FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Agreedelcyros said:
He-162 vs Meteor MK-III
- Thread starter delcyros
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
That I will agree with also, however I still dont like the engine behind the cockpit like that. I think they could have done that better.
- Thread starter
- #43
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
Yes, if they had decided to do so, they would cancel the whole He-162 program and shift ressources towards Messerschmidt´s P1101 program.
Even without variable wing sweep (The V-1 prototype had them just in order to get additional datas for transsonic speeds and low speed handling) the plane would have been better. However it doesn´t fit to the RLM´s ideas of a small, simple plane which is easy to fly and producable in very high numbers.
Even without variable wing sweep (The V-1 prototype had them just in order to get additional datas for transsonic speeds and low speed handling) the plane would have been better. However it doesn´t fit to the RLM´s ideas of a small, simple plane which is easy to fly and producable in very high numbers.
I agree either the P.1011 or the Ta-183 program. Both were almost ready for test flight by wars end.
carpenoctem1689
Airman 1st Class
- 285
- Sep 10, 2005
The Ta-183 was found to have some problems that took time to correct. Kurt tank actually built the aircraft for.... <.< >.> ... Paraguay maybe, i dont know, but the aircraft had poor handling at first and needed some refinement to the wings and the tail surfaces. The germans just didnt have time to choose what might be better, because they needed something right then and there, and Heinkel had been working on a small lightweight fighter for some time, so had the edge.
- Thread starter
- #46
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
I will go with You on this.
The Pulqui-II build for Argentinia was somehow problematic. It should be noted that it isn´t a Ta-183 (the basic idea behind it shares a lot with the original Huckebein but the technical solutions to provide space for new jet engines show a new design at all).
Since there is no recorded flight of a Ta-183 prototype we can only draw cocnlusions from the construction charts. The high wing sweep with very high aspect ratio and without anhedral and additional lift provider for low speeds (no slats or flaperons) would give the plane an excellent crit Mach but a worrisome low speed handling. Wing boundary layers could fix it as demonstrated by Lawotchkin´s La-15 (who overtook the Ta-183 wingdesign).
All in all a problematic plane to fly in my estimation. The Me-P1101 was far more ahead in development but Heinkel had the advantage of P1073, which was the ancestor of the He-162. Neither the Me nor the Ta could be produced in such a brief period and pushed into service.
It should be considered that the layout of the He-162 makes improvements (engine, weaponry, fuel, wing sweep) very easy. Any operational engine could be fitted, the wing could be replaced by a swept one (this did not go farther than a half completed prototype with interchangable swept forward or swept back wings, found by advancing ground forces at the Schwechau plant)
The Pulqui-II build for Argentinia was somehow problematic. It should be noted that it isn´t a Ta-183 (the basic idea behind it shares a lot with the original Huckebein but the technical solutions to provide space for new jet engines show a new design at all).
Since there is no recorded flight of a Ta-183 prototype we can only draw cocnlusions from the construction charts. The high wing sweep with very high aspect ratio and without anhedral and additional lift provider for low speeds (no slats or flaperons) would give the plane an excellent crit Mach but a worrisome low speed handling. Wing boundary layers could fix it as demonstrated by Lawotchkin´s La-15 (who overtook the Ta-183 wingdesign).
All in all a problematic plane to fly in my estimation. The Me-P1101 was far more ahead in development but Heinkel had the advantage of P1073, which was the ancestor of the He-162. Neither the Me nor the Ta could be produced in such a brief period and pushed into service.
It should be considered that the layout of the He-162 makes improvements (engine, weaponry, fuel, wing sweep) very easy. Any operational engine could be fitted, the wing could be replaced by a swept one (this did not go farther than a half completed prototype with interchangable swept forward or swept back wings, found by advancing ground forces at the Schwechau plant)
Parmigiano
Senior Airman
I agree with Delcyros, the Salamander was designed as 'quick' solution and having easiness of service and developmnent in mind.
Apparently one of the reason of the strange jet arrangement was that in that position there was no problem to ingest mud and dirt in case of operation on semi-prepared runways, plus the easy replacement/change of the engine.
It the goal to have an operational jet fighter in very short time this points were deemed more important than the inevitable drawbacks of such a configuration.
Prototypes and designs were made with He011 jet engine, 1 or 2 Argus pulsejets (same as V1) and others.
All in all it looked more an experimental aircraft pressed into production than a fully developed project.
If I have to be honest, I don't like the 162 very much!
Apparently one of the reason of the strange jet arrangement was that in that position there was no problem to ingest mud and dirt in case of operation on semi-prepared runways, plus the easy replacement/change of the engine.
It the goal to have an operational jet fighter in very short time this points were deemed more important than the inevitable drawbacks of such a configuration.
Prototypes and designs were made with He011 jet engine, 1 or 2 Argus pulsejets (same as V1) and others.
All in all it looked more an experimental aircraft pressed into production than a fully developed project.
If I have to be honest, I don't like the 162 very much!
the lancaster kicks ass
Major General
- 19,937
- Dec 20, 2003
i do, not only do i like the concept but i like the plane..........
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
I think it was a pretty slick aircraft, my only worry would of been its reliability...
I think looks wise and performance wise she was a good aircraft, I just dont like the fact of trying to eject from an aircraft with the engine right behind my cockpit or the fact with the engine there it would have made it very easy to hit that engine with your cannons.
cheddar cheese
Major General
I think that it was remarkable...Especially considering Germany's position when they were designing it and its brilliance compared to the length of development...
I agree CC. It was good considering it was developed and put into production so quickly, something the Germans needed to as the war drew to a close, it allowed a cheap and effective interceptor to get into the skies relatively quickly after coming off the drawing board.cheddar cheese said:
That was the whole point of the "Volks Jaeger" (Peoples Fighter). It was to be easy to build without using rare materials and easy to learn to fly. In that sence it was a very remarkable machine, considering it was all of those three things.
As I said I think it was a great aircraft, I just dont like where the engine is.
As I said I think it was a great aircraft, I just dont like where the engine is.
- Thread starter
- #54
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
A psychological disadvantage it seems to be...
While it is easier to hit an engine mounted on the back, you need to fly in the same performance class....P-80 or Meteor (F)MK-IV. Even then it is a tiny target to hit (64 cm in diameter, the BMW-003 was the smallest axial engine in ww2) and jet engines in general can take more damge than the more complicated piston ones. In this special point I would prefer the british, resp. the US radial designs, they can take much more than the axial ones, preferred by the Germans.
I am not sure if the He-162 was easy to fly, I would expect that the engine layout can produce a considerable amount of yaw and pitch forces. It probably was the most agile jet of it´s time (considering stick forces and roll rates) but not the easiest (this in my view belongs to either the Gloster E 28/39 or the He-280) to learn with.
I find it interesting that the project in the end succesfully overcomes the shortcomings of the early prototypes as pointed out above.
Comparing the He-162 with the other "Volksjäger" candidates of Focke Wulf, Blohn&Voss and Junkers the RLM decision for Heinkel was correct, the plane had the best performances and great potential for further development. Can anyone provide informations of british jet projects in 44? hadn´t the RAF a contract in 44 about a single engined jet fighter or am I wrong?
While it is easier to hit an engine mounted on the back, you need to fly in the same performance class....P-80 or Meteor (F)MK-IV. Even then it is a tiny target to hit (64 cm in diameter, the BMW-003 was the smallest axial engine in ww2) and jet engines in general can take more damge than the more complicated piston ones. In this special point I would prefer the british, resp. the US radial designs, they can take much more than the axial ones, preferred by the Germans.
I am not sure if the He-162 was easy to fly, I would expect that the engine layout can produce a considerable amount of yaw and pitch forces. It probably was the most agile jet of it´s time (considering stick forces and roll rates) but not the easiest (this in my view belongs to either the Gloster E 28/39 or the He-280) to learn with.
I find it interesting that the project in the end succesfully overcomes the shortcomings of the early prototypes as pointed out above.
Comparing the He-162 with the other "Volksjäger" candidates of Focke Wulf, Blohn&Voss and Junkers the RLM decision for Heinkel was correct, the plane had the best performances and great potential for further development. Can anyone provide informations of british jet projects in 44? hadn´t the RAF a contract in 44 about a single engined jet fighter or am I wrong?
Glider
Captain
I think you are talking about the Vampire that was in test at the time. Another unusual design but one that worked.
carpenoctem1689
Airman 1st Class
- 285
- Sep 10, 2005
I love the He-162 as an aircraft. If ir was built entirely of metals and alloys, and the engines were more reliable, it could have been an amazing aircraft. But because it was made because of a lack of all those things, it never made it to its full potential as an interceptor. Think about an all metal He-162, with a reliable He sO11 engine and two Mk-108, fitted with drop tanks to extend loiter time above the target. It would have been the most formidable interceptor flying.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Metal Alloys? Shoot I 'd like to see one built from modern composites!
- Thread starter
- #58
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
A metal winged He-162 with HeS011 and drop tanks would have been an excellent fighter, agreed. The metal wing was already on the drawing board in nov. 44 but canceled because of the delaying factor. Drop tanks could be fitted under the wingtips, increasing the endurance at sea level to around one hour at 100%. The extra weight of engine and wing could counter the recoilforces of the MK 108 but I don´t think it would have been an ideal fighter´s layout. Three MG 151/20 were still in the limits of the original design and I expect that this would be excellent for it´s role.
And I have to underline that the jet engine of the He-162 was, compared to it´s standarts, a reliable jet powerplant. Don´t mix it with a Jumo-004.
The spoolup time was shorter, it wasn´t that sensitive to throttle setting changes, it even could sustain a 115% overrew for at least 30 sec. (tested up to two minutes but for the cost of average lifetime)! Not to mention it´s much higher average lifetime (200 hours compared to 25-50 for the Jumo-004). It wasn´t that prone to flamouts at full acceleration, it had a superior high altitude behavior and even less specific fuel consumption. I would also like to point out that it weights nearly 200 Kg less than a Jumo-004 (dry).
We don´t know if the HeS011 would make it to a reliable powerplant, testbenched examples showed a wide field of complications (spool up time, feul consumption, high alt effectiveness), the only example to fly under a He-111 showed no malfunctions but decent tests are missing.
The Vampire is great, I simply lack in detailed knowledge but would be grateful if anyone can provide some interesting links.
Originally I had the Supermarine Ace or something comparable in mind. Ideas?
And I have to underline that the jet engine of the He-162 was, compared to it´s standarts, a reliable jet powerplant. Don´t mix it with a Jumo-004.
The spoolup time was shorter, it wasn´t that sensitive to throttle setting changes, it even could sustain a 115% overrew for at least 30 sec. (tested up to two minutes but for the cost of average lifetime)! Not to mention it´s much higher average lifetime (200 hours compared to 25-50 for the Jumo-004). It wasn´t that prone to flamouts at full acceleration, it had a superior high altitude behavior and even less specific fuel consumption. I would also like to point out that it weights nearly 200 Kg less than a Jumo-004 (dry).
We don´t know if the HeS011 would make it to a reliable powerplant, testbenched examples showed a wide field of complications (spool up time, feul consumption, high alt effectiveness), the only example to fly under a He-111 showed no malfunctions but decent tests are missing.
The Vampire is great, I simply lack in detailed knowledge but would be grateful if anyone can provide some interesting links.
Originally I had the Supermarine Ace or something comparable in mind. Ideas?
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
The main disadvantage of the early Vampires was their short range, had this been improved enough they might have seen some active service tward the war's end.
I don't think the BMW 003 was the smallest axial engine of the war, though it was certainly the smallest to see significant production. The smallest axial engine of the war that had production potential (and perhaps the best) was the HeS-006 (HeS-30) engine. It was slightly narrower, significantly shorter and lighter than the 003. With a diameter of only 24in (62cm), a length of 107in (272cm), a weight of 860 lbs (390kg), and a thrust of over 2000 lbf (in static tests, max theoretical thrust was projected at 2478 lbf) giving it a Thrust/weight of 2.8 (theoretical) and 2.33 (in testing) it was superior to all other early engines. In addition to these properties the engine used only a 3-stage compressor an along with its lighter weight it would have been easier and more economical to produce. (too bad it was dropped for the HeS-011, which, IMHO was not as good of an overall design, and certainly not as usefull since the 006 could have feasibly entered production between the 004 and 003 engines))
The 1600 lbf axial Westinghouse J30 engine which was entering production in late 1944 (used in the FH Phantom first flying in early '45) was also smaller though it wasn't available in numbers until after the war's end.
I don't think the BMW 003 was the smallest axial engine of the war, though it was certainly the smallest to see significant production. The smallest axial engine of the war that had production potential (and perhaps the best) was the HeS-006 (HeS-30) engine. It was slightly narrower, significantly shorter and lighter than the 003. With a diameter of only 24in (62cm), a length of 107in (272cm), a weight of 860 lbs (390kg), and a thrust of over 2000 lbf (in static tests, max theoretical thrust was projected at 2478 lbf) giving it a Thrust/weight of 2.8 (theoretical) and 2.33 (in testing) it was superior to all other early engines. In addition to these properties the engine used only a 3-stage compressor an along with its lighter weight it would have been easier and more economical to produce. (too bad it was dropped for the HeS-011, which, IMHO was not as good of an overall design, and certainly not as usefull since the 006 could have feasibly entered production between the 004 and 003 engines))
The 1600 lbf axial Westinghouse J30 engine which was entering production in late 1944 (used in the FH Phantom first flying in early '45) was also smaller though it wasn't available in numbers until after the war's end.
