"Wildgans", "Libelle", "Wespe", P.1106: bogus Messerschmitt Projects?

[Zizi6785]

Me P.1106B (???)

New what-if project or real? A don't remember two-set version and the wing shape is different too.

 

[Michel Van]

Re: Me P.1106B (???)

sadly it is fake from post war era
more info here
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,20040.msg254291.html#msg254291
and here
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,6587.0.html

 

[Zizi6785]

Re: Me P.1106B (???)

sadly it is fake from post war era
more info here
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,20040.msg254291.html#msg254291
and here
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,6587.0.html

Yes, it is fake, but not from post war era, it is from this year

 

[airman]

Re: Me P.1106B (???)

Can be described also a " what if " around the real project Me.P1106 !

 

[hesham]

Hi,

with great respect to all members here,I agree with you as they were a bogus Projects,but can anyone
give us a reliable source,say they were a fake ?.

About no numbered for them,I want to say; Messerschmitt had probably anther series as I know,for
example the P.65 was redesigned as P.1065,and a Germany sources said that; those Projects were
appeared from February to April 1945 ?!,(some magazines and books).

 

[Orionblamblam]

And Did someone have more info about Zestrorer I concept?

It's *not* a zerstorer. The earliest publication of that diagram that anyone has found was a few years post-war, and was not described as a wartime design; it was called a passenger transport. And if you look at it, you can see the passenger windows. Windows that do *not* make sense for a military aircraft

What it appears to be is a rocket-boosted ramjet or turbojet powered high speed jetliner.

 

[GTX]

with great respect to all members here,I agree with you as they were a bogus Projects,but can anyone
give us a reliable source,say they were a fake ?.

Are you actually asking for proof that they were fake?

 

[hesham]

with great respect to all members here,I agree with you as they were a bogus Projects,but can anyone
give us a reliable source,say they were a fake ?.

Are you actually asking for proof that they were fake?

Yes my dear GTX.

 

[newsdeskdan]

with great respect to all members here,I agree with you as they were a bogus Projects,but can anyone
give us a reliable source,say they were a fake ?.

Are you actually asking for proof that they were fake?

Yes my dear GTX.

In order to get definitive proof, you would need to find whoever the anonymous source was who handed them to Karl Pawlas in the mid-1970s. The appearance of these designs in Luftfahrt International Nr. 18 of 1976 was the first time anyone had ever seen them and is the only source for them. Pawlas himself, who clearly stated in the article that they could be postwar designs, died in 2014 so we can't ask him (it'd be great if someone in Germany could track down his family and see whether it'd be possible to access his personal archive, if it still survives).
The evidence for the 'animal names' designs is circumstantial but take a look at the 'P 1106' and 'P 1108' which appear alongside them and are presumably from the same source. In both cases, the designs broadly resemble the Messerschmitt originals - which we now have - but are 'off' in several respects, as though they have been drawn from memory.
What I would say is, we unfortunately cannot be 100% certain that the 'animal names' designs are fake. Maybe 99% but not 100%. And there are still Messerschmitt designs out there, I think, that no one has yet seen. For example, I have a report on an interview with Ludwig Bölkow - who was in charge of the P 1108 project - in which he states that among the configurations considered for the P 1108 was one with forward-swept wings. Given that the P 1108 is very nearly a flying wing, that must've been one heck of a design and one that no one's yet seen. So no proof unless you can track down Pawlas' family, access his archive, track down the anonymous drawing donor and extract some sort of confession from him.

 

[hesham]

Thank you my dear Dan,

and I think a great magazine (Luftfahrt) didn't chance by its reputation and published a fake designs,second,for
the drawings were very close to P.1106 & P.1108,I give you an example,I am a very small designer of aircraft,I created
about 30 types,in many of them,you will see front nose,wings shape,landing gear and tail unit were resemble
to each other,that's a clue for me the creator,in the same case the Messerschmitt.

 

[newsdeskdan]

Thank you my dear Dan,

and I think a great magazine (Luftfahrt) didn't chance by its reputation and published a fake designs,second,for
the drawings were very close to P.1106 & P.1108,I give you an example,I am a very small designer of aircraft,I created
about 30 types,in many of them,you will see front nose,wings shape,landing gear and tail unit were resemble
to each other,that's a clue for me the creator,in the same case the Messerschmitt.

I admire your persistence in believing in a fantasy. Pawlas thought they were probably fake, and there's a 99% chance that they are. Surely it's better to go looking for the real lost Messerschmitt designs than keep on clinging to these dodgy doodles.

 

[hesham]

I don't believe in fantasy at all,by who rejected those Projects can't give us a reliable source to confirm.

 

[newsdeskdan]

Leaving aside the fact that Pawlas put them in Luftfahrt International, persuade me that you're right, and that they're real. What is it about them that convinces you?

 

[hesham]

Leaving aside the fact that Pawlas put them in Luftfahrt International, persuade me that you're right, and that they're real. What is it about them that convinces you?

Of course not,a reliable source only.

 

[Orionblamblam]

Aviation Week is considered a reliable source, yet they've published incorrect, goofy and just plain unsubstantiated stuff from time to time (Soviet atomic bombers, "flaming pumpkin seeds," Aurora sightings, etc.).

Luftfarht Intl. also published nonsense about German wartime flying saucers.

 

[newsdeskdan]

Leaving aside the fact that Pawlas put them in Luftfahrt International, persuade me that you're right, and that they're real. What is it about them that convinces you?

Of course not,a reliable source only.

I wouldn't characterise Pawlas as entirely reliable. He did invaluable work in printing facsimiles of original documents but as a writer, editor and critic he was very much of his time. The most reliable German secret projects author seems so far to be Walter Schick and even he wasn't above getting things wrong. Creek and Smith are generally good, Forsyth too, and Lommel. Griehl has his moments. Not one of them is entirely infallible.

 

[hesham]

Of course not,a reliable source only.

That's your guess,speculation and opinion,not convince me,maybe all of them were fake,but as I learned in this great site,
only reliable source can confirm that.

In the book; Die Deutsche Luftruestung 1933-1945 - Vol.3 - Henschel-Messerschmitt,which my dear Justo quote from it in
rely # 15,they insisted about those were a real Projects,and even anther un-numbered Projects consider a real in that bible,
and I am asking,why you don't object on those Projects also ?!.

 

[newsdeskdan]

Of course not,a reliable source only.

That's your guess,speculation and opinion,not convince me,maybe all of them were fake,but as I learned in this great site,
only reliable source can confirm that.

In the book; Die Deutsche Luftruestung 1933-1945 - Vol.3 - Henschel-Messerschmitt,which my dear Justo quote from it in
rely # 15,they insisted about those were a real Projects,and even anther un-numbered Projects consider a real in that bible,
and I am asking,why you don't object on those Projects also ?!.

I have that book, and some bits and pieces from Nowarra's collection which was broken up and sold after his death. The first drawing is from a 1950s report that's unrelated to Messerschmitt - there was a copy of it on eBay a couple of years back. I'm guessing it got lumped in with 'Messerschmitt' because of its P 1109-ish layout. The second drawing is one of the 1976 animal names designs (Nowarra was writing in the early 1990s) and the third one I don't know, although I vaguely recall seeing it somewhere other than Nowarra's chuck-absolutely-everything-in-no-matter-where-you-got-it four volume set. The first one is definitely not Messerschmitt, the second is 99% likely to be not Messerschmitt and the third, don't know.

EDIT: Knew I'd seen that third drawing somewhere before. It's on p174 of Dieter Herwig and Heinz Rode's Luftwaffe Secret Projects: Ground Attack and Special Purpose Aircraft, only they show the actual drawing (apparently the same design appeared in Messerschmitt drawing XVIII/104 and XVIII/105) rather than a poor re-draw. As an aside, I'd suggest that the text accompanying both the Nowarra image and the Herwig/Rode one is, well, wrong. I'd further suggest that very little is known about the XVIII/104 and XVIII/105 drawings other than what's actually written on them. And we don't get to see XVIII/105.

 

[hesham]

Aviation Week is considered a reliable source, yet they've published incorrect, goofy and just plain unsubstantiated stuff from time to time (Soviet atomic bombers, "flaming pumpkin seeds," Aurora sightings, etc.).

Luftfarht Intl. also published nonsense about German wartime flying saucers.

No way to compare,AW displayed just a speculative designs,but for Luftfahrt,they introduced a real Projects
depended on Pawlas report or source,I can't imagine he faked all those and not enough,but lied on people
to submit a fantasy concepts,how come ?.

For flying saucers,we know very well it was many real Luftwaffe Projects in this field,so hard to judge.

 

[hesham]

From Jet Planes of the Third Reich - The Secret Projects-volume one,

the author claims that,the Messerschmitt Schwalbe maybe called P.1115,also some
drawings to P.1106.

 

[newsdeskdan]

From Jet Planes of the Third Reich - The Secret Projects-volume one,

the author claims that,the Messerschmitt Schwalbe maybe called P.1115,also some
drawings to P.1106.

Strange that the P 1106 should have been included in this topic, since it was real! Maybe it was meant to be the P 1116, which wasn't.

 

[Sherman Tank]

I don't suppose there's much chance of these designs being genuine but misattributed to Messerschmitt, or is there?

 

[hesham]

From Ailes 8/1949.

 

[steelpillow]

I do wonder how fake these projects necessarily are. During these exploratory design studies, many variations would be considered and the possibility of support from various organizations sounded out; any hint of interest would result in a new variant with the latest thinking tailored to the requirement. Information on these projects is extremely thin and vast amounts of papers were either destroyed or disappeared. It seems perfectly possible that an ex-employee squirreled away drawings of their pet projects or variants, drawings which have no other surviving data to corroborate them.

Dan's Luftwaffe:Secret Jets from 2015 has a nice pair of examples on P.126, in the Blohm & Voss Ae 607 and MGRP. Lumped in the same "Unknown!" section as these Messerschmitt designs, one turned out to be genuine, the other a case of mistaken identity. Dan himself subsequently unearthed the Ae 607 drawing, which showed that the earlier one had been mirror-flipped with the cockpit on the wrong side and spurious detail added. The MGRP turned out to be a project submitted in a quite different context by an independent maverick whose name I forget and somehow in the scarcity of published information got mis-attributed to B&V.

So when some guy walks into the office of a respected publisher with some apparently genuine documents and he sees fit to endorse them, in the absence of corroborative evidence one way or the other I can only wonder whether they are skillful forgeries or uniquely-preserved treasures.

Meanwhile I have come across a putative Messerschmitt P.1106T, a tailless navalised version of the P.1106. I cannot find any mention anywhere reputable. That's not to say there never was any. Um.

 

[iverson]

There is more to a project than an image, however authentic it might be. If Kurt Tank doodled something on his cocktail napkin during some interminable Goering speech, it's would be an authentic Tank doodle, not a project. A project implies a requirement, problems, constraints, and a sequence of investigations leading to an engineered solution, drawings, data, presentations, etc. A project is, in short, a history. So even if I was certain that my imagined cocktail napkin had Tank's actual pencil marks on it, I wouldn't find it very interesting, because it wouldn't say anything except that Tank was bored. I'd just auction off the napkin on eBay and forget about it.

 

[athpilot]

I´m still uncertain, if the Messerschmitt "Zerstörer" is fake or was a real project. Anyways unicraft complicated it further (at least for me) because they render/model it with three engines; I always thought it had only one (in the fuselage).