Jet fighter projects of 1946

hesham

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
26 May 2006
Messages
33,575
Reaction score
13,703
Hi,

in Flightglobal of 1946 many fighter projects and some of
it was taken from Luftwaffe and some of it was unknown,
such as this Heinkel fighter project.
http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1946/1946%20-%201485.html?search=jet%20fighters%20aircraft%201946
 

Attachments

  • Heinkel.JPG
    Heinkel.JPG
    17.4 KB · Views: 1,324
It is the relatively well known Heinkel P1078B.

You may find out some, few, more infos at the Luft 46 web site:

http://www.luft46.com/heinkel/hep1078b.html
 
Good find archipeppa,

but there is many other projects;
http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1946/1946%20-%201486.html?search=STOL%20transport%20aircraft
http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1946/1946%20-%201487.html?search=STOL%20transport%20aircraft
http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1946/1946%20-%201488.html?search=STOL%20transport%20aircraft
http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1946/1946%20-%201489.html?search=STOL%20transport%20aircraft
 
...where there is no need to repeat Luft'46... ;D
 
I have tried to identify some desings with the following results:

Page b
-------
Drawing 1 - A Messerschmitt P.1065 Entwurf I heavy fighter
Drawing 2 - A Heinkel P.1079A heavy fighter
Drawing 3 - Unknown to me. It may be a Messerschmitt design as the tail surfaces shape looks very similar to the "Wespe I" project
Drawing 4 - It looks like a variant from the Messerschmitt HG-I straight wing an tailplane. It might be a project of high-altitude interceptor.
Drawing 5 - An Arado E-395-01 bomber
Drawing 6 - Unknown to me. It looks like a reduced version of the four engined Junkers EF-130 to be used as Zerstörer or Night Fighter

Page c
-------
Drawing 1 - A Gotha P.60 C-2a night fighter
Drawing 2 - A Blohm und Voss P.215 night fighter
Drawing 3 - A Lippisch P.11 (December 1943 Drawing)
Drawing 4 - A Blohm und Voss BV 197 heavy fighter
Drawing 5 - Unknown to me. It might be a version of the Heinkel P1078 B with a third turbojet.....or rocket?
Drawing 6 - A Focke Wulf P.011-045 Night Fighter

Page 115 - A Heinkel P.1079 all weather interceptor

---------
Page d
-------
Drawing 1 - A Heinkel He 162 C fighter
Drawing 2 - A Junkers EF 128 fighter
Drawing 3 - A Messerschmitt P.1101 fither
Drawing 4 - A Messerschmitt P.1110/1 fighter
Drawing 5 - Unknown to me. It might be a variant from the Junkers EF 128, with single tailfin, or a variant of the Lippisch P.01-115 with lateral air-intakes
 
My friend Lark is absolutely right. Please stay in the time period limit of this section of the forum. An exception can be done for projects started during the war and put to fruition after it, but only if they remained in a form true to the original wartime one. Cut-off date is VE-day (may 1945).
Thanx !
 
It was moved from post war for not being post war. I think that the Luft 46 stuff is generally well covered elsewhere, e.g. the Luft 46 website.
 
Hence the question not to repeat the -Luft'46- information here...
 
Knowing your expertise in this field Justo , it
was done in a perfect way..
 
Skybolt said:
Cut-off date is VE-day (may 1945).
Thanx !
Click to expand...

Wouldn't VJ Day, August 15th, be a better choice?

WWII did not begin on December 7th, 1941, nor did it end on May 7, 1945.

Jon
 
With the invasion of Poland 1939 unitil the surrender of Japan 1945
or more easely from 1939 till 1945 ?
 
The VE Day would make sense because with the access to the German research and technology the aeronautical field changed immensely. A project conceived in summer of 1945 could contain some element of captured ideas. Comparatively, the Japan surrender changed nothing. So, at all practical effects, from an aeronautical design point of view, WW2 ended on VE Day, IMHO.
 
From aeronautical designers point of view this sounds reasonable.

But from the historical side we must count from 1 September 1939 (invasion of Poland)to 2 September 1945 (offical surrender of Japan)
There were still unflown designs on the drawing board in Japan
after V-day in Europe.

But this is only a personal view ofcourse.
 
Skybolt said:
The VE Day would make sense because with the access to the German research and technology the aeronautical field changed immensely. A project conceived in summer of 1945 could contain some element of captured ideas. Comparatively, the Japan surrender changed nothing. So, at all practical effects, from an aeronautical design point of view, WW2 ended on VE Day, IMHO.
Click to expand...

Sorry Skybolt, but that is overly simplistic.
I guess you are not familiar with R.T. Jones and his NACA work on tailless designs and sweptwings done before the German capitulation? German research and technology also had little immediate effect on British and US engine technology.

Jon
 
I know that British and American war-time projects and research were very advanced, but it is undeniable that the captured German one made a sensation... anyway, if you guys like VJ as a cutoff, let it be.
 
Re: Jet fighter and bomber projects of 1946

Hi,

we also can speak about jet bomber,such as the Junkers EF.116,
which was powered by four Junkers Jumo 109-004H engines.
 

Attachments

  • EF 116.JPG
    EF 116.JPG
    8.2 KB · Views: 926
Taken from the bomber volume about 'German Secret Projects'
I guess Hesham.

This is NOT a fighter
WW II jet bomberprojects should be in a new thread.
 
The Luft'46 'Napkinwaffe' stuff should definitely be kept to a separate area, especially as, Dear Hesham, they do not date from 1946.

Jon
 
I believe this is the right time to say that the purpose of the fantastic German designs that we know today as Luft 46 was to capture the imagination of the Nazi leaders. And it was so because that is the established method among manufacturers to obtain resources in wartime.
It was just a marketing strategy to avoid being absorbed by the Messerschmitt group.

In the 50s we lived a similar situation with the spaceship designs published in the Collier's magazine.

The eyecatching of these drawings has allowed the creation of a Luft 46 subculture and its publishing success. But, from a pragmatic point of view, just a few of them would have actually flown or got into combat.

In practice, the enormous aerodynamical potential of these designs did not work well. The Me 262 could not fight at high altitude and the position of its engines created problems of compressibility buffeting. The Horten IX had longitudinal instability, could not shot just one cannon and could not be used as night fighter for structural reasons. As for the Lippisch flying triangles we all know that the XF-92-A was not supersonic even in a dive! And it was an American engineer who solved the problem using the "wasp waist".

In my opinion, we are back to the classic debate between dreamers and pragmatic men. I believe that only the cooperation between the two types would make aerospace industry possible and, for extension, the progress of the human being.
 
Excelent, what an accurated and beautiful reasoning Sr Miranda. Anybody interested on German Wunderwaffen should read that words before going further on their research.

I remember other brilliant posts in that forum from Jemiba, Boxkite and Orionblamblam about Luft 46 but, in my opinion, that from Mr Miranda is specially illustrative with very few words.

As Lark says, it is nothing more left to be said. :)
 
Hi,

the Horten X as in Flightglobal in 1947.
http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1947/1947%20-%200487.html
 

Attachments

  • Horten X.JPG
    Horten X.JPG
    18.7 KB · Views: 878
My dears, there will always something more to say regarding Luft46... those airplanes are of the stuff dreams are made on... (personal hommage to the Bard.. ;D )
 
pometablava said:
As Lark says, it is nothing more left to be said. :)
Click to expand...

Oh, there's *lots* more to be said. Some of it glowing praise, some of it technical description, and some of it profanity-laced invective. I'm particularly fond of the latter, and reasonably well skilled at it.

As previously mentioned, much of the "Luft '46" design work was "sales material." But there was a special extra incentive that the wartime German designers had that most other designers, especially in the West, have not had: if you turn out to be superfluous... it's off to the Russian front with you. And since by 1944 there was really no practical need for aircraft designers - what the Germans needed was aircraft *builders* - the designers had to make it look like they were needed. Consequently, they'd dream up War Winning Futuristic Designs that would look damned impressive, but wouldn't necessarily work. Of course, these designs didn' *need* to work. They just needed to impress the brass long enough to let the designer avoid that east-bound train.

Something very similar seems to have happened just after the war as well. After von Braun turned himself in, he gave interviews to US Army interogators where he described all the neato projects his team was working on, under his direction: satellite launchers, space shuttles, space stations and more. However, he never seems to have turned over any actual design data. And after discussing this with a few Peenemunde rocketeers, they claim that such projects were *not* underway, beyond late-night casual discussions. But von Braun seems to have tried to give across the impression that these designs were fairly advanced.

What would be the reason for this exaggeration on von Braun's part? Simple: he wanted a job. In effect, I believe he was padding his resume with things he thought the US Army would want, and that he wanted to work on. It worked.

Von Braun was a very rare animal: equal parts quality engineer, good manager and effective con man. Rather than look on this with distaste, I'm actually quite envious of those skills. Because those are the sorts of things that are needed to make a real change sometimes. But while an effective way to Get Things Done, smoke-and-mirrors (be it some advanced bullcrap jet fighter design or some handwavy claim of space launch vehicles) often leads to mucked-up history.
 
Also- With the collapse of Nazi Germany and the capture of the aerospace design bureaus, we had a cross-section of the aircraft design process, from flying prototypes to bar-napkin sketches. Until "Project Cancelled" came out, there was hardly any source for information on dead-end and abandoned projects elsewhere, and without the efforts of researchers such as Scott Lowther and Tony Buttler, very little more. The Allies aerospace corporations were free to stash or scrap their abandoned or unsuccessful projects. To this day, try to find some information on the Bell XP-83 or Vickers Windsor. Slap a Swastika on their tail and paint them in RLM 83/85/65, and they would have whole books written about them.

Kim M

PS- Justo, please take PayPal.

Kim M
 
A sound reaction to close the endless German Secrets discusion about
"Who did what ,when and why and where is the hidden agenda"
 
Re: Jet fighter projects of 1946 - 1st two drawings

I have found some drawings on the Bell XP-83 and Vickers Windsor.
The bibliography is

Bell XP-83
-Wings , april 2004
- Le Fanatique de l’Aviation (Le Bell XP-83 heritier malheureux de l’Airacomet)
- Le Fanatique de l’Aviation (Hors Serie n.16)
- American combat planes by R.Wagner , Doubleday 1982
- The American fighter by E.Angelucci and P.Bowers, Orion books 1987
- Fighters of the United States Air Force by R.F. Dorr, Temple Press Aerospace 1990
- War Planes of the Second World War ,Figters,vol 4 by William Green , Macdonald
1961,Doubleday 1964.
- The complete book of fighters by William Green & G.Swanborough,Salamander 2001
- Jane’1947
- Jane’s Fighting Aircraft of World War II, Crescent Books 1996
- Samoloty odrzutowe 1935-45 by W.Baczkowski, Agencja Wydawnicza CB 2000
- Skrzydlata Polska n. 3-89

Vickers Windsor
- Aircraft of the fighting powers-vol 7 ,by Owen Thetford, Argus books 1979
- British Secret Projects by Tony Buttler Midland 2004

Regarding PayPal, the reason of not using this service is the small size of my business (100 copies per issue to sell throughout the year) and, in my country, it is not worth to work with credit cards with sales volumes lower than 1000 copies. I do not believe that it may be possible to gather 1000 guys interested in my work, due to its deliberate marginal nature.
 

Attachments

  • Escanear0001.jpg
    Escanear0001.jpg
    46.3 KB · Views: 923
  • Escanear0002.jpg
    Escanear0002.jpg
    56.6 KB · Views: 935
Re: Jet fighter projects of 1946 - last two drawings

last two drawings
 

Attachments

  • Escanear0004.jpg
    Escanear0004.jpg
    42.1 KB · Views: 670
  • Escanear0003.jpg
    Escanear0003.jpg
    53.3 KB · Views: 594
Note that this site has about 12,500 unique visitors a month, a large number of whom visit most days. Obviously not all of them are going to be specifically interested in your subjects but still...

On a separate note, due to "fair use" we try to restrict the size of posted scans from published books to 600 pixels or thereabouts in order to encourage people to buy the originals. Your images are too high resolution if they are scanned from published books.

This doesn't apply to drawings you made yourself of course.
 
overscan said:
On a separate note, due to "fair use" we try to restrict the size of posted scans from published books to 600 pixels or thereabouts in order to encourage people to buy the originals. Your images are too high resolution if they are scanned from published books.
Click to expand...

The Windsor drawing is from the old WWII era "Aircraft Of The Fighting Powers" series, and I don't think they've been reprinted since the late 70s-early 80s.

Jon
 
overscan said:
Your images are too high resolution
Click to expand...

I know and respect the rules.
I made a mistake while using my scanner.
The Windsor plan has a big size, the drawing lines are very thin and I used a new high resolution scanner with which I am not yet very familiar.

Please accept my apologies.
 
Hi,

the rocket fighter projects;
http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1946/1946%20-%201011.html
 

Attachments

  • Rocket fighter 1.JPG
    Rocket fighter 1.JPG
    24 KB · Views: 1,428
  • Me-262 jet and rocket.JPG
    Me-262 jet and rocket.JPG
    28.9 KB · Views: 189
  • Rocket fighter 2.JPG
    Rocket fighter 2.JPG
    40.3 KB · Views: 209

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom