- Thread starter
- #21
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
Soren huh?
But that said, Soren, what are the differences between the V1 and V2?
But that said, Soren, what are the differences between the V1 and V2?
Captured He 178 at Wright Field?!?
- Thread starter kool kitty89
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Its almost certainly the same aircraft and the same picture.
It was not unlikely that pictures were crudely retouched, if they were deemed to be of low quality. The smaller picture looks done up in the style of a 1940's technical magazine (the surface looks painted on).
The aircraft is in exactly the same spot on the ground and relative to the hangar, a feat that would be impossible with two pictures of two aircraft.
Kool Kitty. There were not two museums it seemes. The aviation museum lost their aircaft during the war. Later (after the war) a combined technical museum was opened. Notice this bit from the article:
"housing more than 120 planes, 200 engines"
It was not unlikely that pictures were crudely retouched, if they were deemed to be of low quality. The smaller picture looks done up in the style of a 1940's technical magazine (the surface looks painted on).
The aircraft is in exactly the same spot on the ground and relative to the hangar, a feat that would be impossible with two pictures of two aircraft.
Kool Kitty. There were not two museums it seemes. The aviation museum lost their aircaft during the war. Later (after the war) a combined technical museum was opened. Notice this bit from the article:
"housing more than 120 planes, 200 engines"
KK,
Note:
1.) Different end exhaust
2.) Different canopy, one has a curved top while the other is striaght.
Do you see it ?
Anyway it's just a guess as that's all we can do on things like this
Soren the two pictures above are of the same aircraft. One is just larger and of better quality. Look closer and you will see the canopys are the same, etc...
No that is an inside view of the museum. I have seen a similiar model when I was in Berlin the last time. It is just cut away so that you can see how it would have looked like.
Its a shame that all of those planes were lost.
Ok, the museum is inside, the room walls and the perimeter wall just looked different
Disregarding that, we are back to the story about the He-178.
Primarily, we should focus on:
1. Did it dissapear among the other items?
2. Did it get destroyed during an air raid?
Following the rules of "expert reasoning" we should ask: Where did the destruction story come from?
Are there any hard facts regarding the destruction, or is it simply assumed (perhaps the museum was hit and since the he-178 was no where else, it was assumed it was destroyed)?
Facts seem to be, that about 100 aircraft was missing from the collection after the war. We have that from Holger Steinie, from the German Museum of Technique in Berlin. That article does NOT mention any destruction of anything.
Disregarding that, we are back to the story about the He-178.
Primarily, we should focus on:
1. Did it dissapear among the other items?
2. Did it get destroyed during an air raid?
Following the rules of "expert reasoning" we should ask: Where did the destruction story come from?
Are there any hard facts regarding the destruction, or is it simply assumed (perhaps the museum was hit and since the he-178 was no where else, it was assumed it was destroyed)?
Facts seem to be, that about 100 aircraft was missing from the collection after the war. We have that from Holger Steinie, from the German Museum of Technique in Berlin. That article does NOT mention any destruction of anything.
- Thread starter
- #29
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
And the large pic I posted seems to be more correct looking, the smaller "shiny" picture seems to have been edited/enhanced differently giving the rounded canopy and odd looking exhaust. (it looks like a jet pipe, but it can be seen that the angle is odd and probably touched up oddly)
The larger picture apears to show the exhaust with a plug in place. (at first I thought the roundish hole was the exhaust but it apears to be on the plug and that whole rectangular end to the fusalage should be the exhaust)
Also there are pics like this:
Clearly showing a different tail. Hoever the V1 could simply have had a lot of changes and modification during its testing life, so there's not nacessarily another prototype. (many sourses say the second one was not completed)
It seems the V1 used 2 canop designs, 2 tail designs, and 2 wing designs. The exhaust may also have changed. The initial flights were also done with fixed landing gear, later replaced with the retractable gear. (note not just the gear left unretract, but actual fixed gear with the fusalage faired over where wells to retract into would be)
2 different engines were also used, but the larger HeS-6 didn't fit well and the intake may have been too small for it, resulting in poorer performance than the HeS-3b. Iirc there were mechanical problems tward the end of the program with the gear failing to retract, and it was thus retired. With focus being put on the He 280.
Here's another one:
Origins of German jet power
The intake design can be seen here:
History of Jet Engines - Hans Von Ohain
See also: LuftArchiv.de - Das Archiv der Deutschen Luftwaffe
The larger picture apears to show the exhaust with a plug in place. (at first I thought the roundish hole was the exhaust but it apears to be on the plug and that whole rectangular end to the fusalage should be the exhaust)
Also there are pics like this:
Clearly showing a different tail. Hoever the V1 could simply have had a lot of changes and modification during its testing life, so there's not nacessarily another prototype. (many sourses say the second one was not completed)
It seems the V1 used 2 canop designs, 2 tail designs, and 2 wing designs. The exhaust may also have changed. The initial flights were also done with fixed landing gear, later replaced with the retractable gear. (note not just the gear left unretract, but actual fixed gear with the fusalage faired over where wells to retract into would be)
2 different engines were also used, but the larger HeS-6 didn't fit well and the intake may have been too small for it, resulting in poorer performance than the HeS-3b. Iirc there were mechanical problems tward the end of the program with the gear failing to retract, and it was thus retired. With focus being put on the He 280.
Here's another one:
Origins of German jet power
The intake design can be seen here:
History of Jet Engines - Hans Von Ohain
See also: LuftArchiv.de - Das Archiv der Deutschen Luftwaffe
I do not believe that the He 178 made it out of Germany. I think it was destroyed. Why, because that is all I have ever read to this date.
Now having said that, it would not suprise me if some did get out. If I recall Udets plane that used to be in the museum along with a Me 309 that were supposedly destroyed in the museum have recently turned up in Poland.
Now having said that, it would not suprise me if some did get out. If I recall Udets plane that used to be in the museum along with a Me 309 that were supposedly destroyed in the museum have recently turned up in Poland.
- Thread starter
- #33
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
Yep.
Another thing I noticed is that the original smaller elliptical wing seems to be present with the pictures fixed landing gear, and the longer span tapered wings on almost all the others.
And some more info: http://www.cressnet.ir/Journals/J_E...NEERING_FOR_GAS_TURBINES&POWER_2000_APRIL.pdf
Another thing I noticed is that the original smaller elliptical wing seems to be present with the pictures fixed landing gear, and the longer span tapered wings on almost all the others.
And some more info: http://www.cressnet.ir/Journals/J_E...NEERING_FOR_GAS_TURBINES&POWER_2000_APRIL.pdf
After reading it again in Kool Kittys link, Im struck by the lack of foresight shown by a number of Germanys leading aviation experts.
Fair enough they didn't consider the aircraft fit for combat, but disregarding the technology completely......
Reminds me of the story of Bell's telephone demonstration, where observers from the major US telegraph co found it kinda cute, but without any commercial value.
Fair enough they didn't consider the aircraft fit for combat, but disregarding the technology completely......
Reminds me of the story of Bell's telephone demonstration, where observers from the major US telegraph co found it kinda cute, but without any commercial value.
- Thread starter
- #35
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
It is not about Germany's aviation experts disregarding technology, but as someone formulated it very correctly in a book; Hitler was a man of the 19th century not of the 20th.
Regards
Kruska
- Thread starter
- #37
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
It wasn't just Hitler though, there was a wole convoluted political mess winin the RLM on the topic of jets, and more on Heinkel, and Messersmitt on there own.
Hitler certainly didn't help though. (just like the use of the Me 262 as a bomber, while this wasn't the main reason for the lagging production it was certainly not a help along with all the other political and technical problems)
And these were more pronounced on Heinkel's programs.
And while the political problems of the US and UK jet programs were of a different nature, the Soviets' situation in many ways was similar to Germany.
And Stallin didn't help there either.
And Yakolev had considerable influence in it too, seeing what happened to the excellent (1944-1946) Su 9/11/13.
And one thing to note on the Soviet projects is they started genuine serious studies ( '20's) and development ('30's) and recieved government intrest before any other country, ironically they ended up being one of the last of the major players to actually fly their own jet, and then on copied engines.
http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/threads/printthread.php?Board=spmbttoe&main=515709&type=post
An indepth view on the Soviet designs: Russian Aviation Page: Russian Jet Technology 1937-45
some early Russian designs: M.Gudkov's projects
more engine stuff: Jets45-Engines
And the first serious Soviet jet design: Gu-VRD
Some on the US: ch3
Whittle: A TRIBUTE TO A CAMBRIDGE ENGINEERINGSTUDENT
Some good German jet info o this thread: The soc-history-war-world-war-ii November 2006 Archive by thread
Some books: German Jet Engine and Gas Turbine ... - Google Book Search
Hans Von Ohain: Elegance in Flight - Google Book Search
The Jet Race and the Second World War - Google Book Search
Hitler certainly didn't help though. (just like the use of the Me 262 as a bomber, while this wasn't the main reason for the lagging production it was certainly not a help along with all the other political and technical problems)
And these were more pronounced on Heinkel's programs.
And while the political problems of the US and UK jet programs were of a different nature, the Soviets' situation in many ways was similar to Germany.
And Stallin didn't help there either.
And Yakolev had considerable influence in it too, seeing what happened to the excellent (1944-1946) Su 9/11/13.
And one thing to note on the Soviet projects is they started genuine serious studies ( '20's) and development ('30's) and recieved government intrest before any other country, ironically they ended up being one of the last of the major players to actually fly their own jet, and then on copied engines.
http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/threads/printthread.php?Board=spmbttoe&main=515709&type=post
An indepth view on the Soviet designs: Russian Aviation Page: Russian Jet Technology 1937-45
some early Russian designs: M.Gudkov's projects
more engine stuff: Jets45-Engines
And the first serious Soviet jet design: Gu-VRD
Some on the US: ch3
Whittle: A TRIBUTE TO A CAMBRIDGE ENGINEERINGSTUDENT
Some good German jet info o this thread: The soc-history-war-world-war-ii November 2006 Archive by thread
Some books: German Jet Engine and Gas Turbine ... - Google Book Search
Hans Von Ohain: Elegance in Flight - Google Book Search
The Jet Race and the Second World War - Google Book Search
