Various Henschel projects

[newsdeskdan]

Dan, can you please check if the 1944 heavy weapons modified Ju 188 and the 1944 flying wing incorporate a Hs 129 like cockpit? This I take from Smith/Kay`s "German Aircraft of World war Two", back from the 70`s.

The Ju 188 was to have a heavily armoured cockpit "designed according to the experience of Hs 129". No mention of the Hs 129 in the flying wing description.

 

[Wurger]

Dan, I hate to be a bugger, but can you please also check if:

the 1936/1938 bomber projects w/Jumo 210 have a stepped cabin or a greenhouse one;

the 1938 single seat fighter w/ rotating wing has tandem rotors.

This material are awesome! Congrats on amassing such impressive ammounts of original documents.

 

[newsdeskdan]

Dan, I hate to be a bugger, but can you please also check if:

the 1936/1938 bomber projects w/Jumo 210 have a stepped cabin or a greenhouse one;

the 1938 single seat fighter w/ rotating wing has tandem rotors.

This material are awesome! Congrats on amassing such impressive ammounts of original documents.

The 1936 bomber project was to have a 'Vollsichtkanzel' and the 1938 one was the same but with a different wing configuration.

The 1938 fighter's wing seems to have rotated like that of the BV 144 or P 188, rather than being a rotor.

 

[Wurger]

Super!!! That leave us with a 1942 helicopter project (P.77) absent in this report, but mentioned in "Laufende Auftraege" of the Henschel Jahrbuch for 1942. This was stated by Steve Coates, the expert in german helicopter development, our forum member.

 

[hesham]

Anther mystery,

also here,they spoke about Henschel HS-292 as an air-to-ship guided missile ?,

https://books.google.com.eg/books?id=kckIOtfftzwC&pg=PA253&lpg=PA253&dq=henschel+hs.292&source=bl&ots=Knrohhbxu2&sig=gHBL3Psh9yXf0iuo-7sjLaqvU0k&hl=ar&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJy6OgrMLeAhUE-qQKHfjNA5cQ6AEwDXoECAYQAQ#v=onepage&q=henschel%20hs.292&f=false

 

[sienar]

Anther mystery,

also here,they spoke about Henschel HS-292 as an air-to-ship guided missile ?,

https://books.google.com.eg/books?id=kckIOtfftzwC&pg=PA253&lpg=PA253&dq=henschel+hs.292&source=bl&ots=Knrohhbxu2&sig=gHBL3Psh9yXf0iuo-7sjLaqvU0k&hl=ar&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJy6OgrMLeAhUE-qQKHfjNA5cQ6AEwDXoECAYQAQ#v=onepage&q=henschel%20hs.292&f=false

A typo for 293.

 

[Jemiba]

In such cases it may be helpful just to google the author to find, if his books can be at least regarded
as slightly credible. Here it's only a typo, of course, but if we have a look at other of Henry Stevens titles like
- "Dark Star: The Hidden History of German Secret Bases, Flying Disks & U-Boats"
- "Hitler's Suppressed and Still-Secret Weapons, Science and Technology"
- "Hitler's Flying Saucers: A Guide to German Flying Discs of the Second World War" (including a report by a German test
pilot who actually flew one of the flying saucers )
things may become a bit clearer. Hopefully ! :

 

[Skyraider3D]

My various artworks of the Hs P 122.
The first two were commissioned by Dan Sharp (newdeskdan) for one of his excellent bookazines, while the last one was originally commissioned by Thomas Hitchcock for Manfred Griehl's second volume on Luftwaffe secret jet projects.

 

[Jemiba]

Great, thanks for posting !
Don't get me wrong, it's just a question : Isn't the red band on the fin with the, ehm, thingy
in the white circle a typical pre-war marking ?

 

[Skyraider3D]

That's true, but since the war ended in 1945 all is fair game with these 1946 what-ifs ;D

 

[hesham]

I will eventually. See below. The 28th and last one is my personal favourite - evidently Henschel designed the pressure cabin for the DFS 228 but regarded the rest of the 228 as "aerodynamically unrefined". It was therefore proposed to create a tailless altitude/speed record attempt aircraft by putting together a DFS 228 pressure cabin, P 135 wings and an all-new fuselage.
There are a handful of sketches (not original drawings) with the report but also a selection of photos, including one of a P 75 model that looks quite a lot different from the design depicted elsewhere.
I've attached the frontispiece, p2 (to give you an idea of the layout) and p40 which has the weird DFS 228/P 135 hybrid description on it.

The 28 break down as:
Single-seat fighter - four projects
1938 fighter with rotating wing
1941 P 75
1944-45 P 130
1944-45 P 135 (in parallel with P 130)

Heavy fighter - three projects
1936 similar to Bf 110
1944 heavy weapons mod Ju 188
1944 flying wing

Ground-attack aircraft - five projects (no individual dates, just '1939-43' to encompass them all)
similar to Hs 123
similar to Fw 190
similar to Hs 129
2 x jet single-seater with limited calibre weapons
similar to V-1

Bomber - three projects
1936 4 x Jumo 210
1938 4 x Jumo 210 but canard configuration
1944 4 x BMW 018 tailless

Battlefield reconnaissance - one project
1940 heavily modified two-seater Hs 129

Long-range reconnaissance - three projects
1942 2 engine high-altitude
1943 3 x jet canard
1944 as 1943 but tailless

Commercial/military transport - four projects
1941 2 engine high-speed airliner for DLH
1942 4 engine transatlantic airliner for DLH
1942 as above but diesel-fuelled for DLH
1942 tactical transport for Luftwaffe

Special aircraft - five projects
1941 2 x pulsejet light bomber
1944 unguided missile with glider attached
1944 P 136
1944 P 136 with additional ramjet
(no date) DFS 228/P 135 hybrid

My dear Dan,

is there any chance to see them in your next book ?.

 

[blackkite]

Hi! Excellent drawings.
I 'm not sure the meanig of these drawings but I imagine that Justo-san or Ed-san already know. Each radiator shape are different. 　
https://www.deviantart.com/comradeloganov/art/Japanese-Hitachi-A9He1-Herman-Heinkel-He-100-363236383
https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/ki-61-and-he-100-related.26499/

 

[Flitzer]

Any info about this project?

This is a hoax. I made a 'what if' model years ago made from spare bits using Unicraft kits. Someone took it further. I wouldn't think I was that good an Historian if it was true. I have a couple of pictures somewhere.

 

[Flitzer]

Any info about this project?

This is a hoax. I made a 'what if' model years ago made from spare bits using Unicraft kits. Someone took it further. I wouldn't think I was that good an Historian if it was true. I have a couple of pictures somewhere.

My mistake....I thought it was referring to the Asymmetric pic. Must get some new glasses...

 

[Pioneer]

Hi,


Hs P.76 was a twin engined low-mid-wing ground attack project,looks like Hs.129.

You are correct in your observation hesham

"The Henschel P.76 was a design for a larger version of the Hs 129A that would have solved some of that aircraft's main problems. The Hs 129A-0 had been inspected by pilots from Erprobungskommando 129 (a special unit formed to bring the aircraft into service) in November 1940, and they had not been impressed. The Argus engines didn't provide enough power for the increasingly heavy aircraft, and the armoured cockpit had tiny windows with very limited visibility. The pilot's reports on the new aircraft was almost universally poor, and early in 1941 the Luftwaffe made it clear that it was not going to accept the Hs 129A-1 production aircraft that were then approaching completion.

The Henschel design team, lead by Dipl Ing Friedrich Nicolaus, had seen this problem coming, and soon had a new design ready. The P.76 would have been a larger version of the Hs 123, with a wing span of 50ft 10 N in, four feet wider than on the Hs 123, and a length of 33ft 2in, up by just over a foot. The P.76 would have been powered by two 700hp Gnome & Rhône 14M 04/05 radial engines, a large number of which had been captured after the fall of France.

Although the new design was clearly superior to the cramped Hs 129, it would have delayed the production of an anti-tank aircraft by at least a year, and this was unacceptable to the Luftwaffe. Instead Nicolaus was ordered to fit the Gnome & Rhône engines to the existing Hs 129A-1s, to produce the pre-production B-0..."



(Source: http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/weapons_henschel_P_76.html)

Regards
Pioneer

 

[hesham]

Here is a Wind Tunnel Measurements of the Henschel Projectile "Zitterrochen" at Subsonic and Supersonic Velocities.

Slideshow | NASM.XXXX.0408_ref550

 

[newsdeskdan]

1944 flying wing

Just discovered the detailed spec for this among some Horten papers. It's the Henschel P 132 (not to be confused with the Hs 132) - a flying wing destroyer powered by a single Jumo 222 E/F driving two 3-bladed props. No drawing though.

 

[Wurger]

1944 flying wing

Just discovered the detailed spec for this among some Horten papers. It's the Henschel P 132 (not to be confused with the Hs 132) - a flying wing destroyer powered by a single Jumo 222 E/F driving two 3-bladed props. No drawing though.

Rear or frontal engine, Dan?

 

[newsdeskdan]

1944 flying wing

Just discovered the detailed spec for this among some Horten papers. It's the Henschel P 132 (not to be confused with the Hs 132) - a flying wing destroyer powered by a single Jumo 222 E/F driving two 3-bladed props. No drawing though.

Rear or frontal engine, Dan?

In Nicolaus's postwar report for the Allies he describes the Henschel flying wing Zerstoerer designed in 1944:
"In 1944, certain hopes of a timely and efficient nature were linked to the completion of the Horten IX, which, however, we had to dash on the basis of the tests we carried out. After all, Lippisch seemed to have a time advantage. We therefore, following the wishes of the RLM, projected a destroyer to the wing of Ho IX. This had a pilot and a radio operator, both under armour protection, with heavy offensive armament, but no defence. The engine was a twin-engine Jumo 213 in the fuselage with counter-rotating airscrews. The maximum speed I could expect was 780km/h. Contrary to the Horten design, we had provided a central fin."

The 'Zerstoerer Hs P 132' outlined in the data sheet differs in having a single Jumo 222 E/F but it does have two three-bladed props (it doesn't explicitly state that they are contra-rotating). Similarly, it is a two-seater. The sheet is stamped '3. Nov. 1944'.
Several aircraft designs from this period were specifying the Jumo 222 E/F but this engine seems to have been abandoned in early 1945. Perhaps before the war ended Henschel switched to linked 213s?
Maximum speed given for the P 132 is given as 815km/h at 13km altitude, having reached 780km/h at 10km altitude.
I would guess that the engine was mounted centrally or to the rear, with the contra-rotating props in a pusher configuration, but that is only a guess.

 

[Wurger]

1944 flying wing

Just discovered the detailed spec for this among some Horten papers. It's the Henschel P 132 (not to be confused with the Hs 132) - a flying wing destroyer powered by a single Jumo 222 E/F driving two 3-bladed props. No drawing though.

Rear or frontal engine, Dan?

In Nicolaus's postwar report for the Allies he describes the Henschel flying wing Zerstoerer designed in 1944:
"In 1944, certain hopes of a timely and efficient nature were linked to the completion of the Horten IX, which, however, we had to dash on the basis of the tests we carried out. After all, Lippisch seemed to have a time advantage. We therefore, following the wishes of the RLM, projected a destroyer to the wing of Ho IX. This had a pilot and a radio operator, both under armour protection, with heavy offensive armament, but no defence. The engine was a twin-engine Jumo 213 in the fuselage with counter-rotating airscrews. The maximum speed I could expect was 780km/h. Contrary to the Horten design, we had provided a central fin."

The 'Zerstoerer Hs P 132' outlined in the data sheet differs in having a single Jumo 222 E/F but it does have two three-bladed props (it doesn't explicitly state that they are contra-rotating). Similarly, it is a two-seater. The sheet is stamped '3. Nov. 1944'.
Several aircraft designs from this period were specifying the Jumo 222 E/F but this engine seems to have been abandoned in early 1945. Perhaps before the war ended Henschel switched to linked 213s?
Maximum speed given for the P 132 is given as 815km/h at 13km altitude, having reached 780km/h at 10km altitude.
I would guess that the engine was mounted centrally or to the rear, with the contra-rotating props in a pusher configuration, but that is only a guess.

Something really puzzling/interesting is the linked Jumo 213. Junkers Motoren wasn`t very keen on these "gruppenmotoren" given Daimler-Benz`s bad experience. Nevertheless they toyed with this idea in the Jumo 212 (2xJumo 213) or the Jumo 215 (2xJumo 214), according Reinhard Müller`s "Junkers Flugtriebwerke".

 

[newsdeskdan]

Something really puzzling/interesting is the linked Jumo 213. Junkers Motoren wasn`t very keen on these "gruppenmotoren" given Daimler-Benz`s bad experience. Nevertheless they toyed with this idea in the Jumo 212 (2xJumo 213) or the Jumo 215 (2xJumo 214), according Reinhard Müller`s "Junkers Flugtriebwerke".

I suppose the glittering prize for a successful linked engine was a lot of power for a relatively modest increase in drag. Calum would know better than I why they persisted with the idea so long. I actually asked Calum whether the British ever considered linking two Merlins - he said he would be surprised if it had never been suggested but there was no known evidence of it.

 

[Wurger]

Something really puzzling/interesting is the linked Jumo 213. Junkers Motoren wasn`t very keen on these "gruppenmotoren" given Daimler-Benz`s bad experience. Nevertheless they toyed with this idea in the Jumo 212 (2xJumo 213) or the Jumo 215 (2xJumo 214), according Reinhard Müller`s "Junkers Flugtriebwerke".

I suppose the glittering prize for a successful linked engine was a lot of power for a relatively modest increase in drag. Calum would know better than I why they persisted with the idea so long. I actually asked Calum whether the British ever considered linking two Merlins - he said he would be surprised if it had never been suggested but there was no known evidence of it.

Another interesting by-product of this subject would be to know if the linked engine was to be tandem or side-by-side. Given the airframe (Ho 229) it probably would be side by side, with a rear propeller. Smith and Kay also mentioned such a design.

 

[newsdeskdan]

Something really puzzling/interesting is the linked Jumo 213. Junkers Motoren wasn`t very keen on these "gruppenmotoren" given Daimler-Benz`s bad experience. Nevertheless they toyed with this idea in the Jumo 212 (2xJumo 213) or the Jumo 215 (2xJumo 214), according Reinhard Müller`s "Junkers Flugtriebwerke".

I suppose the glittering prize for a successful linked engine was a lot of power for a relatively modest increase in drag. Calum would know better than I why they persisted with the idea so long. I actually asked Calum whether the British ever considered linking two Merlins - he said he would be surprised if it had never been suggested but there was no known evidence of it.

Another interesting by-product of this subject would be to know if the linked engine was to be tandem or side-by-side. Given the airframe (Ho 229) it probably would be side by side, with a rear propeller. Smith and Kay also mentioned such a design.

What do they say about it? Also, although Nicolaus says that the Henschel flying wing destroyer was based on the H IX, the actual dimensions of it (length and wingspan) - while in the ballpark - are not exactly the same. It doesn't seem as though it would be possible to take a standard H IX wing and just refit it to make the P 132.

 

[Wurger]

Something really puzzling/interesting is the linked Jumo 213. Junkers Motoren wasn`t very keen on these "gruppenmotoren" given Daimler-Benz`s bad experience. Nevertheless they toyed with this idea in the Jumo 212 (2xJumo 213) or the Jumo 215 (2xJumo 214), according Reinhard Müller`s "Junkers Flugtriebwerke".

I suppose the glittering prize for a successful linked engine was a lot of power for a relatively modest increase in drag. Calum would know better than I why they persisted with the idea so long. I actually asked Calum whether the British ever considered linking two Merlins - he said he would be surprised if it had never been suggested but there was no known evidence of it.

Another interesting by-product of this subject would be to know if the linked engine was to be tandem or side-by-side. Given the airframe (Ho 229) it probably would be side by side, with a rear propeller. Smith and Kay also mentioned such a design.

Or, as evidenced in the literature, could be a H-24 engine. This way it would`t be a "linked" engine.

 

[newsdeskdan]

Something really puzzling/interesting is the linked Jumo 213. Junkers Motoren wasn`t very keen on these "gruppenmotoren" given Daimler-Benz`s bad experience. Nevertheless they toyed with this idea in the Jumo 212 (2xJumo 213) or the Jumo 215 (2xJumo 214), according Reinhard Müller`s "Junkers Flugtriebwerke".

I suppose the glittering prize for a successful linked engine was a lot of power for a relatively modest increase in drag. Calum would know better than I why they persisted with the idea so long. I actually asked Calum whether the British ever considered linking two Merlins - he said he would be surprised if it had never been suggested but there was no known evidence of it.

Another interesting by-product of this subject would be to know if the linked engine was to be tandem or side-by-side. Given the airframe (Ho 229) it probably would be side by side, with a rear propeller. Smith and Kay also mentioned such a design.

Or, as evidenced in the literature, could be a H-24 engine. This way it would`t be a "linked" engine.

Nicolaus's note seems to stress the limited time available for the project. You would have thought, with this in mind, that an 'off the peg' engine - one that was basically ready to install - would have been chosen over something requiring lots of development and testing.

 

[Wurger]

Something really puzzling/interesting is the linked Jumo 213. Junkers Motoren wasn`t very keen on these "gruppenmotoren" given Daimler-Benz`s bad experience. Nevertheless they toyed with this idea in the Jumo 212 (2xJumo 213) or the Jumo 215 (2xJumo 214), according Reinhard Müller`s "Junkers Flugtriebwerke".

I suppose the glittering prize for a successful linked engine was a lot of power for a relatively modest increase in drag. Calum would know better than I why they persisted with the idea so long. I actually asked Calum whether the British ever considered linking two Merlins - he said he would be surprised if it had never been suggested but there was no known evidence of it.

Another interesting by-product of this subject would be to know if the linked engine was to be tandem or side-by-side. Given the airframe (Ho 229) it probably would be side by side, with a rear propeller. Smith and Kay also mentioned such a design.

Or, as evidenced in the literature, could be a H-24 engine. This way it would`t be a "linked" engine.

Nicolaus's note seems to stress the limited time available for the project. You would have thought, with this in mind, that an 'off the peg' engine - one that was basically ready to install - would have been chosen over something requiring lots of development and testing.

Then, the simplest way was to link engines through shafts like DB`s

Something really puzzling/interesting is the linked Jumo 213. Junkers Motoren wasn`t very keen on these "gruppenmotoren" given Daimler-Benz`s bad experience. Nevertheless they toyed with this idea in the Jumo 212 (2xJumo 213) or the Jumo 215 (2xJumo 214), according Reinhard Müller`s "Junkers Flugtriebwerke".

I suppose the glittering prize for a successful linked engine was a lot of power for a relatively modest increase in drag. Calum would know better than I why they persisted with the idea so long. I actually asked Calum whether the British ever considered linking two Merlins - he said he would be surprised if it had never been suggested but there was no known evidence of it.

Another interesting by-product of this subject would be to know if the linked engine was to be tandem or side-by-side. Given the airframe (Ho 229) it probably would be side by side, with a rear propeller. Smith and Kay also mentioned such a design.

Or, as evidenced in the literature, could be a H-24 engine. This way it would`t be a "linked" engine.

Nicolaus's note seems to stress the limited time available for the project. You would have thought, with this in mind, that an 'off the peg' engine - one that was basically ready to install - would have been chosen over something requiring lots of development and testing.

If memory doesn`t fail me this flying wing would sport a Henschel Hs-129 cockpit, with a rear propeller. It somehow fits in the "zerstörer" or "schlachtflugzeug"category.

 

[iverson]

Something really puzzling/interesting is the linked Jumo 213. Junkers Motoren wasn`t very keen on these "gruppenmotoren" given Daimler-Benz`s bad experience. Nevertheless they toyed with this idea in the Jumo 212 (2xJumo 213) or the Jumo 215 (2xJumo 214), according Reinhard Müller`s "Junkers Flugtriebwerke".

I suppose the glittering prize for a successful linked engine was a lot of power for a relatively modest increase in drag. Calum would know better than I why they persisted with the idea so long. I actually asked Calum whether the British ever considered linking two Merlins - he said he would be surprised if it had never been suggested but there was no known evidence of it.

Allison's V-3420 was, technically, very successful, even if it was not widely used. So I doubt that there was anything inherently wrong with the idea. It just required good engineering and systematic development.

 

[newsdeskdan]

>If memory doesn`t fail me this flying wing would sport a Henschel Hs-129 cockpit, with a rear propeller. It somehow fits in the "zerstörer" or "schlachtflugzeug"category.

I don't know of any evidence linking the flying wing to the Hs 129's cockpit, and in both known sources it's said to be a two-seat Zerstoerer, rather than a ground-attack aircraft. The 'ground attack' section of Nicolaus's report, however, does mention a couple of different projects in connection with Hs 129 cockpits. One of them is an Me 210 with BMW 801s and with an Hs 129 cockpit attached.

 

[newsdeskdan]

Something really puzzling/interesting is the linked Jumo 213. Junkers Motoren wasn`t very keen on these "gruppenmotoren" given Daimler-Benz`s bad experience. Nevertheless they toyed with this idea in the Jumo 212 (2xJumo 213) or the Jumo 215 (2xJumo 214), according Reinhard Müller`s "Junkers Flugtriebwerke".

I suppose the glittering prize for a successful linked engine was a lot of power for a relatively modest increase in drag. Calum would know better than I why they persisted with the idea so long. I actually asked Calum whether the British ever considered linking two Merlins - he said he would be surprised if it had never been suggested but there was no known evidence of it.

Allison's V-3420 was, technically, very successful, even if it was not widely used. So I doubt that there was anything inherently wrong with the idea. It just required good engineering and systematic development.

Another point for Calum Douglas to pick up! I don't know the technical ins and outs myself but I would hamper a guess that the Americans could make it work because they had superior materials. Whereas the Germans, particularly during the war itself, were hampered by petrochemical and metallurgical issues.

 

[Wurger]

Smith/Kay`s "German Aircraft of World war Two". page 339, state this Ho 229 was to field a single 1,750 Hp Jumo 213 engine installed as a pusher.

 

[newsdeskdan]

Smith/Kay`s "German Aircraft of World war Two". page 339, state this Ho 229 was to field a single 1,750 Hp Jumo 213 engine installed as a pusher.

I've got the book somewhere - I'll go dig it out. Worth bearing in mind, though, that this was Smith/Kay before they really got good - particularly Smith.

 

[Wurger]

Smith/Kay`s "German Aircraft of World war Two". page 339, state this Ho 229 was to field a single 1,750 Hp Jumo 213 engine installed as a pusher.

I've got the book somewhere - I'll go dig it out. Worth bearing in mind, though, that this was Smith/Kay before they really got good - particularly Smith.

They also stressed that this flying wing would have a Hs 129 cockpit, same as a Ju 188 with 2 Jumo 222`s.

 

[newsdeskdan]

Smith/Kay`s "German Aircraft of World war Two". page 339, state this Ho 229 was to field a single 1,750 Hp Jumo 213 engine installed as a pusher.

I've got the book somewhere - I'll go dig it out. Worth bearing in mind, though, that this was Smith/Kay before they really got good - particularly Smith.

They also stressed that this flying wing would have a Hs 129 cockpit, same as a Ju 188 with 2 Jumo 222`s.

No, they've messed that up. There are three separate Zerstoerer designs listed in Nicolaus's report, presented as bullet points - a), b) and c).
a) is something similar to the Bf 110.
The exact text for b) is as follows:
"Die im Jahre 1944 immer grosser werdende Ueberlegenheit des Begleitschutzes der Bomberverbaende veranlasste uns in Anbetracht der schwierigen Beschaffungslage, eine Variation der Ju 188 als Zerstoerer vorzuschlagen, bei der wir den Fluegel, das Fahrwerk und das Rumpfheck uebernehmen wollten und als Triebwerk das von uns entwickelte Triebwerke Jumo 222 vorsahen. Der Rumpfbug und das Rumpfmittelteil enthielten eine nach den Erfahrungen der Hs 129 entworfene, stark gepanzerte Fuehrerkabine mit schweren Angriffswaffen (Schusswaffen und Raketengeschuetze) einschliesslich einem Satz Waffen zum Schraegschuss nach oben und einen ebenfalls stark gepanzerten Schuetzenstand. Der Schuetze sollte aehnlich wie in Hs 130 E ueber ein Periskop mit Ausblick oben und unten je einem Zwillingsstand Mg 131 auf dem Rumpfruecken und auf der Rumpfunterseite bedienen zusaetzlich zu einem MG 151 im Rumpfheck. Die grossen Brennstoffbehaelter hatten starken Gummischutz und lagen ebenfalls unter Panzer."
I read this as a destroyer based on the Ju 188 and powered by two Jumo 222s. It doesn't have an Hs 129 cockpit - the cockpit was just designed based on experience with the Hs 129 cockpit. Not quite the same thing! And nothing in there suggests to me that it's a flying wing.
Then, point c) says (again, exact quote):
"Im Jahre 1944 wurden gewisse Hoffnungen terminlicher und leistungsmaessiger Art an die Fertigstellung der Horten IX geknuepft die wir allerdings auf Grund der uns uebertragenen Nachpruefung zerstoeren mussten. Immerhin schien gegenueber Lippisch ein zeitlicher Votsprung zu bestehen. Wir kamen deshalb dem Wunsche des RLM nach und projektierten zu dem Fluegel der Ho IX einen Zerstoerer. Er hatte einen Fuehrer und einen Funker, beide unter Panzerschutz und schwere Angriffs-, jedoch keine Abwehrwaffen. Als Triebwerk wurde ein Doppelmotor Jumo 213 vorgesehen mit gegenlaeufigen Schrauben im Rumpfheck.
Die erwartete Hoechstgeschwindigkeit lag bei grosser Reichweite meiner Erinnerung nach bei 780km/h.
Entgegen dem Horten-Entwurf hatten wir ein zentrales Seitenleitwerk vorgesehen."
This is a different project from the Ju 188-based design outlined in b). I read it as a flying wing based on the H IX with a contra-rotating pusher prop driven by a double Jumo 213.

It's hard to know what to say about Smith/Kay's 1972 book. Smith in particular is a superb researcher and went on to write some incredible ground-breaking books - the best that exist in many cases. However, I believe that he was still finding his feet in 1972. German Aircraft of World War Two wasn't based entirely on primary source documents - it also appears to be the source of the erroneous and pervasive expression 'Emergency Fighter Competition' (it uses this expression to refer to the 1-TL-Jaeger contest which produced the Messerschmitt P 1101, Junkers EF 128, Blohm & Voss P 212 and Ta 183 among others). I think it must, now, be regarded as unreliable.

 

[Arjen]

The 2002 revised edition of German Aircraft of the Second World War - p.171 - retains the exact same text on the adaptation of the Hs 129's armoured cockpit on the Ju 188 and Go 229 airframes.
Likewise for the text about the Emergency Fighter Competition - p.618 1st edition, p.218 revised edition.
No improvement there.

 

[newsdeskdan]

The 2002 revised edition of German Aircraft of the Second World War - p.171 - retains the exact same text on the adaptation of the Hs 129's armoured cockpit on the Ju 188 and Go 229 airframes.
Likewise for the text about the Emergency Fighter Competition - p.618 1st edition, p.218 revised edition.
No improvement there.

I wonder whether the 'revision' involved the text or just the layout and pics? IIRC the images in the original were very murky. I don't have the revised version. Nevertheless, and I can't speak for the rest of it, in those two respects the book's text is demonstrably inaccurate.

 

[Arjen]

Changes in the revised edition:
- Different format.
- New introduction.
- Revised appendix 1 - type list.
- New appendix - surviving aircraft.
- Better reproduction of photos, mostly new ones, most old ones deleted. More images in the first edition.
- Easier on the eye, although the original edition is sort-of-OK.
- Few, if any alterations to the text, apart from the ones mentioned above.

 

[newsdeskdan]

Changes in the revised edition:
- Different format.
- New introduction.
- Revised appendix 1 - type list.
- New appendix - surviving aircraft.
- Better reproduction of photos, mostly new ones, most old ones deleted. More images in the first edition.
- Easier on the eye, although the original edition is sort-of-OK.
- Few, if any alterations to the text, apart from the ones mentioned above.

To be fair, the focus of Smith, Creek and Kay's work was seldom on unbuilt projects. They have consistently expended their greatest efforts on built types, particularly prototypes, with only a cursory look at drawing board designs. Perhaps they simply didn't realise there was anything wrong with their description of Henschel's projects. The oddest thing is that they seem to have the details - but perhaps misinterpreted and/or mistranslated - or filtered through a third party who did the misinterpreting/mistranslating. For absolute avoidance of doubt, here are the relevant pages from Nicolaus's report.

 

[Arjen]

I never regretted buying any of the Putnam titles, my primary interest is in built types.
This kind of thread gives me access to material I wouldn't have dreamed of reading when I started my hobby. Big thanks.

 

[hesham]

Henschel Hs.132 developed early as a Henschel P.123.

The source;

"X-planes - German Luftwaffe Prototypes 1930-1945" by Manfred Griehl, Casemate 2012

My dear Dan,

I hope to unveiled this also ?.

 

[newsdeskdan]

Henschel Hs.132 developed early as a Henschel P.123.

The source;

"X-planes - German Luftwaffe Prototypes 1930-1945" by Manfred Griehl, Casemate 2012

My dear Dan,

I hope to unveiled this also ?.

I've never seen a primary source document which states that the Hs 132 was begun as the P 123 but it seems plausible.

The 1944 flying wing seems likely to have been the P 132 (it gets confusing when the same three digits are used for a project, the production version of that project and then a different project!). I may publish the full Henschel P 132 spec sheet I retrieved from the Horten papers at some point. It has full dimensional details and, based on the description, it might be possible for someone to create a 'speculative' image of it which isn't too far off reality.
The same microfilmed bundle of papers also includes a drawing of a substantially different variant of a well-known powered Horten type which I will no doubt also be publishing at some point.