XF-92 Deltawing plane (first flight was on september 18th, 1948), which in your definition is the worlds first Delta.


----------



## KraziKanuK (Jul 16, 2005)

You asked for Lippisch designs. I gave you one and now you are having a snit fit. Show some maturity will you pD.

Keep living in your dream world of the 20mm 'killing' Tigers dispite you never showing any proof that they ever did. I know British pilots were such expert marksmen that they could put several 20mm in one spot at 300mph at naught feet.  

Showing off? Think what you want. But then you are the expert on everything, and you claim I am showing off?


----------



## plan_D (Jul 16, 2005)

How are we going to define "Delta" then? I merely state the Avro Type 707 as being the first Delta-Wing aircraft to fly - I suppose I should have rephrased it to jet powered aircraft. 

If we're going for first Delta Wing to fly - then it stems back to 1867 in Britain. I did forget about the XF-92 - so possibly that is the first jet Delta to fly. Lippisch certainly aided in the development of the Delta-Wing aircraft - there's no doubt about that but he didn't create the concept. Britain (and quite possibly America) had been toying with the idea for a long time but the speeds were just too low for a stable platform. 

I wasn't going to insult Canada - NS - well, not right now anyway.  I save that just for you.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jul 16, 2005)

Oh, I'm sorry PD. I just assumed...I mean...Canada became a country in 1867, and KK is Canadian, and you were having an argument with him...I...I'll go hang my head and cry now...sorry.  

Carry on folks, nothing to see here. Good discussion everyone.


----------



## plan_D (Jul 16, 2005)

Don't lie, NS, Canada isn't a country. Not a real one anyway.   

Oh, you got me started!


And the first patent of the Delta Wing was 1867 - it was mere coincidence.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jul 16, 2005)

Too much South Park, eh? I like that show too.


----------



## plan_D (Jul 16, 2005)

There was a Canadian (from Vancouver) at my school - he'd never seen it. We forced him to watch it and he couldn't stop laughing, especially at Terrance and Phillip!


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jul 16, 2005)

What's not to love about those two? They embody the Canadian spirit! Flappy heads and all!


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 16, 2005)

Some particular looking aircraft and his comparations with others, not copies but some inspiration in similar designs.

Gloster Javelin and





… FMA IA-37






Horten Amerika Bomber and..






B-2 Spirit.







EMW A-6 and…






X-15






Focke-Wulf Twin-Engine Jet Fighter Projekt (Fw 250) …and






Super Mystere B2






And we can go on…and on.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 17, 2005)

look, as i've said, the germans had thousands of designs that were just that designs, there's proberly a german design that looks similar to every modern plane! that doesn't mean nessisarily that the design was copied..........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 17, 2005)

You are correct, they were not copied but a lot of post war designs (most post war designs through 1960) were influenced by German WW2 designs.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 17, 2005)

Indeed. The Germans were way ahead of their time coming up with designs like those.


----------



## plan_D (Jul 17, 2005)

There's certainly no doubt about that. They were far ahead in advance technology in aeronautical engineering and rocket technology.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 17, 2005)

i never said they were not and i'm not deneying there may have been some influence, but to claim that we copied their designs as he is doing is stupid.......


----------



## plan_D (Jul 17, 2005)

I know...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 17, 2005)

and most of the designs he's talking about were scarcely more that doodles, you cannot copy the design of a plane if it's just a doodle........


----------



## Smokey (Jul 17, 2005)

Often designs have many influences

For example;


> The Harrier is often cited as an example of British ingenuity and indeed this amazing aircraft is the product of much dedicated work by British Aerospace (and the earlier Hawker Siddeley company) along with Rolls-Royce. However the early Harrier development was largely paid for by the U.S. taxpayer via the Mutual Weapons Development Program (MWDP) and the starting point for the design of the Harrier's Pegasus engine was the work of Michel Wibault, a French engineer.


http://freespace.virgin.net/john.dell/Harrier/Harrier.html
http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avav81.html



> Frenchman Michel Wibault developed the breakthrough idea of using swiveling exhaust nozzles to vector the jet thrust, which eliminated the need for multiple engines.


http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/hawker_kestrel.htm


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 17, 2005)

of course they have influences, i never said they didn't..........


----------



## red admiral (Jul 17, 2005)

The rules of aerodynamics and physics remain the same regardless. Whittle patented the jet engine in 1928 ergo everyone else in the world must have copied him. People have to come to a similar solution to problems else they don't work. Why does Concorde look like the Tupolev 144? Because if it looked like a giant shoe it wouldn't fly. Why do the Mustang, MB5 and CAC Kangaroo look so similar? Because it works.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 17, 2005)

that's a very good way of putting it..........


----------



## Smokey (Jul 17, 2005)

Yep, this is obvious and has been observed on numerous occasions. there's even a saying about it I believe.


----------



## KraziKanuK (Jul 17, 2005)

Well *lanc*, one design that was not a _doodle_ was the Fw190A that had great influence on the Hawker Tempest II. The cowling/engine installation was examined by the Brits and adopted for the Tempest II. There is Brit documentation out there but your junior school library would not have it.

I can't help it you have trouble understanding your mother language. To refresh your memory, this is what I said on the Victor, 

"The wing of the HP Victor was *based on the work* of Kosin and Lehmann who had done at least 3 versions of the crescent wing for the Ar 234."

"The crescent wing of the Victor came from German research. See Versuchsflugel I, II and IV for the Ar234." 

Do you see _copy/copied_ anywhere?


----------



## plan_D (Jul 17, 2005)

> However the early Harrier development was largely paid for by the U.S. taxpayer via the Mutual Weapons Development Program (MWDP)



What in gods name that has to do with design of the aircraft - I'll never know. It's not like the U.S didn't get any Harriers or anything. The key term of "Mutual Weapons Development Program" being *mutual* of course - since it wasn't a one way street.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 17, 2005)

Another of the many projected high altitude interceptors, the *Blohm Voss P.205:*







Blohm Voss had been working on the Bv P205, this had a different layout to the Bv 155B originally intended to have the 4,000 hp 24-cylinder, water-cooled, Argus As 413. Due to the expected un-availability of this engine the Bv P205 in its final form it was to be powered by the DB 603U. The BV P205 eliminated the two large wing-mounted radiators, shortened the wing span and reduced the landing gear wheel track. An annular radiator was incorporated in the nose, while two moderately large radiator air scoops were positioned on either side of the fuselage, near the cockpit. Clearly Blohm Voss thought that the Bv P205 had potential, with reducing the number of radiators and changing the engine cooling system could save weight reduce drag.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 18, 2005)

Thankyou for getting us back on topic.


----------



## Smokey (Jul 21, 2005)

german heavy fighter Focke-Wulf Fw187 (pre-WW2)

http://mitglied.lycos.de/lastdingo/

It seems Goering's bias towards Messerschmitt led to a massive reduction in the Luftwaffe's ability, particularly over long range; the Fw187 had a range of 3000 miles
Also;
1) according to one pilot its turning circle was similar to the me109 and its roll rate almost as good as the me109

2) it climb rate was superior

3) and it had better armament


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 22, 2005)

Favoritism played a big part in who got what contracts and it led to a large amount of aircraft that could have been and that did hurt the Luftwaffes capability.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 22, 2005)

If the Fw-187 got the contract instead of the Me-110, then who knows what the BoB would have been like....


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 22, 2005)

Because of mistakes made by the Germans nothing would have changed.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 22, 2005)

True.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 22, 2005)

Goering would have the Luftwaffe terror bomb London either way and that was just one major mistake among lots of them.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 22, 2005)

Smokey said:


> german heavy fighter Focke-Wulf Fw187 (pre-WW2)
> 
> http://mitglied.lycos.de/lastdingo/
> 
> ...




It was a very fine fighter indeed.
Even with the less powerful Jumos it performed very well.

At list 2 of the 0-series went to Norway in support to the bf-110s and one was equipped experimentally with the MK-101 mm canon.






An history about this plane is that one of them was flown briefly by a Focke-Wulf engineer, and he manage to shoot down some russian planes. ...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 25, 2005)

I think the aircraft should have replaced the Bf-110 anyhow.


----------



## Smokey (Jul 25, 2005)

I thought that this was particularly interesting;



> the program continued, and Focke-Wulf got two 1.000PS DB 600 engines for the sixth prototype (Fw 187V6), which reached a speed of 636km/h *(60-120km/h more than the fighters of the Battle of Britain reached in 1940 with 1050 to 1330PS engines).*


http://mitglied.lycos.de/lastdingo/






Add that to the better climb rate and the allegedly me109-equalling turning circle, plus (allegedly) a roll rate almost as good as the me109, and two 20mm MG FF, two 7,92mm MG 17

Goering and Hitler would still have fubar'ed the BoB, but it would have been alot more nasty


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 25, 2005)

Definately.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 25, 2005)

She is a pretty looking aircraft also.


----------



## vanir (Jul 25, 2005)

I saw this aircraft in wikipedia, not my favorite source for facts but interesting nevertheless:

"Despite an RLM requirement that the Fw 187 use Junkers Jumo 210 engines instead of the planned BMW 600, the performance of the Fw 187 was generally superior to that of the Bf 110. In fact, it was 50 mph (80 km/h) faster than the contemporary Messerschmitt Bf 109B, despite having twice the range, more than twice the weight, and using two of the 109's engines. The Fw 187's climb and dive rates were also on par if not superior to the nimble single-seater. German authorities, however, relied heavily on the Messerschmitt products, and the Fw 187 never entered service. With the Fw 187 they could have had a successful long-range fighter in the Battle of Britain, which would have made an impact on the relative losses of the clashing air forces."


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 28, 2005)

I agree wikipedia is not my favorite source for facts but it is usually a quick source when you are trying to get something real fast. That is why I use it a lot here when I am online posting.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Sep 6, 2005)

I try to post this in "the best BF-109 variant" but is locked by some unknown reason......  Dam Mod ¡¡¡

Aniway a nice cutaway drawing of a G-14.

http://x4.putfile.com/9/24509570161.jpg


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 7, 2005)

Just start up another Bf-109 thread.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 16, 2006)

The luft 46 website had introduce some nice art about the Messerschmitt Projekt P.1091. "Extremer Höhenjäger" ( extreme altitude fighter)teorically this plane would be motorized by a 1650 hp DB-603U with a large turbocharger, teorical ceiling 17.000 metres, armament 2 x 30 mm.


----------



## book1182 (Jan 16, 2006)

The FW-187 and the He-100 or even the He-112 would have been a good plane to continue with as side developments just in case the Me-109 and the Me-110 failed. Why didn't Germany have the sight to develop more than one aircraft at a time?


----------



## 102first_hussars (Jan 16, 2006)

Nice pic Charley, the planes are a bit ugly though, with such a large wingspan I would imagine its roll rate would be horrible.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 17, 2006)

book1182 said:


> The FW-187 and the He-100 or even the He-112 would have been a good plane to continue with as side developments just in case the Me-109 and the Me-110 failed. Why didn't Germany have the sight to develop more than one aircraft at a time?



They did. Many companies worked on the a project under the same guidance and request. When the Bf-109 was under development Focke Wulf, Heinkel, Arado, and Junkers were working on designs for the fighter request. The Bf-109 just happened to win.

If you war talking about develop more than one fighter at a time they did: Bf-109, Fw-190, Ta-152. Just because an aircraft first flew in 1944 does not mean the project begin in 1944. Most projects start about 1 to 2 years before the first flight date. 

The Bf-109 and Fw-190 were not the only fighter projects. The Germans had litterally 100s of projects going on at a time. Very few cut it though.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 17, 2006)

and towards the end of the war even i could design more pheasable planes than some of them (now if only i could spell it  ) don't get me wrong i knew germany had some amazing designers but you have to admit some of their designs wouldn't be pheasable........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 17, 2006)

Like French Bombers....

Somehow with you taste and your thought process I doubt it.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 17, 2006)

don't make me have to draw up plans for a super lanc


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 17, 2006)

However, the people designing the planes werent stupid and they would have bothered desiging them if they didnt think they would work...

Nice CGI up there, they look menacing...kinda like a large bird of prey...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 17, 2006)

Lacn would design a farm tractor with wings and call it a super lanc!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 17, 2006)

no, my super lanc can carry two grandslam internally at a cruising speed of 380mph with a top speed of 430mph, standard range with 44,000lb payload, 5,000 miles


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 17, 2006)

I was thinking of designing a super fighter, but then just realised its the Fiat G.56. Hey, what can you do


----------



## 102first_hussars (Jan 17, 2006)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Lacn would design a farm tractor with wings and call it a super lanc!



Isnt that how the Tank was born? aside from the wings.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 20, 2006)

Not sure on that, but Lanc could not design a bike if he wanted to!

Im kidding Lanc, dont get your panties in a bunch!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 21, 2006)




----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 22, 2006)

You did didn't you?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 22, 2006)

Messerschmitt 262 HG-3, proyected speed 1050 km/h, armament 4 x MG-213.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 22, 2006)

As with the HG-3 there I think the Me-262 had a lot of potential to be improved and developed further. If she ad recieved better engines alone that would have been a good upgrade that would have made even more superior.


----------



## plan_D (Jan 22, 2006)

_"Isnt that how the Tank was born? aside from the wings."_

The tank was created because of the need to crush enemy barbed wire, and a continual track mechanism was found most appropriate. The admiralty saw the Holt tractor as a reasonable test-bed for the idea. But it was only minor in the actual development of the tank - it was just an image for the continual track system. 






The Holt Tractor was actually used as an artillery tug during World War I. But as I said, it merely showed the caterpillar track system off.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 22, 2006)

Good info and good pic. 

Off topic but I find it really interesting how the countries that invented the tank, kind of forgot about its advantages and were sort of left behind by German designers. Dont take me wrong, the Brits had some decent designs at the start of WW2 but not many and the French really got left behind. The Germans saw the usefullness of them and took the advantages of them to heart.


----------



## 102first_hussars (Jan 22, 2006)

cheddar cheese said:


> I was thinking of designing a super fighter, but then just realised its the Fiat G.56. Hey, what can you do



What can you do? see how well it stands against an F-15


----------



## Smokey (Jan 23, 2006)

Interesting info on a tank design in Imperial Russia in 191

http://www.activeboard.com/forum.sp...action=viewTopic&commentID=3749254&topicPage=























> After a month of investigation the cause of track‑shedding was detected and overcome by the installation of cylinders with sprockets in place of those which were formerly smooth. On 20 June 1915, Vezdekhod was once more sent for trials, this time in the presence of an official committee. A series of trenches, pot‑holes, and other obstacles were laid out in the Regimental Barracks Square, across which Vezdekhod performed well. The vehicle also gave a display of turns, easily making rapid manoeuvres in a figure‑eight pattern, and very quickly gathering speed. The results of the test commission were outlined in Report No. 4563:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The curse of non - expert officials!

Other early designs:













> Ped´rail`: A device intended to replace the wheel of a self-propelled vehicle for use on rough roads and to approximate to the smoothness in running of a wheel on a metal track. The tread consists of a number of rubber shod feet which are connected by ball-and-socket joints to the ends of sliding spokes. Each spoke has attached to it a small roller which in its turn runs under a short pivoted rail controlled by a powerful set of springs. This arrangement permits the feet to accomodate themselves to obstacles even such as steps or stairs. The pedrail was invented by one B. J. Diplock of London, Eng.



http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Pedrail

HG Wells predicted the use of pedrail land ships in 1903 in his THE LAND IRONCLADS

http://www.geocities.com/armorhistory/landironclads.htm

Another site

http://www.wwiivehicles.com/ussr/


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 23, 2006)

And this is another interpretation of the HG-3 with the cockpit in the aft location, a bit ugly for my taste.













http://www.luft46.com/gmart/gm262.html


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 23, 2006)

Yes I dont like it that way. Almost looks like a Lipisch design.


----------



## Gnomey (Jan 23, 2006)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Yes I dont like it that way. Almost looks like a Lipisch design.


Agreed, the visibility wouldn't have been to good on landing either. I prefer the other design because it looks better and in my opinion you would have better all round visibility.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 23, 2006)

A lot of the luft '46 planes had their cockpits far back - why? What advantages would they offer?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 24, 2006)

Not sure, I know that Lippisch made a lot of his designs with the cockpit in the aft of the fuselage.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 25, 2006)

Maybe it was a weight distribution thing.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 26, 2006)

Some Italian "Luft46" kind of fighter projekts.

http://digilander.libero.it/lealidellaregia/re2005bifuso.htm

http://digilander.libero.it/lealidellaregia/re2005r.htm

http://digilander.libero.it/lealidellaregia/p119.htm


----------



## KraziKanuK (Jan 26, 2006)

cheddar cheese said:


> A lot of the luft '46 planes had their cockpits far back - why? What advantages would they offer?


Aerodynamics, blends nicely into the fin??? Some racers had the same/simular design, ie the GeeBee.

Btw, the Radinger/Schick 262 book has the canopy in the normal position on the HG III, but might be mislabeled. Nice 3 view drawing


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 26, 2006)

CharlesBronson said:


> Some Italian "Luft46" kind of fighter projekts.
> 
> http://digilander.libero.it/lealidellaregia/re2005bifuso.htm
> 
> ...



Except for them its Regia '44


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 26, 2006)

Well....yes , but the spirit is the same.









> The Reggiane RE 2006 should have been an "exceptional" aeroplane. A fighter built on the powerful Daimler Benz DB 603 12 cylinder engine, capable of developing a power of 1750 hp. It was designed in 1943, removed in time to escape the bombardment on the Reggiane aircraft factory in Reggio Emilia and transferred to a gymnasium in Correggio, where a group of technicians remained incognito. They continued with the construction of the prototype also managing to prevent its destruction at the hands of the partisans


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 27, 2006)

Please refrain from posting any further pics/info about the Re.2006...Gotta clean up this filthy mess on the keyboard and my trousers now...


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 27, 2006)

My apologies, I dont have idea that you was so sensitive  .


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 28, 2006)

cheddar cheese said:


> Please refrain from posting any further pics/info about the Re.2006...Gotta clean up this filthy mess on the keyboard and my trousers now...



Oh brother, leave it to CC!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jan 28, 2006)

Oh for gods sake CB, what do I tell my parents now?!


----------



## Dogwalker (Jan 28, 2006)

CharlesBronson said:


> Some Italian "Luft46" kind of fighter projekts.
> 
> http://digilander.libero.it/lealidellaregia/re2005bifuso.htm
> 
> ...



Talking about twin-fuselage...





http://www.geocities.com/asymmetrics/cors.htm

DogW


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 29, 2006)

That looks like some of Blohm and Voss designs.


----------



## Dogwalker (Jan 29, 2006)

It was just a possibility, the Corsaro was never developed further than drawings.
However, the wings, apart the central section, were the same of Re-2005, and even the fuselage was very similar (Caproni and Reggiane had very close relactions), so, it's developement could have been rapid.

DogW


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 29, 2006)

Interesting though. Probably never really had time to do so though.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 29, 2006)

cheddar cheese said:


> Oh for gods sake CB, what do I tell my parents now?!



Tell them that you going to need some serius medical treatment.  



> Talking about twin-fuselage...



Interesting Dogwalker, I see the project of the Corsaro before but in the full twin boom configuration.






Caproni Bergamaschi’s CA 380 Corsaro (Corsair) positioned the pilot in the starboard fuselage boom. Two Daimler Benz DB 603s of 1,750 HP were used to give a projected speed of 400 MPH at 25,525 feet, a range of 1,500 miles and a ceiling of 34,450 feet. Loaded weight was 16,383 lbs. much (lighter than the P-82’s 25,000 pounds). A span of 52.5 feet and a length of 39.0 feet was also similar to that of the P-82. Armament planned was four 20 mms in a fairing under the center wing section with two 12.7 mm SAFAT MGs in the outer wing panels. 

The CA 380 was not very unusual considering the SM 92 that had already flown. It might have proved a tough customer in combat.


----------



## Dogwalker (Jan 29, 2006)

It seems that, at a moment, they think that a second fuselage was not so useful.

DogW


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 4, 2006)

Looks like the twin 109 concept.


----------



## Twitch (Feb 4, 2006)

And we have the very P-38ish SM.91...








Designed in 1941, it had a crew of 2. A pair of 1,475HP DB 605A-1s powered it to 363MPH at 22,960 feet. It could climb to 19,680 feet in 8.5 minites and had a ceiling of 36,090 feet. Range was 994 miles on internal fuel but a 218 gallon drop tank could extend that. 









The sister ship in the S.M.92 was a bit different. There was no fuselage nacelle as the familiar P-38 has. The pilot and gunner sat asymmetrically in the port fuselage. Caproni had a similar design called the Ca 380 with the crew in the starboard one. 

Two DB 605A-1s of 1,495 HP each nestled in the fuselages. Performance was not bad with a 382 MPH maximum speed seen at 24,935 feet and a 2,800 FPM climb rate, which led to a ceiling of 39,370 feet. The wingspan measured 60.9 feet and proposed armament was heavy with two 20 mm MG 151s in the center wing while another fired through the starboard airscrew hub each with 300 rounds; four 12.7 mm Breda SAFAT MGs below the engines (2 per side) with 350 RPG and finally a barbette midway across the horizontal tail plane with another that was remote controlled by the rear gunner! 

Italy's early demise in the war ended further development.



4- 220-lb or 353-lb bombs or a single 1100-lb bomb could be carried. As with most Italian fighters armament wa heavy. 3- 20mm Mg 151 cannon with 300 RPG mounted in the central nacelle with 2 more carrying 300 RPG in the wing roots. 

Span was 64.6 feet and lebngth was 43.5 feet.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 5, 2006)

Interesing aircraft, looks like a cross between a P-38 and Bf-110.


----------



## Twitch (Feb 5, 2006)

I haven't read every post in this thread but in place of the single-engined 109/190 I think only the Heinkel He 100 could have carried out the job that they did. This is pretending that there was no Reichsluftfahrtministerium prejudice against Ernst Heinkel and favoritism to Willy Messerschmitt.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 7, 2006)

The He-100 would be the best interceptor of all the time... if they allowed to continue his development , for example in April of 1942 there was available the junker Jumo 213A of 1700 hp, with this engine the little He-100 would be a real rocket, also it need to introduce some modifications like reinforced landing gear, and heavier armament (Mauser cannons, 13 mm Mgs), all of that very plausible to do.






------------

A hipotetical combat bettween the Macchi Mc-205 Bifusoliera and a P-82A


----------



## Twitch (Feb 7, 2006)

Yeah, and in late 1944 they were working on the P.1076 which was an He 100 on steroids that owed is basis to the original fighter. Gotta look for my stats on that one and post....


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 7, 2006)

We posted about th 1076 already in the 4th page of this topic , I posted this and Adler posted aditional information also ( We are so damn good  )



CharlesBronson said:


> The last evolution of the heinkel He-100/113, was this, the Heinkel P.1076.
> 
> Equipped with 3x 30mm, and like Arado above powered by the powerful Mercedes DB-603G of 1900 hp, coupled with 3 blade double counterrotating propellers.
> 
> ...


----------



## Twitch (Feb 7, 2006)

Whoaa, I missed that earlier. But there you are. It's just the prejudice against Ernst Heinkel and in favor of Willy Messerschmitt by certain member of the Air Ministry was so strong they lost what could have been an excellen fighter.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 8, 2006)

Well, honestly I think that the massive 1 ton, 44 liter DB-603 is too much for the He-100.








The fine 36 valve, 35 liter, and 700 kg Jumo 213E would be better suitted and it offered the same amount of power of the DB-603A.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 9, 2006)




----------



## Soren (Feb 9, 2006)

According to my sources the DB-603 weighed 910kg, while the Jumo 213E weighed 920kg. An even better engine than these two would have been the DB-605 which only weighed in at 753kg and could produce 2,000 HP, thats a power to weight ratio of 2.65hp/kg !  

*DB-605*


----------



## KraziKanuK (Feb 9, 2006)

It depends on whether that is 'dry' or 'wet' weight.

The DB605 weight varied from 700kg to 770kg, depending on the model.
http://mitglied.lycos.de/luftwaffe1/aircraft/lw/DB605_varianten.pdf

A spec sheet for the DB603A-F gives a weight of 825kg +3%. Another spec sheet for the DB603E gives a weight of 910kg +3% and for the DB603F 990kg +3% .

Can someone translate > vergleichsgewicht

In Hermann's 152 book:
213A - 1805kg
213E - 1909kg
603C - 1832kg

I think this means installed weight. German text is: triebwerk (vergroB. behalter) {sorry accents left off}


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 9, 2006)

1 Metric ton = 1000 kg.

1000-910= 90 kg, the hell with the difference.  

I going to check with my sources for the Jumo I honestly think that is lighter.



> even better engine than these two would have been the DB-605 which only weighed in at 753kg and could produce 2,000 HP, thats a power to weight ratio of 2.65hp/kg



Yes the He-100 was designed "around" the Daimler Benz engine, but the Messerschmitt demand for the DB-601, 601E and 605A,B,C made it impracticable.


----------



## Henk (Feb 9, 2006)

Hi my name is Henk.

I personaly love the work of the Horten's and the showed that the flying wings are a great thing to use as a combat aircraft.

Now the Horten 229 is sitting in the NASM and plans to restore it will take seven years and meanwile it is just sitting there. It is the only one left of its tipe in the world.

The pictures you have posted is great and I will post pictures of the Horten 229 Vf1, V2 and V3 prototypes that I have.

Henk


----------



## Gnomey (Feb 10, 2006)

Welcome to the forum Henk.


----------



## evangilder (Feb 10, 2006)

Welcome aboard, Henk.


----------



## Twitch (Feb 10, 2006)

Henk the 229, yeah, hehehe! I'm looking forward to seeing it restored.

Charles Bronson- The Me 209 is perhaps a viable layout for a decent fighter evolved from the 109. As long as the landing gear is wide stance too! The more I look at it the more logical it looks.


----------



## Henk (Feb 10, 2006)

Thanks guys.

Twitch I had to start somewhere  

KraziKanuK siad that the DB605 weight varied from 700kg to 770kg, depending on the model and the A spec sheet for the DB603A-F gives a weight of 825kg +3%. Another spec sheet for the DB603E gives a weight of 910kg +3% and for the DB603F 990kg +3% . 

The DB 605 weight from 756kg and up and the part about the DB 603 is tru. This is according to Jane's fighting aircraft of WW2. 

Henk


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 10, 2006)

The one shown here is the Me209H V1. It 
was powered by a 2,000 horsepower DB627 engined. It was 
rated for 460mph at altitude. It was delayed by allied bombing 
and was cancelled when complete in 1944.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Henk (Feb 10, 2006)

It looks very much like the Me-109 just with a longer nose. Was it better than the ME-109? Do have any pictures of a prototype.

Henk


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 10, 2006)

There is a pic in this topic, there is no much photo material of this particular plane. This is the V-5 ( A-1) version.


----------



## Henk (Feb 10, 2006)

The nose looks quite like the FW-190 and the Ta-152 fighter. I would profer the Ta-152 and the FW-190 any day or even the Dornier 335.

Now why did it not reach producktion? All that Jane's say is that it never reached production and was not build in grate quantity. I think it was a waste to go on with prop aircraft when you have the tchnology to build fast jet aircraft. 

Henk


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 10, 2006)

It was in the competition for a high altitude Fighter that began in Mid-1942 but the continuos delay of the Messerschmitt work because the large amount of work done by this factory cause that the Me-209 were relegated to low pririty.

In 1943 the RLM want a "Schnellosung" or quick solution heavy altitude fighter , the result: the Me-209H and A-1 but both were defeated by the Fw-190D-9 and eventually the Ta-152.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 10, 2006)

I would have liked to have seen how the Bf-209 and the Bf-309 would have turned out. The Bf-209 was turned down because of lackluster performance correct?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 10, 2006)

The performance for "normal" ( not especialized Höhenjager) fighter wanst that bad, 715 km/h max speed and 1040 m/min initial climb. But the lack of DB-603LA ( high altitude version of the heavy Benz engine) the divertion of technics crew to the completely useless P.1091 and Me-155 proyects, and the fact that the Fw-190D was available to be introduced early.

Anyway with the normal 1750 hp DB-603A-1 or the 1900 hp DB-603G wich was used In the Messers Me-410s the 209A-1 could be natural the replacement for the 109, Fast as the K series but with better climbing performance , better turning performance at high altitude and heavier canon and MG armament.

But just think how much designs were making and manufacturing Willy Messerschmitt in that time (mid -1943):

Me-109G
Me-209
Me-262 prototipes
Me-264 Prototipe.
Me-309 prototipes
Me-110G
Me-210
Me-410
Proyect Me-310
Proyect Me-155A and B.
Proyect P.1091
Me-163 prototipes
Me-263 prototipes
Me-328 proyect........quiet a lot work to be done...isnt


----------



## Twitch (Feb 12, 2006)

And production actually increased despite the American heavy bombers in daytime after the facilities were dispersed.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 15, 2006)

The FW-Ta-153:






This was the answer of Focke-wulf to the RLM request for high speed Begleitjäger( escort fighter) in competition with the Me-209A-1.

This aircraft ( FW-190V-17U1) had a DB-603A of 1750hp, a max speed of 680 km/h and 1040 m/min initial climb.
The range was 750 km. Neither this or the Me-209 fullfilled the RLM requeriments but were used as a base designs for high altitude interceptors.


----------



## Henk (Feb 15, 2006)

Fw loved to use BMW engines on their fighters even with the radical BMW engine used in the Fw-190 and Ta-152? 

Correct me if I am wrong.

Henk


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 16, 2006)

I have to correct you because you are wrong, the series D use a *Junkers* Jumo engine, The Ta-152C a *Daimler-Benz DB-603*, the Ta-152H a *Junker Jumo* and the Ta-153 should use the DB engine as well.


----------



## KraziKanuK (Feb 16, 2006)

Charles, your photo is of the Fw190V32/U1. This was powered by a DB engine as the air intake is on the port side. The Jumos had the air intake on the starboard side. The V17 was powered by a Jumo 213.

The D-14 and D-15 were to use the DB engine.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 16, 2006)

Yes, I was reading the "Monogram close up Ta-152" and I ve noticed that, thanks for the correction.


----------



## Twitch (Feb 17, 2006)

I was toying with the idea of how the He 100 or the Me 209 would look/function with a BMW radial. Hmmm?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 18, 2006)

In the Heinkel He-100...I dont think so, it was a very sensitive airplane regarding the powerplant because it was made "around" the lineal Mercedes.

In the 209 maybe, actually there was a couple of prototipes of the BF-109 with radial engines, one with the BMW 801C and the other with an american made pratt whitney R-1830. They worked well but those aircraft were slower than the normal v-12 variants.

The most powerful german radial was the BMW 802 18-cylinder, twin-row radial engine with a three-speed, single stage supercharger. This engine had a 2600 HP take-off rating, and could deliver 1600 HP at an altitude of 12000 m (39000')...but this engine only was made in a few numbers.












Check this link.

http://www.luft46.com/fw/fwbmw802.html


----------



## Henk (Feb 18, 2006)

CharlesBronson you are correct about the engines used in the Fw-190 D and Ta-52 series. Thank you for correcting me.

Nice info CharlesBronson.

Henk


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 19, 2006)

Focke Wulf Flitzer, single engine alternative to the Me-262, He-162.


----------



## Twitch (Feb 19, 2006)

That mixed powerplant must have kicked ass!

PROJECT P.6
This plane had an all-together different role as a bomber interceptor. It was dubbed Flitzer (Streaker or Madcap have been translated, assigned names but in German it literally means Jeep- military). By late 1944 it was in the wooden mock-up stage with a chance of seeing production. The De Havilland Vampire in development soon thereafter in Britain is a near clone but the twin-engine DH 110 is even closer. A look at the later SAAB 21 tells the same story of copy of form. A hand-launched glider model also is seen in contemporary photos so we know the form was sound.

The Flitzer was to have two HeS 011s with 2,866 lbs. thrust each in the rear fuselage with the twin-boom tail offering a high-mount horizontal stabilizer connecting them. A Walter HWK 509A bi-fuel rocket with 2,646 lbs. thrust was to boost combat and climb speed.

The pilot sat in the same general fuselage position as the above-mentioned planes ahead of the 32-degree swept leading edge of the wing, which had a straight trailing edge. Span was 26.1 feet with length at 32.1 feet. A 516 MPH maximum projected speed seems much too modest. But climb was to be its strength with 36,091 feet achieved from a standing start in 1.9 minutes! Range was thought to be about 800 miles but other data is unknown. A pair of Mk 108s in the lower nose and two 20 mm MG 151s in the wings would have armed the ship. It suffered loss of production to the Ta 183.

A similar shape had no project designation and used a BMW 803 with 3,950 HP pushing contra-rotating props. Armament was the same but the span measured 42.3 feet with a length of 45.25 feet. Weights we not projected.

The layout was validated in its contemporaries. The mixed power would have made it a super fighter.


----------



## Henk (Feb 20, 2006)

Great info and pictures.

I never knew they made such a aircraft.

Henk


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 21, 2006)

The internal layout of the Me 209V5 (A-1)

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Henk (Feb 21, 2006)

Great drawing.

Henk


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Feb 27, 2006)

nice drawing

i would think that the He100 would be better, they have to do something about the cooler sooner or later

the 209 and 309 were cancelled because they were only very slightly better than the 109, were obviously more expensive and harder to mas-produce


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 28, 2006)

Two alternatives to the FW Ta-152H.

*Ta-152A-1*, 11 meters wingspan, Jumo 213, cancelled basically because did not improved the Fw-190D desing.







*Ta-152B-4* design for an armoured *Slatchflugzeug* ground attacker with a very, very heavy gun armament, 4 x Mg-151/20 plus 2 x 30mm MK-108 and a centerline MK-103 for the antiarmour role.  






That would make the Ta-152B the most gunned single engine aircraft of the WW2.


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Mar 2, 2006)

omfg first time ive seen those stuff, have any info on Fw190B/C?


----------



## KraziKanuK (Mar 2, 2006)

loomaluftwaffe said:


> omfg first time ive seen those stuff, have any info on Fw190B/C?


Get the Dietmar Hermann book on the 'long nose'. ISBN 0-7643-1876-4

Lots of info in it.

He also has a book on the Ta152.


----------



## GregP (Mar 2, 2006)

Hey, the Canadians fly jets! Remember the CF-100? Or the Arrow? They now fly Hornets and their Hornets are as good as any Hornets.


----------



## Twitch (Mar 2, 2006)

Hey GreggyP.....are ya following me?


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Mar 3, 2006)

GregP said:


> Hey, the Canadians fly jets! Remember the CF-100? Or the Arrow? They now fly Hornets and their Hornets are as good as any Hornets.



dude wrong thread


----------



## CharlesBronson (Mar 4, 2006)

GregP said:


> Hey, the Canadians fly jets! Remember the CF-100? Or the Arrow? They now fly Hornets and their Hornets are as good as any Hornets.



 ......no more snorting before posting please


----------



## CharlesBronson (Mar 5, 2006)

The high altitude Me-155B and his engine.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Mar 17, 2006)

A interesting FW desing wich used the Jumo 222 24 cilinder engine.







The 2000 hp Jumo 222 was basically 3 geared V-8 engines in a radial layout.


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Mar 17, 2006)

an X engine which is mistaken for a radial when actually more of an inline...


----------



## Henk (Mar 18, 2006)

Yes, I have it also as an inline engine in my Janes fighting aircraft of WW2. 

Henk


----------



## Twitch (Mar 18, 2006)

Like the W-12 auto engine- 3 banks of 4 cylinders. The key to radial/inline is air or liquid-cooled and this baby is liquid-cooled. Here we have 6 banks of 4 cylinders. 8)


----------



## CharlesBronson (Mar 19, 2006)

Well like I said 3 "LINEAL" V-8 engines geared to a single central shaft.


----------



## KraziKanuK (Mar 20, 2006)

Twitch said:


> Like the W-12 auto engine- 3 banks of 4 cylinders. The key to radial/inline is air or liquid-cooled and this baby is liquid-cooled. Here we have 6 banks of 4 cylinders. 8)


If you are saying inlines are liquid cooled and radials are air cooled, not neccessarily true. The Ranger was a V inline that was air cooled. The Hs129 used an air cooled inline engine, the inverted V12 Argus. The Isotta-Franschini Delta RC35 was an air cooled inverted V12. Napier and RR made inline air cooled engines.


----------



## Twitch (Mar 20, 2006)

Sure there are air-cooled inlines but no liquid-cooled radials. I mean when one speaks of a radial it is given that it is air-cooled. And for the most part inline= liquid cooled during combat operational engines in WW2. Is curious to ponder why more development wasn't put to air-cooled inliners though.


----------



## KraziKanuK (Mar 20, 2006)

The XR-7755 was a liquid cooled radial.


----------



## Twitch (Mar 22, 2006)

Yeah but how common was a liquid cooled radial in the context of everyday dialogue of WW2? If someone in 1943 said "the new fighter design calls for an 18-cyinder radial," and you replied "liquid cooled or air cooled?" they'd look at you as if you were a dummy. RELATIVE to the times of WW2 inline meant liquid-cooled and radial meant air-cooled.

What I'm curious about is why the lack of development in air-cooled inliners? I believe there is a point where you reach diminishing returns on HP vs ability to efficiently function and dissapate heat with weight factored in. I wish I knew the formula.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 21, 2006)

Probably because the later cilinders close to the pilot receive a poor fresh air flow, aniway there was some desings in the 200-500 hp level like the Argus V-12 used in the FW-189 FW-56, Fi-156,etc.







Another "alternative" that wanst, the He-112B.

In Luftwaffe service in 1938.( briefly by the way)


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 22, 2006)

Got that same engined Ta-152 in a book of mine at home. Interesting version of the 152.

Got a question everyone.

Did any of the prototype Me-309s see any combat? I ask this because (you have to excuse me because I dont remember ths source) I saw on a website a log of claims from a 8th AF bomber squadron and one claims to have damaged a Me-309 and one claims to have killed one.


----------



## Twitch (Aug 22, 2006)

I don't believe Me 209s saw combat. But...? I do know that there was some weird naming of different German planes by the 8th AF fighter pilots and Allied intel of the era. The 190D was referred to as the Fw 290 and something I never figured out was called the Me 209.


----------



## Jaws (Aug 22, 2006)

The little game I play  Forgotten Battles will soon release a new "1946" addon pack that will include quite a lot of this birds that flew only in the designer's dreams. Not something historical but a nice "What If".

Some info and screens here:

:: RRG STUDIOS ::


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 23, 2006)

Umm Jaws I hope you are not calling the Ta-183 just a designers dreams.

The first prototype of the Ta-183 was scheduled to be completed Oct 1945 but was not finished due the factory being captured in April 1945.

Other simmiler aircraft such as the Messerschmitt P.1011 were litterally only a week from first flight but were captured. The US ended up flying a modified version of the P.1011 after the war.


----------



## Parmigiano (Aug 23, 2006)

There was at least a liquid cooled radial engine : the BMW803A, one of them is restored by BMW in Munich but I don't know if in display for the public:

4 rows, 28 cylinders, 84 litres (!) and 2,5 ton

source: forum.axishistory.com


----------



## Twitch (Aug 23, 2006)

One thing shown in the Ta 183 image that was the real deal and in the hands of the squadrons at the time of capitulation was the wire-guided X-4 missile. Any plane could carry them and they were the most deadly missile of the day. 

About 15 minutes after VE-Day occurred they would have been in use.


----------



## Twitch (Aug 23, 2006)

One this that was for real was in the Ta 183 image was the X-4 wire-guided missiles. Any plane could carry them and they were already in the squadrons' hands at the time of capitulation.

15 minutes after VE-Day they would have been in use.

What the hell. 1st post wouldn't load then did!


----------



## Jaws (Aug 23, 2006)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Umm Jaws I hope you are not calling the Ta-183 just a designers dreams.
> 
> The first prototype of the Ta-183 was scheduled to be completed Oct 1945 but was not finished due the factory being captured in April 1945.
> 
> Other simmiler aircraft such as the Messerschmitt P.1011 were litterally only a week from first flight but were captured. The US ended up flying a modified version of the P.1011 after the war.




The designer's dream came to my mind from this thing:


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 24, 2006)

Yes that was a designers dream. I do believe they had a mock up built of that and were in the process of starting production of a prototype.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 24, 2006)

More like a designers "demential delusion" than dream.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 30, 2007)

A interesting desing, Ta-152 with laminar flown wing and a radial engine.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 31, 2007)

that's from the Luftwaffe secret projects series of books? a fantastic read for anyone that's not seen them.....


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 31, 2007)

Yes it is, sorry I forgot to put the source.


----------



## Lt. Mereel (Jan 31, 2007)

I remember that jet, Didnt the germans add another cockpit at the back....Tail gunner?


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jan 31, 2007)

Wich jet are you talking about ?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 1, 2007)

Those are great books up there. I own the whole series. Excellent books!


----------



## bigZ (Feb 1, 2007)

I don't tink Kurt Tank would have put a laminer flow wing on the 222 engined 152. He had to patiently explain to Goring after he found out the P-51 had laminer flow wings, why all German aircraft didn't have one because of the performance lost if even a few bugs got squashed on the leading edge


----------



## bigZ (Feb 1, 2007)

More of an alternative to Me 110. But what about the Focke Wulf 187 falke. 50mph faster than the 109B when built. Perhaps superiour climb/dive rates and twice the the range(would have been usefull during the BOB). Also more forgiving to the pilot trying to land it. I think 45% of all written off 109's was due to take off/landing.


----------



## davparlr (Feb 3, 2007)

bigZ said:


> I don't tink Kurt Tank would have put a laminer flow wing on the 222 engined 152. He had to patiently explain to Goring after he found out the P-51 had laminer flow wings, why all German aircraft didn't have one because of the performance lost if even a few bugs got squashed on the leading edge



Kurt Tank was correct. The Mustang wing was never a "laminer" flow wing. This is very difficult to achieve and several experimental aircraft was used to study it. Some were successful but not economical. Still the Mustang wing was a low drag wing which allowed for a very clean aircraft and high speed.


----------



## davparlr (Feb 3, 2007)

bigZ said:


> More of an alternative to Me 110. But what about the Focke Wulf 187 falke. 50mph faster than the 109B when built. Perhaps superiour climb/dive rates and twice the the range(would have been usefull during the BOB). Also more forgiving to the pilot trying to land it. I think 45% of all written off 109's was due to take off/landing.



In 1940, the Bf-109E was capable of 357 mph, the Bf-110C was capable of 335 mph, and the Fw 187A-0 was capable of 326 mph, somewhat slower but could climb much better than the Bf-110C.

*Classic Military Warnings*

"Any ship can be a minesweeper...once." Anon Naval Brass


----------



## bigZ (Feb 3, 2007)

davparlr said:


> In 1940, the Bf-109E was capable of 357 mph, the Bf-110C was capable of 335 mph, and the Fw 187A-0 was capable of 326 mph, somewhat slower but could climb much better than the Bf-110C.
> 
> *Classic Military Warnings*
> 
> "Any ship can be a minesweeper...once." Anon Naval Brass



I was comparing the Fw 187 to the 109 in 1937. Perhaps by 1940 it too would have seen significant improvement in performance.


----------



## Jank (Feb 3, 2007)

"_Wich is his your opinion the best alternative for the BF-109/Fw-190 dinamic couple_"

The 190 series had more design potential left but for another alternative to the Bf-109,
*Fiat G.56*


----------



## Smokey (Feb 3, 2007)

bigZ said:


> I was comparing the Fw 187 to the 109 in 1937. Perhaps by 1940 it too would have seen significant improvement in performance.





> Focke-Wulf got two 1.000PS DB 600 engines for the sixth prototype (Fw 187V6), which reached a speed of 636km/h
> (60-120km/h more than the fighters of the Battle of Britain reached in 1940 with 1050 to 1330PS engines).



Focke-Wulf 187 archive file

It seems that the Fw 187 was much faster than a bf 109 with the same powerplant


----------



## johnbr (Feb 3, 2007)

The Focke-Wulf 187 would have been great with the db 601 or db605.


----------



## davparlr (Feb 3, 2007)

bigZ said:


> I was comparing the Fw 187 to the 109 in 1937. Perhaps by 1940 it too would have seen significant improvement in performance.



The A-0 was the 1940 version of the Fw 187.


----------



## Civettone (Feb 3, 2007)

Jank said:


> "_Wich is his your opinion the best alternative for the BF-109/Fw-190 dinamic couple_"
> The 190 series had more design potential left but for another alternative to the Bf-109,
> *Fiat G.56*


Totally agree! It was also rather easy to build (though not as much as the Bf 109). Milch was one of the main advocates for taking the G.55/56 in production but the surrender of Italy ended those plans. A pity because I don't think that the Italian capitulation should have changed those plans. 

Perhaps the Re.2006 would have been an even better interceptor (though not as easy to build as the G.56).

Another alternative was the old He 100. Although I think it was a good decision not to take the Bf 109 out of production in favour of the He 100, I think it would have been an excellent interceptor as late as 1944 (with the DB 605).

The Fw 187 is not an alternative because too expensive though I am interested in the Bf 109Z as a fast Zerstörer, Aufklärer and Jabo.

Kris


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 19, 2007)

> The 190 series had more design potential left but for another alternative to the Bf-109,
> Fiat G.56




Actually there was some Italian Fighters in use with the Luftwaffe, the JG 77 used some Macchis Mc-205 for a four months period in 1944. The Veltro and the Centauro were both superb designs. probably better than the Bf-109G2/4/6.



> The Fw 187 is not an alternative because too expensive




And how it was so expensive ?


----------



## Soren (Feb 19, 2007)

Contrary to popular belief the Bf-109 was anything but outdated at 1945. However to be more easy on the green pilots a re-design of the landing gear was needed.


----------



## Civettone (Feb 19, 2007)

CharlesBronson said:


> And how it was so expensive ?


Two engines versus one (in the Bf 109).



CharlesBronson said:


> Actually there was some Italian Fighters in use with the Luftwaffe, the JG 77 used some Macchis Mc-205 for a four months period in 1944. The Veltro and the Centauro were both superb designs. probably better than the Bf-109G2/4/6.


I'm sure you've read this many times before, but I just love to bring this up time and time again 

_In December 1942 a technical commission of the Regia Aeronautica was invited by Luftwaffe to test some German aircrafts in Rechlin. The visit was part of a joint plan for the standardization of the Axis aircraft production. In the same time some Luftwaffe officers visited Guidonia where they were particularly interested in the performances promised by the Serie 5's. On December 9 these impressions were discussed in a Luftwaffe staff meeting and rised the interest of Goering itself.

In February 1943 a German test commission was sent in Italy to evaluate the new Italian fighters. The commission was led by Oberst Petersen and was formed by Luftwaffe officiers and pilots nad by technical personnel, among them the Flugbaumeister Malz. The Germans carried with them also several aircrafts included a Fw190A and a Me109G for direct comparison tests in simulated dogfights.

The tests began February 20. *The German commission, not without a certain surprise, was very impressed by the Italian aircrafts, the G55 in particular. In general, all the Serie 5's were very good at low altitudes, but the G55 was competitive with its German opponents also in term of speed and climb rate at high altitudes still maintaining superior handling characteristics. The definitive evaluation by the German commission was "excellent" for the G55, "good" for the Re2005 and "average" for the MC205*. Oberst Petersen defined the G55 "the best fighter in the Axis" and immediately telegraphed his impressions to Goering. *After listening the recommendations of Petersen, Milch and Galland, a meeting held by Goering on February 22 voted to produce the G55 in Germany.

The interest of the Germans, apart from the good test results, derived also from the development possibilities they was able to see in the G55 and in the Re2005. For the Re2005 the German interest resulted in the provision of an original DB605 with the new WM injection. This engine and a VDM propeller were installed on the MM495 prototype that was acquired by Luftwaffe and tested in Rechlin. The aircraft reached 700 km/h during a test with a German pilot, but the airframe was not judged sufficiently strong for these performances.

The G55 was bigger and heavier and was considered a very good candidate for the new DB603 engine. Other visits were organized in Germany during March and May 1943 in Rechlin and Berlin. The G55 was again tested at Rechlin at the presence of Milch. Gabrielli and other FIAT personalities were invited to visit German factories and to discuss the evolution of the aircraft. The specifications of the *German G55/II included the DB603 engine, five 20 mm guns and a pressurized cockpit*. The suggestion of weapons in the wings, limited to one 20 mm gun for each wing, originated the final configuration of the Serie I, while the 603 engine was succesfully installed in the G56 prototypes.

As a concrete results of the German interest in the G55, the Luftwaffe acquired three complete G55 Sottoserie 0 airframes (MM91064-65-66) for evaluations and experiments giving in change three DB603 engines and original machinery for the setup of other production lines of the DB605/RA1050 RC58 I. Two of the Luftwaffe G55's remained in Turin, at the Aeritalia plants, where they were used by German and Italian engineers to study the planned modifications and the possible optimizations to the production process. Later these two were converted to Serie I and delivered to the ANR. The third one was transferred to Rechlin for tests and experiments in Germany. The DB603 engines were used to build the G56 prototypes.

The interest in the G55 program was still high after the Armistice: in October 1943 Kurt Tank, who previously personally tested a G55 in Rechlin, was in Turin to discuss about the G55 production. However, war events and the not yet optimized production process were the reasons for which the G55 program was eventually abandoned by the Luftwaffe. Early produced G55's required about 15000 manhours; while there were estimations to reduce the effort to about 9000 manhours, the German factories were able to assemble a Bf109 in only 5000 manhours."_

(* I must note that this was probably the MC.205V, which had the old wings of the C.202 which made it less suited for high altitudes.)

Kris


----------



## Parmigiano (Feb 20, 2007)

"(* I must note that this was probably the MC.205V, which had the old wings of the C.202 which made it less suited for high altitudes.)"

Correct, the 205 tested was for sure a 205V, being the 'real' 205 (205N) limited to 2 prototypes (MM 499 and 500)

The 205V was a 'stopgap solution', being a 202 airframe matched to a DB605, with some modification in the wing structure to accomodate the MG151/20 in place of the 7.7. The MG151 was fitted in series III.

The 205N was instead a new design, featuring larger and redesigned wings, fuselage accomodation for a 'motoren kanone' and so on.
The only difference in the prototypes was the armament (and of course related weight) SN 499 was fitted with 1xMG151 engine mounted, 2xSAFAT 12.7 in the cowlings and 2xSAFAT 12.7 in the wings, MM500 replaced the wing SAFAT with MG151/20.

The next design was the MC206 and 207, with a further enhanced airframe designed for the DB 603. The MC206 was a 'transition design' planned for a DB605 in the new airframe, while the 207 should have had the DB 603.
Armament options were like the 205N MM500 or in alternative 4xMG151/20 wing mounted (tempest style)

The MC 206 prototype was damaged by bombers when it as 2 weeks fro completion, the following armistice blocked any further work on the design.


----------



## Chocks away! (Feb 20, 2007)

Don't forget that the Heinkel He-100 had a top speed of about 670 kph in it's original late 30s early 40s form! You can imagine how amazing it's performance would be had it been developed further...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 20, 2007)

Yes but that aircraft was a stripped down version. It did not carry armament or armour protection. Adding the equipment neccessary to be a combat ready warbird would have reduced its performance somewhat.

Having said that I think it should have been developed further though.


----------



## Civettone (Feb 20, 2007)

Parmigiano, I also read that the C.206 was the one with the DB 603 because the other 6's (G.56 and Re.2006) had the DB 603. Then the C.207 would be the same but with the 4 wing cannons (which doesn't make sense to me if you can get one firing through the motor block?). 
But I've also read what you say so ... that's at least as plausible. But what would the new airframe of the C.206/207 have been like?


From memory, the He 100D (armed and without surface vaporation) the top speed was around 644 km/h. I think the He 100D would have been a better fighter than my beloved Bf 109 because it focused on the strengths of the Bf 109 - speed, agility, power/weight, easy-to-build - but was better at it than the Bf 109. The Bf 109 was probably more manoeuvrable (turn rate) but as turn battles were not the preferred fighting style of the Bf 109, the He 100 would have been better, also with the later fights against the American high-speed fighters in mind. With a DB 605 the He 100 would probably have been faster than the P-51 which also had laminar wings.
But that's just my view - there are insufficient flight data of the He 100 to be sure of its qualities and vices.

In any case, I can completely understand that the Luftwaffe continued their production with the Bf 109 which remained competitive till the very end.
Kris


----------



## Parmigiano (Feb 21, 2007)

"But what would the new airframe of the C.206/207 have been like?"

I have a couple of drawings, I'll see if I can scan the magazine tomorrow. Quality is not very high, unfortunately.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 21, 2007)

I agree Civento. I dont think they should have dropped the program all together.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Feb 21, 2007)

> The interest in the G55 program was still high after the Armistice: in October 1943 Kurt Tank, who previously personally tested a G55 in Rechlin, was in Turin to discuss about the G55 production. However, war events and the not yet optimized production process were the reasons for which the G55 program was eventually abandoned by the Luftwaffe. Early produced G55's required about 15000 manhours; while there were estimations to reduce the effort to about 9000 manhours, the German factories were able to assemble a Bf109 in only 5000 manhours.




It takes more time to build a Ferrari than a volkswagen , the germans might saved time in the BF-109 but wasted a lot in a serie of high altitude programs like the Me-209 stüfe II, Me-309, Me-155, B&V-155, Ta.153, etc, etc and they achieved nothing. So putting in production the G-55 or even better the DB-603 powered G-56 wasnts big deal after all in my opinion.

And also in worth to note that the obsesion with a high altitude fighther began in july 1942 when some nazi spies (those who were not erased by the FBI) reported the flight of a new bomber, the B-29.

As we know there was no B-29 in Europe, all the effort and millions of RM of the hohenjager program was 67 ta-152H...ridiculous.


*G-56.*


----------



## Civettone (Feb 21, 2007)

Not only was there no B-29 in Europe - I suppose they would have appeared if the war had dragged on - it was not the high altitude bomber the Germans feared it was: 600 km/h at a height of 14 km.
The research and resources that went into countering this non-existent threat are mind blowing! What's perhaps even worse ... if this mystery bomber had existed and appeared in late 1944 over Germany, the Germans would have had nothing to counter it.
This is a nice example of how your intelligence service can really mess it up. So when did they find out that the B-29 wasn't a hi-alt bomber? When the Japs got hit by them???? 

Oh yeah, I forgot the primary source to the Italian 5-series being tested at Rechlin: E-Stelle Nr 182/43 g.Kdos 27.2.1943, in: BA-MA RL 36/55. I've been trying to look it up at the Bundesarchiv website but no luck (so far). Would be interesting to read the original reports.

Kris


----------



## Gimmeacannon! (Feb 21, 2007)

I think the He 100 teamed with the Fw 187 could have given somebody some real ****. both very fast and both better aircraft than the Me pair.


----------



## Wespe (Feb 21, 2007)

Hi Gimmeacannon

On behalf of the Fw 187 you might be right, but the He-100 was technically too high tec to become reality in the early war period. Especially the cooling system did not work out. Even after replacing or adding a second cooler the plane had still major malfunctions. If the Luftwaffe would have persued on this plane it could have had a pretty good one in 1942-43 but also would have had "no" plane in 1941-42 besides the Bf-109's.
So in order to compensate the Bf-109, Tank did the right thing - meaning don't dream, take what ever you can get your hands on, and that was the Idea to take the in abundance produced BMW 801 engines and build a plane, the Fw-190A. 

Wespe


----------



## Civettone (Feb 21, 2007)

Wespe said:


> Even after replacing or adding a second cooler the plane had still major malfunctions.
> (...)
> the Idea to take the in abundance produced BMW 801 engines and build a plane, the Fw-190A.


The He 100D got rid of the surface vaporation all together and replaced it with a conventional radiator. A couple of weeks ago I was looking for the article on the He 100 but couldn't find it, but I don't think it mentions any cooling problems on the He 100D.

The BMW 801 was designed after the Fw 190 which first flew with the BMW 139, and was certainly not available in abundance. It took until 1942 before it was reliable enough (which is normal for new engines).

And what do you think about the Bf 109X with the BMW 801 engine?
Kris


----------



## Parmigiano (Feb 22, 2007)

@ Civettone ( others interested)

here is what I could do about drawings of Macchi C206 and C207, there is also a couple of small blurry pics of the prototype C205N MM499

Source is magazine 'Aerei nella Storia', issue 45, Dec 2005
Aerei nella Storia


----------



## Wespe (Feb 22, 2007)

Hi Civettone,

I think that maybe you have to reshuffle your library and knowledge a bit. I am doing that for the past 35 years.

Regarding the Fw-190A

In 1935 the RLM decided to promote a high potential radial engine. One by Bramo-Fafnir and the second one at BMW, who took over Bramo and came out with the BMW 139. This engine however was no meeting the requirements and was not approved by the RLM. Therefore the RLM supported the continuation on the BMW 801.

The construction of the BMW 801 began in October 1939 and in April 1939 the first test run took place. 

Tank's design team prepared two proposals; one based upon the use of the Daimler-Benz DB601 liquid-cooled engine and the other upon the use of the BMW 801 air-cooled radial engine. At that time the radial engine was not favored as a fighter power plant owing to its drag and the restrictions that its bulk placed upon forward view during taking-off and landing, and, in consequence, General Ernst Udet's decision to proceed with the development of the radial-engined fighter came as a profound surprise to Tank and his colleagues.

So Tank was in need for a radial engine, the RLM officially certified the BMW 801 in January 1940.
The BMW 139 was only installed in the Fw-190V prototypes, the prototype Fw-190V5 already had the BMW 801.

The original series production of the Fw-190A was entirely fitted with the BMW 801; The first unit to receive the Fw-190A1 with the BMW 801 was the II/ and IV/JG26 in August 1940. Tank took this engine into account also knowing it would be “easily available” due to its forwarded mass production by the RLM for bombers at the Siemens-Flugmotorenwerk, a total of over 21,000 BMW 801’s were build starting in1941. DB 603 about 8,800 starting in 1941, and Jumo 213 about 9,000 starting in1942.

Regarding the He-100

In the crucial testing period from March 1938 till March 1939 the He-100 had severe cooling problems, also the plane had other major problems, notably a lack of directional stability, landing speeds, servicing the engine, cooling pumps failed, not to mention the maintenance attributes under field condition forwarded by the RLM, and therefore the “ONLY” alternative the Bf-109 “had” to be chosen.
Due to my studies in the last 35 years and many discussions with pilots, I definatly come to the conclusion that the “lacking” of a truly capable plane such as the Fw-190 in 1938/39 is one of the main reasons, for lacking of required performance during the BoB and any further actions by the Luftwaffe.

The fact that the Bf-109 had to be chosen as the prime fighter for the Luftwaffe and its resulting mass production, automatically brought an unstoppable production of a plane which had no outstanding attributes at all. That this plane had its “days” was mainly only due to the expertise and profound training of the initial Luftwaffe pilots, and the average and outnumbered air forces in the beginning of WWII. 
Willi boy to my opinion was Germany’s best businessmen, but defiantly not the producer or manufacturer of outstanding planes.

Just look at all the useless planes he managed to sell: Bf-109/Me-110/Me-210/Me-410, Me-163. Besides revolutionary planes such as the Me-323, or Me-262 nothing of use, just cannon fodder to the allies.

Unfortunately revolutionary designers such as Heinkel were not given the time and support due to the ongoing of history to develop superb and reliable aircrafts. 

I do not ignore the fact, that in the continuance of this dreadful Bf-109 decision, more advanced and improved versions where forwarded by Entrepreneur Willi to the Luftwaffe, but they were never as good as those build by Fw, Junkers or even Arado. 

So if you ask me about the opinion of a Messerschmitt, expecting a positive answer I would be the wrong person to ask. 

Regards, Wespe


----------



## Jank (Feb 22, 2007)

"_The fact that the Bf-109 had to be chosen as the prime fighter for the Luftwaffe and its resulting mass production, automatically brought an unstoppable production of a plane which had no outstanding attributes at all. That this plane had its “days” was mainly only due to the expertise and profound training of the initial Luftwaffe pilots, and the average and outnumbered air forces in the beginning of WWII. 
Willi boy to my opinion was Germany’s best businessmen, but defiantly not the producer or manufacturer of outstanding planes."_

I do not profess to be highly knowledgable on this subject but the above struck me as quite true.


----------



## Civettone (Feb 22, 2007)

Wespe said:


> Due to my studies in the last 35 years and many discussions with pilots, I definatly come to the conclusion that the “lacking” of a truly capable plane such as the Fw-190 in 1938/39 is one of the main reasons, for lacking of required performance during the BoB and any further actions by the Luftwaffe.
> 
> The fact that the Bf-109 had to be chosen as the prime fighter for the Luftwaffe and its resulting mass production, automatically brought an unstoppable production of a plane which had no outstanding attributes at all. That this plane had its “days” was mainly only due to the expertise and profound training of the initial Luftwaffe pilots, and the average and outnumbered air forces in the beginning of WWII.
> Willi boy to my opinion was Germany’s best businessmen, but defiantly not the producer or manufacturer of outstanding planes.
> ...


Perhaps those 35 years should have been spent a bit better? If I read some of the biased things you've stated in this forum since your arrival, I wonder what this 35 years of study have brought to you.

As to the BMW 801 and Fw 190, I really don't see what your problem is. The Fw 190 design predates the BMW 801 design as it was first designed for the BMW 139 (or DB 605 if you will).
That is still in contradiction with your own words: "to take the in abundance produced BMW 801 engines and build a plane, the Fw-190A."

Now, on the Bf 109 vs Fw 190. I have a good feeling that there is probably an old topic on this board about the same subject, and just as probably counting many pages. But if you're willing to back up what you said about the Bf 109 having "no outstanding attributes at all", then please open a new topic where we can discuss this. 

Kris


----------



## Morai_Milo (Feb 22, 2007)

German BMW and DB engine production, 

U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey Aircraft Division Industry Report


----------



## Wespe (Feb 23, 2007)

Civettone said:


> Perhaps those 35 years should have been spent a bit better? If I read some of the biased things you've stated in this forum since your arrival, I wonder what this 35 years of study have brought to you.
> 
> _*If I state that the Me-262 was the best fighter and allround fighter in WWII, then I wouldn't know what is biased about this statement. If others oppose that statement, by pointing out the unreliability of the engines, or that it could not carry torpedos, then I respect that opinion, but I do not count it as a verification to conclude that the Me-262 was not the best. *_
> 
> ...



_*Look at your own posts before you try and start to get personal on other members posts. So far all I can conclude from your previous posts is that you are trying to tell everybody desperately, that the Luftwaffe had no chance, no matter what they did.

Now do you really think that experienced members on this forum do not know that? So what are you posting that comment for, over and over again? *_

So just because, sometimes I let some humor spread into a topic, in order to avoid a head on clash, doesnt mean that I am willing to tollerate continious nonsense or lecturing such as in many of your posts, understood??

Wespe


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 23, 2007)

Wespe said:


> If I state that the Me-262 was the best fighter and allround fighter in WWII, then I wouldn't know what is biased about this statement. If others oppose that statement, by pointing out the unreliability of the engines, or that it could not carry torpedos, then I respect that opinion, but I do not count it as a verification to conclude that the Me-262 was not the best.



That part of the post was obviously implied to me. You again are using my words in the wrong context. You are not undestanding what I was saying and using them in a completly wrong way.

I never said that since the Me-262 could not carry a torpedo it was not the best plane of WW2. I used the torpedo as an example. You said the Me-262 was the most versatile aircraft when in reality it could only perform a few roles. Who cares if it could do them 100kmh hour faster than the fastest piston engine aircraft. I used the torpedo as an example of what other planes could do and still do the same roles as the Me-262 plus a lot more. Hell the Fw-190 and P-38 were more versatile than the Me-262.

*So do me a favor, dont use my words incorrectly. If you dont understand what I said that is fine but dont use my words incorrectly and post them again. You got that?*


----------



## Wespe (Feb 23, 2007)

Quote: Who cares if it could do them 100kmh hour faster than the fastest piston engine aircraft?

Answer: Any German pilot flying the Me-262, and any German pilot who's piston plane didn't stand a chance between 44 and 45.

Quote: Hell the Fw-190 and P-38 were more versatile than the Me-262

Question: in what aspects was a Fw-190 supposedly more versatile? 

Wespe


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 23, 2007)

It could successfully perform more roles than the Me-262. Plain and simple. It is a fact and facts can not be disputed.


----------



## Wespe (Feb 23, 2007)

As a fighter: NO
As a Recon: NO
As a Nightfighter: NO
As a Ground: attackplane: Maybe
As a trainer: both did their job
What else? Sofar it is 4:2 for the Me-262

If you want to move this post to another thread I dont mind since it doesn't belong in this one.
Wespe


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 23, 2007)

Wespe said:


> As a fighter: NO
> As a Recon: NO
> As a Nightfighter: NO
> As a Ground: attackplane: Maybe
> ...



Go aheand and repost this in the thread about versatility because I guarantee I can show you how it could perform more roles successfuly. Facts are facts...


----------



## Civettone (Feb 23, 2007)

> So just because, sometimes I let some humor spread into a topic, in order to avoid a head on clash, doesnt mean that I am willing to tollerate continious nonsense or lecturing such as in many of your posts, understood??


Wespe, I'm sorry that I upset you. 
I acknowledge that I'm sometimes lecturing when I have strong convictions. I think I can back up any statement I make though.

One thing I am pleased about is that you believe I am desperately trying to tell everybody that the Luftwaffe had no chance, no matter what they did. That comment is quite a compliment to me, as I am trying to have a critical historical PoV in my 'research' on the late-war Luftwaffe. What you do not know, and what I don't tell anyone, is that for the last two years I have been working on a document which outlines the possibilities the Germans had to win the war, if a radical change in command had happened in late 1943 - the latest date possible IMO. So more than anyone else, I am convinced that there was at least a chance for the Germans to perhaps not win the war, but at least not lose it before 1946.
In other forums, I'm the big Luftwaffe supporter as I am surrounded by people who love to bash the Me 262, Tiger and other German weapons. I try to keep things in perspective, that means historically correct, so I don't go wandering off in irrational what-if scenarios which I cannot support by critical reasoning or empirical data...




> If I read some of the biased things you've stated in this forum since your arrival, I wonder what this 35 years of study have brought to you.





> If I state that the Me-262 was the best fighter and allround fighter in WWII, then I wouldn't know what is biased about this statement.


What I meant by this, is mainly the _way_ you post your comments, especially the way you defend the Me 262. Anyone coming in here shouting "THE ME 262 IS THE BEST" or any other black&white view will get criticism from me, even though in other circumstances I'll be the first to defend the Me 262. But I try to do with putting stress on both its virtues as well its vices. (Or at least I try to.)

... and btw you write "Me-262" while most Luftwaffe buffs around here write "Me 262". Didn't you read any German reports in those 35 years? Or perhaps it's a deliberate choice to write them like that. In that case, I redraw this comment. Don't want to upset you more than you already are 



> Obviously you know very little about a/c and the processes of developing an a/c. It is very common to develop a plane (aerodynamics and general layout without specifying a certain engine as the only one)


Sure. But again, I was replying to your comment _"to take the in abundance produced BMW 801 engines and build a plane, the Fw-190A."_ That specifically suggests the BMW 801 lead to the Fw 190.
Again, I don't see why you drag in the development story of the Fw 190A all the way up to the Ta 152. 



> So to my interpretation: Taking into account that both planes are more or less equally matched in flying performance, a plane such as the Bf-109F-4 with an average range of 400km , and a lesser weaponry then a Fw-190A-2 already disqualifies itself from a discussion related to “which one was better”


Flying performance of the Bf 109F-4 was marginally better, average range of the Bf 109F is much longer (over 400 miles), and the armament issue is true but of limited value: the Bf 109F had sufficient armament for those days. Also, it had the advantage that it didn't need gun harmonisation thus being more accurate. Later on the Fw 190 got two of those cannons deleted, that says a lot IMO.
And I'll stress this again and again and again, twice as many Bf 109Fs could be built in the same time as one Fw 190. And construction time is the most important element in wartime production! 

Kris


----------



## Wespe (Feb 23, 2007)

Well thank god the war didn't continue, otherwise we would have gotten the A-Bomb.
I don't quite understand your work on a document to proof that theory, Germany never had a chance to win this war.

As for your info regarding planes or the Bf-109 on range, it shows how dissinformed people can get by reading all these "books"

Did you notice that I never used the term "books" as being part of my background knowledge ?

Below is an example for the kind of references I use. Please check for yourself where there is a range of 400mls for the BF-109F4.


----------



## Gnomey (Feb 23, 2007)

Germany wouldn't of got the A-bomb. They were 2-3 years behind the Americans in developing the technology. By the time they had a usable bomb they would of been bombed into submission with all there major cities wiped out Hiroshima style. It was originally planned to drop the bomb on Berlin and other German cities not Japan if the war had continued for longer (which with situation as it was in early 1945 wasn't going to happen.


----------



## Civettone (Feb 23, 2007)

Well, I don't want to get into detail on it but I do see a technical opportunity to raise a shield against bombers over Germany starting in the Spring of 1945, with the Luftwaffe regaining air superiority over Germany. A monthly production of 5000 Natters would make any incursion of allied bombers a massacre. It's not fail proof though ... never claimed it was. It's just an alternative scenario which starts with getting the maximum out of the German industry, releasing command to the army again and stopping the allied advance in Italy and Russia, and driving the Allies back in Normandy. Again, it's an alternative scenario and only makes sense as a whole. It's 66 pages so far. Will tell more about if anyone's interested.

Btw, I read that the V2 project costed the Germans 2 billion dollars, which is about the same as the Manhattan project. Perhaps a bit of a simplistic statement but still interesting if it's true.

Wespe, nice to see you are familiar with the Zeugmeister website. But exactly where am I supposed to see the flying range of the Bf 109F-4. I'm sure it's in there as the title indicates, so I'm probably looking over it. 
Kris


----------



## Wespe (Feb 23, 2007)

Hi Civettone

look for the horizontal line where it says Groesste Flugstrecke (it is the last line of the 3 altitude grouped figures. The highest range is 490km - the lowest 315km.

By the way, most of the information I use is based on the Bundesarchiv or other sources using this information pool, there are just to many nonsense books and mags. on the market.

I just hope,that when you finish that book-document Idea of yours, that people with an openmind are going to judge about it.  

Wespe


----------



## Civettone (Feb 23, 2007)

Doesn't it say "Wahre Geschwindigkeit" ?? 


Anyway, here is what I say: 835 km or 520 miles! And 945 kms for the Fw 190. I never said the Bf 109 could fly further than the Fw 190, only that the range of the Bf 109 wasn't as bad as you claim it is. 

Again, what have you been doing in these 35 years?  

Kris


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 23, 2007)

Actually if you look at Wespes form. If I am reading it right. (I am no expert on WW2 Luftwaffe manuals, flight records and forms for that matter) it says that in that cattagory it would reach it could fly the farthest distance (its best fuel economy) at 415 km/h.

If I am reading it right it says that for that particular group.

*In Horizontal Flight*

*Farthest Distance, RPM 1900, (can not read the next line), Clock Position 925, Fuel Consumption L/Hr 185, Airspeed: 490kmh*

This looks similiar to the charts that we had for our Blackhawks and all it is, is to show the pilot:

A. The greatest duration of flight.
B. Can not read that one.
C. The greatest distance covered.


----------



## Denniss (Feb 23, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> *Farthest Distance, RPM 1900, (can not read the next line), Clock Position 925, Fuel Consumption L/Hr 185, Greatest Distance 490kmh*



(can not read the next line) = Ladedruck = engine boost pressure in ata

Greatest Distance 490kmh = wrong! Wahre Geschwindigkeit = True Air speed

This chart does not specify the achievable max range but it's possible to calculate them. With max range you should always get 800 to 1000 km range on internal fuel.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 23, 2007)

Denniss said:


> Greatest Distance 490kmh = wrong! Wahre Geschwindigkeit = True Air speed



Yes I know that. That was simple typo on my part. What I meant to put was that if you fly 490kmyh you will achieve the farthest distance.

Basically it is telling you the conditions to fly the farthest distance.


----------



## Wespe (Feb 23, 2007)

Congratulations,
You passed the test which I "set up" for the others.
You just have to tell them something they wont agree (e.g. 400km range) and you will see how much they really know.
at least 1 expert amongst all the "experts" who knows how to read a flying range chart.

Groeste Flugstrecke means: if you fly at 1500rpm at5km altitude at a speed of4oo km/h you will use up 145l/h - out of your 400l tank in a Bf-109F-4.

So much for books and Mr. C telling 700km range/ or 800/ or whatever

Have fun, since this is my last post
Wespe


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 23, 2007)

Wespe said:


> Have fun, since this is my last post
> Wespe



Awww so people call you out. They prove you wrong and then you run because you can not handle the truth....

Oh well your loss, you might have actually learned something here. That is the difference between 90 percent of the people that post here and yourself. If they are wrong they learn from it.


----------



## Civettone (Feb 23, 2007)

I would have thought it would be sad if you would get banned of something as childish as creating a second account and then start a discussion with yourself.

But that last bit about flying range and trying to trick us, is just ...

Aah, whatever... 
Kris


----------



## CharlesBronson (May 9, 2007)

A weird hipotetically replacement for the BF-109...the He-112 with DB-605 engine 8) 






pleasant looking isnt ?


----------



## Lucky13 (May 10, 2007)

Looks kinda Russian almost....thinking of the style of the canopy.


----------



## CharlesBronson (May 11, 2007)

Probably, the canopy in the heinkel was by far more adecuate for the pilots view than the early variants of BF-109s.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 1, 2007)

Aditional images of the Heinkel 100D-1 with "normal" cooling.








Note the streamlined canopy.


----------



## SoD Stitch (Aug 2, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> An aircraft that I always thought was a great design and too bad it was not produced much ealier in the war was the Do-335. However here is a zwilling design of the Do-335 that was actually taken over by Junkers.
> 
> Do-635



I know I'm late to the party, but I gotta agree with Adler (again). Great design; too bad it didn't get designed/introduced earlier. My understanding is it had the potential to be the fastest piston-engined aircraft ever. Top speed was at the physical limits of what a reciprocating-engined aircraft could do, in the region of 480 mph (780 kph). Combined with a fairly heavy armament (1x30mm Mk108 2x20mm MG151's) and excellent performance, it could've been a world-beater. On at least one occasion, Allied pilots spotted a Pfeil in the air over Germany and attempted to shoot it down, but the 335 simply flew away due to it's greatly superior speed.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 2, 2007)

SoD Stitch said:


> On at least one occasion, Allied pilots spotted a Pfeil in the air over Germany and attempted to shoot it down, but the 335 simply flew away due to it's greatly superior speed.



Do you have an account of that? Just wondering because I had never heard that. Would be interesting.


----------



## drgondog (Aug 2, 2007)

Civettone said:


> Well, I don't want to get into detail on it but I do see a technical opportunity to raise a shield against bombers over Germany starting in the Spring of 1945, with the Luftwaffe regaining air superiority over Germany. A monthly production of 5000 Natters would make any incursion of allied bombers a massacre. It's not fail proof though ... never claimed it was. It's just an alternative scenario which starts with getting the maximum out of the German industry, releasing command to the army again and stopping the allied advance in Italy and Russia, and driving the Allies back in Normandy. Again, it's an alternative scenario and only makes sense as a whole. It's 66 pages so far. Will tell more about if anyone's interested.



So, magic ressurection of Natters in Spring 1945. 

Refresh my memory regarding what remains to be destroyed in Germany by USAAF and RAF and perhaps how the Natter solves the Eastern Front issues confronting Germany? 

Stopping Allies from taking Italy basically worthless tactically or Strategically, so long as the southern bases are reasonably intact. Killing Russians with 3:1 just means total extermination of the German Race after all the infantry are dead and Russia still has 100,000,000 people to draw from - Ditto US..

You think that you could stop the destruction of Oil and the attendant collapse of Germany's ability to supply army and air force? Germany could have killed twice as many or four times as many USAAF crews and it wouldn't have stopped us - nor could Germany stop USSR from running over Ploesti if Germany stopped us in the air.

Could Germany prevent successful invasion at Normandy? Maybe, if so all Germans speak Russki today.

Then tell me how Germany solves the problem of long range, low level intrusions into German airfields and Transportation centers by P-51s, P-47s and P-38s? Have to take England first and Germany won't control the air over UK with any scenario conceivable post 1943. 

And what does the change in Command do for strategy - you think that an immediate start of peace negotiations don't start instead?? Who of your proposed leaders felt that Germany was going to prevail in late 1943?

And which German had to be in control for the theory of regaining control of the air work? 

As long as UK stands, Italian bases exist - German is vulnerable from the air - even with better technology... simply a numbers game after 1943 - 300,000,000+ to 40,000,000+ with huge attrition to fighting age soldiers and airmen, left with kids and grandfathers to continue feeding the furnace.

Hitler though his troopers had the strength of 10 but post war study found that notion 'optimistic'

No ability to destroy USSR, UK or US industrial base, no ability to grow SS or pilots - had to deal with what they had. The 'farm' system was dead...

And Germany wasn't having to deal with the Allied forces arrayed against Japan. Contemplate those reserves being diverted and thrown at Germany in 1944 at Normandy... 

Must be one hell of a thesis and I a really am interested in your proposed scenario because I am not clever enough to figure it out.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 2, 2007)

> On at least one occasion, Allied pilots spotted a Pfeil in the air over Germany and attempted to shoot it down, but the 335 simply flew away due to it's greatly superior speed



I also read that in the Pierre Clostermann book "The big show" ( Le grand Cirque), but knowing the novelesque stile of Clostermann I couldnt say that is 100 % true.


----------



## Denniss (Aug 6, 2007)

Never heard of a wartime engagement with Do 335 but not impossible. AFAIK at least one Do 335 prototype served as recon aircraft from late 1944.

I only heard of a postwar speedrace with P-51 and a Do 335. Happened on a transfer flight to France and the Do 335 was twenty mínutes or so earlier on target than the two escorting P-51s.


----------



## delcyros (Aug 6, 2007)

> Originally Posted by Civettone View Post
> Well, I don't want to get into detail on it but I do see a technical opportunity to raise a shield against bombers over Germany starting in the Spring of 1945, with the Luftwaffe regaining air superiority over Germany. A monthly production of 5000 Natters would make any incursion of allied bombers a massacre. It's not fail proof though ... never claimed it was. It's just an alternative scenario which starts with getting the maximum out of the German industry, releasing command to the army again and stopping the allied advance in Italy and Russia, and driving the Allies back in Normandy. Again, it's an alternative scenario and only makes sense as a whole. It's 66 pages so far. Will tell more about if anyone's interested.



I do not think this is a credible scenario. There are a couple of problems:
1.) how to produce 5.000 Natter a month? The whole projects would need to take place quarter an year earlier.
2.) how to fuel them? The Natter was dependent on rocket fuels produced in Hamburg. The plant was effectively bombed in oct. 44 and then again in february 45 (when it finally closed production). 
3.) how to train crews? The Natter is rather a non-common behaior plane. It would require long time training to controll it. It is probably more dangerous to the pilots than to a bomber
4.) how to direct them against bombers? The Natter has absolutely NO fc techniques nor radio directioning. It rather has a pretty simple radioset from which the controller communicates to the pilot. If the pilot does not have extraordinary spacial awareness and visibility to the target, he will fail. 



> Refresh my memory regarding what remains to be destroyed in Germany by USAAF and RAF



Uhh, a lot. The economical infrastructure was overheated but still intact at wars end and production figures showed a growth factor. transportation in within Germany was not much of a problem due to the large degree of redundancy as long as it wasn´t occupied by advancing allied ground forces. 



> Then tell me how Germany solves the problem of long range, low level intrusions into German airfields and Transportation centers by P-51s, P-47s and P-38s?


drgondog points to a significant problem. Long range intrusion probably contributed more to disruption of communication than the whole strategic bombing campaign. I can hardly see that to be countered with the low fuel situation in early 1945. It would require standing patrols, which couldn´t be afforded by then.

No chance.


----------



## Trautloft (Aug 6, 2007)

the Do-335 flies with superb characteristics in Il2Sturmovik, i dont know if its close to reality.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Aug 11, 2008)

Interesting document in "Germany WW2 jet aces" of John Weal ( osprey aircraft of the aces series), the letter of dismissal of the He-280


----------

