German Airplanes in WW2

[GrauGeist]

And an interesting footnote about the USN's FH-1 Phantom, was that it was the direct predecessor of the F2H Banshee that saw years of successful service AND the FH-1 was the first jet in the U.S. Navy to be launched/recovered aboard a carrier - this was directly after WWII, so again, if the war had drug on for a little while longer, a great deal of change was in the works.

 

[BLine22]

Not deceiving at all, I said "military jets" not "proof of concept" aircraft like the He178 and the Gloster...the aircraft I listed was a progression in the timeline of combat jet aircraft that were actually intended to be put into production.
The list was put forth as an example of how the Jet age was germinating at a rapid pace, as Grant pointed out.

Sorry "deceiving" was a poor choice of words. I meant to show that i believe that the U.S. was behind and needed the assistance of the British to catch up.

 

[GrauGeist]

Sorry "deceiving" was a poor choice of words. I meant to show that i believe that the U.S. was behind and needed the assistance of the British to catch up.

However, you'll note that the Bell P-59 was a year ahead of the Meteor in final development.

 

[ww2restorer]

I can't remember the German scientist's name who wrote the paper about swept wings, but it was done so before the war I think

The man was Dr. Adolf Busemann and his paper on sweep wing theory was published in 1935.

"By February 1940, the design of the P 1065 had been modified to have the outer sections of its wings swept back some 18 degrees. Originally this was done to solve problems that heavier engine weight estimates were causing with the positioning of the aircraft's centre of gravity."

As Dr Buseman and all Aeronautical engineers will agree, swept wings are a design criteria to reduce high-speed drag, delaying the shock waves caused by fluid compressibility. Rarely was it done to increase visibility or structural convenience.

 

[Shortround6]

As Dr Buseman and all Aeronautical engineers will agree, swept wings are a design criteria to reduce high-speed drag, delaying the shock waves caused by fluid compressibility. Rarely was it done to increase visibility or structural convenience.

It may depend on the degree of sweep. Slightly swept wings (or outer portions of the wing) were often used to correct CG problems in prototype aircraft. But the degree of sweep (single digits) may have no appreciable difference in drag.

 

[michaelmaltby]

"... However, you'll note that the Bell P-59 was a year ahead of the Meteor in final development."

But the P-59 was Bell's first jet. The Meteor was Gloster's second jet .... their first flew May 15, 1941

 

[GrauGeist]

"... However, you'll note that the Bell P-59 was a year ahead of the Meteor in final development."

But the P-59 was Bell's first jet. The Meteor was Gloster's second jet .... their first flew May 15, 1941View attachment 350058

The E.28/39 was a proof of concept aircraft and wasn't related to the Meteor much like the He178 proof of concept wasn't related to the He280.

 

[Shortround6]

And we are back to prove of concept vs viable combat aircraft.

According to Wiki: ( I know.... I Know.... correction welcome)
The 1st Gloster had provision for four .303 machineguns. Hardly first class armament in 1941.

But with a wing span of 29 ft, a wing area of 146 sq ft and an empty weight of 2,886 lb there isn't much space to fit a worthwhile armament. Nor was there enough power to to get worthwhile performance. It had been hoped to get 380mph form a 1200lb thrust engine but the early flights where made with an 860lb thrust engine and speed was 338mph at 10,000ft and climb was best described as abysmal. With 81 gallons of fuel max endurance was 56 minutes. A more powerful engine would of course improve performance but cut into the endurance.
At some point in May-July of 1943 it did hit 466mph but that was with a 1526lb thrust engine and no military equipment.

Edit, changed 1944 to 1943 in last line.

 

[michaelmaltby]

".... E.28/39 was a proof of concept aircraft.... "

And, IIRC, that "proof" data was shared with the US manufactures.

 

[pbehn]

".... E.28/39 was a proof of concept aircraft.... "

And, IIRC, that "proof" data was shared with the US manufactures.

That was an obligation under the lease lend programme.

 

[ww2restorer]

It may depend on the degree of sweep. Slightly swept wings (or outer portions of the wing) were often used to correct CG problems in prototype aircraft. But the degree of sweep (single digits) may have no appreciable difference in drag.

It is debatable, the Boeing 727 had double digit sweep angle and it is a problematic aircraft to taxi and service. If there was not 10,000 #s of fuel in the centre tank, you could not taxi(tow), also you can not fill all tanks without the rear air stair extended or the aircraft loaded, it will sit on its a$$. Under 10 degrees sweep really is so close to a straight wing.

 

[Kryten]

Dakotas had swept wings, of sorts!

 

[gjs238]

That was an obligation under the lease lend programme.

Sharing of jet technology predated Lend-Lease (signed into law on 11 March 1941) with the Tizard Mission in September 1940.
Tizard Mission - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The objective of the mission was to cooperate in science and technology with the U.S., which was neutral and, in many quarters, unwilling to become involved in the war. The U.S. had greater resources for development and production, which Britain desperately wanted to use. The information provided by the British delegation was subject to carefully vetted security procedures, and contained some of the greatest scientific advances made during the war. The shared technology included radar (in particular the greatly improved cavity magnetron which the American historian James Phinney Baxter III later called "the most valuable cargo ever brought to our shores"),[1] the design for the VT fuse, details of Frank Whittle's jet engine and the Frisch-Peierls memorandum describing the feasibility of an atomic bomb. Though these may be considered the most significant, many other items were also transported, including designs for rockets, superchargers, gyroscopic gunsights, submarine detection devices, self-sealing fuel tanks and plastic explosives.

 

[nuuumannn]

The man was Dr. Adolf Busemann and his paper on sweep wing theory was published in 1935.

That's the fella. Thanks ww2aircraftrestorer man.

It's only natural that the Allies shared information and technology; after all they were all working toward the same end. The Germans shared jet and rocket technology with the Japanese. The most bizarre and productive from the receiver's point of view, instance of technology sharing, considering the circumstances would have to be the British giving the Soviets jet engines after the war's end.

 

[wuzak]

And we are back to prove of concept vs viable combat aircraft.

I would argue that the P-59 wasn't really a viable combat aircraft, nor was it supposed to be.

 

[GrauGeist]

I would argue that the P-59 wasn't really a viable combat aircraft, nor was it supposed to be.

It was most certainly intended to be and received contract orders and even after it was found to be lacking in performance, was still used as a trainer and test-bed.

 

[wuzak]

I was just reading about the Meteor. It seems it was doing taxiing tests in 1942, but flight engines were slow in coming from Rover. The first flight was achieved using Halford H.1s.

The reason that the P-59 flew before the Meteor would seem to be that GE did a better job of the Whittle designs than did Rover.