Empire of Japan (1937) Fighter Aircraft – Number Operated 30
During the war with China, the Japanese Air Forces encountered enemy fighters that were much better than what they currently had in their inventory. As their modern fighters were either under development or only available in limited numbers, they tried to acquire new fighters from aboard. The options for acquiring such fighters were rather limited, and the Japanese turned to the Germans for a solution. This came in the form of 30 He 112 known in Japanese service as the A7He1.
The He 112 in Japanese service. Source: D. Bernard Heinkel He 112 in Action
A brief He 112 history
Before the Second World War, the Luftwaffe was in need of a new and modern fighter that was to replace the older biplane fighters in service, such as the Arado Ar 68 and Heinkel He 51. For this reason, in May 1934 the RLM issued a competition for a new and modern fighter plane. While four companies responded to this request, only the designs from Heinkel and Messerschmitt were deemed sufficient. The Heinkel He 112 was a good design that offered generally acceptable flight characteristics and possessed a good basis for further improvements. The Bf 109 on the other hand had slightly better overall flight performance and was much simpler and cheaper to build. Given the fact that the Germans were attempting to accelerate the production of the new fighter, this was seen as a huge advantage over the He 112. Ultimately it would not be accepted for service, and only 100 or so aircraft would be built. These would be mainly sold abroad, with those remaining in Germany used for various testing and evaluation purposes.
While the He 112 project was canceled by the RLM, to compensate for the huge investment in resources and time into it, Heinkel was permitted to export this aircraft. A number of countries such as Austria, Japan, Romania, and Finland showed interest, but only a few actually managed to procure this aircraft, and even then, only in limited numbers.
Attempts to make a deal with Japan
In 1937 a war between Japan and China broke out. While Japan had a better-equipped and more organized army, it faced stiff resistance. The Chinese were supported by the Soviet Union which supplied them with weapons and equipment, including aircraft. These caused huge concern within the Imperial Japanese Navy. Their newest fighters were either present only in small numbers or were still under development. As a temporary solution, IJN officials decided to approach Germany for assistance in the hope of acquiring new fighters.
For this reason, a military delegation was dispatched to Germany in the Autumn of 1937. Despite its later known fame, the German Air Force at that time was still in its early stage of rebuilding and realistically did not have much to offer, being in need of modern fighters themselves. This would come in the form of the Messerschmitt Me 109. Its competing Heinkel He 112 lost the competition but was allowed to be sold abroad if anyone was interested. It was probably for this reason that the Japanese delegation visited the Heinkel factory at Marienehe. There they had the choice to observe the He 112 V9 aircraft. They were generally satisfied with what they saw and placed an initial order for 30 He 11Bs. If these proved to be as good as they hoped they would be, another, larger order for 100 more aircraft was to be given. As a confirmation of this agreement, the Japanese delegation returned with one He 112 aircraft that was to be used for familiarization and evaluation.
One of the 30 He 112 sold to Japan in 1938, Source: D. Bernard Heinkel He 112 in Action
Naming Scheme
As this aircraft was expected to enter service, it was designated as A7He1 by the IJN. The capital ‘A’ stands as a designation for a fighter. The number ‘7’ represents that this aircraft was to supersede the type 6 designation fighter. He stands for the Heinkel, and lastly the ‘1’ stands for the first variant of this type. The Allied intelligence services discovered its existence within the IJP and awarded it the code name Jerry.
Testing In Japan
Four aircraft arrived in 1937, and the last one arrived at the end of 1938. As the first aircraft began to arrive, the IJN began testing the A7He1’s performance in contrast to other fighters that they had in inventory, namely the Mitsubishi A5M2. While the A7He1 proved to be some 65 km/h faster, in other regards such as climbing speed and general maneuverability it proved equal or even worse than the Japanese fighter. The Japanese were not satisfied with the A7He1 engine which was deemed too complex. These factors ultimately led the commission which examined it to propose that it should not be adopted, nor that any further orders should be given. After the arrival of the last A7He1, the order for an additional 100 aircraft was canceled.
Ultimate Fate
As the A7He1 was not adopted for service, the IJN had to decide what to do with the 30 aircraft. They still represent a financial investment that could not be simply discarded. Some of these were allocated to various research institutes for future studies and evaluation, the remainder were given to training schools. None were ever used operationally in combat either in China or in the Pacific.
Quite surprisingly given their age and the rather limited numbers that were acquired, a few He1 survived the war and were captured by the Allies. One example was found in Atsugi airfield near Honshu in early October 1945. Unfortunately, the fate of these captured aircraft is not known but they were likely scrapped at some point after the war.
Despite the limited number of acquired aircraft, some of them survived the war and were later captured by the Allies. Source: www.destinationsjourney.comAnother aircraft (on the left) is being photographed by the Allied soldiers. It is possible that it was the same aircraft as in the previous photograph just taken later when it was being scraped. Source: www.destinationsjourney.com
Technical Characteristics
The He 112 was an all-metal single-engine fighter. The monocoque fuselage consisted of a metal base covered by riveted stress metal sheets. The wing was slightly gulled, with the wingtips bending upward, and had the same construction as the fuselage with a combination of metal construction covered in stressed metal sheets.
During its development life, a great number of engines were tested on the He 112. For the main production version, the He 112 B-2, the 700 hp Jumo 210G liquid-cooled engine was used, and some were equipped with the 680 hp Jumo 210E engine. The He 112 had a fuel capacity of 101 liters in two wing-mounted tanks, with a third 115-liter tank placed under the pilot’s seat.
The landing gear was more or less standard in design. They consisted of two larger landing wheels that retracted into the wings and one semi-retractable tail wheel. The He 112 landing gear was wide enough to provide good ground handling and stability during take-off or landing.
The cockpit received a number of modifications. Initially, it was open with a simple windshield placed in front of the pilot. Later models had a sliding canopy that was either partially or fully glazed.
While the armament was changed during the He 112’s production, the last series was equipped with two 7.92 mm MG 17 machine guns and two 2 cm Oerlikon MG FF cannons. The ammunition load for each machine gun was 500 rounds, with 60 rounds each for the cannons. If needed, two bomb racks could be placed under the wings.
Conclusion
While the He 112 was often portrayed as a modern fighter, from the Japanese point of view it proved to be disappointing in any case. While expecting a potentially effective fighter that was better with everything they had, the He 112 proved to be quite the opposite. After the 30 aircraft arrived no further orders were given. This only serves to prove that the old saying the grass is always greener on the other side is correct once in a while.
He 112B-2 Specifications
Wingspans
29 ft 10 in / 9.1 m
Length
30 ft 2 in / 9.22 m
Height
12 ft 7 in / 3.82 m
Wing Area
180 ft² / 17 m²
Engine
One 700 hp Jumo 210G liquid-cooled engine
Empty Weight
3,570 lbs / 1,620 kg
Maximum Take-off Weight
4,960 lbs / 2,250 kg
Climb Rate to 6 km
In 10 minutes
Maximum Speed
317 mph / 510 km/h
Cruising speed
300 mph / 484 km/h
Range
715 miles / 1,150 km
Maximum Service Ceiling
31,170 ft / 9,500 m
Crew
1 pilot
Armament
Two 20 mm (1.8 in) cannons and two machine guns 7.92 mm (0.31 in) machine guns and 60 kg bombs
He 112 v5 as it was tested by Japan
Credits
Written by Marko P.
Edited by Henry H.
Illustrations by Godzilla
Source:
Duško N. (2008) Naoružanje Drugog Svetsko Rata-Nemаčaka. Beograd
J. R. Smith and A. L. Kay (1990) German Aircraft of the Second World War, Putnam
D. Monday (2006) The Hamlyn Concise Guide To Axis Aircraft OF World War II, Bounty Books
D. Bernard (1996) Heinkel He 112 in Action, Signal Publication
R.S. Hirsch, U, Feist and H. J. Nowarra (1967) Heinkel 100, 112, Aero Publisher
C. Chants (2007) Aircraft of World War II, Grange Books.
Germany (1943) Experimental Circular Wing Aircraft – 1 Prototype Built
The unusual Sack AS-6 circular-wing aircraft [falkeeins.blogspot.com]In the history of aviation there were many designers who had ambitious ideas and concepts for new designs, but never had the chance to bring their ideas to fruition. On the other hand, there were those who had radical or even completely impractical designs that did manage, at least to some extent, to be built. Germany had a fair share of such individuals, especially during the later stages of the Second World War. These designers may have proposed their projects out of desperation to save their country or in fear of being sent to the front. There were also those that were simply enthusiasts in aircraft development but lacked a better understanding of how aerodynamics actually work. One such person was Arthur Sack (1900-1964), who prior to the war came up with the idea of building a circular-wing aircraft known simply as the Sack AS-6.
History
Prior to the war, Germans were prohibited from developing and building military aircraft. The Germans simply bypassed this prohibition by instead focusing on gliders, but also on civilian aircraft which if needed would be quickly converted for military use and conducted secret experiments. They especially took great care in the development and investment of manned gliders, but also scale model-building competitions and organizations. While this may seem like a waste of time and money, it actually helped gain initial and valuable experience in aircraft development which proved vital for the later Luftwaffe.
One such model competition was the National Contest of Aero Models with combustion engines, held in late June 1939 at Leipzig-Mockau. Here, aviation enthusiast Arthur Sack presented his model of an unusually circular-wing-shaped aircraft named AS-1. It is sadly unclear why Sack pursued the design of such an unusual aircraft design. Due to engine problems, the AS-1 was unable to take off from the ground, so the small model had to be launched by hand instead. The Air Minister (Reichsluftfahrtministerium RLM) Ernst Udet, who was present at the event, seemed to be impressed with this design and advised Sack to continue its development.
Arthur Sack and his AS-1 model. [lvz.de]Thanks to financial support from the RLM, Sack was able to proceed with the development and even the construction of a few scale models, a process that lasted some three years. In 1943 he submitted a fully operational model SA-5 to the RLM. The presentation went well for Sack and the RLM commission provided the necessary funds for the construction of a fully operational prototype. Interestingly, at some point Sack came into contact with another unusual aircraft designer Dr. Alexander Lippisch. While not completely clear, it appears that Sack received some design tips from Lippisch, to better improved his work.
With the order secured, Sack initiated the construction of a prototype. He named this aircraft the AS-6 V1 (Versuchs – version). As he had no proper workshop to build the aircraft himself, the glider manufacturer Mitteldeutsche Metallwerke was tasked with this instead. The initial work for the assembly of the aircraft began in the autumn of 1943. It took nearly half a year to complete the working prototype. Interestingly, due to the general shortage of materials, the AS-6 was constructed by utilizing a considerable amount of salvaged components from other damaged aircraft. For example, the cockpit canopy and parts of the interior were taken from a Bf 109B. Once the prototype was ready, it was allocated to the Luftwaffe for initial tests in early 1944.
AS-6 side view. [lvz.de]
Technical Characteristics
A good view of the AS-6 internal wooden frame construction.[all-aero.com]The AS-6 was designed as an experimental prototype to test the idea of using circular-wing design. Sadly, this aircraft is quite obscure and poorly documented so not much is known about its overall design. It was a single-seater aircraft that was mostly built out of wood. It did not have a classical fuselage, instead, the majority of the aircraft consisted of two large circular wings. The internal design is more or less conventional with a wooden construction frame being covered with canvas. Two large elevators were installed on the rear of the wings. The tail assembly is a conventional design as well, consisting of one vertical stabilizer and two horizontal stabilizers.
The AS-6 rearview. The two elevators were too small, poorly designed, and did not provide adequate control during initially limited test flights. [all-aero.com]The AS-6 was powered by an Argus As 10C-3 engine, which ultimately proved to be inadequate [all-aero.com]The AS-6 was powered by a 240 hp Argus As 10C-3 engine driving a two-blade wooden propeller. The engine was housed in a metal frame, which was then bolted to the AS-6 fuselage. The engine was salvaged from a Bf 108 aircraft.
The cockpit canopy and its interior, as already mentioned, were taken from a Bf 109B. The cockpit was slightly elevated above the fuselage and provided the pilot with an excellent all-around view. The landing gear was also salvaged from a Bf 109B, but in the case of the AS-6, it was fixed. Initially, a landing skid was used on the rear, which was later replaced with a landing wheel instead.
The canopy and landing gear was taken from a damaged Bf 109 aircraft [ufxufo.org]
Testing the Prototype
Initial evaluation tests of the AS-6 prototype were conducted at the Luftwaffe Brandis Airbase. The flight tests were conducted by Rolf Baltabol Junkers test pilot. While several short take-offs were made, there were no attempts to actually take the aircraft to the sky. The test pilot noted that the aircraft had an overall poor design and was difficult to control. He urged that the control surfaces and rudder be completely redesigned. The engine was also deemed too weak. During the last short take-off, one of the two landing gear assemblies was damaged.
The AS-6, following its unsuccessful start, spent several weeks in repairs and received a number of modifications in an attempt to improve its performance. These included adding an additional 70 kg of weight to the rear, installation of brakes taken from a Ju 88, and repositioning the landing wheels to the rear by about 20 cm. Sack proposed moving the landing wheels further back, but the test pilot Rolf simply refused to fly it if this change was implemented. He argued that placing the landing gear to the rear would imbalance the aircraft potentially leading to tipping forward during a take-off. For this reason, the modification was not implemented. While the engine was underpowered, there were simply no alternatives available at that time.
The AS-6 during testing [falkeeins.blogspot.com]The next test was scheduled for April 1944. During these tests, Rolf tried to take it to the sky, but failed again to do so. This time it was noted that the wings were simply too short. Further tests were canceled, the AS-6 was to await more modifications, and was to be tested in a wind tunnel; if possible with a completely new engine.
The fate of the AS-6
Following the unsuccessful testing, the AS-6 was stored at the Brandis airfield. In the summer of 1944, this airfield became the main operational base for the experimental Me 163 rocket-powered aircraft. The pilots of the I./JG 400 (charged with testing the Me 163) found the AS-6. One of its pilots, Franz Rossle, expressed a desire to attempt flying the unusual plane. But when the ground crew was preparing the aircraft for take-off, one of its landing gear units simply broke due to rough terrain, effectively preventing the test flight to be conducted. After this, it was once again stored at Brandis. It would remain there until early 1945 when it was lost in an Allied bombing raid.
The AS-7 project
While not clear when (possibly during early 1945), Sack approached Messerschmitt company with a proposal to use his circular-wing design on the Bf 109K-4 aircraft. The aircraft marked as SA-7 would be powered by a DB 605 2,000 hp engine. Fitted with circular wings it was theorized that it would be capable of carrying more armament inside the wings. It is believed (but not clear) that Messerschmitt was interested in this proposal and designated the project Me 600. Due to the war’s end, nothing really came from this project.
Conclusion
While certainly an unusual and interesting design, due to poor quality and salvaged materials used during its construction, the AS-6 performed poorly and never actually achieved flight. We will never know if the AS-6 circular-wing design offered any major advantage over more conventional wing designs. It appears that Arthur Sack did not continue with his idea after the war and passed away in the mid-1960’s. While his work was never implemented in mass production, his unusual design was often mistakenly taken as some advanced and secret German World War II project, which ironically, it never was.
Nazi Germany (1944) Rocket Powered Fighter – Around 370 Built
The Me 163B in standard camouflage. Note the brightly colored nose. [militaryimages.net]Following the successful testing of the previous Me 163A series, the Germans began developing a new improved version that was intended for operational use. This would lead to the Me 163B series, which was the first, and last, operational rocket-powered aircraft to be used in active combat. In comparison to its predecessor, the Me 163B offered a number of improvements to its design and shape. By the war’s end, less than 400 aircraft of this type would be built.
History
Work on the second series of the Me 163, which would be built in greater numbers than the experimental A-series, began at the start of September 1941. In comparison to the predecessor, the B-version had a number of modifications. The most obvious change was the completely redesigned fuselage, which was larger and had an overall more aerodynamic shape. Its armament was installed in the wing roots, the engine was replaced with an improved version, and the pilot cockpit was enlarged.
The differences between the Me 163A (on the left) and the main production version are clearly evident here. [acesflyhigh.wordpress.com]
Initial plans for this aircraft were quite ambitious, as Messerschmitt had predicted that the production of four operational prototype aircraft with additional airframes should commence in October 1941. Once the first few prototypes were completed, a small series of 66 aircraft were to follow. The actual responsibility of building these was given to Messerschmitt production plants at Regensburg with assembly at Obertraubling. It was estimated by RLM (Reichsluftfahrtministerium – Ministry of Aviation) officials that, after the first batch of 70 aircraft was built, it would take some 7 months to actually begin mass production of fully operational aircraft.
One of the first few Me 163B prototypes built. [luftwaffephotos.com]As was the case with many German wartime projects, it suffered from delays due to a lack of resources. The work on the initial group of prototypes started only at the end of 1941. Once again, further delays due to the slow delivery of engines postponed production until March of 1942. At this stage, the Germans were replacing the R II 209 rocket engines with the modified RII 211. The new engine used different types of fuel tanks which necessitated the redesign of the fuselage interior. This engine used a combination of T-Stoff and C-Stoff (a mixture of hydrazine hydrate, water, and methanol). As the construction of the Me 163B V1 prototype was approaching completion, it was proposed to switch to the older R II 203 engine to save development time, but this modification was not carried out. The development of the rocket engines was very slow and plagued with many setbacks, especially the limited production of fuel, which eventually led to huge delays in the Me 163 production. Finally, for the Me 163 production aircraft, the improved HWK-509 engine was chosen.
In May 1942, Me 163 B-0 V1 (KE+SX) was completed, minus the engine, and was tested as an unpowered glider. By 1943, it was obvious that Messerschmitt alone could not cope with the wartime demands, so RLM officials decided to bring aboard another aircraft manufacturer. They chose Klemm’s Stuttgart-Boeblingen factory, with a monthly goal of some 30 Me 163 aircraft. Klemm was also tasked with providing additional workers for Messerschmitt. Delays in delivering essential parts, such as weapons, caused setbacks in the Klemm Me 163 production.
Despite the problems with the Me 163 production, a small number of available aircraft were allocated to the Erprobungkommando (EKdo) 16 unit from April 1942 onward.
First Flights by EKdo 16
Once the first prototype was available, it was flight-tested as a glider by Heini Dittmar in late June, or May of 1942, depending on the source. Heini Dittmar had plenty of experience as a test pilot flying the Me 163A aircraft. The BV1 prototype would be, from this point on, mainly used as a training glider aircraft. From this point forward all aircraft built would be transported to Bad Zwischenahn near Oldenburg. Once there, they would be flight-tested by a number of pilots under the command of Karl Voy from EKdo16. This unit, which was formed in April of 1942, had the primary function of testing and evaluating the newly built Me 163 and helping in the development and improvement of its overall design. Another purpose that this unit had to fulfill was the training of new pilots for the Me 163.
An interesting episode in EKdo 16’s history is connected to the well-known German test pilot Hanna Reitsch. After a number of attempts to get permission to flight test the Me 163, she was finally allowed to do so at the end of 1942. Shortly after she took off, the jettisonable takeoff dolly refused to successfully detach from the aircraft, preventing it from using the landing skid. She managed to land the aircraft but was badly wounded and was placed in a hospital for some time. She later requested permission to fly the Me 163 again, but was explicitly rejected and was forbidden from flying it.
In early 1943, this unit was also tasked with testing jet-powered aircraft that were currently in development. These included the Me 262 and the He 280. EKdo 16 began receiving the first operational Me 163Bs only in July, or February of 1943. Due to extensive Allied Air Force activity near EKdo 16’s base of operation, the unit began the process of relocating its aircraft to Anklam. By this time, the unit had some 7 Me 163A and 1 of the B version. Due to poor ground conditions for Me 163 operations, the aircraft was relocated back to Bad Zwischenahn in late August. The delays with the construction of auxiliary support buildings on this airfield meant that crew training could not begin until October 1943. These initial training flights were carried out using two-seater gliders. Due to a lack of C-Stoff fuel, another series of delays impacted progress on training. In November, the Me 163As were used for crew training. In November and later in December, two aircraft were lost in accidents with the loss of life of both pilots.
In the following months, due to a number of factors like slow production, bad weather, and Allied activity, the Me 163 training program progressed at a slow pace. By May 1944, only a small group of fewer than 50 pilots had a chance to fly either the powered or towed versions of the Me 163. Once these were successfully tested, they would be then allocated to the 1./J.G. 400. unit.
The first combat action of the Me 163 was conducted on 14th May 1944, piloted by Major Spate. Amusingly, just prior to the first flight, his Me 163 BV 41 (PK-QL) aircraft was painted in red. This was done by the unit mechanics, who wanted with this small gesture to bring good luck to their pilots. Seeing no harm in it, Major Spate gave instruction that his aircraft be fully fueled and armed. During his flight, he attempted twice to attack Allied bombers but failed to properly engage them. It seems the red paint did not help with the luck.
During May, a number of unsuccessful combat flights with the Me 163 were undertaken. At the end of May, the airfield at Bad Zwischenahn was heavily bombed. During this attack, several Me 163s were damaged. This attack left the airfield at Bad Zwischenahn unusable for some time. To continue the training of pilots, the whole operation was temporarily moved to Brieg on the Oder. As this airfield lacked any proper workshops, the dismantled aircraft could not be assembled again and, for this reason, no test flights were ever carried out from Brieg.
Interestingly, on the 12th and 13th June 1944, three Me 163s from the EKdo 16 were demonstrated to the Japanese and Italian military delegations. As, at that time, EKdo 16 could not provide a fully operational Me 163, these were instead taken from 1./J.G. 400.
On 15th June 1944, the unit was once again back to Bad Zwischenahn. At their disposal, there were 2 prototypes, 7 gliders and 11 fully operational Me 163 aircraft. A few days later, another accident occurred when the towing aircraft lost power to one of its engines. The towed Me 163 was released at some 50 meters of altitude and the pilot was forced to land at a nearby lake. While the aircraft was heavily damaged, the pilot managed to survive.
In July 1944, a second auxiliary unit (Erganzumgsstaffel) was formed. It was also subordinated to the 1./J.G. 400. It had 6 Me 163s, of which only one was equipped with a rocket engine. It was intended to supplement the training of pilots for 1./J.G. 400.
In mid-August 1944, the airfield was once again attacked by Allied bombers. This caused further delays in training operations, until August 23rd. On that day, another accident led to the death of a pilot and the loss of yet another aircraft. Not wanting to waste the parts of the destroyed Me 163, these were collected and then sent to the training school at Fassberg.
At the start of September, Luftwaffe Generalmajor Adolf Galland told EKdo 16’s Commander Hauptmann Thaler, that the unit was to be disbanded and all personnel and equipment were to be relocated to Brandis. While the commanders of EKdo 16 were against such a decision, there was little they could do and, by the end of September, the unit was on its way to Brandis.
An Me 163 from EKdo 16. While some combat flights were undertaken, the primary purpose of this unit was to provide necessary pilot training. [aviationshoppe.com]
Technical Characteristics
The Me 163 was a high-speed, rocket-powered, swept-wing tailless aircraft. Its fuselage was constructed of metal, while the wings were wood. The fuselage could be divided into three sections, the cockpit, the central fuel tanks, and the rear engine compartment. In order to help the ground crew with repairs, the fuselage was specially designed to contain a large number of removable panels. Thanks to this, the replacement of damaged parts or even the whole engine could be done relatively quickly.
The wings were quite simple in design, consisting of two spars covered in 8 mm thick fabric. The Me 163 wings were swept to the rear at a 23.3° angle. At the wing’s trailing edges, ailerons were placed, which the pilot used for pitch and roll. For landings, large hydraulically operated flaps were added on the wings.
In order for the pilot to enter the cockpit, a ladder was placed on the left side of the aircraft. While the cockpit was not pressurized, it could be jettisoned to help the pilot escape the aircraft in case of emergency. Being unpressurized actually placed time limits for how long the pilot could endure without losing consciousness at altitude and during high-speed maneuvers. For this reason, the pilot had to endure altitude chamber training and had a specially designed diet. Despite attempts to improve visibility compared to the previous version, the Me 163B suffered from poor visibility, especially to the rear and in front of the aircraft’s nose.
In order to enter his flight position, the pilot used a small ladder placed on the left side of the aircraft. [acesflyinghigh.wordpress.com]Close-up view of the Me 163 cockpit and instruments. [luftwaffephotos.com]The Me 163 was equipped with various onboard equipment, including a FuG 16 ZE radio transmitter and receiver. In addition, a FuG 25 IFF (identification friend or foe) transmitter and receiver was installed. Given its small size and limited overall weight, the onboard batteries had a limited capacity. In order to provide the necessary power, the Germans simply added a small windmill generator which was placed on the nose of the fuselage.
During its development, the Me 163B was tested with a series of different rocket engines. Ultimately, for the main production version, the HWK (Helmuth Walter Kiel) 109-509A rocket engine was chosen. This had a thrust power ranging from 100 kg (220 lbs) to 1,500 kg (3,300 lbs) or 1,700 kg (3,750 lbs), depending on the source.
The Me 163 initially used a fuel mixture of the T and Z-Stoff. T-Stoff consisted of a mix of hydrogen peroxide with oxyquinoline or phosphate. Z-Stoff was an aqueous solution of calcium permanganate. Z-Stoff would later be replaced with C-Stoff, which was a mix of methyl alcohol, hydrazine hydrate, and water. T-Stoff was stored in one main and two smaller auxiliary tanks. The smaller tanks were placed on both sides of the cockpit. The C-Stoff fuel tanks were placed in the Me 163’s wings. In order to help circulate the fuel, two centrifugal pumps were placed inside the Me 163.
These chemicals were extremely flammable and dangerous to handle and thus required safety procedures to be used properly. Before each flight, the fuel tanks had to be thoroughly washed with water. During refueling, the ground and the aircraft had to be sprayed with large amounts of water. If the safety procedures were not followed, there was a great risk of explosion, which happened on occasion. Due to the volatile nature of the fuel, any harsh landing with fuel still onboard offered a great chance of explosion as well, which led to a number of pilots being lost. Being highly corrosive and deadly to the touch, the maintenance crews and pilots had to wear specially designed protective clothing and gloves. Preserved photographs seem to indicate that these precautions were not always strictly adhered to. Given that the Me 163 operated in late 1944 were shortages of all kinds of equipment and materials were common, this should not come as a surprise. Still, handling the Me 163 fuel without this kind of protection was highly dangerous for the ground maintenance crews.
This Me 163 is in the process of being refueled. [acesflyinghigh.wordpress.com]The fuel load consisted of 1040 liters (229 gallons) of T-Stoff and 492 liters of C-Stoff. The Me 163 was notorious for having only a limited powered flight endurance of 7 minutes and 30 seconds before its fuel reserve was spent. The actual flight could be much longer, however, since at sufficient altitude, the pilot could switch off the engine, and reactivate it as needed. After all rocket fuel had been spent, the pilot would then use the Me 163 as a glider to fly back to its base, or to any nearby German airfield.
The initial armament consisted of two 20 mm MG 151/20 cannons, which were positioned in the wing roots. To increase the firepower these would be replaced with the stronger 30 mm MK 108 cannons. The Me 163B-0 series was armed with the weaker 20mm cannon while the Me 163 B-1 with the stronger 30mm cannon. While the Mk 108 had sufficient firepower to outright destroy or heavily damage enemy aircraft, it was plagued with low velocity. This combined with the extraordinary speed of the Me 163 made engaging targets difficult. For this reason, the Me 163 was tested with some experimental weapon systems. These include the 5.5 cm R4M air-to-air rocket, and the more revolutionary SG 500 Jagdfaust. This weapon consisted of five rockets usually placed under each wing, but on the Me 163 it was actually mounted vertically in the wings. It was provided with an optical sensor that activated its weapon load once it detected shadow, in theory, a shadow of an enemy plane. This was an automated weapon firing mechanism capable of friendly fire if not managed properly. But this situation would be rare given the fact that Me 163 was a short-range and unique interceptor that operated on its own without support from other aircraft.
The Me 163 was armed initially with two MG 151 and later with MK 108 cannons which were placed in the wing roots. The left-wing cannon muzzle brake is visible in this picture. The pilot in this picture is Heini Dittmar was a vital test pilot for the whole Me 163 project. [acesflyinghigh.wordpress.com]The Me 163 utilized an auxiliary landing gear unit. This was mainly done to reduce the overall weight of the aircraft. Take-offs and landings were divided into two phases. For take-off, the Me 163 sat on a simple two-wheel dolly unit. Once at sufficient altitude the dolly was jettisoned from the bottom of the aircraft. On occasion, there were accidents involving this system, when, for example, the dolly refused to release from the aircraft, or even worse, it could bounce off the ground and strike the aircraft from below. Therefore the Germans worked on developing safer types of dollies. On landing, the Me 163 were to use a simple retractable landing skid, placed beneath the fuselage. In addition, to the rear of the aircraft, a small steerable tail wheel was added to help during take-off and landing.
Close-up view of the Me 163 landing skid. [Wiki]The rear wheel was completely steerable and was added to help during take-off and landing. [warbirdphotographs.com]
Once at a sufficient height, the two-wheel dolly would jettison from the aircraft (in the left corner). While in theory, this should work without any issue, in some cases the dolly would simply bounce off the ground and hit the aircraft from below potentially causing damage to it. [luftwaffephotos.com]While this takeoff and landing system offered the desired reduction in weight, it was not without its problems. Besides the issues previously mentioned, after a successful landing, the Me 163 was immobile and vulnerable to possible enemy attacks. To move it across the airfield the Germans designed and built a small specialized aircraft tug, called the Scheuchschlepper, especially for this task.
The Scheuchschlepper is specially designed to either tow or lift the Me 163 aircraft. [warbirdphotographs.com]The Scheuchschlepper essentially fulfilled two roles. Initially, in the three-wheel configuration, it was to tow the Me 163 along the airfield, using its own dolly, to a designated takeoff position on the airfield (upper picture). After the Me 163 returned from a sortie, the Scheuchschlepper rear wheel would be replaced with a tracked platform which supported a cradle that fully supported the entire aircraft at its wing roots, to move the Me 163 for refueling and to be refitted on a takeoff dolly for the next flight. [wiki]
Operational Combat Use
The first operational unit that was to be equipped with the Me 163 was the Staffel of Jagdgeschwader 20./JG 1 located at Bad Zwischenahn. According to initial plans, this unit was to be formed at least by the end of 1943 or in early 1944 depending on the sources. In its inventory, there were some 12 fully operational Me 163 available. In addition, the Germans planned for the Me 163 to be positioned at a series of auxiliary airfields along Allied bomber routes. These would be fully equipped with spare parts, ammunition, and fuel, and positioned close to each other. This way, after an attack run, the Me 163 pilots could simply choose on which airfield to land, knowing that they could resupply without any problems.
But in reality, it took a few more months before the unit was actually officially formed at the start of March 1944. The development of a network of supporting airfields for the Me 163 was also never completed. The unit was by that time being renamed to Jagdgeschwader 1./JG 400 and stationed at Deelen. The commander of the unit was Oberleunant Rober Olejnik. They were relocated to Wittmundhafen as the airfield at Deelen proved unfit for the Me 163 aircraft’s operation.
The unit received its first operational Me 163 on the 10th of March, and seven more were to arrive by late April 1944. Concurrently, pilots were beginning to arrive from the EKdo 16 training unit. More test flights were carried out until mid-March 1944 when they had to be temporarily stopped. The reason for this was the lack of sufficient water supply which was essential for flushing the Me 163 fuel tanks in order to avoid any accidental explosion. To resolve this issue the unit personnel began drilling wells to collect water.
1./JG 400 was at this stage prohibited from making combat flights in order to avoid the attention of the Allies. However, the unit was permitted to conduct live firing trials during flights in order to test the Me 163 weapons systems. While generally successful, during sharp maneuvers at a speed of some 800 km/h, the ammunition belts proved prone to malfunction. While Olejnik suggested using a drum magazine, which was even tested successfully, his idea would not be adopted. On the 21st of April Olejnik had an accident during a forced landing where he spent some time in hospital thereafter.
In April and May, 1./JG 400 took delivery of a group of 10 aircraft, but one had to be returned to Klemm for modifications. That particular aircraft would be destroyed in an Allied bombing raid on Klemm. These were still prototype aircraft of the B pre-production version. The first Me 163B-0 series aircraft began to arrive from May 1944. At this time the Luftwaffe officials were determined to introduce the Me 163 to service. For this reason, the work on testing and experimenting with the Me 163 was stopped in favor of increasing the overall production of the Me 163 B-1.
With the expected increase in production, another unit, 2./J.G.400, was to be formed in May 1944. It was initially to be involved with crucial crew training. At that time, the size of both units was to be increased to 14 instead of 12 operational aircraft.
In July 1944, 1./JG 400 received permission to make combat flights. The Me 163 were then used in several failed attempts to intercept the Allied reconnaissance aircraft that made frequent flights over the base. At the same time, 1./JG 400 and other available Me 163 were being relocated to new positions at Brandis. The original plans to build numerous connected airfields were abandoned in favor of concentrating all available Me 163 in a few selected airfields. For this reason, Brandis would become the main key point for the Me 163 combat operations. It is from there that the Me 163s attempted to intercept a huge Allied air formation of some 766 bombers, supported with over 14 groups of cover fighters. The Me 163 did not engage the Allies probably due to the small number of available aircraft and the heavy fighter cover. By the end of July, the 1./JG 400 had only four operational aircraft out of 16 available.
In mid-August, Me 163s from this unit attacked an Allied B-17 bomber formation. While evading the fighter cover, they managed to heavily damage at least one bomber, killing two crew members. On the 16th of August, five Me 163 attacked a group of B-17s, and even managed to shoot down two of the bombers. The Germans lost one Me 163 during this engagement being hit by an Allied P-51. On the 24th of August, eight Me 163 managed to shoot down three more bombers while successfully evading enemy fighter cover.
While this aircraft managed to fly back to Allied Air Bases in England, the damage inflicted by the Me 163 cannons is evident here. The rear gunner position was completely destroyed while the right tail unit was heavily damaged. [. Ransom and H.H. Cammann Jagdgeschwader 400]On the 8th of September, the Me 163 were officially taken into service. Given the previous success, of destroying 5 enemy bombers with a limited number of available Me 163, attempts were made to increase the number of squadrons with 20 aircraft. This was never achieved, as the Allies destroyed the vital C-Stoff fuel production facility at Kiel in August. On the 11th of September, a single Me 163 attacked and destroyed a lone B-17.
During these initial combat engagements with the Allied bombers, German pilots noticed that the Me 163s armament had a huge flaw. The weapons were difficult to use with the standard attack tactics of the aircraft. This involved getting the Me 163 high above the Allied bombers and then plunging down at them with a dive speed of 885-930 km/h (550-580 mph). Due to its main cannon’s low velocity, and in order to avoid collision with the target, the pilot had only a few seconds available to engage the enemy. This meant that only the highly experienced Me 163 pilot had a chance of hitting the enemy aircraft. The Me 163 also had another flaw, as it could be only used when the weather was clear.
At the end of September 1944, II./JG400 was formed, under the command of Lieutenant Peter Gerth (3/JG 400) and Oberleutnant Franz Woidich (4/JG 400). These units were renamed in November or December 1944 to 5. and 6./JG 400. During this time the 7/JG 400 was also formed, which was stationed at Stettin-Altdamm. In late 1944 II./JG400 was repositioned at Stargard. Few sorties were carried out mostly due to lack of fuel. In November 1944 a Me 163 engaged a British Mosquito, damaging it and forcing its crew to abandon the aircraft.
An Me 163B is engaging Allied B-17 bombers. The Me 163, despite its small number, proved to be a shock to the Allies pilots. Given that they could do little against it when the Me 163 was in its dive attack. [acesflyinghigh.wordpress.com]Bad weather, lack of fuel and the rapid Allied advance on the West and East temporarily stopped all Me 163 combat operations. Combat operations began again in March of 1945. For example on the 16th March, an Me 163 managed to damage another Mosquito on a reconnaissance mission. While the Mosquito pilot managed to fly back to France, he was forced to crash land. A quite interesting Me 163 air victory was achieved on the 10th April 1945 while piloted by Leutnant Fritz Kelb. This aircraft was equipped with the experimental SG 500 Jagdfaust and managed to shoot down a British Lancaster bomber.
In late April I/.J.G.400 would be disbanded and its remaining few operational Me 163 were allocated to the J.G 7. The former I/.J.G.400 commander Wolfgang Spate, flying one of the remaining operational Me 163, managed to destroy 5 additional Allied bombers by the end of the war. The remaining ground personnel from the I/.J.G.400 were dispatched to the East to fight as infantry in Bavaria. There, they allegedly managed to destroy a Soviet tank using a MK 108 cannon removed from an Me 163, which was placed on makeshift undercarriage wheels, also taken from a Me 163. Given the chaotic state of Germany in 1945, it’s conceivable that the crew operating this gun may have found a way to make it work.
After the War
In May 1945 the Allied forces were rapidly advancing into Germany, capturing many airfields in the process. The crews of the Me 163 were often instructed to destroy their own aircraft to prevent them from falling into the enemy’s hands, but despite this, the Allies managed to capture a number of intact Me 163. This was the case of the II./J.G.400, which surrendered its 48 aircraft to the Allies on the 8th of MAy 1945. Of these, some 25 were transported back to the UK to be properly examined. The Americans also managed to capture a number of Me 163 in various working conditions across occupied Germany. The French Air Force received at least 4 Me 163 from the British after the war. The Soviets were not idle either as they also managed to acquire unknown numbers of the Me 163 including the rare two-seater trainer version Me 163S.
One of the 25 aircraft that were shipped to the UK by the English after the war. [acesflyinghigh.wordpress.com]
In an attempt to increase the Me 163’s performance, Junkers cooperated with Dr. Lippisch. This resulted in the development of a modified Me 163 (based on the BV6 prototype) which was slightly larger, had greater fuel capacity and had two engines. In theory, during take-off, both engines would be activated until a certain altitude was reached. This project would eventually evolve into Me 163C. This aircraft was to have a redesigned fuselage and cockpit. It was to be powered by HWK 109-509A-2 and HWK 509C engines. By the end of the war, only a few incomplete airframes were built.
The Me 163B V6 was tested with two engine configurations It was to serve as the basis for the planned Me 163C version which was never completed, aside from a few airframes. [E. T. Maloney and U. Feist Messerschmitt Me 163]An Me 163C illustration of how it may have looked given that only few uncompleted airframes were built. [walterwerke.co.uk]
Japanese Me-163B
In 1944, on Adolf Hitler’s instructions, a number of previously secret projects were to be shared with the Japanese. For this reason, several submarines were to transport parts of a disassembled Me 163B to Japan. While the one carrying the aircraft parts was sunk, the others that were carrying technical manuals managed to reach the German ally. Based on these, the Japanese managed to build a slightly modified copy of the Me 163. It was known in Japan as J8M1 Shuri (Rigorous Sword). During the first test flight, there was an accident in which the prototype was lost.
During negotiations between Japanese and German military officials, it was agreed to hand over to Japan a production license for many weapons including the Me 163 and Me 262. It was named Mitsubishi Ki-200, for the army, and J8M1 for the navy. The first Me 163B flew in July 1945 but was lost in an accident. Several more were built but the end of the war led to the end of the project.
While the Japanese experimented with their own copy of the Me 163, they did not manage to put it into production. [Wiki]
Production
The production of Me 163 was initially allocated to the Messerschmitt Regensburg factory. As it was overburdened with other projects, it would then be allocated to a much smaller Klemm factory where less than 60 aircraft were built in total. Some sources also mentioned that the production was carried out at the Dornier factory in Oberpfaffenhofen and the Bachmann von Blumenthal factory in Fürth. On the 1st of September 1944, the production of the Me 163 was officially handed over to Junkers. To avoid concentrating the production in one location, given the Allied bombing campaign, Junkers dispersed it across numerous smaller companies. Each of these was tasked with the delivery and production of parts before being finally assembled at Brandenburg-Briest. This, in theory, would increase the overall production and avoid potentially being targeted by Allied bombers. In reality, this backfired, as it caused huge confusion and chaos with the delivery of parts, and poor quality in production. Junkers managed to produce around 299 aircraft of this type by the end of the war.
The question of how many Me 163B were produced during the war is difficult to pinpoint precisely. The sources give different numbers, for example, most state around 400 of all models, of which some 370 were estimated to be of B-version, were built by the war’s end.
Me 163B-0 – Pre-production aircraft
Me 163B-1 – Main production aircraft
Me 163C – Experimental twin-engine modifications of the Me 163B aircraft but only few incomplete airframes were ever built
Operators
Germany – Built less than 400 aircraft of which only a smaller number were ever used in combat
Japan – Built a small number of slightly modified Me 163B by the end of the war.
Soviet Union – Several Me 163B and one Me 163S, captured, were used for many different tests after the war. The results of these tests will lead to the development and creation of several different projects (The Lavochkin I-162 and Mikoyan-Gurevich I-270).
UK – Managed to capture some 48 or so Me 163 aircraft of which 25 were sent to the UK for testing and evaluation.
France – Received four aircraft from the British after the war.
USA – Acquired an unknown number of Me 163 at the war’s end.
Australia and Canada – Both received one aircraft from the British after the war.
Surviving Aircraft
Today at least several Me 163 are known to still exist. One could be found in the Australian War Memorial in Canberra, and one in the Canada Aviation and Space Museum in Ottawa. Two are located in German museums: Luftwaffenmuseum at Berlin-Gatow and Deutsches Museum in Munich. Few more are in the USA Flying Heritage Collection, National Museum of the USAF, and Smithsonian National Air and Space Museums. And in the UK, RAF, Science and National Museum of Flight. The one captured by the Soviets existence is currently unclear.
Luftwaffe Museum at Berlin-Gatow [acesflyinghigh.wordpress.com]
Conclusion
The Me 163 was designed to be light and relatively cheap to build. This was certainly a strength if we take into account the huge shortage of resources and materials that the Germans endured during the later stages of the war. It also used special fuel that was specially designed for it, and thus there was no need for allocating the vital German fuel reserves to it.
With the two MK 108 cannons, the Me 163 was formidably armed given its small size. Just a few rounds of this cannon was enough to destroy or heavily damage an enemy target. Given its phenomenal speed during dive attack at the enemy formation, the Me 163 was essentially immune to enemy fighter cover and was unable to do much against it. That is until it ran out of fuel, at that point it was completely helpless and could only glide back to base.
On the other hand, it was overshadowed by a number of critical faults that were never corrected. For example, while the Me 163 was cheap, due to many reasons it was never produced in any sufficient numbers to cause any serious threat to the Allies. While the number of some 400 aircraft built seems significant, in reality only a dozen or so aircraft were ever used at any given time in combat. Most were used for training, either as gliders, or with an operational engine. Not all built aircraft would be delivered to the operational units, given the great confusion and chaos that the Germans were surrounded with from 1944 on. The fuel could never be produced in sufficient quantities. The problem with fuel was even complicated by the increase in production of the Me 163. Because of this the Germans simply had to reduce the number of aircraft that they used for combat, as there wasn’t enough fuel for all of them. The volatile nature of its fuel, occasionally lead to accidents and explosions, losing aircraft in the process, but more importantly the vital pilots. While its speed was great, its maximum burn time for the engine was only slightly longer than 7 minutes, however this capability could be stretched by the pilot’s ability to switch the engine on and off throughout the flight. Once the engine consumed all the fuel reserves, the aircraft essentially became a simple glider that was vulnerable to enemy fighter cover.
In the final analysis, the Me 163 theoretically possessed great potential for a rocket-powered aircraft. In reality, due to many delays, lack of unity in German aviation circles, and problems with its design and production, the Me 163 never managed to fulfill the role that its designer had intended for it. Its achilles heel was its dangerous and volatile fuel from which a number of planes and pilot lives were lost. Probably its greatest contribution was that it provided a good experimental platform for flight tests at transonic speeds. But due to its unusual design the Me 163 certainly deserves a great place in the history of the development of aviation.
Me 163B Specifications
Wingspans
30 ft 7 in / 9.32 m
Length
19 ft 2 in / 5.84 m
Height
9 ft 1 in / 2.77 m
Wing Area
199.4 ft² / 18.5 m²
Engine
One HWL 509A rocket engine
Empty Weight
4,200 lbs / 1,900 kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight
9.060 lbs / 4.110 kg
Fuel Capacity
1,530 liters / 400 US gallons
Maximum Speed
600 mph / 960 km/h
Engine endurance
7 minutes and 30 seconds
Maximum Service Ceiling
39,700 ft / 12,100 m
Crew
One pilot
Armament
Two 20 mmMG 151
Or two 30 mm MK108 cannons
Gallery
Me 163BV 41 PK+QL 1./J.G. 400. This aircraft, painted in red and piloted by Major Wolfgang Spate, flew its first combat mission on May 14th, 1944.Me 163B V45 PK+QP Erpobungskommando 16 at Bad Zwischenahn, May 1944Me 163B V52 GH+UI ‘Yellow 1’ 7./JG 400, Stettin-Altdamm, October 1944Me 163BMe 163B
Credits
Written by Marko P.
Edited by Henry H. & Ed Jackson
Illustrated by Carpaticus
SourcesMe
D. Nešić (2008) Naoružanje Drugog Svetsko Rata-Nemcaka. Beograd.
W. Spate and R. P. Bateson (1971) Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet , Profile Publications
M. Ziegler (1990) Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet, Schiffer Publishing
M. Emmerling and J. Dressel (1992) Messerschmitt Me 163 “Komet” Vol.II, Schiffer Military History
E. T. Maloney and U. Feist (1968) Messerschmitt Me 163, Fallbrook
S. Ransom and H.H. Cammann (2010) Jagdgeschwader 400, Osprey publishing.
D. Donald (1990) German aircraft of the WWII, Brown Packaging books ltd
D. Monday (2006) The Hamlyn Concise Guide To Axis Aircraft OF World War II, Bounty Books.
D. SHarp (2015) Luftwaffe secret jets of the Third Reich, Mortons Media Group
H. Morgan and J. Weal (1998) German Jet Aces of the World War 2 , Osprey Aerospace
Nazi Germany (1943) Rocket Powered Fighter – 10 Built
The first operational Me 163 prototype. [luftwaffephotos.com]During the Second World War, the Luftwaffe experimented with a number of unorthodox designs. This included a handful of rocket-powered aircraft, like the Me 163. This particular aircraft was created thanks to the somewhat unexpected combination of two different projects. One was the airframe designed by Alexander Martin Lippisch, and the second was the rocket engine developed by Helmuth Walter. Following the testing of the first prototypes, a small series of some 10 aircraft were built that were mainly used for testing and training.
Alexander Martin Lippisch and Helmuth Walter
The history of Me 163 was closely related to the work and design of aircraft engineer Alexander Martin Lippisch and rocket development pioneer Helmuth Walter. Lippisch was somewhat unorthodox in his aircraft design work, to say the least. He was quite interested in the development of gliders and later aircraft that were either completely lacking a tail unit or of an all-wing configuration.
In 1921, Lippisch, together with a colleague, participated in the formation of the so-called Weltensegler GmbH (World Glider Ltd.) company. At that time, the Germans were prohibited from developing and building military aircraft. The Germans worked around this prohibition by instead focusing on gliders and civilian aircraft which if needed would be quickly converted for military use, and conducted secret experiments. While glider development may seem like a waste of effort, it actually provided the Germans with an excellent foundation on which they managed to develop the Luftwaffe during the 1930s, becoming a formidable force at the start of the war. In 1925, Lippisch joined Rhön Rossitten Gesellschaft RRG, where he soon began working on his first glider. It was named Storch I, and incorporated his unusual all-wing design.
Over the years, Lippisch also became interested in rocket technology. With assistance from Fritz von Opel, Lippisch managed to build a rocket-assisted glider. This contraption was flight tested in June 1928. This was actually the first-ever rocket-assisted flight in the world. While initially successful, the glider crash-landed, and caught fire. The plane would be lost in the accident.
This accident did not prevent Lippisch from experimenting with rocket-powered all-wing gliders. He focused his work on a powered version of his Storch V glider. For this project, he used an 8 hp DKW engine. His work was successful and he managed to find investors who were willing to provide funds for the project. This led to the development of the Delta I all-wing aircraft during the late 1920s, and it was followed by Delta II, III, and IV.
Lippisch Delta I prototype. [aviastar.org]Following this, Lippisch joined the Deutsche Forschungsinstitut DFS, where he worked as an engineer. There, he developed a series of new glider designs, like the DFS 40. In 1938, the work of Helmuth Walter came to his attention. Walter was a young scientist who was highly interested in rocket propulsion. He managed to gain military funding, which greatly helped in his work. In 1937, he even managed to gain attention from the Reichsluftfahrtministerium RLM (German Air Ministry). The RLM formed a Sondertriebwerke (Special Propulsion System Department) with the aim of experimenting with rocket engines in the aircraft industry. While this department was mainly focused on developing rocket engines for short take-off assistance, Walter desired a more prominent role in rocket propulsion. He intended to develop a rocket engine that could replace standard piston engines. Walter managed to develop such an engine, named Walter TP-1, which was fueled by the so-called ‘T-Stoff’ (hydrogen peroxide) and ‘Z-Stoff’ (water solution of either calcium or sodium permanganate). His engine design would be tested in 1939 on the He 176. However, the final results were disappointing and the engine did not go into production.
The DFS 194 predecessor
Lippisch and his design team began working on a new project incorporating the Walter rocket engine. Initially, the project was designated simply as Entwurf X (Design X), before being changed to 8-194 and finally DFS 194. Work on the prototype came to a temporary halt as the DFS lacked proper production capabilities to finish the aircraft. To keep the project going, the RLM instructed Messerschmitt to provide the necessary manpower and production support.
Given the small chance of progression in the DFS and in order to increase the speed of the project, Lippisch and his team moved to Messerschmitt’s base at Augsburg at the start of 1939. He also tried to negotiate with Heinkel for the production and development of the DFS 194 project, but nothing came of this. At Augsburg, Lippisch and his team worked in Messerschmitt’s newly formed Department L (which stands for Lippisch).
The DFS 194 prototype served as the base for the future Me 163. [nevingtonwarmuseum.com]The first calculations were promising, as the plane would be able to reach a speed of 550 km/h (342 mph). Once completed the DFS 194, was transported to the secret German rocket test center at Peenemunde-West Airfield during the summer of 1939. During ground tests, it was noted that the engine installation was poorly designed and too dangerous to be actually flight tested. Instead, it was decided to use the design as a glider. Surprisingly, despite this huge setback, production orders for three prototypes were given. Initially, these were designated simply as Lippisch V1, V2, and V3, but would be renamed to Me 163A V1 to V3. This was mainly done to mask the true purpose of this aircraft, as this was the name given to an older, rejected Bf 163 Messerschmitt reconnaissance aircraft project.
The Me 163A Prototype Series
The RLM was not satisfied with the general design of the engine compartment initially tested on the DFS 194. They requested that for further Me 163 development, it would need to be substantially changed. In addition, the engine was to be replaced with the Walter R II-203 engine. This engine was to have a manually regulated thrust ranging from 150-750 kg of thrust (330-1,650 lbs). The engine compartment was also to be completely redesigned in order to have easy access to the main components for maintenance.
Following the start of the Second World War in September 1939, the work on the Me 163 slowed down but still went on. The first unpowered flight by the Me 163 V1 prototype, in some sources marked as V4, (KE + SW) was carried out during early 1941. This prototype was towed by a Bf 110 heavy fighter. Once at a sufficient altitude, the V1 was released. During the test flight, the pilot, Heini Dittmar, managed to reach a speed of some 850 km/h (528 mph) during a dive. While this was a great starting point for the project, Hitler, following military victories in Poland and in the West, ordered that funds for such projects be reduced. In the case of the Me 163, this meant that only two more additional prototypes were to be built.
Side view of the Me 163 V1 (V4).[luftwaffephotos.com]In May 1941, a wooden mock-up of a Me 163 was completed, which was then transported to the Walter Werke. Once there, it was to be equipped with the R II-203 engine. Once the first prototype was fully completed and equipped with this engine, the first tests were carried out at Peenemunde-West in August 1941. The test pilot was once again Heini Dittmar. After a series of test flights that lasted from August to September 1941, the Me 163 prototype showed promising results. The pilot managed to reach top speeds of 800 km/h (500 mph). At this time, the second V2 prototype was also equipped with a rocket engine and used in various test flights. Ernst Udet, Director-General of the Luftwaffe, was highly impressed with its performance. He even gave orders that an additional 8 prototypes were to be built, bringing the total to 13 at this time.
Once the prototype was equipped with the R II-203 engine, the first tests were carried out in August 1941. These proved to be highly successful, which led to an increase in interest for the Me 163 project. [Spate & Bateson]At the start of October, Heini Dittmar said that, in order to fully test the Me 163’s flying performance, the fuel load had to be increased. On his personal insistence, the V3 (CD + IM) prototype, was fully fueled. This is according to W. Spate and R. P. Bateson (Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet). Other sources like M. Griehl (X-Planes German Luftwaffe Prototypes 1930-1945) this aircraft was described as being the V8 prototype instead. On the 2nd of October 1941, he took to the sky, initially towed by a Bf 110. At an altitude of 3,960 meters (13,000 ft), Dittmar activated the engine. After reaching a speed of 965 km/h (600 mph), he lost control of the aircraft as the result of compressibility effects. The prototype began a rapid descent toward the ground. He then switched off the engine, which enabled him to regain control, after which he landed safely on the ground. Later analysis of the flight indicated that Dittmar managed to reach a speed of 1002 km/h (623 mph). As the whole project was undertaken under great secrecy, this success was not published at the time.
The Me 163 in the middle was the aircraft that Heini Dittmar flew when he reached a speed of 1002 km/h (623 mph). [Spate & Bateson]Following these events, the Me 163 project got a temporary boost in prominence, with Herman Goring himself placing great interest in it. Ernst Udet additionally placed an order for 70 new Me 163 airframes together with engines for the B version in October 1941. A month later, things changed dramatically for Me 163 after Udet committed suicide. His replacement, Erhard Milch, was less interested in unconventional aircraft designs, like the Me 163. Work on the project nevertheless continued.
A breakup with Messerschmitt
While the Me 163 project was underway, relations soured between Willy Messerschmitt and Lippisch. Messerschmitt personally disliked the Me 163, partly due to its unique overall design, but also given that he was not involved in its development. By 1943, Lippisch left Augsburg and moved to Vienna. While not physically present in the design bureau, he tried to maintain contact with the Me 163 development team at a distance.
In the meantime, Messerschmitt was unwilling to be involved in the Me 163 project, under the excuse that his company was already overburdened with the production of other aircraft. For this reason, the production of further Me 163 aircraft was instead given to Klemm Leichtflugzeugbau, a relatively small aircraft company owned by Hans Klemm.
Production of the A-0 series
While the V1 prototype was mainly used for initial testing, the V2 would serve as a base for the A-0 series. An initial order for ten A-0 aircraft was previously given to Messerschmitt, but only seven were completed. The remaining three aircraft were actually completed by the Klemm factory. These were all completed from 1941 to 1942. The number of prototypes built is not clear in the sources. The numbers range from 1 to 8 prototype aircraft. According to S. Ransom and H.H. Cammann (Jagdgeschwader 400), while three prototypes were meant to be built initially, not all met the requested specifications, except one, which received the V4 designation. Author M. Griehl (Jet Planes of the Third Reich) on the other hand noted that the V4 was the first prototype. He explained that the previous three prototypes were actually related to the initial Bf 163 reconnaissance project that was rejected.
In-Service
Of the 10 built Me 163 A-0 planes, not all were equipped with fully operational engines. A number of them were instead operated as unpowered gliders. This version was not intended for combat operations and was mainly used for crew training and further experimentation.
At the end of November 1943, the V6 aircraft was lost in an accident with the loss of the pilot. In another accident at the end of 1943, another pilot died when the engine stopped working during a takeoff. While the pilot tried to turn back for a landing, having limited control, the aircraft hit a ground station radio antenna before hitting the ground and exploding. It was discovered in an investigation that the undercarriage dolly bounced off the ground much higher than usual, and struck the aircraft, damaging the rocket engine. Some prominent pilots, like Hanna Reitsch, actually had the chance to flight-test the Me 163 aircraft. At least one aircraft was still operational by February 1945 and was used for testing the 55 mm R4M rockets by Erprobungkommando 16.
Me 163A at Peenemunde, 1943. [Ransom & Cammann]At least one Me 163A survived up to February 1945. It was used by Erprobungkommando 16 (Eng. testing or evaluation-coomand) in Silesia to test the 55 mm R4M rockets. This unit had the primary function of testing and examining the newly built Me 163 and helping in the development and improvement of its overall design. Besides these, no other armament was installed on the Me 163 A series. Source Source: W. Spate and R. P. Bateson Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet
Technical Characteristics
The Me 163A was a high-speed, rocket-powered, swept-wing, short fuselage, mixed-construction tailless aircraft. The Me 163A fuselage was built using metal, divided into three sections, the front cockpit, central fuel tank, and the aft engine compartment.
The wooden wings had a very simple design consisting of two spars covered in thick fabric. If needed, the wings could be detached from the fuselage for transport. At the wings’ trailing edges ailerons were placed, which the pilot during flight used for pitch and roll. The wing area was 17.5 m² (57.4 ft²). The tail did not have the standard horizontal stabilizers, instead of having a single large vertical stabilizer. Despite this, no major problems during flights were ever noted on the Me 163A.
For the pilot to enter the cockpit he was provided with a ladder placed on the left side of the aircraft. The cockpit canopy opened upwards. Overall visibility was poor, and later versions would have an improved canopy. While it did offer some improvements for the pilot’s line of sight, it would not resolve the overall poor visibility of the aircraft. Given that the Me 163A was based on a DFS 194 glider, it was equipped with minimal instrumentation needed for the aircraft to be flown.
View of the Me 163A’s cockpit interior. [Spate & Bateson]The Me 163A was powered by a single HWK R II 203 rocket engine, which gave 750 kg (1,650 lb) of thrust. The main fuel consisted of a mix of T and Z Stoff. These two chemicals were highly reactive, volatile, and prone to explosion. To avoid this, extensive preparation and security measures were necessary. The maximum speed this engine achieved was some 850 km/h (530 mph). This high speed was achieved to some extent thanks to the aircraft’s low weight. The empty weight was 1,140 kg (2,513 lbs) while the maximum takeoff weight was 2,200 kg (4,850 lbs).
Interestingly, in order to save weight, the Me 163 did not have a conventional landing gear unit. Instead, during take-off, it was provided with a specially designed two-wheel dolly. It would be jettisoned upon take-off. When landing on the airfield, the Me 163 used a retractable skid located beneath the fuselage.
Despite the A series having not been designed to have any weapon systems, at least one Me 163A was tested with the installation of the 5.5 cm (2.16 in) R4M air-to-air rockets.
Production Versions
DSF 194 – Prototype whose further development led to the creation of the Me 163
Me 163 Prototype Series– Prototype aircraft
Me 163A-0 – 10 Pre-production aircraft built
Conclusion
The Me 163A series, despite its unusual appearance and overall design, proved to be a rather successful aircraft. It had some shortcomings, mostly regarding its dangerous fuel load. Upon completion of successful testing, order for the Me 163B version was given.
Me 163A Specifications
Wingspans
8.85 m / 29 ft 3 in
Length
5.25 m / 17 ft 2 in
Height
2.16 m / 7 ft 8 in
Wing Area
17.5 m² / 57.4 ft²
Engine
One HWK R II 203 rocket engine with 750 kg (1,650 lbs) of thrust
Empty Weight
1,140 kg / 2,513 lbs
Maximum Takeoff Weight
2,200 kg / 4,850 lbs
Maximum Speed
850 km/h / 530 mph
Crew
1 pilot
Gallery
Me 163A – Illustrated by Carpaticus
Credits
Written by Marko P.
Edited by by Ed Jackson & Henry H.
Illustrations by Carpaticus
Sources
D. Nešić (2008) Naoružanje Drugog Svetsko Rata-Nemcaka. Beograd.
W. Spate and R. P. Bateson (1971) Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet , Profile Publications
M. Ziegler (1990) Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet, Schiffer Publishing
M. Emmerling and J. Dressel (1992) Messerschmitt Me 163 “Komet” Vol.II, Schiffer Military History
E. T. Maloney and U. Feist (1968) Messerschmitt Me 163, Fallbrook
S. Ransom and H.H. Cammann (2010) Jagdgeschwader 400, Osprey publishing.
D. Donald (1990) German aircraft of the WWII, Brown Packaging books ltd
D. Monday (2006) The Hamlyn Concise Guide To Axis Aircraft OF World War II, Bounty Books.
M. Griehl (1998) Jet Planes of the Third Reich, Monogram Aviation Publication
M. Griehl (2012) X-Planes German Luftwaffe Prototypes 1930-1945, Frontline Book
Nazi Germany (1940)
Jet Powered Bomber & Reconnaissance Aircraft – 8 Prototypes Built
The Ar 234 A V6 (GK+IW) prototype. [Warbirdphotographs]
Following a request from the German Ministry of Aviation (Reichsluftfahrtministerium – RLM), in 1940, German aircraft manufacturer Arado began working on a new multi-purpose jet powered plane. Arado’s work would lead to the development of the advanced and sophisticated Ar 234 aircraft. During 1943, a small series of eight prototypes would be built and used mainly for testing, but some saw operational service.
History
During the spring of 1940, Arado was contacted by RLM officials with a request to design a completely new multi-purpose jet aircraft to be used for bombers and for reconnaissance duties. This aircraft was to be powered by new jet engines which were under development by Junkers and BMW. Interestingly, besides the request that it should be able to reach the British naval base at Scapa Flow in Northern Scotland, no other performance requirements were specified. The sources do not specify the precise base of operation for these reconnaissance missions. Geographically, the closest territories under German control were south Norway and Denmark, although it is possible that these aircraft would have had to operate from air bases in the occupied territories in Western Europe, either from France, the Netherlands or Belgium. This would require an estimated range of over 900 km. In essence, the RLM gave Arado free reign in terms of the overall design and its performance. If the prototypes built were satisfactory, an initial order for 50 aircraft was to be given.
Work on this new design was given to engineer Rüdiger Kosin, as Arado’s Technical Director, Walter Blume, was uninterested in this project. When work started, it received the Arado Erprobungs (experimental) 370 designation. During the initial phases, there were several different proposals about the number of crewmen, wing size, weapon configuration and the number of engines. After nearly a year, in October 1941, the first proper project, designated the E 370/IVa, was completed. This proposal was mainly intended to be used as a reconnaissance aircraft and was to be equipped with camera equipment. It was to be powered by two BMW P 3302 turbo jet engines. The armament was quite modest and consisted of only one 13 mm MG 131 machine gun. As this aircraft was to operate from short-length airfields, the designers came up with the idea to use a wooden retractable skid for landing, which was to be mounted beneath the fuselage.
E 370/IVa drawings. [Smith & Creek, Arado 234 A]
The project was presented to RLM officials in late October of 1941. They were satisfied and gave permission for the production of 50 aircraft. During the evaluation, it received the 8-234 designation. Unfortunately for Arado, the head of the RLM Technical Department, Ernst Udet, committed suicide just a few weeks later. He was replaced by Erhard Milch, who was more interested in aircraft that were already being produced rather than the proposed Arado project. This without a doubt affected the earlier mentioned initial production order, as the initial order for 50 seems to disappear from record. Despite this setback, work on the E 370 continued. During early 1942, some modifications to the fuselage were made with the aim of increasing its size and strength. The unusual skid undercarriage was replaced by a retractable wheeled bogie system.
In February 1942, Erhard Milch visited the Arado company. He was presented with the drawings and calculations for the improved E 370 model. He was generally impressed with what he saw, and gave his permission for the construction of a wooden mockup. The order would be increased to six prototypes in the following month. The aircraft was to take off using a small three wheel dolly. After the aircraft was in the sky, the dolly was jettisoned and landed with the help of a parachute, meaning it could be used again. In addition, the idea of using a retractable skid undercarriage was reintroduced. If needed, jettisonable Walter HWK auxiliary rocket take-off engines could be attached under the wings. Throughout 1942, many additional modifications and changes were made to the design. Great attention was given to the testing of different engine types and configurations.
By the end of 1942, the number of prototypes to be built was once again increased to 20. The first seven aircraft were to be powered by Jumo 004 engines, with prototype V8 powered by four BMW 003 engines, and V9 through V14 with two BMW 003 engines. The remaining aircraft were to be powered by four BMW 003 engines. The first prototype was meant to be built by November 1943, with the last in October 1944. Surprisingly, these 1942 plans actually started to be completed early, with the first 3 prototypes ready by August 1943. Thanks to this, it was possible to run the first test trials even earlier than anticipated.
Work on the First Prototypes
Work on the construction of the first prototype began in late 1942. During this time, the name was changed to Ar 234. Progress was slow due to problems with the delivery of the Jumo 004 engines, which only arrived in February 1943. These engines were tested and immediately proved to be problematic, as they failed to achieve the promised 850 kg (1879 lbs) thrust. Once fitted with these engines, the first prototype, Ar 234 V1, was used for static ground testing and taxiing trials. No flight was initially accepted due to the short runway at Brandenburg, where the prototype was built. For this reason, the prototype was moved to a Luftwaffe airfield at Munster. During July 1943, this aircraft was mainly used for ground tests. In late July, there was an accident when one of the Jumo engines caught fire. The damage was minor and was quickly repaired. On 30th July, Ar 234 V1 made its first test flight piloted by Horst Selle. The flight was successful, with no problems with the aircraft. The dolly, on the other hand, was lost when the parachute failed to properly open. In early August, there were again problems with the same engine. To avoid any potential threat to the aircraft, it was simply replaced by an engine taken from Ar 234 V3, which was under construction. On 9th August, another test flight was undertaken. During this flight, Selle reached a speed of 650 km/h (400 mph) without any problems. The dolly was once again lost, similarly to the first one. Additional changes were made to the position of the parachute on the dolly, which proved to be the solution to this problem. The V1 prototype would be lost in an accident where the pilot overshot the landing field and crash landed on 29th August. While the aircraft was not repaired, parts of it were reused for testing other equipment.
The Arado 234 V1 first prototype. This particular aircraft would be lost in an accident where the pilot overshot the landing field and crash landed on 29th August 1943. [Warbirdphotographs] V1 during the third test flight, during which the dolly parachute release system was successfully tested. [Luftwaffephotos]
The V2 prototype was completed in late August 1943. There were some issues with the engine, which had to be replaced. The aircraft was otherwise trouble-free. It was moved to Alt Lonnewitz, where it was mainly used for engine testing. In late September 1943, V3 made its first flight. While, initially, it was to be equipped with a pressurized cabin and an ejector seat, this was never implemented.
In early October 1943, the V2 prototype, with its pilot, Selle, were lost in a fire. This accident prompted the Germans to introduce automatic fire extinguishing systems on all of the Ar 234 prototypes, including later ones. Another change was introducing ejection seats to avoid any further pilot casualties. Due to this accident, there were some delays in the Ar 234 project. Testing continued in November, when V3 was piloted by Walter Kroger. On the 21st of November, the V3 aircraft was transferred to Insterburg to be presented to Adolf Hitler, together with other experimental jet aircraft, like the Me 262 and Me 163. Hitler was highly impressed and even gave orders that some 200 aircraft be built during 1944. During this time, V4 was also flight tested. Both V3 and V4 were used until June 1944 for various roles, including crew training, after which they were removed and replaced with later Ar 234 B versions. By the end of 1943, V5, fitted with Jumo 004 B-0 engines. was introduced.
During early 1944, two Arado 234 aircraft would be tested with a four engine configuration. The idea was that the use of four smaller engines would provide similar performance to the larger ones. V8 was powered by two pairs of BMW P.3302 engines. V6 (which was built later than V8) was tested with four BMW 003 engines placed in four separate wing-mounted nacelles. During a routine flight of V6 at the start of June 1944, all four engines stopped working only 17 minutes after take-off. The pilot was forced to conduct an emergency landing of the plane, after which it caught fire and was heavily damaged, rendering it a complete loss. After this accident, and due to many other engine problems with both versions, all further work on the multi-engined Ar 234 A was discontinued. These would later serve as the basis for the Ar 234 C version instead.
V6 powered by four BMW 003 engines placed in four separated wing cowlings. [Luftwaffephotos] V6 after a forced landing in June 1944, shortly before the engines began to burn. This accident and problems with the engines put an end to the development of the multi-engined Ar 234 A version. [Warbirdphotographs] V8 was powered by four BMW P.3302 engines placed in pairs. [Warbirdphotographs]
Technical Characteristics
The Arado Ar 234A (as they were designated later on) prototypes were designed as all metal, high-wing turbojet-powered experimental reconnaissance planes. Their fuselages had a semi-monocoque design with a flat top. The wings consisted of two main spars, each with 29 ribs. They were covered with metal stressed skin. Each wing was connected to the fuselage by four bolts. If needed, these could easily be taken off and removed. At the rear, there was a more or less conventional tail unit.
The Ar 234 was used to test a number of different engines. The first 4 prototypes were powered by two Jumo 004 A-0 engines, which had 840 kg (1,850 lbs) of thrust. V5 and V7 used Jumo 004 B-0 engines which provided 900 kg (1,980 lbs) of thrust. The 3.8 m (12 ft) long engines (both types had the same size) were attached to the wings using three bolts. V6 and V8 were powered by four engines which were able to achieve 800 kg (1,760 lbs) of thrust. As the Ar 234 was intended to be used for reconnaissance operations, a large fuel capacity was important. One 1,800 liter fuel tank was placed behind the cockpit, with a second 2,000 liter tank in the rear of the fuselage. With this fuel load the Ar 234 had an operational range of 1,500 km (930 miles). To assist with take-off, the Ar 234 could be equipped with small Walter 109-500 type rocket engines. These had a run time of 30 seconds and could generate 500 kg (1,100 lbs) of thrust. After the Ar 234 was in the air, the rocket motors would be jettisoned and would land on the ground using small parachutes.
The Ar 234 did not have conventional landing gear, but instead used a three wheel 640 kg (1,410 lbs) jettisonable take-off assist dolly. The Ar 234 pilot could control this dolly by using the rudder, which was connected to hydraulic brakes on the dolly. Once in flight, the dolly would detach and then fall back to Earth using a parachute, and could thereafter be reused. Initially, it was discarded during flight, but this proved to be problematic. After some redesign work, the moment of release was changed to just after take-off. There was no risk of the dolly impacting the fuselage in midair, as the parachute pulled it away from the aircraft. When the Ar 234 had to land, it would use the retractable hydraulically operated skid under the fuselage. The engine nacelles were also provided with smaller skids to avoid any damage to them and to provide better stability during landing. The V3 prototype tested in early 1944 used a drag parachute during landing. This proved to be successful and was later implemented as standard from the B series on.
The smaller front wheel on the jettisonable dolly was fully steerable to help during airfield taxiing and take-offs [Warbirdphotographs] Close up view of the large sliding skid. [worldwarphotos.info] Ar 234 during landing. A fuselage skid along with smaller skids placed under the engine nacelles were used instead of wheels. Later versions of the Ar 234 incorporated a conventional wheeled landing gear. [Warbirdphotographs]
The pilot’s cockpit was fully glazed, which provided excellent all around visibility. To enter the cockpit, the pilot used a small hatch placed atop the cockpit. This was not a great design feature as, in an emergency, the pilot could not easily escape the plane. In order to protect the pilot from enemy fire from the rear, a 15 mm thick armor plate was installed behind his seat. Behind this protective armor plate, three oxygen tanks were placed. The instruments were placed on two smaller panels to the left and right of the pilot.
A few Ar 234s were equipped with two Rb 50/30 cameras. These were placed behind the rear fuel tank. These could cover a wide area of 10 km (6 mile) at an altitude of 10 km (33,000 ft).
There were initial plans to arm the Ar 234 with a 13 mm machine gun for self defence. Due to the experimental nature of the Ar 234 A version, no actual armament would actually be installed.
Operational Service
In May 1944, Conny Noell of the Luftwaffe experimental Versuchsverband unit requested that at least two Ar 234 airframes be used for experimental reconnaissance operations after examining the prototypes. The request was accepted and the V5 and V7 aircraft were allocated for this task. Besides the camera equipment, virtually nothing else was changed on these two aircraft.
For the testing of these aircraft, two pilots were chosen, Horst Götz and Erich Sommer. At the start of June 1944, the V5 prototype was tested by Götz during a short 30 minute long flight. He later wrote, after the war “The take-off procedure was not very complicated. First, I engaged the starter, then fed petrol into the combustion chamber until, at approximately 6,000 rpm, I made the gradual change to J2 kerosene. The engines were then reved up to their maximum 9,000 revolutions. After take-off, I throttled the engine back to cruising speed. It was a completely new flying experience. Only a slight whistling noise in the cockpit could be heard. The take-off dolly had functioned quite normally. It was really wonderful”.
Four days later, Sommer also tested this aircraft and gave a similar positive assessment of its overall performance. More flights were undertaken in the following days without major problems. While piloting the V5 prototype during a routine take-off, Götz’ wheeled takeoff dolly release mechanism failed, with the assembly remaining stuck to the aircraft’s landing skids. He immediately tried to land back at the airfield. Despite the dangerous maneuver, he managed to land in a nearby potato field, with minimal damage to the plane.
Around this time, the two test pilots were informed that no prolonged or high-altitude flights had ever been attempted by the Ar 234 prototypes, mostly due to a lack of pressurized cockpit. For this reason, Sommer decided to personally test the Ar 234’s performance at altitude. In late June 1944, he made the first high altitude flight, which lasted over an hour and fifteen minutes at an altitude of 11 kilometers (36,000 ft). During a dive, he managed to reach a speed of 590 km/h (367 mph). A few days later, he made another similar flight that lasted over two hours, during which he managed to cover a distance of 1,435 km (890 miles). When the test flights were completed, both pilots gave positive feedback and evaluations about the performance of the planes and recommended their immediate production.
Following the Allied invasion of German occupied France in 1944, the experimental unit was ordered to move its two aircraft and equipment by train to Juvincourt, in France, by the end of July. Due to delays with the delivery of necessary parts, mostly due to Allied air raids, V7 was finally ready to take to the sky on the 2nd of August. V7’s first operational mission was to take photographs of the Allied landing beaches and the 10 km (6 mile) wide inland strip . The flight was a success, without any problems. The Ar 234’s cameras managed to take nearly 400 photographs of the Allied invasion force, which provided the Germans with vital information about the strength and numbers of the enemy. With this single flight, Sommer managed to achieve what the remaining Luftwaffe reconnaissance units failed to do in two months. During August, some 7 reconnaissance flights were undertaken by the two Ar 234 aircraft. Following the rapid Allied advance, they had to be relocated to Belgium. While V7, piloted by Sommer, arrived without any problems, Götz was less fortunate. During the flight, he was hit by friendly anti-aircraft fire. While damaged, Götz managed to fly up to Oranienburg. But his bad luck for that day was not yet over. His landed Ar 234 aircraft was struck from behind in a ground collision by a Focke Wulf Fw 190 which was attempting a take-off, completely destroying V5. Ironically, the first German operational jet powered aircraft, and the first in the world, was shot down by the Germans and then destroyed by a German fighter plane!
Sommer was stationed with his aircraft at Volkel in Holland until the 5th of September, when it was relocated to Rheine base. On the 10th, Sommer performed a reconnaissance flight over the Thames Estuary but, without direct orders, continued up to London. The next morning, he was informed that, due to this action, he was to be arrested and court martialed. Sommer immediately contacted Götz and explained the situation to him. Götz immediately took action and, after persuasions and threats, managed to get the charges against Sommer dropped. After the war, they both found out who demanded Sommer’s arrest. It was the chief of the V-2 program, Hans Kammler, who had feared that the pictures of London would prove the failure of his rocket program.
Part of the damage suffered by V5 during the forced landing and after being hit by ground anti-aircraft fire, shortly before being hit by an Fw 190 taking off. [Smith & Creek, Arado 234 A]
Sommer made at least four more reconnaissance flights with Ar 234 V7 before it was finally replaced with a B version, which was essentially just a copy of the previous version but with a wider fuselage and a more conventional completely retractable wheeled landing gear. After this, V7 was mainly used for crew training before being damaged during a take-off accident on 19th October 1944. After it was repaired, Götz made a flight to Oranienburg, where the plane was removed from service.
Production
Of the Arado 234 A series, only 8 aircraft were ever produced, as they were used for experimentation of various equipment and engine units.
V1 (TG+KB) – Badly damaged during a harsh landing.
V2 (DP+AW) – Was lost in a flight accident.
V3 (DP+AX) – Was presented to Hitler, who authorized the Ar 234 production. Used for various testing until July 1944.
V4 (DP+AY) – Similar to the V3 prototype, used up to June 1944 mainly for crew training, when it was removed from service.
V5 (GK+IV) – The first aircraft to be used operationally, but was lost when damaged by friendly ground-based anti-aircraft fire.
V6 (GK+IW) – Heavily damaged during a landing accident and caught fire soon after.
V7 (GK+IX/ T9+MH) – Used operationally until October 1944, when it was damaged in a take-off accident. Written off as a complete loss.
V8 (GK+IY) – Tested with a four engine configuration, but proved to be highly problematic.
Conclusion
While only a small number of Ar 234A planes were built, they proved to be successful designs. During the initial development phase and in their experimental use in service, no major issues were noted. The major drawback was the insufficient quality of the engines and the use of a jettisonable takeoff dolly. Following the success of the Ar 234 A, the development and production of the B and C versions was approved.
V1, the first prototype, made its first test flight piloted by Horst Selle at the end of July 1943. It would eventually be lost in an accident when the pilot overshot the landing field and crash landed on 29th August 1943. Ar 234 V5 was the first aircraft of the small production series to be used operationally during the Allied Liberation of France in 1944. It would be lost after a series of unfortunate circumstances culminated with a ground collision with a Focke Wulf 190 which was attempting a take-off. Ironically, the first German operational jet powered aircraft, and the first in the world, was shot down by the Germans and then destroyed by a German fighter plane! V5 was fitted with Jumo 004 B-0 engines. V6 was tested with four BMW 003 engines placed in four separate wing-mounted nacelles. During a routine flight at the start of June 1944, all four engines stopped working, forcing the pilot to conduct an emergency landing of the plane. After this, the plane caught fire and was heavily damaged, rendering it a complete loss.
Nazi Germany (1944)
Parasite Interceptor – None Built
Artist’s depiction of the Sombold So 344 firing off its nose rocket. [Heinz Rodes]The Sombold So 344 was a highly specialized interceptor designed by Heinz G. Sombold to attack Allied bomber formations over Germany in 1944. The way the aircraft would attack, however, would be extremely unconventional. Being deployed from a bomber mothership, the So 344 would fly towards an approaching bomber formation and launch its entire nose cone, which was a 400 kg (882 Ib) rocket, at the enemy bombers in an attempt to destroy as many as possible. From there, the So 344 could either attack the remaining bombers or return to base and land on a skid. Work went as far as wind tunnel models for the aircraft but none would be built.
History
Towards the end of the Second World War, Germany found itself at odds on an almost daily basis against the threat of Allied bombers. While pre-existing aircraft were used to defend Germany from this threat, more and more proposals for aircraft designed to deal with enemy bombers began to emerge. A number of these projects would use extremely unorthodox or downright strange methods to attempt to destroy enemy bombers. These ranged from carrying specialized weapons to even ramming the bomber. These projects were often small in design and were made of widely available materials, like wood, to save on production costs, reserving the more important material for mainline aircraft. An aircraft produced in small numbers that followed this formula was the Bachem Ba 349 “Natter”. Although not used operationally, the Ba 349 was a small bomber interceptor that would not require an airstrip to take off. Instead, it would be launched vertically from a launch rail. After taking off, the Ba 349 would approach the Allied bombers and attack them with a salvo of rockets in the nose. With its ammo depleted, the pilot would then eject from the aircraft, with the aircraft’s engine section parachuting down and being recovered for reuse. The nose would break off for the pilot to deploy the rockets under the cone. The Ba 349 is the most well known of these projects, but many would never leave the drawing board. Many of these aircraft designs were created by large companies but a handful came from individual engineers. One such design, the Sombold So 344, would approach the destruction of enemy bombers in an entirely different, almost ludicrous way.
3-way view of the So 344 [Luft46.com]The Sombold So 344 was the idea of Heinz G. Sombold of the Bley Ingenieurbüro (Engineering Office). Bley Segelflugzeug was a sailplane manufacturer located in Naumburg, Germany. During the 1930s, they became popular for their various sailplane designs, like the Kormoran and Motor-Kondor designs. Heinz G. Sombold was an engineer at Bley. He began working on the So 344 in late 1943 and his aircraft incorporated many features of the sailplanes built by the company. At the time, the craft was only designed as a parasite escort fighter and armed with two machine guns. On January 22nd of 1944 however, Sombold would drastically change the design and purpose of the aircraft. From here, the aircraft would be designed for the destruction of enemy bombers. To fit this new role, it would use a very unorthodox weapon. The nosecone of the So 344 was a rocket filled with 400 kg (880 Ib) of explosives that could be launched by the pilot at enemy aircraft. Sombold envisioned his aircraft using its nosecone rocket against close formations of bombers, where multiple aircraft could be destroyed with one well placed explosive. American bombers would often fly in combat box formations, where the bombers would fly close together to maximize the defensive capabilities of their guns. This allowed the bombers to have ample protection from enemy interceptors, as the approaching craft would come under fire from most of the aircraft in said formation. There were earlier weapons deployed by the Germans to try and damage the closely packed formations, like the BR 21, but none would be as huge a payload as the Sombold’s nose rocket.
Rear view of the wind tunnel model
Design work on the So 344 continued through 1944, even going as far as having a ⅕ scale wind tunnel model being made and tested at the Bley facility. By 1945, work on the project was cut off, as the Bley facility had to be abandoned due to the encroaching warfront. No further work was done on the Sombold So 344 and Sombold’s fate is unknown. No other designs by Sombold are known to have existed. The 344 designation was later used for the Ruhrstahl X-4, or RK 344, air-to-air missile system.
At the top of this image is the photo of the claimed nosecone of a Sombold So 344. In actuality it is a nose section of a Wasserfall SAM. [Lower: Wiki][Upper: Luftwaffe Secret Projects 17]A photo has circulated in several books, as well online, that claims a nosecone of the So 344 was built and discovered by the Allies at the end of the war. However, this photo actually depicts the nose section of a Wasserfall surface-to-air missile. The nose of the Wasserfall easily could be confused for that of the Sombold’s, as its shape is semi-similar and both have four stabilizing fins. No So 344 was built.
Design
Photo of the 1/5 wind tunnel model of the Sombold So 344
The Sombold So 344 was a single man special attack aircraft. It was to have a short, tubular body of wooden construction. For ease of transport, the aircraft could be split into two sections. The cockpit would be located at the rear of the body, directly in front of the vertical stabilizer. The aircraft would have conventional control surfaces on its wings and stabilizers. At the ends of the horizontal stabilizers were two angled vertical stabilizers. The wings would be mid-set. For its powerplant, the So 344 would use a Walter 509 bi-fuel rocket engine. To conserve fuel, the aircraft would be deployed via bomber mothership. Once deployed, it would have around 25 minutes of fuel. To land, the So 344 would have a rounded ski built into the body, similar to how the sailplanes Bley created would land.
For its main armament, the So 344 had a massive unguided rocket as its nose cone. The nose would contain 880 Ibs (400 kg) of explosive Acetol. The rocket was triggered via a proximity fuse. For stabilization, four fins would be placed on the nose. Additionally, the So 344 would have two forward machineguns to either defend itself or attack other bombers once its payload was released.
Operations
The So 344 would be carried to an approaching bomber formation via a modified bomber mothership. Once deployed, the aircraft would move in an arc towards the bombers, coming in downwards at them from at least 3,300 ft (1,000 m) above. This height would protect the So 344 from defensive fire during its dive. When the aircraft was lined up with a group of bombers, the pilot would launch the nosecone into the middle of the formation. Given the close proximity of the bombers in formation and the explosive threshold of the nosecone, it was predicted the resulting explosion would be able to take down several bombers in one attack. After launching its nosecone, the So 344 would have some fuel left and could continue to attack the remaining bombers with two machine guns on the aircraft. When fuel was low, the aircraft would return to base via gliding, like the Messerschmitt Me 163B rocket interceptor. Once near an airfield, it used a large ski to land.
Conclusion
The So 344 was a very strange way of approaching the bomber problem over Germany late in the war. The logic behind it was not too far fetched. The aforementioned Ba 349 Natter followed a similar attack plan, approaching the bombers and firing off a salvo of rockets before the pilot bailed from the craft. A project like the So 344 was not new to Germany by that point in the war and, like most of its contemporary designs, was not produced.
Had it been produced, the So 344 would have been a very niche aircraft. The fact that the aircraft had a single shot from its rocket payload made accuracy extremely important. The aircraft also would have been a prime target for Allied escort fighters once it ran out of fuel. A bomber would also need to be modified to carry the So 344 and would be a prime target for the escort fighters once the attacker was launched. The nature of the aircraft has led it to wrongly be named a “suicide attacker” by many postwar books on the subject. In some instances, the craft is also incorrectly listed as being a ramming aircraft. It is likely the aircraft would not have impacted the war very much.
Variants
Sombold So 344 (1943)– Original planned fighter version. Armed with two machine guns or heavier armament. None were built
Sombold So 344 (1944)– The Sombold So 344 attack aircraft. Armed with a nosecone rocket which would be fired at enemy bomber formations. None were built.
Operators
Nazi Germany – The Sombold So 344 was designed for the Luftwaffe to use against Allied bombers over Germany. None of the type would be built.
Sombold So 344 Specifications
Wingspan
18 ft 8 in / 5.7 m
Length
22 ft 11 in / 7 m
Height
7 ft 1 in / 2.2 m
Wing Area
64.58 ft² / 6 m²
Engine
Walter 509 Bifuel rocket engine
Weight
2,976 Ib / 1,350 kg
Flight Time
25 minutes
Crew
1 pilot
Armament
2x machine guns
1x 880 Ib (400 kg) Nose Rocket
Gallery
Artist’s Concept of a completed So 344 with striped nosecone – By Ed Jackson
Video
Credits
Article by Marko P.
Edited by Henry H. and Stan L.
Illustration by Ed Jackson
Herwig, D. & Rode, H. (2003). Luftwaffe Secret Projects: Ground Attack & Special Purpose Aircraft. Hinckley, England: Midland Pub.
France (1936-1940)
Fighter – 25 Built & ~200 Incomplete [Destroyed]
The VG.33 on an airfield. Colorized by Amazing Ace
Arsenal de l’Aéronautique was one of the more peculiar plane manufacturers of interwar France, though it is also one of the somewhat more obscure ones. Arsenal was a state company which was created towards the end of 1934. Its goal at the time was to provide a way to train aviation engineers employed by the French state, and to help them evaluate design proposals. It would also be tasked with studying aircraft designs without the profitability constraints of a private company, meaning Arsenal de l’Aéronautique would typically be used to study experimental projects not necessarily meant to see mass-production. Following the mass nationalization of France’s aircraft industry ,which began in August 1936 under the Popular Front’s government, Arsenal was given eight hangars built by Bréguet in Villacoublay, near Paris, to install its design bureau and production facilities.
Roots in Tandem-Engine Fighter Designs
The timeline of the VG 33’s predecessors tends to be somewhat unclear. It is generally considered that the fighters hold their roots in tandem-engine designs, which were being studied at the request of the French state in the mid to late 1930s. The VB10, which would be manufactured postwar, was one result of these studies. However, orders to design such tandem designs appear to date from 1937 according to some sources, while a mockup of the VG 33’s direct predecessor, the VG 30, appeared in November of 1936.
The Arsenal VG.30 mockup, the beginning of the VG.3X series of fighters, at the Paris air show of November 1936. [arsenalvg33.free.fr ]In any case, the engineers of Arsenal, led by lead engineer Michel Vernisse, presented their new plane at the 15th Paris Air Show in November 1936. The design they had worked on appears to date from early 1936, and was an attempt to compete with contemporary fighter designs, such as the MS.405 or LN 161 . This aircraft would be designated the Arsenal de L’aéronautique VG.30.
The VG.30: An Impressive First Draft
The VG.30 mockup which was first presented at the Paris air show was a low cantilever-wing monoplane powered ,originally, by the Potez 12dc 610 hp in-line engine. The plane was to use an almost exclusively wooden construction, which would save on cost and strategic resources (though this would prove less so the case than expected when it was found France lacked the spruce wood reserves to build the aircraft and had to purchase large quantities abroad to compensate for this issue). It had a capable armament of one 20 mm HS-404 firing through the propelled hub, and four wing-mounted 7.5 mm MAC 34 machine-guns. The wings had a surface of 14 m². When first unveiled, the VG.30 had a very modern appearance and drew considerable interest from France’s air ministry. So much so that, in early 1937, the Air Ministry set requirements for a competition, the “A.23”, for French aircraft designers to offer light fighter aircraft designs. This opened up some competition to the VG.30, which would materialize in several prototypes, such as the (Bloch MB.700, SNCAO CAO.200, Roussel R.30).one design, Caudron’s C.714, would enter production (Caudron’s very light C.714)
Arsenal worked on adapting their VG.30 to these requirements and then manufactured a prototype. Manufacturing of the prototype started during the summer of 1937, and faced some considerable delays. Notably, the Potez engine could not be delivered, which pushed the Arsenal designers to switch to another engine, Hispano-Suiza’s 12Xcrs, which would provide a considerable power increase up to 690 hp. This change would start the association between Arsenal’s VG.3X series fighters and Hispano-Suiza in-line engines.
A small but nonetheless rare view of the VG.30 prototype during flight. [Internet Movie Plane Database]The first prototype of the VG.30 had its first flight on the 15th of October 1938. It would still have to wait several months for official state trials, in which some subsequent modifications were made to the aircraft. in July of 1939 were the state trials undertaken. The VG.30 proved to have decent performance for a light fighter with a Hispano-Suiza powerplant that was not the most powerful of these available; up to 485 km/h in level flight. In a dive, the VG.30 was found to reach 805 km/h.
The VG.30 prototype on the ground during trials. [arsenalvg33.free.fr ]
Improving Upon the VG.30
The VG.30 had been found to be a rather capable design, but it had room for improvement. This was done by designing the VG.31. An issue with the VG.30 was that the radiator was fairly far forward. Being further in front than the cockpit, it was found not to be ideal for the plane’s aerodynamic profile. The VG.31 had its radiator moved back by two meters, and also had the wing surface reduced by two square meters. A more powerful engine was fitted in the form of the Hispano-Suiza 12Y-31 860 hp, which did not however feature a 20 mm gun firing through the propeller hub. Two of the wing machine-guns were also removed, with only two 7.5 mm MAC 34s remaining as armament.
The VG.31 was never flown. It appears a fuselage was built, but was then converted to a VG.33 which was also never flown, but used as a model to base production upon.
The VG.33: First Production Model
Wind tunnel trials of the VG.31 showed that its reduced wingspan resulted in aerodynamic instability. Its reduced armament was also a major issue. However, its radiator, pushed back to the rear, appeared to be a good design choice in order to reduce drag and improve the aerodynamic profile of the series.
In designing a more advanced version, the best parts of the VG.30 and VG.31 were combined. The new fighter, the VG.33, would combine the wingspan and armament of the VG.30, with the fuselage and engine of the VG.31 – modified to mount a 20 mm HS-404 firing through the propeller hub.
Production of the VG.33 prototype started in 1938, and the prototype took flight for the first time on the 25th of April 1939. The official trials would last from July of 1939 to March of 1940, and were generally very positive.
Design: The Structure of the VG.33
A photo of the first VG.33 prototype during production in late 1938, showing the wooden structure of the aircraft before the plywood cover was applied. [Le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]Schematics of the wing structure of the VG.33, which was mostly made using spruce. [Le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]The VG.33 was designed using a largely wooden construction, made mostly of spruce. Almost all of the plane’s internal structure was wooden, and then given a plywood skin. The VG.33 used a semi-monocoque fuselage and a one-piece wing structure. The plane had a wingspan of 10.80 m, with each wing having a surface of 14 m². The plane was 8.55 m long, and 3.35 m high. Empty, it would weigh around 2,050 kg. When loaded, it would be between 2,450 and 2,896 kg (the second prototype would be weighed at 2,680 kg in seemingly standard configuration, with guns, fuel and pilot). The VG.33’s landing gear deployed outward.
The mounting of the Hispano-Suiza 12Y-31 engine onto a VG.33. [Le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]The VG.33 used a Hispano-Suiza 12Y-31. This was a V12 engine producing 860 hp maximum at a critical altitude of 3,320 m, and at 2,400 rpm. This engine was fitted with a three-bladed Chauvière variable pitch propeller with a diameter of 2.95 m. This propeller would rotate at up 1,600 rpm. The water radiator was located below the cockpit,and was recessed into the fuselage as a way to reduce drag as much as possible. Upon take-off, a VG.33 would weigh 2,680 kg.
Firing through the propeller hub was the plane’s heaviest armament: a 20 mm HS-404 autocannon. Found on most French fighters of the era, this cannon fired 250 grams projectiles at a muzzle velocity of 880 m/s. It was fed by a 60-round drum magazine, which would typically be expended quite quickly considering the weapon typically fired at 570 to 700 rpm. Additionally, two MAC34M39 machine-guns were located in each wing. The M39 was the belt-fed version of the original MAC34 aircraft machine-gun, which initially used drum magazines. The 9 gram 7.5 mm projectiles were fired at 830 m/s, and 1,200 to 1,450 rpm. With a larger ammunition provision of 850 rounds per gun, the machine-guns could be kept firing much longer than the cannon.
The VG.33 featured the standard radio of the French air force at the time, the RI 537.
Performance
The VG.33 on an airfield, giving a good angle on the plane’s sleek profile and radiator. [Pinterest]The trials undertaken from July of 1939 to March of 1940 gave a very good impression of the Arsenal VG.33, which could reasonably be considered the best French single-engine fighter of the era.
At its optimal altitude of 5,200 m, the VG.33 could reach a maximum speed of 558 km/h. This was faster than the newest French fighter of the time, the D.520, by about 20 km/h. The take-off speed would be of about 135 km/h, with a take-off distance of about 550 m. The landing speed was 125 km/h. The plane’s climb-rate was also a strength of the design. It would reach 1,000 m in 1.17 minutes, 2,000 in 2.34, 5,000 in 6.26 and 8,000 in 13.26. The plane had an operational ceiling of roughly 9,500 m.
The VG.33 had a maximum range of 1,060 km with its full fuel load of 400 litres. At an altitude of 5,000 m, it had an endurance of two hours and forty minutes There were trials for additional fuel tanks on the VG.30, which could perhaps have been applied to the VG.33 as well. The plane would then have a fuel load of 600 litres, and it was expected a VG.33 could cross up to 1,560 km, or fly for four hours and twenty minutes.
A view of the instrument board in the VG.33’s cockpit. [Pinterest]Posessing superb performance, forgiving flight characteristics, and good maneuverability, the VG.33 was a great fighter for its day . The first report made by the CEMA, the French Air Force’s evaluation service, in September in 1939, found the plane had excellent and well-balanced control surfaces which were effective at all speeds. Even at low speed, the plane remained very controllable all the way down to the stall speed, which made it easy to perform landings with. Furthermore, there was no particular imbalance and no risk of the plane losing control and nosing over. Taking-off was also not hard on the VG.33. The plane had no issues keeping a straight trajectory on the runway,and was considered very controllable even on the ground. The landing gear was found to be reliable and safe. The only somewhat lacking element was found to be the plane’s brakes, which were perhaps not as powerful as would be appreciated.
In comparison to the D.520 – which was already a decent fighter – the VG.33 compared favorably in pretty much all areas. This was even more of an achievement when taking into account the weights and powerplants of the two planes. The D.520’s weight was about equal to the VG.33 (2,050 kg empty, 2,740 kg fully loaded), however, it used a more powerful version of the same series of Hispano-Suiza 12Y engine, the 12Y-49. In comparison to the VG.33’s 12Y-31, the 12Y-49 producded 90 hp more, with a maximum output of 950 hp. This did not prevent the VG.33 from being faster than the D.520, climbing at a higher rate, and being more manoeuvrable, while featuring the exact same armament. In other words, the VG.33 would be, by the standards of 1939 and1940, a stellar fighter, very much able to compete with the newest designs from Germany or Great-Britain, the likes of the Bf109E and Spitfire. The plane would also have enough evolutionary potential to birth a series of fighters lasting potentially well into the war
A view of the uncovered 12Y-31 engine of a likely unfinished VG.33, the photo likely being of German origin. The 12Y-31 was not the most powerful version of the 12Y engine available by 1940, yet it was sufficient for the VG.33 to outclass fighters such as the D.520 powered by more powerful models of the same engine family. [hisaviation.com]
Production Orders and Setting Up the VG.33’s production
The outbreak of the Second World War in September of 1939 led to Arsenal’s fighter,which had been undertaking trials for several months at this point, being ordered into production. A first order was placed on the 12th of September, for 220 VG.33s.
Arsenal de L’Aéronautique lacked any facilities suited for mass-production. As such, production of the VG.33 would be undertaken by the SNCAN factory of Sartrouville, South-West of Paris. Five days after the first order, an additional 200 VG.33s were ordered, with the fighter being thought of as a good potential replacement for the aging Morane-Saulnier MS.406.
In the following months, orders and scheduled production of the VG.33 would evolve considerably, with the type quickly being seen as a future mainstay fighter for the French air force. By late September 1939, it was planned that the first 10 serial-production VG.33s were to be delivered in April of 1940, with production gradually rising to 150 planes a month by the autumn. The schedule was revised in November, with the 10 examples then being scheduled for February, and production to be set at 50 planes a month from April onward at the SCAN factory. It was already understood that a second assembly line would be required at this point. It was planned to open an assembly line in Michelin’s factories of Clermont-Ferrand, in the region of Auvergne in Southern France. This facility would not produce the VG.33, but one of its derivatives, the VG.32, of which the first were to be completed in December of 1940. There were also plans to set up a VG.33 production chain in Vendée, Western France.
VG.33 fuselages (top) and wing structures (bottom) during production. [Le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]The flap of a VG.33 during production in a workshop. [arsenalvg33.free.fr ]Production of the VG.33 required a large number of small producers. The aircraft’s largely wooden construction meant that a lot of parts could be supplied by cottage industry sources. Nonetheless, the production of the plane was quite consuming in terms of resources. To produce a single VG.33, 1,166 kg of spruce, 110 kg of plywood, 880 kg of steel, 436 kg of aluminum and duralumin and 125 kg of magnesium was required. Even if mostly wooden, a large quantity of steel was still consumed in the aircraft’s production. The most significant efforts in providing the materials needed to produce the VG.33 were not spent in acquiring any of the steel though, but rather the spruce wood. The French Air Force only had a reserve of 750 tonnes, and the wood was also used to manufacture some reconnaissance or training aircraft, meaning this available reserve would only be sufficient to provide for about 500 VG.33s. France had to start a scramble to acquire spruce from foreign sources. In November, the acquisition of 500 m3 of spruce from Great-Britain was negotiated. In the meantime, France also bought spruce not only from its traditional suppliers, the USA and Canada, but also from an additional source, Romania. Romanian spruce was soon found to be lacking in comparison to the North American-sourced material. However, it would still be sufficient for less strategically important reconnaissance or training aircraft, freeing up better quality spruce for the VG.33, which had become an absolute priority of the French air ministry by the spring of 1940. In terms of cost, the airframe of the VG.33, without engine or armament, cost 630,000 French francs to produce. This was less than the D.520 (700,000) or MB.152 (800,000), and the VG.33 could be considered to be a fairly economical fighter – though not as much as the much lighter, and less capable, Caudron C.714, born from the same specifications .
Too Little, Too Late
The first production schedule for the VG.33 evolved considerably over the months.At the outbreak of the war, it was expected that the first VG.33s would be delivered in April 1940. In November 1939, the date for the first expected deliveries was changed to February 1940. In January of 1940, it appeared obvious this schedule would not be met and the new set date for the first VG.33 deliveries was March. Finally, in March, the first VG.33 were not yet completed, and the schedule was moved again to April of 1940, where it originally was at the start of the war. Finally, the first production aircraft would take flight on the 21st of April 1940. The next two production aircraft followed in early May. Eventually, 7 production aircraft would be taken into the French Air Force’s registry. The aircraft’s production and service was cut short by the German invasion of the Low Countries and France, with the production facilities at Sartrouville being occupied by German troops around the 14-15th of June 1940.
Side view of a VG.33. Taken in Toulouse, Southern France, in 1942, this photo shows one of the few production aircraft which could be evacuated to Southern France in time. [Le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]The first squadron the VG.33 was supposed to enter service with was the GC ½, which previously operated the MS.406, far outclassed by the D.520 or Bf.109E. This squadron was allocated its two first aircraft, the 2nd and 4th production VG.33s, on the 10th of June 1940. The squadron, already engaged in the campaign, could not allocate any pilots to recover the aircraft. In the end, pilots of a reconnaissance group, GR 1/55, took them and relocated them from the under threat airport of Villacoublay, near Paris, to the far-away Toulouse-Francazal, deep in Southern France. Production planes n°1 and n°7 were moved to Clermont-Ferrant, where they were supposed to serve as models for the future VG.32 assembly chain. A fifth aircraft was moved to Southern France, n°7, in uncertain conditions.
Two VG.33s were reportedly part of an ad-hoc defensive squadron created in Bordeaux in June, GC I/55 active from the 17th to the 24th. According to some scaint claims, they may have been engaged in a few combat missions in the last days of the campaign of France. Two VG.33s are known to have been captured by German forces on Mérignac airfield, in Gironde, the same region as Bordeaux. These may have been the same aircraft.
Two production VG.33s captured intact by the Germans in Mérignac, Gironde. [Le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]Outside of these 7 aircraft taken in by the French air force, production at SCAN’s facilities in Sartrouville had been starting to pick up steam, and a number of aircraft were at various stages of production. It appears a total of 19 fighters had been completed. 20 more lacked only their landing gear and were near completion. Seemingly, at least 120 more fuselages were at various stages of production. The vast majority of these were sabotaged in extremis to prevent advancing German troops from capturing them. Notably, the completed fighters, that had yet to be taken in by the French air force were destroyed by the crew of a Potez 540 reconnaissance bomber on the 14th of June using sledgehammers, mere hours before German troops would seize the facilities. This did not prevent the Germans from getting their hands on a few VG.33s. Two VG.33s were seemingly captured in Mérignac airfield. Located near Bordeaux, these two planes may have been those part of an ad-hoc defensive squadron. At least one aircraft would be repainted in German colors and tested extensively, likely at Rechlin airfield, Germany, and given the registration number “3+5”. According to some sources, the Germans would capture a total of five serial production VG 33s as well as the original prototype.
An uncompleted VG.33, likely photographed by the picture services of Germany’s armed forces in Sartrouville. [Le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]The VG.33 which would be tested by German pilots at the Rechlin airfield. [Armedconflicts.com]Another photograph of the VG.33 which was captured by the Germans [Armedconflicts.com]
A Series of Derivatives, France’s Potentially Mainstay World War Two fighter
Though the VG.33 was already a very potent fighter by 1940, there were already plans to improve upon it, generally by improving its powerplant. A variety of prototypes, mostly based on VG.33 airframes and given alternative designations as VG.33 prototypes, were flown in the Spring of 1940 and would have given Arsenal’s new series of fighters a more promising fate, were it not for the German occupation of France.
The VG.32, developed before the VG 33, but never flown, replaced the 12Y-31 engine with an American-sourced Allison V-1710-C15 1,150 hp engine. A model from the same series of engines would be fitted into the American P-40 Warhawk fighter. While also being more powerful than the Hispano-Suiza 12Y, the most significant advantage of the Allison engine was that it would relieve France’s strained engine industry. By producing the relatively easy to build VG.33 airframe and giving it an engine which would not strain the local industry, France would have a fighter that would require comparatively few work hours. The fifth VG.33 prototype airframe, VG.33-05, was supposed to receive the Allison engine and be the VG.32 prototype. However, the engine was not delivered before the armistice and, as such, the prototype was never flown. Nonetheless, the VG.32 had been ordered for serial production. Production was to be set-up in Michelin’s facilities of Clermont-Ferrant. It was hoped the first dozen would be delivered in December of 1940, with 25 to be manufactured in January of 1941, 40 in February, 70 in March, 100 in April, and 150 monthly from May 1941 onward. This obviously never materialized. As it was never flown, there is no good way to estimate the VG.32’s performance. The Allison engine reportedly required lengthening the engine cover by 42 cm and may have made the plane somewhat heavier, but its significantly higher power output may still have resulted in the VG.32 being at least comparable, if not somewhat superior to the VG.33.
A rear view of the first VG.33 derivative to take flight, the VG.34, parked aside a LeO 451 bomber on a French airfield. [Aviafrance]The first VG.33 derivative to take flight would be the VG.34. Built using the second VG.33 prototype airframe (VG.33-02), the VG.34 mounted a more powerful version of the Hispano-Suiza 12Y engine, the 12Y-45. Producing 960 hp, this was enough to give the VG.34 a maximum speed of 576 km/h at 6,000 m, and likely improve upon its climb rate as well. The VG.34 had its first flight on the 20th of January 1940. It appears to have been at an airfield near Toulouse by the armistice, with its further fate unknown.
The VG.35, made from VG.33-04, received a Hispano-Suiza 12Y-51 engine producing 1,000 hp. Sadly, it is a lot more elusive than the VG.34. Its recorded performances do not appear to be known, nor do any photo survive, despite the VG.35 having its first flight on the 25th of February 1940. The plane was known to be in Orléans by the point German forces captured the city. Its further fate is unknown.
A front view of the fairly impressive-looking VG.36 prototype. [Old Machine Press]The VG.36 could be said to be a more mature version of the VG.35. Using the same 12Y-51 engine, the VG.36 was not built from a converted VG.33 airframe, but instead had a new one, incorporating a number of changes. Its radiator was wider but presented a smaller profile, and was more integrated into the fuselage in an effort to reduce drag. Taking its first flight on the 14th of May 1940, the VG.39 could reach 590 km/h at 7,000 m. Very satisfying in terms of its performance, it appears to have been scheduled to replace the VG.33 on the production lines at some point. As for the prototype, it was reportedly withdrawn to an airfield in La-Roche-Sur-Yon during the campaign, before being destroyed to avoid capture.
The VG.37 was never built; a further development of the VG.36, it was to feature a supercharger and be modified for long-range operations. The VG.38 was never built either, and was to feature an improved version of the 12Y engine – the exact model being unknown.
The sleek and impressive looking VG.39, often considered to be the most brilliant example of the future of French fighter design to have reached prototype stage by 1940, parked in front of a LeO 451 bomber. [ww2.sas1946.com]The VG.39 was the most advanced model which took flight. Its main improvement was in terms of its powerplant. It received the advanced Hispano-Suiza 12Y-89 ter, with an output of 1,200 hp. It appears this engine did not allow for a cannon firing through the propeller hub in this version. To somewhat compensate for this, the wings were redesigned, keeping the same surface area but having a vastly modified structure which enabled for the mounting of one additional MAC34 machine-gun in each wing. Taking its first flight on the 3rd of May 1940, it could reach an impressive 625 km/h at 5,750 m. A very well performing plane for the time, the VG.39 was, as the VG.36, intended to enter production. This would, however, likely have been in the form of an improved version still on the drawing board by 1940. Designated as the VG.39bis, this improved VG.39 would feature an even more powerful Hispano-Suiza 12Z-17 engine producing 1,600 hp and allow for a 20 mm HS-404 to fire through the propeller hub, with the 6 wing machine-guns being retained. The VG.39bis would also incorporate a lower and widened radiator design similar to the one found in the VG.36. It would likely have been a very high performing aircraft, but it stayed on the drawing board due to the German occupation of France. As for the VG.39 prototype, its eventual fate is unknown.
The Undying Shadow of a Promising Fighter: Vichy Regime Studies
As can be seen, the VG.33 was an aircraft with promising performance, and an already well-developed series of variants which would have guaranteed the aircraft good evolutionary potential. Had France not been knocked out of the war by 1940, it is likely the Arsenal VG.3X series would have become for France what the Spitfire was to Britain or the Bf.109 to Germany: a mainstay able to continue to evolve and remain relevant for pretty much the entirety of the conflict.
This promising future was cut short by German wings, tracks and feet occupying France in 1940. Nonetheless, the armistice regime known as Vichy continued some studies upon the base of the VG.33. A few of the fighters, seemingly five production models as well as the original prototype, were indeed re-located in the unoccupied part of France at the end of the 1940 campaign. Though they were not put into service, they appear to have been taken as a basis to continue working on future fighters.
A series of profile views of Arsenal’s series of fighters. There is little in common to be found between the original VG.30 or VG.33 and the later VG.50 or VG.70 projects undertaken by the Vichy regime. [le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]Under the Vichy regime, studies would continue, leading to the VG.40, 50 and then VG.60. The definitive aircraft designed by 1942 would have featured larger 16.25 m² wings, and a completely redesigned fuselage which had little to do with the old VG.33. It would feature a new version of the Hispano-Suiza 12Z engine. Studies stopped after the occupation of the unoccupied part of France in November of 1942, but would resume after the liberation of France, with a VG.60 fitted with a German Jumo 213E 1,750 hp engine being considered. This would have been a fighter vastly different from the original VG.33. Armed with eight wing-mounted M2 Browning 12.7 mm machine-guns and a cannon of unknown model firing through the propeller hub, it would have weighed up to around five tons and was expected to reach over 700 km/h. This would never materialize, as Arsenal would end up manufacturing a version of a pre-war project in the form of the tandem engine VB.10. The design bureau would also design some jet fighters in the form of the VG.70 and VG.90, though these would not result in any Arsenal aircraft being adopted by France before the bureau was absorbed into the larger SNCAN in December of 1954.
A Fighter Mystified and Fantasized-About, Cut Short by France’s Defeat
The Arsenal VG.33 was a particularly interesting French piece of equipment. Having its roots in a venture by Arsenal de L’Aéronautique to design the VG. 30 light fighter, the type would evolve into a solid fighter by 1939-1940. Having both promising performance and evolutionary potential, the VG.33’s future was cut short by the German invasion which happened right as the very first production aircraft were taking their first flights. Even more so than the D.520, often described by this sentence, the VG.33 arrived too few and too late, and couldn’t provide the French air force an aircraft able to compete with Germany’s Bf.109 . It has since become a fairly mystified piece of French engineering. An elegant fighter with a sleek design, it has become a sort of ambassador for the large variety of advanced military equipment which France was to field by 1940, but never got the chance. In this fashion, it is not too different from the Somua S40 and B1 Ter tanks or MAS 40 rifle in the psyche of French military enthusiasts.
Two production VG.33s on a French airfield. The majestic and sleek fighter design that is the VG.33 has attracted the eyes of many French military enthusiasts for decades. Though the reality is somewhat more complex, it is certain the VG.33 would have provided the French air force with a better performing asset than the MS.406, MB.152, and even D.520 and H.75. [Old Machine Press]
Replica Construction
This heavily mystified status of the VG.33 likely played a role in the creation of a project to produce a replica of the French fighter aircraft. An association, Arsenal Sud Restoration, was created with the goal of building a replica. With the original plans unavailable, the team had to recreate them using new tools. As of November 2020, while far from complete, the shape of the replica’s fuselage is starting to take shape, while the rudder has been painted and given its markings.
A view of the state of the project in October of 2020 [Facebook]
Variants
VG.30: Original light fighter prototype
VG.31: Planned modified variant of the VG.30, with Hispano-Suiza 12Y-31 860 hp engine, radiator moved to the back, and only two 7.5mm machine-guns. Never flown, a fuselage built and converted to a VG.33 prototype
VG.32: Planned variant fitted with Allison V-1710-C15 1,150 hp engine. A VG.33 prototype fuselage was set aside to receive the engine and serve as the VG.32 prototype, but it had not yet been mounted in June of 1940. Production was scheduled to begin in December 1940.
VG.33: Main production variant, using the Hispano-Suiza 12Y-31 860 hp engine and armed with one 20mm HS-404 autocannon and four 7.5mm MAC 34 machine-guns.
VG.34: Prototype converted from the second VG.33 prototype airframe, using the Hispano-Suiza 12Y-45 engine producing 960hp.
VG.35: Prototype converted from the fourth VG.33 prototype airframe, fitted with the Hispano-Suiza 12Y-51 1,000hp engine.
VG.36: Prototype, an improved iteration of the VG.30 series with the 12Y-51 engine in a modified airframe, with a radiator designed to reduce drag and significant other changes. Was to replace the VG.33 on the production lines at some point
VG.37:Planned variant of the VG.36 fitted with a supercharger and optimized for longer-range operations, never built
VG.38: Fighter design with an unknown iteration of the 12Y family of engines, never built.
VG.39: Prototype using the Hispano-Suiza 12Y-89 ter, producing 1,200hp but not fitted with an engine cannon, and instead using six 7.5mm machine-guns instead of four.
VG.39bis: Further evolution of the VG.39, powered by the Hispano-Suiza 12Z-17 1,600hp engine which would allow for a 20mm firing through the engine, while retaining six 7.5mm machine-guns. Never built
VG.40: First variant studied under the Vichy regime, using a Roll-Royces Merlin III 1,030hp engine on an airframe based on the VG.39bis. Never built
VG.50: Variant studied under the Vichy regime, using the Allison V-1710-39 engine. Never built
VG.60: Variant studied under the Vichy regime, with a new version of the Hispano-Suiza 12Z series of engines. Never built.
Arsenal VG.33 Specifications
Wingspan
10.8 m / 35 ft 6 in
Length
8.55 m / 28 ft 1 in
Height
3.55 m / 11 ft 8 in
Wing Area
14 m² / 46 ft² (One Wing) 28 m² / 92 ft² (Total)
Engine
Hispano-Suiza 12Y-31
Engine Output
Take Off – 760 hp Optimal Altitude – 860 hp at 5,200 m / 17,000 ftMax RPM – ~1,850 Standard
Propeller
Three-bladed Chauvière Variable Pitch Propeller (2.95 m diameter)
Empty Weight
2,050 kg / 4,519 lb
Takeoff Weight
2,450 to 2,896 kg (2,680 kg standard) 5,400 to 6,385 lb (5,908 lb standard)
Wing Loading
95.7 kg/m² / 19.6 lb/ft² (at standard 2,680 kg weight)
Fuel Capacity
400 liters / 105 US gallons 600 liters / 158 US gallons with proposed additional non-droppable fuel tanks
Maximum Speed
558 km/h / 347 mph
Cruising Speed
385 km/h / 239 mph
Cruising Range
1,060 km / 620 mi with Standard 400 liter fuel load
1,560 km / 970 mi with Extended 600 liter fuel load
Endurance
2h40 at 5,000m with 400 liter fuel load
4h20 at 5,000m with 600 liter fuel load
Maximum Service Ceiling
9,500 m / 31,000 ft
Time to Altitude
1.17 minutes to 1,000 m
2.34 minutes to 2,000 m
3.51 minutes to 3,000 m
5.07 minutes to 4,000 m
6.26 minutes to 5,000 m
8.02 minutes to 6,000 m
10.11 minutes to 7,000 m
13.26 minutes to 8,000 m
Crew
One Pilot
Armament
20 mm HS-404 firing through the propeller hub center with 60 rounds
4x MAC34M39 machine-guns with 850 rounds per gun in the wings
Production
1 prototype + 4 completed derivative prototype
Around 20 production aircraft fully completed of which 7 were taken in by the French Air Force
40 airframes very close to completion
About 200 aircraft in various stages of production in total by June of 1940
Gallery
Arsenal VG.30 PrototypeArsenal VG.33 PrototypeArsenal VG.33 in Standard Camouflage for 1940German Captured VG.33 – Depicted as seen in testing at Rechlin
Germany (1944)
Experimental VTOL Fighter – Paper Project
The bizarre looking Focke-Wulf Triebflügel fighter design. [luft46.com]During the war, German aviation engineers proposed a large number of different aircraft designs. These ranged from more or less orthodox designs to hopelessly overcomplicated, radical, or even impractical designs. One such project was a private venture of Focke-Wulf, generally known as the Triebflügel. The aircraft was to use a Rotary Wing design in order to give it the necessary lift. Given the late start of the project, in 1944, and the worsening war situation for Germany, the aircraft would never leave the drawing board and would remain only a proposal.
History
During the war, the Luftwaffe possessed some of the best aircraft designs and technology of the time. While huge investments and major advancements were made in piston engine aircraft development, there was also interest in newer and more exotic technologies that were also being developed at the time, such as rocket and jet propulsion. As an alternative to standard piston engine aircraft, the Germans began developing jet and rocket engines, which enabled them to build and put to use more advanced aircraft powered by these. These were used in small numbers and far too late to have any real impact on the war. It is generally less known that they also showed interest in the development of ramjet engines.
Ramjets were basically modified jet engines which had a specially designed front nozzle. Their role was to help compress air which would be mixed with fuel to create thrust but without an axial or centrifugal compressor. While this is, at least in theory, much simpler to build than a standard jet engine, it can not function during take-off. Thus, an auxiliary power plant was needed. It should, however, be noted that this was not new technology and, in fact, had existed since 1913, when a French engineer by the name of Rene Lorin patented such an engine. Due to a lack of necessary materials, it was not possible to build a fully operational prototype at that time, and it would take decades before a properly built ramjet could be completed. In Germany, work on such engines was mostly carried out by Hellmuth Walter during the 1930s. While his initial work was promising, he eventually gave up on its development and switched to a rocket engine insead. The first working prototype was built and tested by the German Research Center for Gliding (Deutsche Forschungsinstitut für Segelflug– DFS) during 1942. The first working prototype was tested by mounting the engine on a Dornier Do 17 and, later, a Dornier Do 217.
The Dornier Do 217 was equipped with experimental ramjets during trials. [tanks45.tripod.com]The Focke-Wulf company, ever keen on new technology, showed interest in ramjet development during 1941. Two years later, Focke-Wulf set up a new research station at Bad Eilsen with the aim of improving already existing ramjet engines. The project was undertaken under the supervision of Otto Ernst Pabst. The initial work looked promising, as the ramjets could be made much cheaper than jet engines, and could offer excellent overall flying performance. For this reason, Focke-Wulf initiated the development of fighter aircraft designs to be equipped with this engine. Two of these designs were the Strahlrohr Jäger and the Triebflügel. The Strahlrohr had a more conventional design (although using the word conventional in this project has a loose meaning at best). However, in the case of the Triebflügel, all known and traditional aircraft design theory was in essence thrown out the window. It was intended to take off vertically and initially be powered by an auxiliary engine. Upon reaching sufficient height, the three ramjets on the tips of the three wings would power up and rotate the entire wing assembly. It was hoped that, by using cheaper materials and low grade fuel, the Triebflügel could be easily mass-produced.
A model of the Triebflügel. This is how it may have looked if completed. [Wiki]
The Name
Given that these ramjet powered fighter projects were more a private venture than a specially requested military design, they were not given any standard Luftwaffe designation. The Triebflügel Flugzeug name, depending on the sources, can be translated as power-wing, gliding, or even as thrust wing aircraft. This article will refer to it as the Triebflügel for the sake of simplicity.
Technical Characteristics
Given that the Triebflügel never left the drawing board, not much is known about its overall characteristics. It was designed as an all-metal, vertical take-off, rotary wing fighter aircraft. In regard to the fuselage, there is little to almost no information about its overall construction. Based on the available drawings of it, it would have been divided into several different sections. The front nose section consisted of the pilot, cockpit, and an armament section for cannons and ammunition, which were placed behind him. Approximately at the centre of the aircraft, a rotary collar was placed around that section of the fuselage. Behind it, the main storage for fuel would be located. And at the end of the fuselage, four tail fins were placed.
A drawing of the Triebflügel’s interior. [luft46.com]This aircraft was to have an unusual and radical three wing design. The wings were connected to the fuselage while small ramjets was placed on their tips. Thanks to the rotary collar, the wings were able to rotate a full 360o around the fuselage. Their pitch could be adjusted depending on the flight situation. For additional stability during flight, the tail fins had trailing edges installed. The pilot would control the flying speed of the aircraft by changing the pitch. Once sufficient speed was achieved (some 240 to 320 km/h (150 to 200 mph)), the three ramjets were to be activated. The total diameter of the rotating wings was 11.5 m (37 ft 8 in) and had an area of 16.5 m² (176.5 ft²).
This unusual aircraft was to be powered by three ramjets which were able to deliver some 840 kg (1,1850 lb) of thrust each. Thanks to ramjet development achieved by Otto Pabst, these had a diameter of 68 cm (2.7 ft), with a length of less than 30 cm (0.98 ft). The fuel for this aircraft was to be hydrogen gas or some other low grade fuel. The estimated maximum speed that could be achieved with these engines was 1,000 km/h (621 mph). The main disadvantage of the ramjets, however, was that they could not be used during take-off, so an auxiliary engine had to be used instead. While not specifying the precise type, at least three different engines (including jet, rocket, or ordinary piston driven engines) were proposed.
In the fuselage nose, the pilot cockpit was placed. From there the pilot was provided with an overall good view of the surroundings. The main issue with this cockpit design wass the insufficient rear view during vertical landing.
Close up view of the Triebflügel landing gear assembly. [Secret Jets of the Third Reich]The landing gear consisted of four smaller and one larger wheels. Smaller wheels were placed on the four fin stabilizers, while the large one was placed in the middle of the rear part of the fuselage. The larger center positioned wheel was meant to hold the whole weight of the aircraft, while the smaller ones were meant to provide additional stability. Each wheel was enclosed in a protective ball shaped cover that would be closed during flight, possibly to provide better aerodynamic properties. It may also have served to protect the wheels from any potential damage, as landing with one of these would have been highly problematic. Interestingly enough, all five landing wheels were retractable, despite their odd positioning.
The armament would have consisted of two 3 cm (1.18 in) MK 103s with 100 rounds of ammunition and two 2 cm (0.78 in) MG 151s with 250 rounds. The cannons were placed on the side of the aircraft’s nose. The spare ammunition containers were positioned behind the pilot’s seat.
Final Fate
Despite its futuristic appearance and the alleged cheap building materials that would have been used in its construction, no Triebflügel was ever built. A small wooden wind tunnel model was built and tested by the end of the war. During this testing, it was noted that the aircraft could potentially reach speeds up to 0.9 Mach, slightly less than 1,000 km/h. The documents for this aircraft were captured by the Americans at the end of the war. The Americans initially showed interest in the concept and continued experimenting and developing it for sometime after.
In Modern Culture
The Triebflügel taking off in the movie. [marvelcinematicuniverse.fandom.com]Interestingly, the Triebflügel was used as an escape aircraft for the villain Red Skull in the 2011 Captain America: The First Avenger movie.
Conclusion
The Triebflügel’s overall design was unusual to say the least. It was a completely new concept of how to bring an aircraft to the sky. On paper and according to Focke-Wulf’s engineers that were interrogated by Allied Intelligence after the war, the Triebflügel offered a number of advantages over the more orthodox designs. The whole aircraft was to be built using cheap materials, could achieve great speeds, and did not need a large airfield to take-off, etc. In reality, this aircraft would have been simply too complicated to build and use at that time. For example, the pilot could only effectively control the aircraft if the whole rotary wing system worked perfectly. If one (or more) of the ramjets failed to work properly, the pilot would most likely have to bail out, as he would not have had any sort of control over the aircraft. The landing process was also most likely very dangerous for the pilot, especially given the lack of rear view and the uncomfortable and difficult position that the pilot needed to be in order to be able to see the rear part of the aircraft.
The main question regarding the overall Triebflügel design is if it would have been capable of successfully performing any kind of flight. Especially given its radical, untested and overcomplicated design, this was a big question mark. While there exist some rough estimation of its alleged flight performances, it is also quite dubious if these could be achieved in reality. The whole Triebflügel project never really gained any real interest from the Luftwaffe, and it is highly likely that it was even presented to them. It was, most probably, only a Focke-Wulf private venture.
Triebflügel Estimated Specifications
Rotating Wing diameter
37 ft 8 in / 11.5 m
Length
30 ft / 9.15 m
Wing Area
176.5 ft² / 16.5 m²
Engine
Three Ramjets with 840 kg (1,1850 lb) of thrust each
Empty Weight
7,056 lbs / 3,200 kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight
11,410 lbs / 5,175 kg
Climb Rate to 8 km
In 1 minute 8 seconds
Maximum Speed
621 mph / 1,000 km/h
Cruising speed
522 mph / 840 km/h
Range
1,490 miles / 2,400 km
Maximum Service Ceiling
45,920 ft / 14,000 m
Crew
1 pilot
Armament
Two 3 cm MK 103 (1.18 in) and two 2 cm (0.78 in) MG 151 cannons
Gallery
A rendition of how the Triebflugel may have looked had it been built. Illustration by Pavel ‘Carpaticus’ Alexe.
Credits
Article by Marko P.
Duško N. (2008) Naoružanje Drugog Svetsko Rata-Nemačka. Beograd.
D. Sharp (2015) Luftwaffe Secret Jets of the Third Reich, Dan Savage
Jean-Denis G.G. Lepage (2009) Aircraft of the Luftwaffe 1935-1945, McFarland and Company
J.R. Smith and A. L. Kay (1972) German Aircraft of the Second World War, Putham
Nazi Germany (1943)
Night fighter – Approximately 2,520 Built
A Ju 88G-1 in transit. [Boiten]Developed from converted fighter versions of the Ju 88A-4 medium bomber, the Ju 88G would take up a growing role in the German night fighter force, as it saw its greatest successes in the Spring of 1944, and its decline in the Autumn of that same year. While built mostly as a result of the German aviation industry’s failure to produce a new specialized night fighter design, the Ju 88G would nonetheless prove to be a valuable asset, one that far exceeded the capabilities of its predecessors and was well suited for mass production.
Hunting in the Dark: 1943
1943 was a year of highs and lows for the Luftwaffe’s night fighter force, one that saw their tactics change considerably to match those of RAF’s Bomber Command. The year started with the Luftwaffe continuing the heavy use of its long standing fixed network of defensive ‘Himmelbett’ cells. These contained searchlights, radar, and night fighters that coordinated to bring down raiders. This chain of defenses stretched across the low countries through northern Germany in a network known more broadly as the ‘Kammhuber line’, named after its architect and initial commander of the German night fighter force, Josef Kammhuber. However the British would develop tactics to shatter this line and employ countermeasures to blind the radars used both by flak and fighter directors, and night fighters.
They employed what became known as the ‘bomber stream’, deploying their aircraft in a long and narrow formation in order to penetrate as few of the Luftwaffe’s defensive boxes as possible. It was a simple but effective tactic, a night fighter could only intercept so many planes, and the cells were quickly overwhelmed. When they coupled this tactic with radar reflecting chaff, which they called ‘window’, the result was the near total collapse of the German air defenses during the July raid against the city of Hamburg. With German radar scopes clouded by the resulting interference, they were unable to direct gun laying radar for their anti-aircraft guns, and night fighters could not be vectored onto their targets, much less find anything using their on-board radar systems. Virtually defenseless and in the grips of a hot, dry summer, Hamburg suffered a level of destruction eclipsed only by the raid on Dresden when the war was coming to a close.
The Himmelbett system provided expansive coverage but could easily be overwhelmed by a concentrated stream of enemy aircraft. [Price]The Luftwaffe’s disaster over Hamburg forced them to reform their strategy and develop new detection systems that would be unaffected by the newest RAF countermeasures. Kammhuber was sacked, though not exclusively as a result of the raid, and a new system of night fighter control was to be the primary means of nightly strategic air defense. Instead of the heavy focus on the fixed Himmelbett boxes, night fighters would be assembled over beacons before being directed towards bomber streams. This would ensure there would be no bottlenecks and would allow the full strength of the night fighter force to, as it was hoped, be brought against the enemy in mass. They would also employ new equipment, modifying their Wurzburg radars, used for fire and aircraft direction, with a chaff discriminating device, and replacing the older Lichtenstein (B/C) aerial search radars with the new SN-2.
In the winter of 1943, Bomber Command set out to try and knock Germany out of the war. They launched a series of large-scale raids against major industrial cities and the capital, with Sir Arthur Harris, its C-in-C, believing he could end the war without the need for a costly invasion of the continent (Overy 339). The Luftwaffe’s new weapons and tactics would quickly prove their worth during what later became known as the ‘first Battle of Berlin’. Bomber Command held that a loss rate of 5% represented “acceptable losses” and significantly higher values could spell trouble for continuous operations (Brown 309). Between August and November of 1943, the casualty rates during the “1st Battle of Berlin” sat at 7.6-7.9%, figures which would climb slowly over the following months (Overy 342). However, while most Luftwaffe planners were enthusiastic about the new air defense methods, they would have to confront a growing concern in the service: they were reliant on considerably dated night fighter designs.
The Search for a New Design
Left to right: Ta 154, He 219, Ju 188. [avionslegendaires.net & Wikipedia]Throughout much of 1943, the night fighting mission was taken up mostly by variants of the Bf 110, followed by the Ju 88, and in much smaller numbers the Do 217 and He 219. In order to address the lack of a mass produced, specialized night fighter design, three new proposals were introduced. The first being the Ta 154 “Moskito,” a wooden, dedicated night fighter design which hoped to capture the same success as the British aircraft which bore the same name. The second, the He 219, was a specialized night fighter design championed by the very man who had devised the Himmelbett system, Josef Kammhuber. Lastly the Ju 188, a bomber that at the time still lacked a night fighter version, was proposed for conversion (Aders 72).
The Ta 154, despite high hopes for the project, never came to fruition as a result of its troubled development. The He 219 was sidelined by Generalflugzeugmeister (Chief of Procurement and Supply) Erhard Milch, who opposed increasing the number of specialized airframes in favor of mass production of multipurpose designs (Cooper 265). To make matters worse for the project a number of technical issues prolonged development, the aircraft took around 90,000 hours to produce, and with comparatively little support from the Luftwaffe, few were built (Cooper 325). The aircraft would, however, still be employed with the Luftwaffe, but in limited service. The Ju 188 design that likely would have received Milch’s support simply never materialized.
With the failure to find a new design, it was clear that the brunt of future night fighting would fall on existing designs, in particular the Ju 88. In early 1943, it was on this design that hopes were placed for a high performance, specialized night fighter that would become available to the Luftwaffe the following year (Cooper 266).
The Old 88
Left to right: Ju 88A-4, Ju 88C-6, Ju 88R, Ju 88G-1. [Asisbiz]Originally entering service as a medium/dive bomber in 1939, the Ju 88A was a state of the art, if somewhat conservative, design that was exceedingly versatile and easily modifiable. The airframe was sturdy, aerodynamically clean, and modular, with many components capable of being modified without necessitating major revisions to its overall design. This is perhaps nowhere more evident than the self-enclosed combined engine-radiator assemblies that allowed the powerplant and its associated cooling systems to be easily removed or replaced via connecting plates and brackets (Medcalf 106, 107, 191).
Not long after its teething period subsided, the Ju 88 proved itself in a number of roles and was employed as a night fighter early in the war, as some bombers were converted to Zerstorer (long range fighter/ground attack aircraft) at Luftwaffe workshops. Several of these aircraft were subsequently handed off to night fighter squadrons by the end of 1941, the first set with their dive brakes still equipped (Aders 31). However, by the end of 1941, small quantities of serial-built Ju 88C fighters were being delivered, with a larger production run following in the subsequent years. The type would eventually take up a growing position in the night fighter force (Medcalf 166, 178). Owing to their origins as converted aircraft, the Ju 88C-6 series retained virtually the same airframe as their bomber counterparts, with some minor alterations. The bombardier and their equipment were removed and an armament of three 7.92 mm MG17’s, a 20mm MG 151/20, and a pair of 20mm MG FF cannons were installed in the nose of the aircraft and in the “gondola” beneath the nose that would have otherwise carried the bombsight and ventral gunner (Medalf 319).
The night fighting capabilities of the C-6 were good but its shortcomings were becoming more apparent as the war progressed. By early 1943, it was considered relatively slow and this was particularly worrying in the face of the RAF’s growing use of the Mosquito as a bomber and pathfinder, an aircraft which no German night fighter in service was able to effectively intercept. When flying at high speeds and altitudes, catching these aircraft was often more a matter of good fortune than anything else. In mid 1943, an interim design known as the Ju 88R was introduced in the hopes of alleviating some of the deficiencies of the preceding series. Despite remaining very capable in the anti-heavy bomber role, it had no hope of intercepting the Mosquito. While the Ju 88R proved to be significantly faster thanks to the use of the much more powerful BMW 801 engines over the older Jumo 211Js, it still failed to fulfill the anti-Mosquito role that its planners hoped to achieve.
While the aircraft offered greater performance and was favored by pilots, it was still very much a simple conversion, much like the C series it was supplementing, and it was clear additional modifications were necessary to better realize the airframe’s potential. In particular, its greater engine power meant the aircraft could reach higher speeds, but that power also enabled the aircraft to exceed the limits to which the rudder was effective (Aders 73). However, despite the disappointments of the year and the failure to secure a brand-new night fighter design, the hope that a new model of specialized Ju 88 would be entering service was soon realized.
Gustav
The Ju 88G would provide the Luftwaffe with a high performance night fighter that also allowed them to consolidate existing production lines. [Asisbiz]By the end of 1943, work on the new night fighter was complete and the Luftwaffe was preparing to receive the first planes by the end of the year. The new Ju 88G-1 was developed as the successor to the previous C and R series night fighters, both consolidating production and vastly improving performance.
The Ju 88V-58 was the primary prototype for the Ju 88G-1 and first flew in June of 1943 (Aders 258). It sat between the older Ju 88R series aircraft and the later Ju 88G in design and appearance, using the same basic airframe as the Ju 88R and its BMW 801 power plants. However, it also incorporated the vertical stabilizer designed for the Ju 188, used a new narrower, low drag canopy from previous fighter models, and removed the “gondola” which carried a portion of the aircraft’s armament in previous models (Aders 132; Medcalf 191, 192). The armament was significantly improved with the addition of a mid-fuselage gun pod which mounted four MG 151/20 20 mm cannons, making use of the space otherwise taken up by bombing gear, with another pair of cannons installed in the nose of the aircraft. However, the nose mounted pair were removed later on due to issues regarding the muzzle flash of the guns affecting the pilot’s vision, a resulting shift in the aircraft’s center of gravity, and interference with nose mounted radar aerials (Medcalf 191).
After this series of changes to the aircraft’s fuselage, armament, and the subsequent addition of an SN-2c radar, the Ju 88G went into production. 6 pre-production Ju 88G-0 aircraft and 13 Ju 88G-1s were completed by the end of 1943 (Medcalf 178). The production switch between the previous Ju 88R and 88C models to the G was relatively smooth, with the first three aircraft delivered to the Luftwaffe in January of 1944. Production and deliveries of the new model increased sharply over the following weeks thanks to the aircraft sharing most of its components with older models (Aders 129). Mass production was carried out rapidly, with 12 planes completed a month later in January, roughly doubling the next month, and rising to 247 aircraft in June, before gradually falling as the production of its successor, the G-6, began to supersede it (Medcalf 240).
The Ju 88G-1 went into production with an offensive armament of four forward facing 20 mm MG 151/20 cannons in a pod mounted ventrally near the center of the aircraft. Upward facing cannons in the fuselage, in a configuration referred to as ‘Schräge Musik’, were often installed later at field workshops. These upward facing weapons were of particular use against British bombers, which had forgone ventral defensive guns. This armament was a marked improvement over the three 20 mm cannons and three MG 17 7.92 mm machine guns carried by the preceding C6 and R series (Medcalf 319).
The aircraft was powered by the much more powerful BMW 801 G-2 engines producing 1740 PS, a huge boost up from the Jumo 211J, 1410 PS, on the Ju 88C-6. This allowed the aircraft to reach 537 km/h at an altitude of 6.2 km, quite a considerable improvement over the Ju 88C-6’s 470 km/h at 4.8 km (Junkers Flugzeug und Motorenwerke 7, 12, Medcalf 319). The engines were unchanged from that of the previous Ju 88R model, though it was able to make better use of them thanks to the enlarged vertical stabilizer which granted better control and stability at high speed.
G-6
The G-6 would incorporate more powerful engines and standardize several common modifications made to the previous model. [albumwar2]To build on the success and production base of the first design, work began on a successor. Retaining the same airframe, the G-6 would be powered by the Junkers Jumo 213 A-1 and would standardize the use of equipment commonly added to the G-1 at Luftwaffe workshops. To this end several new prototypes were produced, these being Ju 88V-108, V-109 which included the MW50 boost system, and Ju 88V-111 which served as a production prototype (Medcalf 192).
The aircraft carried with it several key improvements over the initial model. It was faster, better armed, and possessed a more advanced set of electronic warfare equipment. However, it’s top speed is difficult to ascertain given the limited number of sources on the aircraft. It was able to achieve 554 km/h (344 mph) at 6km (19685 ft) without the use of the MW50 boost system, and after the war Royal Navy test pilot Eric Brown was able to reach a top speed of 644km/h (400mph) at an altitude of 9,145 meters in tests (30,000ft) (Medcalf 319, Eric Brown 195). In all likelihood, this was a testing aircraft that was using either Jumo 213E or 213F engines, as 9km was well above the full throttle height of the Jumo 213A. Alternatively, some of these engines may have made their way into very late production G-6 aircraft.
The new standardized equipment included an upward firing pair of 20 mm cannons, the FuG 350 Naxos Z radar detector, and they would later be the first night fighters to be equipped with the new SN-2R and Naxos Zr tail warning equipment. They also carried the new Neptun radars for twin engine fighter use and were the only aircraft that made use of the SN-3 and Berlin search radars (Medcalf 319, 324; Aders 181).
The SN-2R was a rearward facing radar aerial added to the SN-2d search radar sets that would warn the crew of pursuers. It helped to significantly improve survivability along with the new Naxos Zr, which could now warn the crew of enemy night fighter radar emissions. These systems quickly showed their worth. Ju 88G-6’s fared better in the presence of enemy night fighters than the He 219’s and Bf 110’s, which lacked standardized tail warning equipment (Aders 181).
Late G-6’s were also equipped with the FuG 120A Bernhardine. This device was intended to make use of a nationwide network of high powered transmitters that would have been unjammable by the RAF’s electronic warfare equipment. The system would provide the altitude of a bomber stream, its location on a grid map, its course, strength, and the recipient night fighter’s bearing from the ground station. All of this information was relayed in coded messages by means of a teleprinter in the cockpit of the night fighter. It was mostly foolproof, but the system was not fully operational by the war’s end (Medcalf 325; Price 237, 238).
Pilot’s Remarks and General Flight Characteristics
As with the rest of the Ju 88’s in the night fighter service, the plane had the ergonomics and handling characteristics that were so sought after by pilots. The sorties they faced by this point of the war were as long as two hours and as such undemanding flight characteristics were a crucial feature of any night fighter (Aders 23). Stability, well balanced controls and the ability to fly well on one engine were crucial factors, and having them made the Ju 88G a highly rated aircraft among the force (Aders 31, 132). Its reinforced airframe also came in useful, as its earlier use as a dive-bomber required a high tolerance for g-forces that made it capable of pulling off hard maneuvers without risk of damaging the airframe in the process. The addition of the Ju 188’s vertical stabilizer also improved handling markedly, as the newer design provided much smooth rudder controls over the previous version, which had ones unchanged from older bomber models and were quite stiff once the aircraft was brought up to speed (Medcalf 304).
Ju 88G-1 flown by Roland Beamont. [asisbiz.com]The G-1 handled exceedingly well, with controls that were well balanced and responsive. Praise for the Gustav’s handling could even be found outside the ranks of the Luftwaffe, as Roland Beamont, an RAF fighter pilot and post war test pilot, had a chance to take one up and evaluate how it performed at RAF Tangmere in the summer of 1945. Beamont found the aircraft undemanding, with gentle controls and that, on landing, the aircraft “could be steered on the approach as gently and responsively as any fighter”. Equally as important, he found the aircraft needed very little adjustment in the air, with only very minor trimming of control surfaces needed for smooth operation in regular flight. In a rare chance, he even found an opportunity to have a mock battle with another RAF pilot, Bob Braham, flying a DeHavilland Mosquito. Beamont found the 88 was able to hold its ground for some time, but eventually letting up when he began to reach the limits of the unfamiliar plane so low to the ground and in the wake of Bob’s plane, which promptly outmaneuvered him.
Despite his praise for the aircraft’s flight characteristics, he felt the structural cockpit framework was very restrictive of the pilot’s vision. In a summary of his first flight and a second on July 16th, he claimed “It has remained in my rating as one of the best heavy piston-engined twins of all time and a very pleasant flying experience.” (Medcalf 294, 295). Much like Beamont, most Luftwaffe pilots were very satisfied with the aircraft (Aders 132).
Famed Royal Navy pilot Capt. Erik ‘Winkle’ Brown would also be among the few allied pilots to have the opportunity to fly both the G-1, and subsequent G-6 model. Capt. Brown felt the aircraft possessed largely the same excellent handling characteristics as the Ju 88A-5 he’d flown prior. He praised the aircraft for its easy ground handling, thanks to its excellent brakes, it’s good handling during climbs, and light controls at cruising speed (Brown 190).
Capt. Brown would spend more time with the G-6 and was able to put one through more demanding tests. Having previously flown several versions of the Ju 88, Brown was particularly impressed by the aforementioned high speeds achieved by a Ju 88G-6 (Werk-nr 621965) he’d flown in tests. The aircraft remained in line with his general, glowing remarks over the Ju 88. “It was a pilot’s airplane, first and last, it demanded a reasonable degree of skill in handling and it responded splendidly when such skill was applied. There was a number of very good German aircraft but, with the exception of the Fw 190, none aroused my profound admiration as did the Junkers ‘eighty-eight’ (Brown 195).”
Perhaps the simplest but greatest advantage the aircraft had in night fighting was in the close proximity of the crewmembers, which allowed them easy communication in the event of intercom failure or emergency. It also allowed the pilot to be seated beside their radar operator, with the flight engineer seated directly behind him, an ideal arrangement providing both easy communication and good situational awareness, which became a necessity as bomber streams became the hunting grounds for RAF night fighters (Aders 132).
While it inherited the benefits of the original design, it also had its flaws, the most obvious of which was the poor visibility due to the bars of the reinforced cockpit frame, and the troublesome landing gear which had a tendency to buckle if the aircraft was brought down too hard (Medcalf 75). The landing gear was a hydraulically actuated set that rotated 90 degrees so that the wheels would lie flat within their nacelles. This greatly reduced drag, as the shallower landing gear bays contributed far less to the frontal area of the plane, but they could be broken in forced landings or careless flying. These types of accidents were typically handled by the airfield ground staff, though handing off the plane to a recovery and salvage battalion could prove necessary in the event of a forced landing or a particularly bad accident (Medcalf 62).
Lichtenstein SN-2
Early combined SN-2 with the wide-angle attachment; compared to a later model on Ju 88G. These large aerials came to be known as the ‘Hirschgeweih’(stag antlers). [Bauer, Rod’s Warbirds]Perhaps the most important feature of the Ju 88G, its radar, was easily the weakest point of the aircraft in comparison to its contemporaries in foreign service. Unlike the British or Americans, the Germans lacked any major production of centimeter band search radars, forcing them to rely on meter band types. In practical terms, the meter band radar carried with it several major disadvantages, the most evident and visible of which were the large aerial antennas which protruded from the aircraft’s fuselage and created significant drag. In tests by the Luftwaffe’s Rechlin test pilots, it was found that the Lichtenstein (B/C) decreased the maximum speed of a Bf-110 by 39.9 km/h (Aders 44). Another major disadvantage was its inferior ability to cut through ground clutter, leading to very poor performance at lower altitudes and making it useless near ground level (Aders 163, 200).
The standard Ju 88G-1 was equipped with the Lichtenstein SN-2c, also designated as FuG 220. This airborne radar set was designed by Telefunken for naval service and originally rejected by the Luftwaffe earlier in the war. Its initial rejection was based on its extreme minimum range of 750 meters, which meant that any target would disappear off the scopes long before the pilot would be able to see it (Aders 79, 80). Its later adoption was a matter of the previous air search radar having a relatively short maximum range, and that the SN-2 would be unaffected by the chaff that made the previous sets useless (Brown 309). However, due to the shortcomings of the original SN-2, the device was coupled with a simplified version of the older Lichtenstein FuG-212 radar to track targets within the large minimum range of the new system. The resulting set up required the use of 5 radar scopes and was an exceedingly cumbersome display, with three scopes devoted to the older Lichtenstein set and two for the SN-2 (Price 196).
The two scope SN-2c display, the “peaks” represent radar contacts. Left is azimuth and range, right is elevation. The range demarcations are 2 km for both sides, the radar will not display contacts beyond the 5th demarcation.[Bauer]The SN-2 carried by the 88G was an improved model which had its minimum range decreased to an acceptable distance, allowing it to drop the excess equipment for the far simpler SN-2c, which required only two scopes (Aders 122). The system had a frequency range of 73/82/91 MHz, a power output of 2.5 kW, an instrumented range of 8km, a minimum range of 300 m, a search angle with an azimuth of 120 degrees, an elevation of 100 degrees, and a total weight of 70 kg. While the system had a maximum instrumented range of 8km, its practical detection range was tied to the altitude at which it was operating and the size of the target. For example, if searching for a heavy bomber traveling at the same altitude, and with the maximum antenna aperture towards the Earth being roughly 30 degrees, and at an operating altitude of 5km, the slant range of the radar can be placed roughly at the system’s maximum range of 8km (Bauer 12, 13). This range increases or decreases correspondingly with the altitude of the aircraft or its target, with the device being virtually useless near ground level.
One SN-2c was eventually recovered by the RAF when an inexperienced crew landed their plane at RAF Woodbridge as a result of a navigation failure, which allowed the British to develop both effective chaff and electronic jamming countermeasures for it (Price 221). This same aircraft would be the one given such a good review by Roland Beamont, its registration code being 4R+UR.
The SN-2 would see further development even as its usefulness declined in the face of widespread jamming and chaff which targeted its operating bands. The SN-2d was the most immediate development which helped to some degree. Its operating frequencies were shifted to the 37.5-118 MHz dispersal band to make use of its still usable frequencies that were not fully targeted by RAF jamming efforts. It would later be combined with the SN-2R tail warning radar and, very late in the war, made use of low drag ‘morgenstern’ aerials and an aerodynamic nose cone which fit over it (Aders 244).
Late War and Experimental Radars
Left to right: Fug 218 Neptun, Lichtenstein FuG 220 SN-2 with a low drag array, FuG 240 Berlin with its parabolic antenna set behind a removable nose cone. [Rod’s Warbirds, Asisbiz,ww2aircraft.net] The FuG 217/218 Neptun radar setswere developed and built by FFO. These had been initially developed for use in single engine night fighters, but were later adapted for use aboard twin engine aircraft. They were largely a stop gap following the RAF jamming efforts against the SN-2, as any new aerial search radar was months away. These series of radars came in a variety of configurations as they were further developed and pressed into wider service.
The Neptun 217 V/R was a search radar that could switch between two frequencies between 158 and 187 MHz, had a search angle of 120 degrees, a maximum range of 4 km with a minimum of 400 meters, and a total weight of 35 kg. The subsequent Neptun 218 V/R search radar included four new frequency settings along the same range, had a maximum range of 5km with a minimum of 120 meters, a power output of 30kW, weighed 50kg, and possessed the same search angle as the previous model. Both radars could be mounted in a “stag antler” array with the preceding Neptun 217 V/R also having a “rod” type mounting arrangement, which consisted of individual antennas attached to the airframe. As with the SN-2, tail warning sets were produced which were found in the form of the standalone Neptune 217 R and Neptun 218 R sets, or as a component of the Neptune 217 V/R and Neptun 218 V/R combined search and tail warning radars. (Aders 245, 246).
The FuG 228 SN-3 was developed by Telefunken and was visually similar to the SN-2 but with thicker dipoles. The device operated on a frequency range of 115-148 MHz, had a power output of 20kW, a maximum range of 8km with a minimum of 250m, a search angle with an azimuth of of 120 degrees, an elevation of 100, and a total weight of 95kg. Some sets also made use of a low drag “morningstar ” array that used ¼ and ½-wavelength aerials. 10 sets were delivered for trials and may have been used in combat (Aders 245).
The FuG 240 Berlin was another radar developed by Telefunken and their last to see operational use during the war, it also being the first and only centimetric aerial search radar to see service with the Luftwaffe. It operated on a wavelength of 9 to 9.3 cm, an output of 15kW, had a maximum range of roughly 9 km, a minimum of 300 m, a search angle of 55 degrees, weighed 180 kg, and had no serious altitude limitations (Aders 246, Holp 10). While only twenty five Berlin sets were delivered to the Luftwaffe they made successful use of them in March of 1945 (Aders 246; Brown 317). While these new devices were free of the heavy jamming the SN-2 faced, they lacked the larger production base of the SN-2 which continued to be fitted to new night fighters until the end of the war.
Passive Sensors
While the SN-2 radar was somewhat mediocre, this deficiency was offset by other devices that were often installed aboard which could supplement it, these being the FuG 227Flensburg and FuG 350 Naxos Z. Developed by Telefunken, Naxos was able to detect the emissions of British H2S ground mapping radar and other devices with frequencies in the centimeter band. This would enable a night fighter equipped with the system to home in on RAF aircraft that were using ground mapping radar to direct bomber streams to their targets. The Naxos Z set was capable of detecting emissions at up to 50 km, enabling them to find pathfinders or simply other bombers in the stream as the ground mapping radar became more commonplace among the aircraft of Bomber Command (Price 176, Medcalf 325). Subsequent models would expand the reception band to allow the device to detect British centimetric aerial intercept radar and combine the system with tail warning equipment to alert aircrews to the presence of British, and later American, night fighters, with the series working within the 2500 mHz to 3750 mHz band (Medcalf 325). These included the Naxos-Zr, used exclusively in Ju 88s, with the aerial contained within the fuselage, the Naxos ZX, which further increased the detectable frequency ranges, and the Naxos RX, which was a version of the previous type which coupled it with tail warning equipment (Aders 248, 249). This was solely a directional sensor and would give the operator the azimuth of the target, but not its altitude or range.
Naxos indicator, each notch represents a detected emission [Bauer]Flensburg was another passive device, this one made by Siemens. While Naxos detected the emissions from RAF ground mapping radar, Flensburg picked up the tail warning radar of RAF bombers, a device codenamed Monica. With later versions operating on a tunable frequency band of 80 mHz to 230 mHz, it allowed aircraft equipped with it to detect virtually all bombers traveling within a stream should their rear warning radar be active (Medcalf 325). Among the captured pieces of equipment in Ju 88G [4R+UR], this was evaluated by the RAF and found to be an exceedingly useful tool for detecting and closing in on their bombers. The aircraft with the device was evaluated by Wing Commander Derek Jackson in a series of tests with both a single RAF Lancaster bomber and a small group of five planes flying over a considerable distance. He found that, in both cases, he was able to home in on the bombers with the Flensburg device alone from as far as 130 miles away without any issues even when the aircraft were in close formation, where there was hope that several of the tail warning radars operating closely together might have confused the device (Price 222).
In all, 250 Flensburg sets were produced, alongside roughly 1,500 Naxos-Z sets, and though only the latter became standard equipment, both saw extensive use among Ju 88 night fighters (Aders 124). These devices proved incredibly successful in combination with SN-2 and, for several months, allowed the German night fighter forces to achieve great operational success. However, they eventually fell behind again one final time after the successful British efforts to counter the Luftwaffe’s sensors and tactics in the months following the landings in France (Brown 319). In the end only Naxos remained the only reliable means of detecting raiders as, unlike Monica, they could not do without their H2S ground mapping radar.
Initial Deployments
Field use of the aircraft began shortly after the delivery of the first pre production aircraft, which were quickly sent out to units equipped with older models of Ju-88s, often being placed into the hands of formation leaders. In this way, its introduction into service was gradual, with the first aircraft already being in the hands of more experienced pilots before more deliveries allowed for the entire unit to transition away from older models. Prior to July of 1944, Gruppe IV of NJG3, II and III of NJG6, and I of NJG7 were supplied with large numbers of G-1s, followed by a gradual supply to NJG2, Gruppe IV of NJG 5, III of NJG3, and NJG100. It should also be noted that these aircraft could be found in the inventories of most units, even those that did not fully transition over fully to their use (Aders 131).
For the first three months of 1944, the Luftwaffe inventory had only a single digit number of operational G-1s but, by April and May, mass deliveries of the aircraft began, with 179 planes available in May and 419 by July (Aders 272). A total 1,209 Ju 88G-0s and G-1s were delivered to the Luftwaffe between December of 1943 and October of 1944, with the aircraft and its successor, the Ju 88G-6, becoming the mainstay of the German night fighter force for the remainder of the war (Medcalf 178, 240).
Zahme Sau: Winter through Spring
As a heavy radar equipped night fighter, the Ju 88G would serve the Luftwaffe as “Zahme Sau” (Tame Boar) interceptors. They differed from “Wilde Sau” (Wild Boar), in that they were to receive guidance toward enemy bombers from a series of ground based stations in a system known as Y-Control. With information collected from various search radars and passive radio and radar detectors scattered throughout much of Western Europe, ground control operators would direct interceptors toward bomber streams (Price 175, 178).
For much of 1944, a typical mission for a Zahme Sau pilot would go as follows. First, they would take off and head for an assembly point marked by a radio/searchlight beacon. Then, they would wait their turn before receiving radio commands directing them towards a bomber stream. The fighters were led away from the beacons by their formation leaders, but rarely did all a gruppe’s fighters actually reach the target in close order. Lastly, upon reaching the stream, they would attempt to merge with it and then begin to search out targets with on board sensors. In addition to direct guidance, Y-control gave a running commentary on a bomber stream, describing its course and the altitude range the staggered bombers flew at (Aders 102, 103,195). This running commentary was particularly useful later on when night fighters more commonly flew alone and the use of the signal beacons was restricted.
This system would see the effectiveness of the Luftwaffe’s night fighters reach its zenith in the spring. Building upon their successes of the previous winter they would inflict heavy losses on Bomber Command. Between November of 1943 and March of 1944, Bomber Command would lose 1,128 aircraft prior to the temporary withdrawal from large scale operations over Germany. During the raid on Nuremberg in April of 1944, 11.9% of raiders failed to return home in what became the costliest raid of the entire war (Overy 368). Thankfully for the Allies, the Luftwaffe would never see this level of success again, as Bomber Command shifted to support Operation Overlord at the end of May. While Arthur Harris wished to continue his large-scale area bombing campaign over Germany, he would relent to pressures from higher offices and place his forces in support of the coming operation to liberate France. The subsequent raids against various rail yards across coastal France would prove a well needed respite for Bomber Command. The short distance the raiders flew over hostile territory meant that Luftwaffe night fighters had fewer opportunities for interception, and thus Bomber Command’s losses were comparatively light.
RAF Tactics and Changing Fortunes
Avro Lancaster and DeHavilland Mosquito NF MK XVII. [Flickr]Following Overlord, Bomber Command returned to Germany better equipped and prepared for the challenges ahead. A typical late war Bomber Command heavy raiding force was composed mostly of Lancaster and Halifax heavy bombers which were supported by airborne radar and radio jammers, night fighters, decoy formations composed of trainee squadrons, and chaff dispersing aircraft. In addition to the aforementioned Lancaster and Halifax, the B-17 and B-24 were also used by both the USAAF and RAF as electronic warfare platforms during these raids, though in much smaller numbers. Several variants of the DeHavilland Mosquito would be used as pathfinders, bombers, and nightfighers. The pathfinders were particularly troublesome as they could outpace any interceptor, save for a night fighter variant of the Me 262 that was introduced near the end of the war. While goals of the heavy bombers were straightforward, the supporting forces’ goal was to disorient Luftwaffe ground controllers and engage their night fighters to reduce operational losses and tie up enemy aircraft (Aders 194, 195).
Locating the stream proved difficult, but if a fighter was to infiltrate it, they were mostly free of electronic interference and would encounter little resistance. While successful infiltration often meant good chances for kills, most night fighters would end up returning to base having expended most of their fuel in the search.
Various derivatives of the FuMG 402 Wasserman radar, a long range early warning and fighter control radar built by Siemens. Later versions were capable of frequency changes within the 1.9-2.5 m, 1.2-1.9 m, and 2.4-4.0 m ranges (Aders 251). [cdvandt]While the Luftwaffe’s system was still holding steady it soon faced a new challenge, as from December 1943 onward, German night fighter pilots would also have to contend with the long-range Mosquito night fighters of the RAF’s 100 Group. Tasked with supporting bombing raids through offensive action, they operated by seeking out German night fighters over raid targets, at night fighter assembly points, and lastly to seek out enemy aircraft near the stream itself (Sharp & Bowyer 289).
By the beginning of May 1944, 100 Group possessed only about a hundred Mosquitos, though the number would grow larger and they would begin to replace their older and less capable aircraft (Sharp & Bowyer 290, 291). In the Autumn of 1944, the Mosquitos began to carry equipment to track German night fighters by activating their Erstling IFF (Identify Friend or Foe System) by mimicking the signals of German search radars. With this new gear and their bolstered numbers, they had tied down much of the Luftwaffe night fighter force by the winter of 1944. Eventually, the Germans left their IFFs off, which made tracking their own planes extremely difficult, and forced them to abandon the use of the assembly beacons which were frequented by the Mosquitos (Aders 196). Understandably, the Mosquito became the source of constant anxiety for Luftwaffe night fighter crews. The Mosquito typically made its appearance during takeoffs, landings, and when the often unsuspecting German night fighters were transiting to and from their targets. Under such circumstances, the use of tail warning and radar detecting equipment aboard the Ju 88G was both an important defensive tool, and a serious morale booster.
Despite its earlier successes, the Luftwaffe’s night fighter force’s effectiveness began its decline in August of 1944 in the face of general disruptions to their detection and communication capabilities as the Allies deployed radar and radio jammers to the continent (Aders 194, 195, 197). This loss of early warning radar coverage would prove a decisive blow to the Luftwaffe, one that they never recovered from.
Blind and Deaf: Autumn into Winter
As summer turned to autumn, night fighter bases were increasingly harassed by Allied daylight fighter bombers, which forced the Luftwaffe to disperse their forces to secondary airfields. While these “blindworm” locations were free of prowling Mosquitos and fighter bombers, they were not without their disadvantages. While these fields were well camouflaged, their rough landing fields could be hazardous and they were not cleared for night landings. This forced many night fighters to land at their more well-constructed bases after their nightly sorties and return to the camouflaged fields in the evenings. The result was a rise in losses as the aircraft were occasionally caught by Allied fighters on their flight back. Through late 1944 and into 1945, German night fighter losses were most commonly the result of interception in transit or being hit on the ground. While at first only bases in Belgium and the Netherlands were threatened, Allied fighters would appear in growing numbers over the skies of Western and Southern Germany, as would the recon aircraft that periodically uncovered the “blindworm” bases (Aders 197).
A Ju 88G caught in transit. [asisbiz.org]In September of 1944 the night fighter force flew a total of 1,301 sorties against approximately 6,400 enemy aircraft, of which they brought down approximately 76, representing a loss rate of 1.1%. Bomber Command losses had fallen significantly from the 7.5% of the previous year, and from last April’s catastrophic high of 11.9%. As such, Bomber Command losses were once again well below the 5% attrition threshold for continuous operations (Aders 197).
By the start of winter, the RAF and USAAF had largely succeeded in jamming most of the Luftwaffe’s early warning radars, y-control radio services, and through the use of chaff and jammers, made the standard SN-2 search radar useful only in the hands of experts. This had the overall effects of ensuring the night fighter force was slower to respond in-bound raiders, more likely to be sent against diversionary formations, and that night fighters were far less likely to make contact with the bomber stream after being vectored toward it. By winter, it had become clear for the Luftwaffe that the after hours war over Western Europe had been irrevocably lost.
While the night fighter force had some success in finding alternatives to their models of the SN-2 air search radars there was no hope of recouping their past successes. Between the chronic fuel shortages, marauding RAF Mosquitos, mounting ground and transit losses, and the compromised performance of most of the Luftwaffe’s ground based radars, the situation had become unsalvageable. Its decline was final, and in February of 1945, the force disintegrated as the Allies took the war into Germany (Aders 201). After almost a year following its greatest successes, the Luftwaffe’s night fighter force finished the war mostly grounded for lack of fuel and as night harassment forces in support of Germany’s depleted and hard pressed army (Aders 206).
Large numbers of German night fighters were captured as the Allies overran their airfields, many left intact. Lacking flame dampeners or exhaust stains, these planes have likely never been flown. [flickr]
On the Offense
In conjunction with their interception duties, many units equipped with Ju 88Gs would conduct night ground attack operations against Allied forces in France against the Normandy beachhead, and later across the Western front in support of Operation Wacht am Rhein at the end of 1944.
On the night of August the 2nd, 1944, the first of these operations were carried out against various targets, including the disembarkation area at Avranches and the Normandy bridgehead. The operation code-named ‘Heidelburg’ was conducted by elements of NJG’s 2, 4, and 5.These attacks were conducted without the use of bombs and were regarded by some as absurd due to the extreme danger in conducting low level strafing runs at night, and with only limited preparations being made before the operation (Boiten P4 25). The attacks would be carried out until the night of the tenth with the night fighters taking considerable, but inconsistent, losses.
On the night of the sixth, one Ju 88G would claim an unusual victory in this period as during their return flight, Lt. Jung of 6./NJG2. Jung and his R/O Fw. Heidenrech detected and closed in on P-38 of the 370th fighter squadron at around 2:30 near Falaise, which they subsequently downed. Not all the aircraft had the same luck as Jung, as during the same night another Ju 88G of his Gruppe would be brought down by an Allied night fighter. The aircraft proceeded to crash into a Panther tank belonging to the 1st SS Panzer Division, resulting in a two hour traffic jam during that unit’s counter attack on Mortain (Boiten P4, 28). The overall impact these missions had were largely undefinable due to the inability to accurately survey the damage inflicted.
While infrequent attacks were carried out during the Autumn of 1944, the Luftwaffe’s night fighters would not be committed to any major ground attack operations until the end of the year. On the night of December 17th, several night fighter squadrons would be called upon for night ground attack operations in support of Operation Wacht Am Rhein. This action saw roughly 140 Ju 88’s and Bf 110’s of at least seven Gruppen being committed to what was to become the Battle of the Bulge (Boiten P3, 65).
This abandoned Ju 88G-6 was modified for ground attack missions, its radar had been removed and racks for bombs had been added. An AB 500 cluster bomb unit lies in the foreground. [Rod’s Warbirds]These night raids did considerable damage and sowed confusion amongst rear-echelon services, as vehicles initially traveled with undimmed lights and many facilities failed to observe black out conditions. This was especially true against rail and road traffic which, until then, felt safe traveling at night. These mistakes placed otherwise safe trucks, trains, depots, and barracks in the sights of night fighters sent on massed area raids, and armed reconnaissance patrols. These attacks were typically carried out by strafing, and bombing in the case of modified aircraft, which were equipped with ETC 500 bomb racks. During the nightly ground attack operations during the Battle of the Bulge, these modified aircraft typically carried a pair of AB 250 or AB500 cluster bombs which themselves contained either SD-1 and SD-10 anti-personnel submunitions.
These attacks were particularly effective on the odd night with higher visibility. On the night of the 22nd of December, 23 Bf 110G’s and Ju 88G’s belonging to the I. and IV./NJG 6 flew interdiction missions around Metz-Diedenhofen. Owing to the good weather that night they were able to successfully attack several targets, which included some 30 motor vehicles credited as destroyed, and several trains which they attacked north of Metz. They were joined that night by seven aircraft from I.NJG4 which undertook low level strafing attacks, for which they were credited for the destruction of one locomotive, four motor vehicles, and a supply dump. Additionally, they were credited for damaging another locomotive, six motor transport columns, and five single motor vehicles. Losses amongst the night fighters were uncharacteristically light that night, with only Bf 110 G-4 2Z+VK having been lost during the raids (Boiten 73).
Ground crew with an engine heater prepare a Ju 88G-1. [Asisbiz]The operational conditions during these raids were generally very poor, both a result of the weather, which had infamously grounded most aircraft during the initial stages of the battle, and Allied electronic interference. While the navigational aids and avionics of their aircraft made them effectively all weather capable, the harsh weather and Allied jamming of navigation beacons and radio communications proved serious challenges to Luftwaffe night fighter crews. The difficult nature of the missions themselves made for little improvement, as they typically flew at low altitudes under weather conditions which reduced visibility. The sum of all of these factors made for missions which brought on significantly more fatigue than the typical bomber interception mission.
Throughout the battle, the Ju 88G would prove an exceptional night ground attack aircraft or ‘Nachtschlachter’. With its powerful engines, cannons, large payload, and exceptional de-icing systems, the aircraft could carry out attacks under very harsh winter conditions. Several of these aircraft would have their radar removed and were used exclusively for this mission until the end of the war. A number of former night fighters would even serve with the bomber squadron KG2, with their cannon armament removed, as night attack aircraft (Medcalf Vol.2 618).
The raiders encountered few night fighters as several RAF Mosquito night fighter units had been withdrawn to requip with the new Mosquito NF Mk. XXX. Between the two USAAF squadrons with their P-61’s and the remaining RAF units, there were few Allied night fighters in the area (Aders 200). However, Luftwaffe losses to AAA were high thanks to the advanced centimetric gun-laying radars in use with the US and British armies. In the end the night fighters were able to cause disruptions behind allied lines, but the price paid was steep, with 75 aircraft being lost over 12 nights (Boiten P5 3).
Operation Gisela:
The Ju 88G would play an exclusive role in the last major Luftwaffe night action of the entire war, in a large-scale intruder mission dubbed Operation Gisela. This operation was likely formulated after Maj. Heinz-Wolfgang Schnaufer discovered that night fighting conditions on the other side of the ‘front’ were far more favorable. He later submitted a proposal to his fighter division to attack Allied bombers over the North sea, where there would be relatively little electronic and chaff interference, and where the bombers would least suspect an attack. However, the CO of the 3rd fighter division would instead propose to attack the bombers at their airfields when they were landing.
In any case the British intelligence services got wind of the plan as was made clear by the broadcasting of the song ‘I dance with Gisela tonight’ over a propaganda station. The attack would be postponed several times until early March, 1945 (Aders 205).
About 100 Ju 88G’s were dispatched in three waves to follow a bomber stream as it departed for home. Upon reaching their destination the first wave would down twenty two bombers, however the fires from the wrecks would ruin the chances of the subsequent waves. While many bombers were saved by flying to different airfields after being alerted by the flames, eight more were wrecked attempting to land at darkened airstrips. However, the night fighters would face a dangerous return trip as they had to chart a course using dead reckoning and astral navigation due to their signal beacons being jammed (Aders 205). In the end, the night fighters would suffer a similar level of losses to the bombers they were hunting as a result of ground fire, crashes resulting from low level flight, and navigation failures. Operation Gisela would end in failure with no subsequent missions being attempted.
Construction
Fuselage
Wing connecting system [Ju 88A-4 Bedieungsvorscrift. [1941], 46]The Ju 88A-4 was the most widely produced bomber variant and provided the foundations for the C, R, and G types. It was a fairly conventional all metal aircraft in its construction, and, while it pushed few technical boundaries, it was state of the art and versatile. It was primarily made of sheet aluminum fastened by rivets, with cast parts used for load bearing elements. Some use of Elektron magnesium alloy was made to further reduce weight, with sparing use of steel where strength was required, particularly in the landing gear assemblies and fuselage connecting elements. The fuselage cross section was rectangular with rounded corners and clad in large sheet aluminum stampings. It used a semi-monocoque structure made up of formers and bulkheads joined by connectors that ran front to aft, with the outer aluminum skin riveted to both elements, which allowed it to bear some of the structural load. Its structural load factor was 4.5 with a 1.1 multiplier for the first wrinkle, 1.3 for yield, and 1.8 for failure. In service, it proved very sturdy, with Junkers engineers claiming after the war that there had been no reported major structural failures over the service life of the airframe (Medcalf 41,43,73).
Eventually, the construction process had been improved to the point where the fuselage could be built from sub-assemblies that would become the upper and bottom halves of the fuselage. These would then be joined together after the internal components were fitted. Wing construction followed a similar process, making heavy use of sub assemblies, followed by equipment installation, skinning, and painting. An early model Ju 88 took roughly 30,000-man hours to complete. By the end of 1943, this number remained about the same for the Ju 88G-1. While this may seem unimpressive at face value, the night fighter carried an airborne radar system and a much more sophisticated set of avionics (Medcalf 41-43; Adders 183).
Wings and Stabilizers
The Ju 88’s wings were the heaviest part of the aircraft, comprising much of its total structural weight at over 1200 kg. A pair of massive main spars ran from the root to the wing tip, a rear spar ran across the entire span of the wing to support the flaps and ailerons, and two forward spars ran from the engine nacelles to the fuselage to transfer thrust from the engines and support loads from the landing gear. These spars were joined by relatively few airfoil shaped ribs and stiffened with corrugated aluminum (Medcalf 41-43). The wings were joined to the fuselage by means of four large ball connectors, which made for easy assembly and alignment. (Medcalf 73).
The vertical stabilizer was fixed to the fuselage by means of the same ball-screw connectors as the wings. Installing it was simple, with the rudderless stabilizer being fitted to the fuselage, and the rudder fin being affixed afterwards. The horizontal stabilizers did not use the same fitting system. Instead, they were each inserted into the fuselage by two spars which were then bolted together. This process was virtually the same on both the Ju 88A and the Ju 188, save for the latter having a fin which was 42% larger by area and a rudder which was 68% larger than the previous model (Ju 88A-4 Bedienungsvorschrift-FL Bedienung und Wartung des Flugzeuges; Ju 188E-1(Stand Juni 1943); Medcalf 123). The Ju 88G would incorporate the larger vertical stabilizer from the Ju 188 to improve stability and control at high speed.
Ju 188 vertical stabilizer assembly. [Ju 188E-1(Stand Juni 1943)]As previously stated, the landing gear could prove troublesome due compromises in its design. During early prototyping, JFM (Junkers Flugzeug- und Motorenwerke) redesigned the landing gear into a single strut that would rotate so that it would lie flat beneath the wing when retracted. While this did remove the frontal area that would have seriously impacted the aircraft’s high speed performance, it came at the cost of added complexity and made for a far less robust landing gear arrangement (Medcalf 74, 75). Differing from earlier series, the Ju 88G’s landing gear frames made use of welded cast steel instead of light weight alloys.
The G-1 carried a maximum of 2835 liters (620 gallons) of fuel, with the subsequent G-6 likely having a reduced fuel capacity considering its shorter endurance (Report No. 8 / 151).
Engines and De-icing Systems
The Ju 88R’s BMW 801 engines and engine mounting plate. [Wikimedia]Among the most notable features of the Ju 88 were its use of unitized engine power units and its novel de-icing system. The unitized engine installation incorporated both the engine and associated cooling system into a single module that could be installed or removed from the aircraft relatively quickly, and made storage of components easier. These “kraftei” arrangements existed for the BMW 801 G-2, and, later, Jumo 213 A-1 engines. These engines were fitted with VDM and VS-111 propellers respectively.
Engine Type
Arrangement
Bore
Stroke
Displacement
Weight
Maximum Output
Maximum RPM
Fuel type
BMW 801 G-2
Radial 14
156 mm
156 mm
41.8 liters
1210 kg
1740 PS
2700
C3, 95 octane
Junkers Jumo 213 A-1
Inverted V-12
150 mm
165 mm
35 liters
820 kg
1775 PS [2100 PS MW50]
3250
B4, 87 octane
(Medcalf 323; Ju 88S-1 Flugzeug Handbuch 3, Smith & Creek 687; Jumo 213 13)
The aircraft was also equipped with a de-icing mechanism which took in air, ran it through a heat exchanger around the exhaust ejector stacks, drove it through channels in the wings, and then out over the ailerons (Rodert & Jackson). As the BMW 801 had no exhaust stacks compatible with this system, they made use of a petrol-fired heater to supply air to the de-icing system on the Ju 88G-1 (Report No. 8 / 151).
On left: Exhaust stack heat exchanger. On Right: the wing channel flow area. [Rodert & Jackson]
Cockpit
The crew arrangement on all Ju 88 models would set the entire crew within the canopy and in close contact with one another. The bombardier ,or radar operator, sat to the pilot’s right, a flight engineer/gunner at the pilot’s back, and a ventral gunner sat beside the flight engineer or in a prone position inside the “gondola”, where his weapon was located. Aboard the Ju 88G, the ventral gunner’s position had been omitted with the removal of the gondola, however the positions of the other crew members remained largely unchanged. While these close quarters arrangements were somewhat claustrophobic, they ensured easy communication between the pilot and the rest of the crew at all times. It also made for a much simpler bail out procedure, as half the canopy would detach and allow for a quick escape for all aboard. In the Ju 88G, the crew entered the aircraft through a hatch below the cockpit.
Ju 88G-1 instrument panel. The cables for the radar display are on the right. [albumwar2]The Ju 88G’s cockpit differed heavily from previous fighter versions as a result of added instrumentation and alterations to some of the aircraft’s existing controls. Among the new additions were ammunition counters with space for representing up to six guns, and a Zeiss Revi C.12/D gunsight. This sight differed from previous sets by its new elevation controls and its lack of an anti-glare shield. The front of the canopy was protected by a 10mm armor plate, with the windscreen itself being comprised of four panes of armored glass. The three in front of the pilot were electrically heated to prevent frost formation (Report No. 8 / 151). Work was also done to revise the controls to bring them more in line with other Luftwaffe fighters, perhaps most usefully by the addition of an automatic engine control system and manual propeller pitch control switches being added to the throttles (Brown 194).
Armament
The gunpod of the Ju 88G. [Asisbiz, Ju 88 G-1 Schusswaffenlage Bedienungsvorschrift-Wa]The aircraft’s initial armament consisted of four Mg 151/20 cannons and a defensive MG 131. The cannons were mounted in a ventral pod between the aircraft’s wings and supplied by ammunition belts that occupied the space used as a bomb bay on bomber variants of the airframe. The ammunition belts were loaded with an equal proportion of high explosive ‘mine-shot’, armor piercing, and general purpose high explosive shells. The single 13 mm MG 131 was placed at the rear of the canopy within an armored glass mount and supplied with 500 rounds of armor piercing and high explosive shells in equal proportion (Ju 88G-1 Schusswaffenlage Bedienungsvorschrift-Wa). An armament of upward firing 20mm cannons, being either the MG FF or MG 151/20, were often installed at Luftwaffe field workshops prior to their inclusion to the design in the production run of the G-6 model.
In addition to its cannons, the aircraft could mount ETC 500 underwing racks for bombs and fuel tanks. These racks could each support bombs weighing over 1000kg, though bomb loads in service were light compared to those carried by bomber variants of the Ju 88. These were universal pylons that were added to existing aircraft, an alteration that was fairly simple given the design commonalities with the older Ju 88A-4, and newer Ju 88S medium bombers.
Avionics
In addition to its complement of detection devices, the aircraft carried a variety of tools to aid in navigation and ground direction. Ju 88G’s were typically equipped with the following devices: FuB1 2 (Blind approach receiver), Fug 10P (radio set), FuG 25 (IFF), FuG 101 (Radio altimeter), and the FuG 16zy (radio set).
The FuB1 2 was a blind landing system that guided the aircraft onto a runway by way of two radio beacons placed at 300 m and 3000 m away from one end of the airstrip. It was a tunable device so that airfields could possess separate frequencies between 30 and 33.3 mHz. The aircraft itself carried the Eb1 2 beacon receiver, the Eb1 3F beam receiver, the FBG 2 remote tuner, the AFN 2 approach indicator, the U8 power supply unit, and either a mast or flush antenna (Medcalf 324).
The FuG 10P was a radio developed by Telefunken and was coupled with the Pielgeräte 6 radio direction finder. The device consisted of numerous transmitters and receivers capable of operating at various ranges. One pair, E10 L and EZ 6, operated at between 150-1200kHz, and another, S10 K and E10 K, between 3-6mHz. Other components included the U10/S and U10/E power supply units, and the fixed antenna loading unit AAC 2. Numerous versions existed and made use of various other components. Much of this system was later removed during the production run of the Ju 88G-6 (Medcalf 324).
The FuG 25 “Erstling” was an IFF system manufactured by GEMA that would respond with coded impulses to the ground-based Wurzburg, Freya, and Gemse radar systems up to a range of 100 km. The receiver operated on a frequency of 125 mHz and the transmitter at 160 mHz. The entire unit was contained within the SE 25A unit, with the BG 25A control box in the radio operator’s station (Medcalf 324).
FuG 101 was a radio altimeter designed by Siemens/LGW with a maximum range of 150-170 m and operated on a frequency of 375 mHz at 1.5 kW. Accuracy was within 2 m and the entire system weighed 16 kg. It consisted of the S 101A transmitter, E 101A receiver, U 101 power supply unit, and the pilot’s panel indicator (Medcalf 325).
The FuG 16zy “Ludwig” was a radio manufactured by Lorenz and used for fighter control and directional homing, operating on a frequency range of 38.5 to 42.3 MHz. In Ju 88 night fighters it usually accompanied the Fug 10P radio gear which sat just below the defensive machine gun at the rear of the canopy. It could be set to different frequencies for the Y-control communication system: Gruppenbefehlswelle [between aircraft in formation], Nachischerung und Flugsicherung [between the pilot and the ground control unit], and Reichsjagerwelle [running battle commentary] (Aders 242). It was composed of the S16 Z Tx transceiver, E16 Z and U17 power supply systems, and the loop phasing unit ZWG 16 along with the antenna (Medcalf 324).
The FuG 120A ‘Bernhardine’ was a radio positioning device designed by Siemens to provide navigational assistance and bomber stream intercept information to night fighters by means of a teleprinter in the aircraft’s cockpit. It was intended to overhaul the night fighter force’s air to ground communication infrastructure which faced significant signals interference from the RAF, but the war ended before it entered large scale service. Aircraft could be directed over a range of 400km with position bearings accurate within .5 degrees from ground stations (Medcalf 325, Price 238, 239).
Emergency Equipment
The emergency equipment carried by the Ju 88G. [Ju 88S-1 Flugzeug Handbuch]The Ju 88G would share the same emergency gear as the Ju 88S, this being stowed in a compartment at rear of the fuselage. The largest items of the set were an inflatable raft and an emergency radio beacon, with the contents of the entire compartment being sealed in a waterproof cloak (Ju 88S-1 Flugzeug Handbuch 64).
Production
Junkers Flugzeug und Motorenwerke AG was the sole manufacturer of the Ju 88G and, as was the case with most late war German aircraft, production was conducted at major plants in conjunction with dispersal facilities. The primary production facility for the Gustav was at Bernburg, with two dispersal plants at Fritzlar and Langensalza, each of which would eventually be able to assemble 75 aircraft every month, these being half the capacity of the main Bernburg plant (Medcalf 241, 247).
As with all major fighter projects at the time, large-scale mobilization of labor and material resources was managed by the Jagerstab, an office which built direct links with the RLM (Reichsluftfahrtministerium, the German Air Ministry), regional government officials, and industrialists in order to marshal resources for expanding fighter production. The office was created in response to increasing Allied raids against Germany’s aviation industries and the growing disparity in numbers, which began to strongly favor the Allies as they built up their forces in anticipation for the landings in France. The office was headed by Albert Speer, Minister of Armaments and War production, and aided by Erhard Milch, Generalluftzeugmeister (Air Master General). In spite of the rapidly deteriorating wartime conditions facing all German industries, the office was successful in boosting production, but relied on desperate and illegal measures (Medcalf 229,232). In the fall of 1944, a minimum 72-hour work week was standard, as was the use of forced labor under conditions that were especially poor at the dispersal sites. The acceptance of rebuilt and used parts became ever more commonplace. This, however, did little to offset the clear superiority of the Allies in the air after the Summer of 1944 (Medcalf 247).
Up until April of 1944, the aircraft was built in parallel with decreasing numbers of Ju 88C-6 and Ju 88R, as production at Bernburg transitioned over to the Gustav. Production of the Ju 88G-1 ceased in October as the factories shifted over to the Ju 88G-6 (Medcalf 240). The Bernburg plant was hit twice by the USAAF’s Eight Air Force in February of 1944, which resulted in total stoppages for only a few days, after which production quickly resumed. However, there was a projected loss of over a hundred aircraft per month compared to the averages of the previous year, with a full recovery requiring several months (Medcalf 229).
Ju 88 Production
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
1943
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
13 (+6 pre-production)
1944
12
26
47
169
209
247
239
143
88
10
–
–
5*
14*
138*
189*
222*
308*
178*
1945
168*
35*
19*
Ju 88G-6 production*
Ju 88G-0 Werk Nummern: 710401 through 710406
Ju 88G-1 Werk Nummern: 710407 through 714911
Ju 88G-6 Werk Nummern: 620018 through 623998
Ju 88G-7 Werk Nummern: 240123 through 240125 (~3 built)
Ju 88G-10 Werk Nummern: 460053 through 460162 (~30 built, converted to mistel air to ground weapons)
Variants:
G-0: Preproduction aircraft, the same as G-1
G-1: Production night fighter, powered by BMW 801 G-2 engines
G-2: Proposed zerstorer, powered by the Jumo 213A, was to carry a single MG 131, four MG 15’s, and two MK 103’s. No radar.
G-3: Proposed night fighter, powered by DB 603, same armament as the G-1
G-4: Proposed night fighter, powered by Jumo 213A, with GM-1 boost system
G-5: Proposed night fighter, powered by Jumo 213A
G-6: Production night fighter, powered by Jumo 213A
G-7: The same as G-6 except with Jumo 213E engines with three speed, two stage intercooled superchargers. Output: 1726 HP (1750 PS) unboosted, 2022 HP (2050 PS) with boost at 3250 RPM. Weight: 28,946 lbs (13,130 kg). Speed: 650 km/h at 7.9 km. Experimental.
G-10: Same as G-6 but with an extended fuselage.
(Medcalf 319, 178, 240; Green 448-482; Smith & Creek 687)
Conclusion:
Only a handful of Berlin centimeter band radars would enter service with the Luftwaffe near the end of the war. The system improved the aircraft’s performance across the board, lacking the drag inducing aerials of the SN-2, and it was untroubled by allied jamming or the altitude limitations of older systems. [wikimedia]The Ju 88G would prove a valuable asset to the Luftwaffe’s night fighter forces through its zenith, in the spring of 1944, until its collapse nearly a year later. From a production standpoint the aircraft was phenomenal. It made use of existing supply chains and components from Ju 88 variants that had long been in service prior to its introduction, allowing for a near seamless transition into mass production. In terms of its performance, the initial model would prove exceptional, being far faster and easier to fly than the existing night fighter workhorses, the aging Bf 110G and Ju 88C. The subsequent G-6 model would prove to be even more impressive with the addition of more powerful engines and standardized tail warning equipment.
While the aircraft did have its downsides and couldn’t solve every problem the night fighter service faced, it effectively fulfilled its purpose, and became the most numerous night fighter model in German service by the war’s end.
Specification Charts:
Classification
Aircraft type
Engine
Engine output
Loaded weight
Range
Maximum Speed
Bomber
Ju 88A-4
Jumo 211J
2×1400 PS (2x 1380 hp)
14000 kg, 30864lbs
2430 km, 1510 mi
440 km/h (5.5 km), 273mph (18044ft)
Zerstorer/Night fighter
Ju 88C-6
Jumo 211J
2×1400 PS (2x 1380 hp)
–
–
470 km/h (4.8 km), 292mph (15748ft)
Zerstorer/Night fighter
Ju 88R-2
BMW 801D
2×1740 PS (2×1716 hp)
–
3450 km, 2144 mi
550 km/h (6.2km), 341 mph (20341ft)
Night fighter
Ju 88G-1
BMW 801G
2×1740 PS (2×1716 hp)
12005 kg, 26466lbs
2870 km, 1783 mi
537 km/h (6.2km), 333mph (20341ft)
Night fighter
Ju 88G-6
Jumo 213A
2x 1775 PS [2100 PS], (2×1750 hp [2071 hp])
12300 kg, 27116lbs
~2400km, 1491 mi
554 km/h (6.0km), 344mph (19685ft)
(Medcalf 323, 319, 320; Smith & Creek 687)
*only the G series was tested with radar and exhaust flash hiders fitted, when equipped with these devices the C and R series flew at values lower than the ones presented on this chart
[] denotes performance with the MW50 boost system
Ju 88G-1 (Ju 88G-6)
Specification
Engine
BMW 801 G-2 (Jumo 213 A-1)
Engine Output
2×1740 PS (2x 1774PS [MW50: 2100PS]) : 2×1706 hp (2×1750 hp [2071 hp])
(Ju 88 G-2, G-6, S-3, T-3 Bedienungsvorschrift-Fl 66, 69 Part II; Ju 88G-1,R-2, S-1,T-1 Bedienungsvorschrift-Fl 49, 53 part II; Report No. 8 / 151: Junkers Ju 88 G-1 Night Fighter 2; Medcalf 323, 319, 320)
*Top speeds reflect only the initial production models and do not take into account any boost systems.
BMW 801 G-2 Low supercharger gear (January 1944)
At Height
Output
RPM
Manifold Pressure
Maximum power (3 minutes)
0.9 km
1740 PS
2700
1.42 ata
Combat power (30 minutes)
1.1 km
1540 PS
2400
1.32 ata
Maximum continuous
1.6 km
1385 PS
2300
1.20 ata
Low power, greatest efficiency
2.2 km
1070 PS
2100
1.10 ata
Low power
2.3 km
980 PS
2000
1.05 ata
BMW 801 G-2 High supercharger gear (January 1944)
At Height
Output
RPM
Manifold Pressure
Maximum power (3 minutes)
6.0 km
1440 PS
2700
1.30 ata
Combat power (30 minutes)
5.6 km
1320 PS
2400
1.32 ara
Maximum continuous
5.8 km
1180 PS
2300
1.20 ata
Low power, greatest efficiency
5.7 km
990 PS
2100
1.10 ata
Low power
5.7 km
905 PS
2000
1.05 ata
Engine rated for C3 ~95 octane fuels
(Ju 88S-1 Flugzeug Handbuch 3)
Radar System
Practical Maximum range
Minimum range
Search angle-azimuth
Search angle-elevation
Frequency
Output
Array
Other notes
FuG 220 Lichtenstein SN-2c & SN-2d
8km (instrumented)
Altitude dependent
300m
120 degrees
100 degrees
73/82/91 MHz later changed to 37.5-118 MHz dispersal band
2.5kW
Stag antler (Hirschgeweih), few examples of low drag morningstar array (Morgenstern)
SN-2d had a narrower beam width, was combined with tail warning radar, and performed better against jamming. Standard production radar for the Ju 88G.
FuG 217 Neptun V/R
Altitude dependent
400m
120 degrees
–
Two click stop frequencies of 158 amd 187 MHz
–
Rod or stag antler
FuG 217R was the tail warning radar component
FuG 218 Neptun V/R
Altitude dependent
120m
120 degrees
–
Six click stop frequencies between 158-187 MHz
–
stag antler
FuG 218R was the tail warning component
FuG 228 Lichtenstein SN-3
Altitude dependent
250m
120 degrees
100 degrees
115-148 MHz
20kW
Stag antler, morningstar
ten sets built
FuG 240/1 Berlin N-1a
~9km
300m
55 degrees
–
9-9.3cm (3,250-3,330 MHz)
15kW
Parabolic antenna
25 sets built, 10 delivered for service, 1945
This chart is only for operational and experimental radar usage aboard the Ju 88G, it does not include earlier radars or specialized sets designed for other aircraft.
*The morgenstern (eng. morningstar) aerial is often misidentified as a separate search radar or exclusive to either the SN-2d or SN-3, it is a low drag aerial arrangement compatible with either device.
Ju 88G-1 [4R+UR], 7. Staffel/NJG2 flown by Hans Mackle, WNr. 712273. This is a relatively early production Ju 88G equipped with an FuG 220 SN-2c search radar and a FuG 227 Flensburg radar detector.Ju 88G-6 [C9+AC], Stab II./NJG5 Hans Leickhardt, 1944. This late production G6 used a rare “morningstar” low drag array for its SN-2d combined search and tail warning radar set. While the SN-2’s faced considerable jamming and chaff interference, the series still was still improved upon, focusing on its still usable bands and developing more aerodynamically efficient antennas. This plane was also equipped with a Naxos radar detected which was installed within the fairing over the cockpit.Ju 88G-1 [2Z+HM], 4. Staffel/NJG6 Aschaffenburg, Germany 1945. While this is a relatively early production Ju 88G it was later refitted with the SN-2d as can be seen from the angle on the nose mounted dipoles and the tail warning array. This aircraft also received a pair of upward firing cannons and a Naxos radar detector.Junkers Ju 88G-6 [C9+AR], 6. Staffel/NJG5 Dubendorf, Switzerland, 1945. A late war Ju 88G-6 equipped with a FuG 218 G/R Neptun combined search and tail warning radar set, and while it lacks the fairing typically used for installing the Naxos radar detector there was by this point a fuselage mounted model designed for the Ju 88G. Unlike the SN-2R, the FuG 218R tail warning radar sits at the top of the vertical stabilizer rather than below it.Junkers Ju 88G-6 [4R+EP], 6. Staffel/NJG2 Fritzlar 1945. This aircraft is a good example of the lax camouflage regulations for the Luftwaffe’s night fighters. While aircraft were delivered in white-grey liveries the air and ground crews were free to devise their own patterns.Ju 88G-6 [C9+HB], 1. Staffel/NJG5, 1945. This aircraft was equipped with an extremely rare FuG 240 Berlin centimeter band search radar. While it presented many major improvements over previous Luftwaffe aerial search radars, only a few were delivered near the end of the war. The radar’s parabolic antenna sits behind the wooden nose cone which created far less drag compared to the ‘antlers’ that were used by the older meter band radars. This aircraft and others that carry late war radar sets are typically misidentified as Ju 88G-7’s. Due to the overlap between that type and very late production G-6’s, identifying them can only be done through their Werk-Nummer.With its nose mounted Mg 151/20, Hptm. Johannes Strassner’s Ju 88G had perhaps the most peculiar Schräge Musik arrangement of any night fighter. (Boiten P4 30) [Asisbiz]One of the most obvious differences between the Gustav and other Ju 88 fighters was the removal of the nose mounted weapons to a ventral pod, where muzzle flashes would not disturb the pilot, and the empty area that once served as a bomb bay would offer a much larger capacity for ammunition. Also visible here is the larger vertical stabilizer. [warbirdphotographs.com]A Flensburg aerial, one of several mounted to a Ju 88G [asisbiz.com]The capture of a Ju 88G-1 proved to be one the most valuable Allied intelligence coups of the war and, for the Germans, a source of endless trouble. [i.pinimg.com]Many of the Luftwaffe’s ‘blindworm’ makeshift airfields were later overrun by allied forces, here American personnel inspect Ju 88G-6’s and Bf 110G-4’s hidden in a forest clearing. [SmallScaleArt]Despite its growing obsolescence and degraded performance in the face of RAF jamming efforts, the SN-2 saw continued development. Its last versions used morningstar aerials encased within wooden nosecones to reduce drag.[Asisbiz]
A restored Ju 88G-1 fuselage in the Berlin Technikmuseum. (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eWzHzdTpJNo/TVqQOv6IFHI/AAAAAAAACVI/gvX4yAaLL_0/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/ju88berlin0.jpg )
Primary Sources
Air Intelligence 2 (g) Inspection of Crashed or Captured Enemy Aircraft Report Serial No. 242 dated 16th July 1944 Report No. 8 / 151: Junkers Ju 88 G-1 Night Fighter. 1944.
Fw-190 A-5/A-6 Flugzeug-Handbuch (Stand August 1943). Der Reichsminister der Luftfahrt und Oberbefehlshaber der Luftwaffe, Berlin. December 8, 1943.
Handbuch fur die Flugmotoren BMW 801 MA-BMW 801 ML-BMW 801C und BMW 801D Baureihen 1 und 2. BMW Flugmotorenbau-Gessellschaft m.b.H. Munich. May, 1942.
Junkers Flugmotor Jumo 213 A-1 u. C-0. Junkers Flugzeug und Motorenwerke Aktiengesellschaft, Dessau. December, 1943.
Ju 88S-1 Flugzeug Handbuch. Junkers Flugzeug und Motorenwerke A.G., Dessau. 1944.
Ju 88A-4 Bedienungsvorschrift-FL Bedienung und Wartung des Flugzeuges. Der Reichsminister der Luftfahrt und Oberbefehlshaber der Luftwaffe, Berlin. July 19, 1941.
Ju 188E-1 (Stand Juni 1943). Junkers Flugzeug und Motorenwerke Aktiengesellschaft, Dessau. June 1, 1943.
Ju 88G-1 Schusswaffenlage Bedienungsvorschrift-Wa (Stand Oktober 1943). Der Reichsminister der Luftfahrt und Oberbefehlshaber der Luftwaffe, Berlin. November, 1943.
Ju 88 G-1,R-2, S-1,T-1 Bedienungsvorschrift-Fl (Stand November 1943). Der Reichsminister der Luftfahrt und Oberbefehlshaber der Luftwaffe, Berlin. December 1, 1943.
Ju 88 G-2, G-6, S-3, T-3 Bedienungsvorschrift-Fl (Stand September 1944). 1944.
Rodert, L. A., & Jackson, R. (1942). A DESCRIPTION OF THE Ju 88 AIRPLANE ANTI-ICING EQUIPMENT (Tech.). Moffett Field, CA: NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS. 1942.
Secondary Sources
Aders, Gebhard. German Night Fighter Force, 1917-1945. Stroud: Fonthill, 2016.
Bauer, A. O. (2006, December 2). Some Aspects of German Airborne Radar Technology, 1942 to 1945 [Scholarly project]. In Foundation for German Communication and Related Technologies. Retrieved from https://www.cdvandt.org/
Bauer, Arthur O. “Stichting Centrum Voor Duitse Verbindings- En Aanverwante Technologieën 1920-1945.” Foundation for German communication and related technologies (History of Technology), December 2, 2006. https://www.cdvandt.org/.
Boitens, Theo. Nachtjagd Combat Archive 24 July – 15 October 1944 Part 4. Red Kite . 2021.
Boitens, Theo. Nachtjagd Combat Archive 16 October – 31 December Part 5 1944. Red Kite . 2021.
Boitens, Theo. Nachtjagd Combat Archive, 1 January – 3 May 1945. Red Kite . 2022.
Brown, L. A radar history of World War II: Technical and military imperatives. Bristol: Institute of Physics Pub. 1999
Brown, Eric Melrose. Wings of the Luftwaffe. Hikoki, 2010.
Cooper, M. The German Air Force, 1933-1945: An Anatomy of Failure. Jane’s Pub, 1981.
Green, William. The warplanes of the Third Reich (1st ed.). London: Doubleday. pp. 448–482, 1972.
Manfred Griehl, Nachtjäger über Deutschland, 1940-1945: Bf 110, Ju 88, He 219 (Wölfersheim-Berstadt: Podzun-Pallas-Verlag, 1999).
Medcalf, William A. Junkers Ju 88 Volume One From Schnellbomber to Multi-Mission War Plane. Manchester, UK: Chevron Publishing Limited , 2013.
Medcalf, William A. Junkers Ju 88 Volume Two The Bomber at War Day and Night Operational and service history. Manchester, UK: Chevron Publishing Limited , 2014.
Holpp, Wolfgang. “The Century of Radar.” EADS Deutschland GmbH
Holm, M. (1997). The Luftwaffe, 1933-45. Retrieved February, 2021, from https://www.ww2.dk/
Overy, Richard James. The Bombing War: Europe 1939-1945. London: Penguin Books, 2014.
Price, Alfred. Instruments of Darkness: the History of Electronic Warfare, 1939-1945. Barnsley, S. Yorkshire: Frontline Books, 2017.
Sharp, C. Martin, and Bowyer Michael J F. Mosquito. Bristol: Crecy Books, 1997.
Smith, J. R., & Creek, E. J. (2014). Focke-Wulf Fw 190, Volume 3: 1944-1945. Manchester: Crecy Publishing.
Nazi Germany (1936)
Shipborne and coastal reconnaissance aircraft – 98~118 Built
The He 114 Source: www.warbirdphotographs.com
In the mid-thirties, the German Ministry of Aviation (Reichsluftfahrtministerium – RLM) tasked the Heinkel company with developing a replacement for the He 60 shipborne and reconnaissance aircraft. While Heinkel fulfilled the request by building the He 114, its overall performance was deemed insufficient for German standards.
History
During the early thirties, the He 60 was adopted for service as the main German shipborne and coastal reconnaissance aircraft. As it was considered outdated, in 1935, the RLM issued to Heinkel a request for a new shipborne and coastal reconnaissance aircraft that was to replace the He 60. The next year, two prototypes were completed. While it was originally planned to test these aircraft with the BMW 132 engine, due to lack of availability, this was not possible. The first prototype (with D-UBAM marking) made its maiden flight in September 1936. It was powered by a Daimler Benz DB-600A which gave out 900 hp. The test results of the first flight were disappointing, as it proved difficult to control on the water but also in the air. The second prototype, V2 (D-UGAT), powered by a 740 hp Jumo 210 E, made its first flight in December 1936. It was used to test the catapult launching capabilities of this aircraft. It had some modifications in comparison to the first prototype, like having a larger tail and redesigned floats. Despite some improvements, the catapult launch testings from the Gneisenau showed that the He 114 was not suited for this role.
Despite not having a promising start, further prototypes were ordered. The V3 (D-IDEG) prototype was powered by an 880 hp BMW 132 K (or D, depending on the source) engine. The floats were once again redesigned and the pilot had a better-glazed shield. This aircraft was tested in April 1937 with similar performance as previous versions.
V4 (D-IOGD) made its maiden test flight in August 1937. It had many modifications in order to improve its performance. The wing’s edges were redesigned, new floats were used and it was also fitted with machine gun armament. V5 (D-IQRS) had new improved floats which enabled it to take-off even from ice. While most sources mention only five prototypes, some note that there were two more. The V6 and V7 prototypes were tested with similar equipment and were armed with two machine guns, one firing through the propeller and the second mounted to the rear. Additional armament tested consisted of two 50 kg (110 lb) bombs.
A side view of the V4 prototype, during a test flight. Source www.warbirdphotographs.com
Technical characteristics
The He 114 was designed as a single-engine, all-metal, twin crew biplane aircraft. It had a monocoque oval-shaped fuselage design. It was powered by one BMW 132K 960 hp nine-cylinder radial engine. The fuel load consisted of 640 l.
The He 114 BMW 132K 960 hp nine-cylinder radial engine. Source: www.warbirdphotographs.com
Somewhat unusual for biplanes of the era, the lower wings were much smaller than the upper ones. They had a half-elliptical design and were thicker than the upper wings. The upper wing was connected to the fuselage by two ‘N’ shaped struts. There were also two ‘Y’ struts connecting the lower and the upper wings. The upper wing was constructed using three parts with two ailerons. The upper wing could, if needed, be folded to the rear. The landing gear consisted of two floats which could also act as auxiliary fuel storage tanks with 470 l each.
On later models, the floaters were used as auxiliary fuel tanks. Source www.warbirdphotographs.com
The crew consisted of the pilot and the rear positioned machine gunner/observer. The armament consisted of one MG 15 7.92 mm (0.31 in) machine gun placed to the rear. The ammunition load for this machine gun was 600 rounds. Additionally, there was an option to externally mount two 50 kg (110 lb) bombs.
Close up view of The He 114 pilot control table. Source: www.warbirdphotographs.com/luftwaffephotos
Further development
Despite being shown to have poor performance, a small production run was made by Heinkel. Some 10 (or 6 depending on the source) aircraft of the A-0 series, together with 33 of the A-1 series would be built. The only difference was the use of a larger rear tail design on the He 114A-1 series. The small number of He 114 built were given to various test units and flight schools, where its performance was often criticized by all. During its introduction to service, the much more promising Ar-196 was under development, but it would need some time until production was possible. As a temporary solution, the Luftwaffe officials decided not to retire the He 60 from service yet. Heinkel was informed that, due to the He 114’s overall poor performance, it would not be accepted for service and that it would be offered for export if anyone was interested. For this reason, Heinkel developed the He 114A-2 series. The He 114A-2 had a reinforced fuselage, floats that could be used as fuel storage tanks, and, additionally, it was modified to have catapult attach points. The He 114A-2, while tested, was not operated by the Luftwaffe, and it was used for the export market.
The following B-series (including B-1 and B-2) were actually just A-2 planes with some slight improvements, meant primarily for export. The history of the C-series is somewhat unclear, as it appears to be specially developed for Romania. It was much better armed, with either two 20 mm (0.78 in ) MG 151 cannons, two 13 mm (0.51 in) MG 131 heavy machine guns, or even two MG 17 7.92 mm (0.31 in) (the sources are not clear) placed inside the lower wings. Some sources also mention that additional machine guns were installed inside the engine compartment and could be fired through the propeller. Additionally, it appears that its fuselage was modified to be able to carry two additional 50 kg (110 lb) bombs. The rear positioned MG 15 was unchanged. This version also had a new Junkers type 3.5 m diameter propeller. The floaters were also slightly redesigned and it received smoke screen trovers. Additionally, to provide better stability while positioned near shore, a small anchor could be realized.
Operational use
Despite not being accepted by the Luftwaffe, due to the Kriegsmarine’s (German war navy) lack of sufficient seaplanes, some He 114 had to be used for this purpose. The distribution of the He 114 began in 1938 when the 1./Küstenfliegergruppe 506 was equipped with this aircraft. In 1939, it was 43equipped with the older He 60, as these proved to be better aircraft. Some German ships, like the Atlantis, Widder, and Pinguin, received these aircraft. During their use, the He 114 floater units proved to be prone to malfunctions. These were reported to be too fragile and could easily be broken down during take-off from the sea during bad weather.
While designed to be able to take-off from German ships, the He 114 construction was not strong enough and was prone to breakdowns with many aircraft being lost this way. Source /www.warbirdphotographs.com/luftwaffephotosDespite intended as a replacement of the He 60 this was never implemented due to He 114 poor performance. Source www.warbirdphotographs.com/luftwaffephotos
A group of 12 He 114 C-1 aircraft that were to be sold to Romania were temporarily allocated to the 2nd Squadron of the 125th Reconnaissance Group (2/125 Aufkl.Sta.). These units operated in the area of Finland’s shore. When the Bv 138 became available in sufficient numbers, the He 114 C-1 was finally given to Romania.
Foreign use
While the He 114 failed to get any large production orders in Germany, it did see some export success. These included Denmark, Spain, Romania and Sweden. The B-series was sold, which was more or less a copy of the A-2 series.
In Danish service
The Danish use of the He 114 is not clear. Depending on the source, there are two versions. In the first, Denmark managed to buy 4 He 114 aircraft and even ordered more, but the German occupation stopped any further orders. In the second, while Denmark wanted to buy some He 114, nothing came of it, once again due to German occupation.
In Spanish service
During 1942, Spain obtained some 4 He 114s from the Germans. In Spanish service, these were known as HR-4. Despite their obsolescence and lack of spare parts, these would remain in use up to 1953.
Small numbers of He 114 were supplied to Spanish State during 1942. Source: www.warbirdphotographs.com
In Romanian service
Romania received a group of 12 He 114 in 1939. During the war, the number would be increased to 29 in total. These would be extensively used to patrol the Black Sea. At the end of the war, these were captured by the Soviets, who confiscated them. Some would be returned to Romania in 1947, which would continue to use them up to 1960, when they were scrapped.
The He 114 in Romanian Service.Source: www.warbirdphotographs.com/luftwaffephotos
In Swedish service
Sweden bought some 12 He 114 in March 1941. In Swedish service, these would be renamed to S-12. Despite being an unimpressive design and prone to malfunction, the Swedish used them extensively during the period of 1941 to 1942, with over 2054 flight missions. They would remain in service up to 1945, with six aircraft being lost in accidents.
One S-12 (as it was known in Sweden) of 12 in total was sold to Sweden. Source: www.warbirdphotographs.com/luftwaffephotos
Production
Despite its poor performance, Heinkel undertook a small production of the He 114. The number of produced aircraft ranges from 98 to 118 depending on the source.
He 114 Prototypes – Between 5 to 7 prototypes were built
He 114 A – Limited production series
He 114 B – Export version of the A-series
He 114 C – Slightly improved version with stronger armament
Operators
Germany – Small numbers of these aircraft were operated by the Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine, but their use was limited
Denmark – Possibly operated four He 114 before the German occupation
Spain – Bought four He 114, and operated them up to 1953
Sweden – Bought 12 He 114 in March 1941, which remained in use until 1945
Romania – Operated 29 He 114, with the last aircraft being scrapped in 1960
Surviving aircraft
While there are no complete surviving He 114s various parts and wrecks have been found over the years. Parts of one wreck were found in lake Siutghiol near Mamaia, on the Romanian Black Sea coast, in 2012. There is a possibility that the wreck of another lays in a lake near Alexeni as well.
Conclusion
The He 114 was an unsuccessful design that failed to gain any larger production orders in Germany. It had difficult controls both in the air and on the water. While it would see some limited service with the Luftwaffe, most would be sold abroad, where some were used up to the ’60s.
He 114C-1 1./SAGr.125 -Baltic Area 1941He 114A-2 1.-KuFlGr-506 Devenow 1938He 114A 1./SAGr.125 Baltic Area 1941He 114B in Romanian Service Circa 1943
Sources
D. Nešić (2008), Naoružanje Drugog Svetskog Rata Nemačka Beograd
M. Griehl (2012) X-Planes German Luftwaffe Prototypes 1930-1945, Frontline Book.
S. Lonescu and C. Craciunoi, He 114, Editura Modelism
Jean-Denis G.G. Lepage Aircraft Of The Luftwaffe 1935-1945, McFarland and Company.
Ferenc A. and P. Dancey (1998) German Aircraft Industry And Production 1933-1945. Airlife England.
https://www.cugetliber.ro/stiri-eveniment-hidroavion-din-al-doilea-razboi-mondial-descoperit-in-lacul-tasaul-201060
Empire of Japan (1937)
Germany (1943)
France (1936-1940)
