The Me 163 designed around a jet engine from day 1

[tomo pauk]

Basically, the aircraft looks like the Lippsich P.20, even if it uses the dolly for take-off. The Jumo 004 engine aboard, two cannons - nothing fancy. For puposes of this thread, the Me 262 is killed off (sorry), while Messerschmitt produces this 1-engined fighter instead. Rate of roughly 5, per each 3 Me 262s historically produced?
How much this can add to German air defences? Mostl likely Allied response? Influence to post-war fighter design?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Interesting discussion. To start with I would wonder how the 163 would perform at near transonic speeds. Tailless aircraft were notorious for "washboard" effect at high speeds. I'd also question landing/ low speed operations, especially when flown by a low time pilot. Lastly, I think you'll have a weight issue with a turbine engine (as opposed to a rocket motor) Getting over these issues I think there's potential for a game changer if the aircraft could be produced in numbers.

 

[at6]

Looked the plane up and while it would been a little short range, most of the fuel consumed at take off, it was definitely a better looking aircraft.

 

[Glider]

I don't think that the low speed handling would be a significant issue as the Me163 was a very capable glider, with a replica being built and flown as a normal glider ( I used to have a photo of it somewhere).
Weight is of course the problem as a Jet engine is heavier, bigger and needs a lot more fuel, resulting in an aircraft that was nothing like the original Me 163.

It almost as if the thread was What if the He162 had been around in the same timeline and was built instead of the Me262.

The following link may be of interest
World's First & Only Flying Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet – Replica

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I don't think that the low speed handling would be a significant issue as the Me163 was a very capable glider, with a replica being built and flown as a normal glider ( I used to have a photo of it somewhere).
Weight is of course the problem as a Jet engine is heavier, bigger and needs a lot more fuel, resulting in an aircraft that was nothing like the original Me 163.

My point - Although the Me 163 did have good gliding ability, I think you would have had an entirely different beast with 2000+ pounds of engine and fuel while turning base to final. I see pretty rapid landing speeds.

 

[Glider]

My point - Although the Me 163 did have good gliding ability, I think you would have had an entirely different beast with 2000+ pounds of engine and fuel while turning base to final. I see pretty rapid landing speeds.

Totally agree

 

[tomo pauk]

My point - Although the Me 163 did have good gliding ability, I think you would have had an entirely different beast with 2000+ pounds of engine and fuel while turning base to final. I see pretty rapid landing speeds.

Difference in weight between Jumo 004 and Walter rocket engine was 1200 lbs.
The 'empty' 163 with jet engine will be heavier than 'empty' historical Me 163 by ~550 kg, or ~2650 kg instead of 2100? That's wing loading of perhaps 60% of what Bf 109 or Fw 190 had.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Difference in weight between Jumo 004 and Walter rocket engine was 1200 lbs.
The 'empty' 163 with jet engine will be heavier than 'empty' historical Me 163 by ~550 kg, or ~2650 kg instead of 2100? That's wing loading of perhaps 60% of what Bf 109 or Fw 190 had.

Don't forget fuel and is that dry weight?

 

[tomo pauk]

Don't forget fuel and is that dry weight?

2100 kg was 'landing weight' for the Me 163, fuel+oxydizer is already used. Fuel+oxydizer weighted 2026 kg.
Me 262 carried 2570 L of fuel (~2000 kg) for it's two engines.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

2100 kg was 'landing weight' for the Me 163, fuel+oxydizer is already used. Fuel+oxydizer weighted 2026 kg.
Me 262 carried 2570 L of fuel (~2000 kg) for it's two engines.

So for a turbine -163 we're looking at fuel and a wet weight engine included in it's landing weight, much heavier than 2100 kg

 

[tomo pauk]

So for a turbine -163 we're looking at fuel and a wet weight engine included in it's landing weight, much heavier than 2100 kg

Of course.
I've already given above the figure for a no-fuel situation of a jet-powered Me 163 (~2650 kg). Granted, pilots will not try to use up all the fuel 1st and then land, so we'd probably see a 2750 kg with 10% of fuel left.
A fully fueled jet Me 163 could be carrying ~1000kg of fuel, based on ~2000 kg of fuel for the Me 262. The historical Me 163 carried 2026 kg of fuel+oxydizer.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

So given the weight, I see higher wing loading, higher landing speeds, and more mass to slow down or speed up. The -163 had a lot of vertical stabilizer/ rudder area so off the cuff I don't see any directional stability issues at low speeds with higher weights. All this assuming you're operating this aircraft like a normal jet and not allowing the turbine to flame out on landing.

 

[tomo pauk]

So given the weight, I see higher wing loading, higher landing speeds, and more mass to slow down or speed up. The -163 had a lot of vertical stabilizer/ rudder area so off the cuff I don't see any directional stability issues at low speeds with higher weights. All this assuming you're operating this aircraft like a normal jet and not allowing the turbine to flame out on landing.

All fair points.
OTOH - I'm not trying to improve the Me 163 (though the safety of the pilot will jump by the order of magnitude, and range will also be much better), but to improve Luftwaffe's fighter force from winter of 1943/44 on.

 

[jetcal1]

Let's not forget the fun of accommodating new intakes and rearranging the two cannon. And with 004, how is it going to be started? (BTW, wasn't the 003 a smaller diameter and lighter engine? Depending on the sfc, it might be a better choice.)

 

[tomo pauk]

Let's not forget the fun of accommodating new intakes and rearranging the two cannon. And with 004, how is it going to be started? (BTW, wasn't the 003 a smaller diameter and lighter engine? Depending on the sfc, it might be a better choice.)

The BMW 003 is a much later engine.
The intakes are not new, premise of this thread is that Me 163 is designed around a jet engine from day one.

 

[jetcal1]

The BMW 003 is a much later engine.
The intakes are not new, premise of this thread is that Me 163 is designed around a jet engine from day one.

Oh, too bad. Because I was thinking the Me-263/JU-248 would have made a much better starting point.

 

[Akuma]

Basically, the aircraft looks like the Lippsich P.20, even if it uses the dolly for take-off. The Jumo 004 engine aboard, two cannons - nothing fancy. For puposes of this thread, the Me 262 is killed off (sorry), while Messerschmitt produces this 1-engined fighter instead. Rate of roughly 5, per each 3 Me 262s historically produced?
How much this can add to German air defences? Mostl likely Allied response? Influence to post-war fighter design?

Given the then existing technology of jet engines, including their long 'spool up' times and reliability issues the 163 would probably have had two engines and looked different even if it kept its general form. It might help to take a look at the Horten IX flying wing and imagine a 163 with a similar engine layout. The 163 was already operating at close to Transonic speeds. There was a case where Mr. Rudolf Opitz was in a climb and exceeded critical mach as he was passing through 38000 feet ( Altitude might have been higher, I don't remember the exact number but this figure is close) when the rudder parted company with the rest of the plane. He did not regain control of the plane until he had fallen to somewhere about 3000 above sea level. (Again this figure may be a little to high and I seem to remember a figure closer to 1500 ASL) I seem to remember that the engineers determined the speed to have been somewhere around Mach .87.