- Thread starter
- #41
Are you sure?
Luftwaffe Secret Projects 1939-1945
- Thread starter DerAdlerIstGelandet
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
cheddar cheese
Major General
Yep. The MiG-9 really does look a lot like the Ta-183.
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
Der Adler wrote:
Indeed, Towards 1947 ends, and after reuniting the ideas of the FMA designers, it was begun with a first draft denominated IA-33. As basic characteristics this airplane must have arrow wing, lodge a powerful engine, bubble cabin, low-mounted wing and i horizontal fin to half of the tail.
When is decided to display the project to the maximum authorities of the factory in the same meeting Professor Tank and his secretary Neuman was presented. In this same meeting, Tank did diverse considerations, being interested in the project. Here same he showed for the first time the planes of the Ta 183. This generate an interchange of ideas and reached the conclusion that the Tank project got greater maneuverability at 10,000 mts., and the one of the technicians and engineers of the FMA had greater speed at sea level.
Like result of this interesting meeting, engineer San Martín arranged that was formed two teams; one German, lead by Tank, and another Argentinean lead by the engineer Morchio. Each team had to elaborate a project, which was in consideration of San Martín. Finally was made the presentation of both projects. They were analyzed by parts: The wings and the empennage were practically identical, thus I do not generate discussion. However the main differences were in the fuselage and the undercarriage. The fuselage projected by the Argentine technicians was of smaller diameter, and this added to the best air inlet efficiency, towards of which this had better performance, but limited the fuel capacity. As far as the undercarriage the Germans anticipated the retraction of the same one towards the wings, by means of a complex mechanism. However the Argentine equipment anticipated the retraction towards the fuselage. Finally was decided by the German design for the fuselage, and for the Argentinean for the undercarriage. As we can appreciate, there was a strong competition between the two projects, being both solved through the smaller construction difficulty. Finally, and according to own words of the Argentine designers, not take the project of Tank Ta-183 as base of development, but on the contrary, was modify the prototype of the Argentine technicians that was the base of the project.
But, in my opinion the influence is more than this.
Indeed, Towards 1947 ends, and after reuniting the ideas of the FMA designers, it was begun with a first draft denominated IA-33. As basic characteristics this airplane must have arrow wing, lodge a powerful engine, bubble cabin, low-mounted wing and i horizontal fin to half of the tail.
When is decided to display the project to the maximum authorities of the factory in the same meeting Professor Tank and his secretary Neuman was presented. In this same meeting, Tank did diverse considerations, being interested in the project. Here same he showed for the first time the planes of the Ta 183. This generate an interchange of ideas and reached the conclusion that the Tank project got greater maneuverability at 10,000 mts., and the one of the technicians and engineers of the FMA had greater speed at sea level.
Like result of this interesting meeting, engineer San Martín arranged that was formed two teams; one German, lead by Tank, and another Argentinean lead by the engineer Morchio. Each team had to elaborate a project, which was in consideration of San Martín. Finally was made the presentation of both projects. They were analyzed by parts: The wings and the empennage were practically identical, thus I do not generate discussion. However the main differences were in the fuselage and the undercarriage. The fuselage projected by the Argentine technicians was of smaller diameter, and this added to the best air inlet efficiency, towards of which this had better performance, but limited the fuel capacity. As far as the undercarriage the Germans anticipated the retraction of the same one towards the wings, by means of a complex mechanism. However the Argentine equipment anticipated the retraction towards the fuselage. Finally was decided by the German design for the fuselage, and for the Argentinean for the undercarriage. As we can appreciate, there was a strong competition between the two projects, being both solved through the smaller construction difficulty. Finally, and according to own words of the Argentine designers, not take the project of Tank Ta-183 as base of development, but on the contrary, was modify the prototype of the Argentine technicians that was the base of the project.
But, in my opinion the influence is more than this.
The Pulqui II was unstable because Kurt Tank decided to move the tail plane. The Argentinian test pilot disliked the prototype and it was cancelled.
The MiG-15 developed from the MiG-9. The MiG-9 is widely based on the Ta-183 to learn lessons from the Ta-183 design, then the MiG-15 was developed to learn yet more lessons and ultimately create a fighter worthy of any combatant in the skies. The MiG-9 even flew with BMW 003 and Jumo 004 engines.
The MiG-15 was a development from the design, based even more so on German aeronautical engineering discoveries e.g swept wings. The fuselage was increased to hold the RD-45 (Nene V) engine. The tail plane was moved, as Tank had done to the Pulqui II and more modern equipment installed. Slight alterations of a design don't change the core basis, the Ta-183 and other German designs.
The MiG-9 was ordered in 1945, straight after World War II. At a time when German scientists were freshly captured. MiGs own design, I think not.
The MiG-15 developed from the MiG-9. The MiG-9 is widely based on the Ta-183 to learn lessons from the Ta-183 design, then the MiG-15 was developed to learn yet more lessons and ultimately create a fighter worthy of any combatant in the skies. The MiG-9 even flew with BMW 003 and Jumo 004 engines.
The MiG-15 was a development from the design, based even more so on German aeronautical engineering discoveries e.g swept wings. The fuselage was increased to hold the RD-45 (Nene V) engine. The tail plane was moved, as Tank had done to the Pulqui II and more modern equipment installed. Slight alterations of a design don't change the core basis, the Ta-183 and other German designs.
The MiG-9 was ordered in 1945, straight after World War II. At a time when German scientists were freshly captured. MiGs own design, I think not.
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
And that´s what I disagree in.
The Pulqui-II was unsatble, surprise? No, because Kurt Tank wasn´t the chief designer for the Ta-183 project. This position belongs to Hans Multhopp, who never went to Argentinia. If Tank continued his Ta-183 project (which was the case in my mind) he would have it to do without the experiances of Multhorp and his careful tail design studies (the latest versions of the Ta-183, the Entwurf-III showed a new tail design with an F-86 like elevator positioned much deeper).For the Mig-9, resp. I-300 we have a similar problem: Not Multhopp worked for Mikoyan (indeed he went to Britain and later to the US) but Ernst Heinkel is said to have worked for Mikoyan in the post war period. If the Mig-9 would be based on the Ta-183 than in less tahn a two months (construction charts have been closed in june 1945, it can be excluded that the SU would have analysed the captured Ta-183 material in this timeframe)the fuselage, the tail and the wing would have been completely redesigned. The picture is showing an Mig-9 FR, the more advanced version with two RD-20F (afterburner modified BMW-003 B), where the guns are already moved to the side of the fuselage. This happened because of the flamouts and because german material was under investigation (construction charts for Mig-9 FR were closed in late 1946).
The original I-300 goes back in the stage of preliminary studies to february 1945, so I suppose that we barely see any influence from the Ta-183 in this design.
The project C ("S), I-310 (or Mig-15) was initiated in late 1946 parallel to the Mig-9 F (FR/FN/FL and FF) under the impressions the swept wing made at ZAGI windtunnel testings. This directly comes from german research.
However, the Mig-15 not directly derivates from the Mig-9, as I showed a parallel development of the later Mig-9F and the Mig-15. The Mig-15 was found so superior that the Mig-9F development was canceled. It was indeed an entirely new design, influenced more on german papers in the preliminary study stage but with acces to the RR Nene, the SU designers build a fuselage around an Nene with circular diameter, longer air intake. The components were positioned behind each other and the wing had to be designed on the ZAGI results for a moderatly swept back wing. The wing is much thicker than the Ta-183 wing, so it could contain main wheel and fuel tanks. Heinkels contributions to the Mikoyan program is the ejection seat of the He-162, which was from the Mig-9M and -UTI onwards.
The general layout similarities of Ta-183 and Mig-15 are not more striking than those of the Ta-183 and the F-86 but nobody says that there is a connection (with good reason because there isn´t much-alike the Mig).
The Pulqui-II was unsatble, surprise? No, because Kurt Tank wasn´t the chief designer for the Ta-183 project. This position belongs to Hans Multhopp, who never went to Argentinia. If Tank continued his Ta-183 project (which was the case in my mind) he would have it to do without the experiances of Multhorp and his careful tail design studies (the latest versions of the Ta-183, the Entwurf-III showed a new tail design with an F-86 like elevator positioned much deeper).For the Mig-9, resp. I-300 we have a similar problem: Not Multhopp worked for Mikoyan (indeed he went to Britain and later to the US) but Ernst Heinkel is said to have worked for Mikoyan in the post war period. If the Mig-9 would be based on the Ta-183 than in less tahn a two months (construction charts have been closed in june 1945, it can be excluded that the SU would have analysed the captured Ta-183 material in this timeframe)the fuselage, the tail and the wing would have been completely redesigned. The picture is showing an Mig-9 FR, the more advanced version with two RD-20F (afterburner modified BMW-003 B), where the guns are already moved to the side of the fuselage. This happened because of the flamouts and because german material was under investigation (construction charts for Mig-9 FR were closed in late 1946).
The original I-300 goes back in the stage of preliminary studies to february 1945, so I suppose that we barely see any influence from the Ta-183 in this design.
The project C ("S), I-310 (or Mig-15) was initiated in late 1946 parallel to the Mig-9 F (FR/FN/FL and FF) under the impressions the swept wing made at ZAGI windtunnel testings. This directly comes from german research.
However, the Mig-15 not directly derivates from the Mig-9, as I showed a parallel development of the later Mig-9F and the Mig-15. The Mig-15 was found so superior that the Mig-9F development was canceled. It was indeed an entirely new design, influenced more on german papers in the preliminary study stage but with acces to the RR Nene, the SU designers build a fuselage around an Nene with circular diameter, longer air intake. The components were positioned behind each other and the wing had to be designed on the ZAGI results for a moderatly swept back wing. The wing is much thicker than the Ta-183 wing, so it could contain main wheel and fuel tanks. Heinkels contributions to the Mikoyan program is the ejection seat of the He-162, which was from the Mig-9M and -UTI onwards.
The general layout similarities of Ta-183 and Mig-15 are not more striking than those of the Ta-183 and the F-86 but nobody says that there is a connection (with good reason because there isn´t much-alike the Mig).
The MiG-9M was in development when cancelled due to the MiG-15 appearing from German studies. The MiG-9 design began in 1945, not so long after World War 2. It doesn't take too long to get a good idea of German designs, even without the head scientist of the project. One scientist doesn't do it all even if only one, the head, is named in all history books.
The MiG-15 was developed from lessons learnt on the MiG-9 and German studies during World War 2. The MiG-15 was created from the Ta-183 then changes made for vital parts like the Nene V and wing tanks.
The changes made to the MiG-15 during development due to different demands don't take the core away from the Ta-183.
The F-86 was in design before the Ta-183 was discovered, the F-86 benefitted from the wings of the Ta-183 and other swept wing designs. The wing was already a P-51s wing though, and it was swept when the U.S discovered the papers and scientists.
In that case, every single swept wing aircraft post-WWII was developed from German studies.
The MiG-15 was developed from lessons learnt on the MiG-9 and German studies during World War 2. The MiG-15 was created from the Ta-183 then changes made for vital parts like the Nene V and wing tanks.
The changes made to the MiG-15 during development due to different demands don't take the core away from the Ta-183.
The F-86 was in design before the Ta-183 was discovered, the F-86 benefitted from the wings of the Ta-183 and other swept wing designs. The wing was already a P-51s wing though, and it was swept when the U.S discovered the papers and scientists.
In that case, every single swept wing aircraft post-WWII was developed from German studies.
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
Now we are closing!
But if you check some books, you will find that the Mig-9 design begun in ww2. In february 1945. The design was closed in june 1945, not long after VE-day.
German scientist were brought later into the SU, and I doubt that analysis of captured material progressed that far in the time between may and june. The redesign of the armement for the Mig-9FR show some more influence or maybe improvements taken over from those documents but with this we are in 1946 at soonest. The analysing of the german captured documents in the US and UK took even more time.
However, in case of the Mig-15, the initiative (like the La-15) came from both: Order based on the impressions of captured Ta-183 docs and maybe spies in the US (not sure in this but it wouldn´t surprise me much), where the F-86 with a similar concept was in progress.
The acces to the RR Nene proved to be vital for the entire soviet jet program, but now the SU designers had to design a (new) fuselage around the Nene and they made additional changes to the wing and tail. In the end, we have a new aircraft design. Just like the Saab-J-9 Tunnan. This plane also was influenced in preliminary studys on the Ta-183 but became a genuine swedish aircraft in the end.
With the F-86 we are positive that the program was started during ww2 (comparable to the Mig-9), but the original wing was replaced (not only swept back) by a NACA optimazed (Me-262 / Me-P1101 based) wing. The problem with the swept back wing was bad stall speed and low speed behavior (that´s why US researchers acknowledged but ignored the swept wing in their own 1945 documents) in general. The F-86 wing is modified, it has little in common with the original P-86 (I think it was the very first prototype)straight Mustang wing. Just note the leading edge slats, this is for sure not a Mustang wing detail. Aspect ratio and laminar flow was also modified a little to counter the worse low speed behavior of a laminar flow swept back wing. In the end the F-86 is also a genuine US design, incorporating new aerodynamic solution for high subsonic speeds (from captured german research material).
But if you check some books, you will find that the Mig-9 design begun in ww2. In february 1945. The design was closed in june 1945, not long after VE-day.
German scientist were brought later into the SU, and I doubt that analysis of captured material progressed that far in the time between may and june. The redesign of the armement for the Mig-9FR show some more influence or maybe improvements taken over from those documents but with this we are in 1946 at soonest. The analysing of the german captured documents in the US and UK took even more time.
However, in case of the Mig-15, the initiative (like the La-15) came from both: Order based on the impressions of captured Ta-183 docs and maybe spies in the US (not sure in this but it wouldn´t surprise me much), where the F-86 with a similar concept was in progress.
The acces to the RR Nene proved to be vital for the entire soviet jet program, but now the SU designers had to design a (new) fuselage around the Nene and they made additional changes to the wing and tail. In the end, we have a new aircraft design. Just like the Saab-J-9 Tunnan. This plane also was influenced in preliminary studys on the Ta-183 but became a genuine swedish aircraft in the end.
With the F-86 we are positive that the program was started during ww2 (comparable to the Mig-9), but the original wing was replaced (not only swept back) by a NACA optimazed (Me-262 / Me-P1101 based) wing. The problem with the swept back wing was bad stall speed and low speed behavior (that´s why US researchers acknowledged but ignored the swept wing in their own 1945 documents) in general. The F-86 wing is modified, it has little in common with the original P-86 (I think it was the very first prototype)straight Mustang wing. Just note the leading edge slats, this is for sure not a Mustang wing detail. Aspect ratio and laminar flow was also modified a little to counter the worse low speed behavior of a laminar flow swept back wing. In the end the F-86 is also a genuine US design, incorporating new aerodynamic solution for high subsonic speeds (from captured german research material).
- Thread starter
- #48
Through all this I wonder how the German designers were treated by there counter parts in Russia, England, and the United States. I would assume as colleges by the British and the US but by the Russians this may have been a different story. It would just be interesting to know.
As for the Mig-9 I have to go with pD on this as a direct development of the Ta-183.
Also if you look at Kurt Tanks first design for a Focke-Wulf air superiority fighter. It looke remarkably similar to the I-301 and the Mig-9. Different only the fact that it did not have swept wings. You can read up on his first design in the book Luftwaffe Secret Projects Fighters 1939 - 1945 by Walter Schick and Ingolf Meyer.
The second design actually looks more like the Ta-183 that we know of however with the third design again we go back to a remarkable resemblance to the I-301 and the Mig-9. This time it had swept back wings used both on the Ta-183 and the Mig-9.
As for the Mig-9 I have to go with pD on this as a direct development of the Ta-183.
Also if you look at Kurt Tanks first design for a Focke-Wulf air superiority fighter. It looke remarkably similar to the I-301 and the Mig-9. Different only the fact that it did not have swept wings. You can read up on his first design in the book Luftwaffe Secret Projects Fighters 1939 - 1945 by Walter Schick and Ingolf Meyer.
The second design actually looks more like the Ta-183 that we know of however with the third design again we go back to a remarkable resemblance to the I-301 and the Mig-9. This time it had swept back wings used both on the Ta-183 and the Mig-9.
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
I got a look into the book, Adler.
If the Focke-Wulf project is "Vorschlag 2 from 1943" for an air superiority fighter I would like to remind you that this project -unlike the Ta-183- never went further on the drawing board (e.g. to stage of construcktion charts for details). It also misses an fuselage based air intake (since the single jet engine is mounted in a nacelle under the fuselage). The wing contains (alike the Mig-9) the main wheel and is set in mid wing position.
All in all, Vorschlag 2 was kind of a preliminary study.
The closest Mig-9 like design in the book you may find in the Messerschmidt P1094(?)/4. It bears a close tail design, a mid wing set straight wing, a single jet engine in the center of the fuselage with a short engine exhaust, a forward set cockpit and an fuselage based, seperated air intake. The similarities are not striking if you take a look into the details, however. As in this case, the documents of this Messerschmidt project did fall into US hands, who captured the TB of Oberammergau/Augsburg. The SU had no acces to them, as far as I know.
In no book I found atrace of a connection between Ta-183 and Mig-9.
The timeframe is too narrow to estimate a strong influence here.
By the way, what do you think was the most promising Luftw. fighter plane of the last promisal?
Ju-EF128, Ta-183, Hs-P-135, He-162(D), or a Me-design?
If the Focke-Wulf project is "Vorschlag 2 from 1943" for an air superiority fighter I would like to remind you that this project -unlike the Ta-183- never went further on the drawing board (e.g. to stage of construcktion charts for details). It also misses an fuselage based air intake (since the single jet engine is mounted in a nacelle under the fuselage). The wing contains (alike the Mig-9) the main wheel and is set in mid wing position.
All in all, Vorschlag 2 was kind of a preliminary study.
The closest Mig-9 like design in the book you may find in the Messerschmidt P1094(?)/4. It bears a close tail design, a mid wing set straight wing, a single jet engine in the center of the fuselage with a short engine exhaust, a forward set cockpit and an fuselage based, seperated air intake. The similarities are not striking if you take a look into the details, however. As in this case, the documents of this Messerschmidt project did fall into US hands, who captured the TB of Oberammergau/Augsburg. The SU had no acces to them, as far as I know.
In no book I found atrace of a connection between Ta-183 and Mig-9.
The timeframe is too narrow to estimate a strong influence here.
By the way, what do you think was the most promising Luftw. fighter plane of the last promisal?
Ju-EF128, Ta-183, Hs-P-135, He-162(D), or a Me-design?
- Thread starter
- #50
You are correct the Vorschlag 2 never made it past the drawing board. Yes you schould check out the books though they are great.
I do believe the Ta-183 was the future and the best design along with the Me-P.1101. I am also fond of the Lippisch Delta VI design, Messerschmitt P.1065, Messerschmitt P.1099, Arado Ar-234P-5, and the Arado Project 1 of 1945.
I do however think the most promising designs which could have made it in the air by 1946 were the Messerschmitt P.1110. It almost reminds me of the USAF Thunderchiefs from Vietnam.
I do believe the Ta-183 was the future and the best design along with the Me-P.1101. I am also fond of the Lippisch Delta VI design, Messerschmitt P.1065, Messerschmitt P.1099, Arado Ar-234P-5, and the Arado Project 1 of 1945.
I do however think the most promising designs which could have made it in the air by 1946 were the Messerschmitt P.1110. It almost reminds me of the USAF Thunderchiefs from Vietnam.
P38 Pilot
Tech Sergeant
Have any of u ever heard of a German bomber known as the JU390? It was a 6-engine bomber built during the war. I read a book that said it was believed that only two of these bombers took off for flight.
cheddar cheese
Major General
Yeah - I think it was actually a transport though, not a long range bomber.
- Thread starter
- #53
It was originally a transport but was turned into a Bomber for the "Amerika Bomber" project. In one of the bomber threads we discussed the Ju-390 at length and the "Amerika Bomber" project.
The Junkers Ju 390 was a long-range derivative of the Junkers Ju 290 and was intended to be used as a heavy transport, maritime patrol aircraft, and bomber. It was a design selected for the abortive Amerika Bomber project.
Two prototypes were created by inserting an extra pair of inner wing segments into the wings of basic Ju 290 airframes and adding new sections to "stretch" the fuselages. The resulting giant first flew on October 20, 1943 and performed well, resulting in an order for 26 such aircraft, to be designated Ju 390A-1. None of these were actually built by the time that the project was cancelled (along with Ju 290 production) in mid 1944. The maritime patrol version and bomber were to be designated Ju 390B and Ju 390C respectively. It was suggested that the bomber could have carried the Messerschmitt Me 328 parasite fighter for self-defence. Some test flights are believed to have been performed by Ju-390 aircraft with the anti-shipping Fritz-X guided smart-bomb.
Disputed New York flight in 1944
There is a heavily disputed claim that in January 1944, a Ju-390 prototype made a trans-atlantic flight from Mont-de-Marsan (near Bordeaux) to some 20 km (12 miles) of the coast of the United States and back. Critics claim FAGr.5 (Fernaufklärungsgruppe 5) never flew such a flight. Supporters say the only link between FAGr.5 and the New York flight is the common use of an airfield at Mont-de-Marsan and the veracity of the New York flight is neither proved nor disproved by a lack of unit records for such a flight. Indeed the flight may have had nothing whatsoever to do with FAGr.5 operations.
Whilst the Ju-390's 32-hour endurance would have certainly made such a crossing theoretically possible, there is a lack of evidence to support the claim. Aviation historian Horst Zoeller claims the flight was recorded in Junkers company records.
Critics have also pointed to the vagueness of the aircraft's alleged position and even the date of what would have been a milestone flight. The best known (and maybe earliest publication) of the claim in English was in William Green's Warplanes of the Third Reich in 1970, where he wrote that the Ju 390 flew to "a point some 12 miles from the US coast, north of New York". Critics say the vagueness of detail and lack of corroborating evidence are hallmarks of an urban legend.
Critics believe that the aircraft would have had to overfly parts of the Massachusetts coast in order to fix their location, and point out the likelihood of the aircraft being spotted by observers and/or radar, which it was not. If New York state were meant, this would have put the aircraft closer to Boston. Critics ask why this city wasn't referred to for fixing the position of the claim. Finally, it is questioned how the aircrew would have been able to fix their position so accurately anyway.
Supporters argue that a Ju-390 crew could have obtained a highly accurate fix from public broadcast radio stations. Also that a Ju-390 would not have needed to overfly Massachusetts at all. They say there was no reason why New York City could not have been approached purely from the sea.
Supporters also note that the mission was designed to deliver a single bomb to New York and that such a bomb could only have been the atomic weapon under development. Japan and Germany at the time were using the "Harteck Process" of gaseous uranium centrifuges. Germany in 1944 was shipping both uranium ores and centrifuges to Japan by U-boat.
Supporters of the New York flight say of course the mission was kept secret so as not to tip off the US Government to provide better air defences. It was an ultra top secret test flight for the delivery of an atomic bomb.
Corroboration is gleened from the so-called Silbervogel sub-orbital bomber designed to attack New York from space with only a single bomb. Only one type of bomb was worth all the time and expense involved. Supporters say a mission so secret would never have found its way into FAGr.5 logbooks.
Supporters note the top secret unit, II/KG200 also flew the Ju-390 as did Junkers company test pilots in Czechoslovakia.
Following the war, Hitler's armaments minister Albert Speer also recounted to author James P O'Donnell that a Ju-390 aircraft flown by Junkers test pilots flew a polar route to Japan in 1944.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Ju_390
Crew 8
First Flight October 20, 1943
Entered Service 1943
Manufacturer Junkers
Length 34.20 m 112 ft 2 in
Wingspan 50.30 m 165 ft 1 in
Height 6.89 m 22 ft 7 in
Wing area 254 m² 2,733 ft²
Empty 39,500 kg 86,900 lb
Loaded 53,112 kg 116,846 lb
Maximum takeoff 75,500 kg 166,100 lb
Engines 6x BMW 801E
Power 8,818 kW 11,820 hp
Maximum speed 505 km/h 314 mph
Range 9,700 km 6,027 miles
Service ceiling 6,000 m 19,680 ft
Rate of climb
Wing loading 209 kg/m² 43 lb/ft²
Power/Mass 0.17 kW/kg 0.10 hp/lb
The Junkers Ju 390 was a long-range derivative of the Junkers Ju 290 and was intended to be used as a heavy transport, maritime patrol aircraft, and bomber. It was a design selected for the abortive Amerika Bomber project.
Two prototypes were created by inserting an extra pair of inner wing segments into the wings of basic Ju 290 airframes and adding new sections to "stretch" the fuselages. The resulting giant first flew on October 20, 1943 and performed well, resulting in an order for 26 such aircraft, to be designated Ju 390A-1. None of these were actually built by the time that the project was cancelled (along with Ju 290 production) in mid 1944. The maritime patrol version and bomber were to be designated Ju 390B and Ju 390C respectively. It was suggested that the bomber could have carried the Messerschmitt Me 328 parasite fighter for self-defence. Some test flights are believed to have been performed by Ju-390 aircraft with the anti-shipping Fritz-X guided smart-bomb.
Disputed New York flight in 1944
There is a heavily disputed claim that in January 1944, a Ju-390 prototype made a trans-atlantic flight from Mont-de-Marsan (near Bordeaux) to some 20 km (12 miles) of the coast of the United States and back. Critics claim FAGr.5 (Fernaufklärungsgruppe 5) never flew such a flight. Supporters say the only link between FAGr.5 and the New York flight is the common use of an airfield at Mont-de-Marsan and the veracity of the New York flight is neither proved nor disproved by a lack of unit records for such a flight. Indeed the flight may have had nothing whatsoever to do with FAGr.5 operations.
Whilst the Ju-390's 32-hour endurance would have certainly made such a crossing theoretically possible, there is a lack of evidence to support the claim. Aviation historian Horst Zoeller claims the flight was recorded in Junkers company records.
Critics have also pointed to the vagueness of the aircraft's alleged position and even the date of what would have been a milestone flight. The best known (and maybe earliest publication) of the claim in English was in William Green's Warplanes of the Third Reich in 1970, where he wrote that the Ju 390 flew to "a point some 12 miles from the US coast, north of New York". Critics say the vagueness of detail and lack of corroborating evidence are hallmarks of an urban legend.
Critics believe that the aircraft would have had to overfly parts of the Massachusetts coast in order to fix their location, and point out the likelihood of the aircraft being spotted by observers and/or radar, which it was not. If New York state were meant, this would have put the aircraft closer to Boston. Critics ask why this city wasn't referred to for fixing the position of the claim. Finally, it is questioned how the aircrew would have been able to fix their position so accurately anyway.
Supporters argue that a Ju-390 crew could have obtained a highly accurate fix from public broadcast radio stations. Also that a Ju-390 would not have needed to overfly Massachusetts at all. They say there was no reason why New York City could not have been approached purely from the sea.
Supporters also note that the mission was designed to deliver a single bomb to New York and that such a bomb could only have been the atomic weapon under development. Japan and Germany at the time were using the "Harteck Process" of gaseous uranium centrifuges. Germany in 1944 was shipping both uranium ores and centrifuges to Japan by U-boat.
Supporters of the New York flight say of course the mission was kept secret so as not to tip off the US Government to provide better air defences. It was an ultra top secret test flight for the delivery of an atomic bomb.
Corroboration is gleened from the so-called Silbervogel sub-orbital bomber designed to attack New York from space with only a single bomb. Only one type of bomb was worth all the time and expense involved. Supporters say a mission so secret would never have found its way into FAGr.5 logbooks.
Supporters note the top secret unit, II/KG200 also flew the Ju-390 as did Junkers company test pilots in Czechoslovakia.
Following the war, Hitler's armaments minister Albert Speer also recounted to author James P O'Donnell that a Ju-390 aircraft flown by Junkers test pilots flew a polar route to Japan in 1944.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Ju_390
Crew 8
First Flight October 20, 1943
Entered Service 1943
Manufacturer Junkers
Length 34.20 m 112 ft 2 in
Wingspan 50.30 m 165 ft 1 in
Height 6.89 m 22 ft 7 in
Wing area 254 m² 2,733 ft²
Empty 39,500 kg 86,900 lb
Loaded 53,112 kg 116,846 lb
Maximum takeoff 75,500 kg 166,100 lb
Engines 6x BMW 801E
Power 8,818 kW 11,820 hp
Maximum speed 505 km/h 314 mph
Range 9,700 km 6,027 miles
Service ceiling 6,000 m 19,680 ft
Rate of climb
Wing loading 209 kg/m² 43 lb/ft²
Power/Mass 0.17 kW/kg 0.10 hp/lb
Attachments
cheddar cheese
Major General
It would be interesting to see if Erich has any more information about he supposed flight to New York and back. I severly doubt it myself.
- Thread starter
- #55
It would be interesting. I doubt it also myself but it would have been possible only because the US was not expecting something like that.
delcyros
Tech Sergeant
Interesting. My favourite would be the Hs-P135 jet fighter. With better engines, a more swept tail and some minor layout changes (metal wing structure instead of the wooden one), the airframe is probable to go transsonic for a short time. It also has a decent speed (611 mph estimated), excellent critical Mach speed, low wingload and very good climb and ceiling.
- Thread starter
- #57
The Hs P.135 was an interesting aircraft. It had a similar wing design to that of the SAAB J-35 Draken.
Wow, that little German plot is very interesting. The US really wouldn't have had any idea. I didn't even know that they had thought of something like that, I mean everyone is full of secrets but dang. The only attacks on US soil that I can remember reading about were a Japanese balloon that blew up in Kansas killing a car full of people, and a supposed (not sure if this happened or not) Japanese bombing of a forest on the west coast to start a big fire and cause panic. Those little incidents and then...an a-bomb? Jinkies.
- Thread starter
- #59
The real likelyhood of it actually happening though was very very slim.
Erich
the old Sage
the myth supporting Ju 390 equipped FAGr 5 came from Englishman William Green's book on Third Reich planes back in the late 1960's. There is nothing at all on this mission or it's planning. Even KG 200 which had the craft was not in support of such an indevour anc ontinued to fly its secret agent dropping missions.
Funny how old and bizarre news is carried on as fact....
Funny how old and bizarre news is carried on as fact....
