Horton Flying Wing

[Koopernic]

We had ground radar even in the Vietnam era, Early 70's, they used them at firebases on the perimeter .
They could detect people, tell if they were armed or not. And sensitive enough that operators could tell people from water buffaloes.

One of the first tests Randall and Boot did with their 1kw 9cm magnetron was detect each other walking down the beach over a few hundred yards.

The reflection coefficient for waterproof plywood is 0.26, that for MDF 0.12.

Because the radar signal return is an inverse power of 4 it means that the detection range is only reduced to 70% to 50% for a wood sheet over a metal plate. It's not much but it would be noticed by a WW2 radar operator on his A or J scope. Combine that with the lack of radar scatter from the absence of a tail and propellers it might be more significant. The Northrop YB-49 was noted for its unintended stealth why wouldn't a much smaller wooden flying wing be at least as stealthy.

i don't think Reimer Horten did any deep research. The Hortens were self educated tinkerers and they probably noticed something, understood that wood is a poorer reflector and thought they could use it to promote their flying wing.

Anyway in 1950 he says wooden aircraft have radar camouflage. He says "guided by these principles I designed the Ho IX."

i suspect in due course the professionals with real radar absorbers from the signal branches of the German navy or Luftwaffe would have become involved with the Ho 229.

 

[CAVU Mark]

The San Diego Air and Space Museum received a treasury trove of images from the Hortens. Here are a few.

 

[CAVU Mark]

And some more.

 

[CAVU Mark]

And some more..

 

[CAVU Mark]

And some more.. oops. the last images are of a high altitude intercept and then some concepts when he went to Argentina. A number of years before the F-86 and MIG-15.

 

[GrauGeist]

The bottom images in post #105 are Kurt Tank's Ta183.

 

[Tkdog]

When discussing stealth it is worth considering what on earth it would have been good for given the German's situation. It's only really going to be useful at night, which means area bombing. An expensive jet aircraft in 1945 will not be plentiful enough to make area bombing worthwhile.

Stealth is useful today because they can hit what they are aiming at. Most usefully to suppress air defenses so less stealthy and less expensive aircraft can come in behind. That was not possible in WW2.

There was a great deal of experimentation during the war. Some of the results were by chance and led to further developments.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

When discussing stealth it is worth considering what on earth it would have been good for given the German's situation. It's only really going to be useful at night, which means area bombing. An expensive jet aircraft in 1945 will not be plentiful enough to make area bombing worthwhile.

Stealth is useful today because they can hit what they are aiming at. Most usefully to suppress air defenses so less stealthy and less expensive aircraft can come in behind. That was not possible in WW2.

There was a great deal of experimentation during the war. Some of the results were by chance and led to further developments.

While a "real" stealth aircraft may not have helped Germany latter in the war, it would have had the possibility to draw resources away from the front and enabled the Luftwaffe to keep fighting. Even with a reduced RCS, interceptors over the UK would have had less time to react to any incoming threat.

 

[Tkdog]

Would it? The buzz bombs had minimal impact really. Would it be anything more than that? I don't seem them reducing the offensive against Germany to combat what could never be more than a small number of nuisance raiders. Sure, some attempt at interception would be made that's a given. But if the issue becomes pronounced then it is addressed by raids in the airfields.

I don't see the attraction folks have in trying to find a way for the Nazi thugs to have kept fighting. But that aside, the proposals are, like this one, fairly silly and don't take into account the scale of operations that were underway.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Would it? The buzz bombs had minimal impact really. Would it be anything more than that? I don't seem them reducing the offensive against Germany to combat what could never be more than a small number of nuisance raiders. Sure, some attempt at interception would be made that's a given. But if the issue becomes pronounced then it is addressed by raids in the airfields.

YES - Germany was still attempting to cause damage right up to the end, especially at night, last German raid was in March 1945.

I don't see the attraction folks have in trying to find a way for the Nazi thugs to have kept fighting. But that aside, the proposals are, like this one, fairly silly and don't take into account the scale of operations that were underway.

I don't see where there's an "attraction" here, just stating a fact that is backed up by a ton of evidence so please keep the emotional semantics to a minimum!

 

[pbehn]

Would it? The buzz bombs had minimal impact really. Would it be anything more than that? I don't seem them reducing the offensive against Germany to combat what could never be more than a small number of nuisance raiders. Sure, some attempt at interception would be made that's a given. But if the issue becomes pronounced then it is addressed by raids in the airfields.

I don't see the attraction folks have in trying to find a way for the Nazi thugs to have kept fighting. But that aside, the proposals are, like this one, fairly silly and don't take into account the scale of operations that were underway.

They may have had little impact in USA, because they didn't land there, you wouldn't want those ineffective buzz bombs falling on New York at any time since Columbus landed. They had a huge impact in London, the V2 even greater because it was in effect a permanent air raid with no warning, just explosions and casualties. Massive resources were put into countering the V1 from the Tempest and Meteor fighters to radar guided proximity artillery.

 

[pbehn]

YES - Germany was still attempting to cause damage right up to the end, especially at night, last German raid was in March 1945.

T Tkdog maybe it means more when you can reach some of the places involved on foot or by bicycle. Operation Gisela - Wikipedia

The last German aircraft to crash on UK soil was on 4th March 1945 raiding Elvington airfield N Yorkshire which is 50 miles from me, planes diverted in the order to scatter ended up at Croft airfield which is 12 miles away. Both were post war race circuits which I raced at regularly.
The Luftwaffe attack on RAF Elvington - Operation Gisela - Yorkshire Air Museum[/QUOTE]

 

[pbehn]

The approximate figures for V weapons are as follows
V-1 2,754 killed, 6,523 wounded
V-2 5,475 killed, 16,309 wounded
8,229 total killed in England, 22,832 wounded

Please compare to the figures for the 9/11 attack and tell me how you conclude 8,229 killed and 22,832 injured had "minimal impact"?

 

[GrauGeist]

Additionally, the V2 gave zero warning of it's approach or target.
Once the V2 launched and aquired it's flight path, no one (but launch control) knew where it was going.
After it started it's descent, it became supersonic - technology of the day had no way to detect/track it, there was no sound of it's approach, only it's impact and explosion bore witness to it's arrival.

Of all the "wunderwaffe" weapons Germany had, this was actually a true terror weapon.

 

[pbehn]

Additionally, the V2 gave zero warning of it's approach or target.
Once the V2 launched and aquired it's flight path, no one (but launch control) knew where it was going.
After it started it's descent, it became supersonic - technology of the day had no way to detect/track it, there was no sound of it's approach, only it's impact and explosion bore witness to it's arrival.

Of all the "wunderwaffe" weapons Germany had, this was actually a true terror weapon.

There was no defence against an individual V2 but there was against the whole system. Not only were the launch sites and holding silos attacked, their information system was also, to progressively make them land further from the target, just about the last use of the double cross spy system in ww2.

 

[GrauGeist]

There was no defence against an individual V2 but there was against the whole system. Not only were the launch sites and holding silos attacked, their information system was also, to progressively make them land further from the target, just about the last use of the double cross spy system in ww2.

Indeed

 

[Tkdog]

Minimal impact compared to the ongoing losses from the war. The argument above was that a few "stealth" bombers would disrupt the allies war fighting abilities as they scrambled to reply. My point is that the casualties from the V1, w could be intercepted, did not result in such a disruption. It would be difficult for a small number of these bombers to do more than that. So, why would the allies be disrupted?

Tens of millions of people died in WW2, an incomprehensible tragedy. But the allies weren't going to prolong the war to divert resources to go after an attack that was threatening a few thousand people. There would be a response, but it would be proportional.

 

[Capt. Vick]

And some more.. oops. the last images are of a high altitude intercept and then some concepts when he went to Argentina. A number of years before the F-86 and MIG-15.

Yes, the last 3 images in post #105 are Kurt Tank's Ta 183, but the one before those show the sad remains of the DFS 228 post war. I assume after the allies picked it apart to learn any secrets it may have kept. I understand this picture was taken in Britain.

 

[nuuumannn]

Anyway in 1950 he says wooden aircraft have radar camouflage. He says "guided by these principles I designed the Ho IX."

This is, of course, pure fiction as there is no evidence anywhere that the Ho IX or the Go 229 were conceived with the intent of using radar absorbent material in their construction. None at all, despite what Horten later wrote.

It's common knowledge, or at least easy to find out that the Germans were working on radar absorbent material, but there was no cross reference between German research conducted and the Horten aircraft. None. I have asked in the past that whomever keeps referring to this to prove it with contemporary documentation produced during Nazi times, so, let's see it.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Minimal impact compared to the ongoing losses from the war. The argument above was that a few "stealth" bombers would disrupt the allies war fighting abilities as they scrambled to reply. My point is that the casualties from the V1, w could be intercepted, did not result in such a disruption. It would be difficult for a small number of these bombers to do more than that. So, why would the allies be disrupted?

My point is they would provide enough of a disruption to move valuable assets from the front to protect a civilian population, something that was actually done during WW2 with units like Group 12 being assigned to do nothing but intercept night intrusions by the Luftwaffe, and assets from 150 wing RAF, 3 Squadron that did nothing but intercept V-1s, you're talking dozens of fighters that could have been supporting the action across the channel.

Tens of millions of people died in WW2, an incomprehensible tragedy. But the allies weren't going to prolong the war to divert resources to go after an attack that was threatening a few thousand people. There would be a response, but it would be proportional.

And it was proportional, the "what if" of a near stealth aircraft would have upped the ante, especially if it was the British population facing the wrath of this.