Captured He 178 at Wright Field?!?

[kool kitty89]

Soren huh?

But that said, Soren, what are the differences between the V1 and V2?

 

[Soren]

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

 

[MONDARIZ]

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"

 

[MONDARIZ]

I found a picture showing a model of Deutsche Luftfahrtsammlung in 1936. Quite a large collection for such an early museum. Mostly outside it appears.

 

[Soren]

Pretty sure that's an inside view of the Museum Mondariz, note the bearing collumns. Furthermore the a/c for certain wouldn't be left outside.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

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...

I found a picture showing a model of Deutsche Luftfahrtsammlung in 1936. Quite a large collection for such an early museum. Mostly outside it appears.

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.

 

[MONDARIZ]

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.

 

[MONDARIZ]

I have now written to Holger Steinie, hoping to answer the question about the immediate fate of the He-178.

The question was in short:

Did the He-178 get destroyed during an air raid, or was it lost in the chaos of war?

 

[kool kitty89]

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

 

[MONDARIZ]

The AC certainly was very experimental and you are most likely right, is saying the flew the V1 with different structural and aerodynamical configurations.

I read that the v2 was built, but never flew.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

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.

 

[MONDARIZ]

I don't belive it made it out of Germany either, but I'm wondering if the destruction story is true, or it got lost with the rest of the collection.

Had it made it to Wright Field, we would all have heard about it.

 

[kool kitty89]

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

 

[MONDARIZ]

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.

 

[kool kitty89]

There was the other site too:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DY2sOfNnQYc

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF2WsyKOZOE

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oCdKGnWWxc


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F508BnlCqMc
YouTube - spottydog4472's Videos

 

[Kruska]

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......

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

 

[kool kitty89]

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

The Russians first started work on jets in the early 1920s. They set up a specialized gas turbine engine reserach group in 1926 and in 1930 the group was headed by V Oovarov. At that time, the primary focus was on turboprop engines and, in 1936, the group developed the 1,150 shp GTU-3 turboprop that was proposed as a powerplant for the TB-3 bomber. The prototypes of the GTU-3 were first test-flown in 1938. That year, the group split into two parts, one of which developed turboprops, the other of which started work on turbojets. That part was headed by Arkhip Mikhailovich Lyulka. By 1941, he had developed the RD-1 jet engine that delivered 1,100 pounds of thrust. Meanwhile, the Oovarov group were assembling a turboprop that could deliver 4,400 shp.

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