Austro-Hungarian Drachenballon in 1917 [US National Archives]The Parseval-Sigsfeld Drachenballon was a German observation balloon designed to replace the older spherical-type balloons used for nearly a century. The balloon would be designed in such a way that it would face into the wind, and be much more stable over its predecessor, using design attributes similar to kites. The Drachenballon would be used in several wars over its lifetime, including widespread use during the First World War. Here, it saw service on almost all fronts, and would even be copied by the Allies. The type would eventually be replaced by the much more stable Caquot/Type Ae 800 observation balloons in 1916, but despite this would continue to see service until the 1920s.
The Spherical Balloon: An Outdated Design
Two German spherical balloons in 1896. These balloons could only be used in good wind conditions, any rough weather would jostle the balloon around. [Waffen Arsenal 149]The idea of using balloons as a means of observation in war dates back nearly to their initial conception in the late 1700s. An aerial observer allowed an army excellent view of the battlefield below, offering a strategic advantage over your enemies. The first time a balloon would be used in war for this purpose would be at the Battle of Fleurus in 1794 during the French Revolution. Balloons would continue being used in several smaller roles in later wars, such as the American Civil War and the Boer Wars, but would never see widespread use in large numbers. Beginning in the late 1800s, balloon corps began forming in sufficient numbers, all using the same type of spherical tethered balloon design that had been used for nearly a century without design changes. While it allowed observers to be elevated to altitudes sufficient to observe the battle, it was not the most stable of designs. Spherical balloons, when encountering even a light wind, would be thrown about. This severely limited when the balloon could operate, as even slightly windy days could prevent the aircraft from operating efficiently. The swaying from the wind also made it difficult for the operators to observe the battle and would oftentimes make them very air sick. Despite this, the design was the only type of observation balloon used for nearly a century.
Two French Type H balloons with a Type E spherical balloon. [Imperial War Museum]
The Parseval-Sigsfeld Drachenballon
Diagram of a Drachenballon from Balloons and Airships, 1783-1973
The German Empire was no exception in this field and had their own balloon corps formed after seeing the success of observation balloons in the American Civil War. Like the rest of the world, they too would use the simple spherical balloon type until the 1890s. In the early 1890s, two German officials; Major August Von Parseval and Captain H Bartsch von Sigsfeld began working together to create a new type of balloon to address the problems associated with spherical balloons. The two had extensive experience with designing and using balloons for military applications. Attempts to remedy the old spherical balloon had been attempted in the past, but none of these would ever be successful. Parseval and Sigsfeld would use the knowledge gained from these past attempts to develop their own replacement. Testing of the new type began in 1893. Many different shapes, sizes and layouts were tested over several years, until in 1898, the final design for their observation balloon was completed. The new design was named the Drachenballon, literally ‘kite balloon,’ as it would glide with the wind, with the German spelling ‘ballon.’ The balloon was designed in such a way that it would face into the wind, instead of being blown around by it. Balloons designed in this way would from then on be called kite balloons. The Drachenballon would mostly serve as a captive balloon, or one that was connected to the ground via a cable. With the design proving to be a major improvement over the old spherical balloons, mass production soon commenced. Production of the type initially began at the August Ridinger plant in Augsburg, Germany. Here the balloons would be produced as well as the vehicles necessary to transport and support the balloons. The type quickly became the mainstay for the German Military for aerial observation duties, both by the German Army and the German Navy. For the Navy, Drachenballons would be carried aboard large warships and sent up for rangefinding and battle observation. Despite being superior to the spherical balloons, the two types were still used together in balloon companies until the early 1900s when the Drachenballon completely replaced the older spherical type.
Design
Two German Drachenballons in different colors. The closest is painted green while the background is tan. The tan balloon’s ballonet isn’t inflated yet. [Waffen Arsenal 149]The Drachenballon was a captive observation balloon developed for the German Empire. The main body consisted of a large cylinder shape made out of rubberized fabric that was filled with hydrogen gas. Gas pressure and release was regulated by a valve in the nose of the balloon. It could do so automatically, or manually via rope. At the rear of the body was an internal air bag, or ballonet, that was filled with air via the wind to keep the balloon’s shape if the hydrogen gas bag was not fully filled yet. Underneath the ballonet was an air inlet that was fed directly by the wind. On the underside of the front of the balloon was its neck, where the hydrogen gas would be pumped into the gas bag while it was on the ground. Two valves placed on each side of the gas bag/ballonet could be opened to quickly release the gas/air and descend. On each side of the balloon’s body was a small stabilizing fin. Early examples of these were triangular in shape, but they became rectangular near the outbreak of World War I. At the back of the body was a steering bag that was sewn on. The steering bag was made of regular fabric and was designed to keep the balloon stable and facing into the wind. The steering bag was inflated by wind via a large intake at the bottom of the bag facing forward, and a smaller intake located on the bag itself. At the top of the steering bag was a safety valve that permitted excess air to escape. The steering bag was held together via rigging to the main body. Connected to the steering bag was the tail of the balloon, which was a long cable with up to 6 removable tail cups, resembling small parachutes which trailed behind the main balloon, that helped with stabilization. The balloon would face towards the wind at an angle of 30-40 degrees. Slightly below the equator of the balloon was the balloon girdle. This was made of rubber and served as the attachment point for all of the balloon’s rigging. Various ropes were used for the rigging, which kept the different parts of the balloon together. Three colors of rope were used to differentiate their specific sections; white, red and blue. Blue rope was rigging for the steering bag, white rope was for cable rigging and red ropes connected to the observer’s basket. It is unknown if rope colors were used throughout its service or if the copies used by the Allies also used colored ropes. The cable that connected the balloon to the ground and the ropes that connected the basket were different ropes and were not connected together. On the ground, the steel mooring line was connected to a pulley that prevented the balloon from moving and could lower or raise the balloon at will.
A balloon operator fires a signal gun in the basket of a German Drachenballon. [US National Archives]The basket of the Drachenballon was made of willow and bamboo and was secured to the balloon by four ropes. These ropes were adjustable by the crew to prevent the basket from swinging around. Accommodations for the observer were located in the basket. A telephone could be placed in the basket and would have its cable connected to the ground via an internal wire that went through the mooring cable. Two pockets were located inside the basket to store equipment, as well as ten metal cases to protect valuable reports. Once a report was finished, it was put into a case and dropped from the balloon to the ground. Flags were put on the cases to help the ground crew find them more easily. Standard operating height for captive observation balloons were 500m, but if the weather was rough, the balloon would be raised to 300m instead. The larger Drachenballon variants created during the First World War would be able to achieve a maximum height of 2,000 meters. Inflation of the balloon would take 15 minutes, with ascension taking 10 minutes and descent taking 5 minutes. Equipment used by the observer included maps, notebooks, two signal flags (one red, one white), a barometer, a knife, two looking glasses of varying magnification, and a signal disk to show what commands could be done with the flags. Later on during the First World War, parachutes would also become standard onboard equipment. Additional equipment that could be carried included signal flares, a flare gun, or a camera. On Drachenballons used by the Navy or aboard ships, life preservers were standard issue. A single observer would remain in the basket during operations but up to 48 men made up the ground crew that would handle moving, inflating, deflating, and transporting the balloon and its associated equipment.
A German Drachenballon being fired upon by flak. [Imperial War Museum]The Drachenballon would be used for observation of enemy troop positions and movements, and would report on the current situation of the battle. Gun sighting and fire correction were also reported during battle to adjust the accuracy of artillery used near the balloon. Aboard ships, the Drachenballon was used for rangefinding purposes. During the First World War, submarine spotting was an additional duty naval Drachenballons were used for.
Drachenballons of the German Army were standard tan or dark green in color. On the sides and on the underside was an Iron Cross emblem to identify its operator. Allied countries would not have these emblems on their balloons and their exact colors are unknown. Russian Drachenballons were known to be white.
The 1900s: The Drachenballon Goes To War
A German Drachenballon prepares to go up, 1915. [Rolf Kranz]The Drachenballon would see its first operational use in wartime in 1904 during the Russo-Japanese war. Imperial Russia had acquired several Drachenballons from Germany around the outbreak of the war, and would use them in the conflict. The first battle Drachenballons would be used in would be the Battle of Port Arthur. Aside from land usage, the balloons were also used by the Russian Navy, one such Drachenballon was used aboard the Armored Cruiser Rossia for observational duties and for directing fire of the main guns. The balloons would be used through the war until the final battle at Mukden.
Drachenballon on the Eastern Front in 1916. [Waffen Arsenal 149]In 1909, Sweden would purchase five Drachenballons from Germany to use for their military. The type would be named the Drakballong m/09, with three going to the Royal Swedish Army and two going to the Royal Swedish Navy. Two m/09s would be sent to the Swedish Balloon Corp stationed in Frosunda for training. The Swedish Royal Navy would purchase a barge from Britain and convert it into a balloon carrier. The ship would be designed to house and operate the two m/09s the navy operated and was named Ballongfartyget No 1. Sweden would continue to use the m/09 until 1926.
Also in 1909, Spain would use a Drachenballon they built from purchased plans during the Campaign of Millela.
In 1912, the Italians would use the Drachenballon during the Italian-Turkish War for observing Turkish positions. These were purchased from Germany. The Italian-Turkish War was a major stepping stone in regards to aviation, being the first use of combat aircraft in war, and would serve as a prelude to what was to come in only a few years. Italian Drachenballons would also be used during their involvement in the First Balkan War. Aside from Italy, Bulgaria would also use Drachenballons during this war.
Romanian operated Drachenballon. [Imperial War Museum]In 1914, Europe would be plunged into the First World War, with most armies across Europe participating in combat. Germany would enter the war only days after its start, first declaring war on Russia on August 1st, then against France on the 3rd. Despite declaring war in August, the first balloon companies wouldn’t see action until October. On the fronts, the Drachenballons were used as observation balloons and rangefinding for artillery. Each balloon company would be its own division in the army it was attached to. By the end of 1915, over 80 Drachenballons were in service with the German Army. The majority of the balloons used at this point were still 600 m³ volume, but newer 800 m³ and 1000 m³ volume models had begun production. The increase in size was to improve overall stability, and to allow greater altitude to be achieved. The largest type would be 1200 m³ volume. Austria-Hungary would receive several Drachenballons from Germany for their own armies to use. These balloons would be used on the Italian Front and several would be lost to enemy fighters. The Austria-Hungarian Navy would also use Drachenballons aboard ships. German Drachenballons saw mass deployment during the Battle of the Verdun in February of 1916, directing the large number of artillery regiment on the German side. Due to their success at Verdun, more balloon divisions were formed.
An interesting German Drachenballon. This particular example appears to be two tone colored [Imperial War Musuem]The shape of the Drachenballon became iconic in World War One, earning itself many nicknames. The most common was “sausage” in reference to its overall shape, and maybe its German origin. Many other nicknames were spawned from its overall shape, most of them phallic references. Overall, Allied countries would simply refer to them as kite balloons or shorten the name to just “Drachen”
Underside of an Drachenballon, the two side fins are clearly visible. [US National Archives]During the Battle of Flers, the first battle to use tanks operationally, the Mark I tank D17 “Dinnaken” fired once upon a German Drachenballon as it charged Flers. The shot is noted as either closely missing or hitting the kite balloon, but not destroying it. In response, the balloon was likely lowered by the observers and ground crew to avoid being fired upon again. The diary of the tank reported that Gunner Reiffer claimed that the balloon was brought down manually and that Gunner Boult was the one to claim the hit. This was later claimed by Reiffer as himself shooting down the balloon and destroying it in a 1963 book. This incident could be cited as the first “kill” of a tank in combat, but the balloon itself was not destroyed, making this claim untrue.
At the outset of the war, most Allied countries would still be using spherical balloons. France in particular had large numbers of the type in service, and Russia would still have their Drachenballons they had purchased from Germany in the early 1900s. Italy would also continue to use their Drachenballons from the previous war once they entered the fray. Belgium would start the war off with a single 800 m³ Drachenballon they had purchased from Germany years before. In late 1914, France would copy the Belgian Drachenballoon’s design and would begin mass producing the type under the name Ballon Captif Type H. The French would also begin selling the Type H to other allied nations. In February of 1915, British officials would do a test flight of a French Type H and would soon after make a purchase of an unknown amount of these balloons for their empire. After this, they would produce their own copied versions of this craft. Britain would make heavy use of Drachenballons on several of their fronts in the Royal Army, and with the Royal Navy. The Royal Navy would have several specially designed ships created solely for the purpose of carrying kite balloons during fleet operations. The early ships of this type would use Drachenballons. Several examples of these ships include the HMS Manica, HMS Hector and HMS City of Oxford, all of which were designed to carry and operate the Drachenballon. These balloons were used to not only observe and direct guns, but as the threat of submarines became more prevalent, the balloon operators began looking for submarines as well. Minesweeping also became a common use for RNAS (Royal Naval Air Service) Drachenballons, where the balloon would be raised to detect incoming mines from the air. Several other nations would end up using the Drachenballon, but the details of their acquisition and use are lacking. Romania and Switzerland are two such examples.
Balloon Observer jumps from a Drachenballon via parachute. The tail and its cups are clearly visible. [US National Archives]As the war went on, the use of combat airplanes increased. In particular, fighters began being produced in larger numbers. This posed a problem to the Drachenballon, as these large and stationary balloons became easy targets. Taking down a balloon was considered the same as shooting down an enemy plane, so the Drachenballon became a prime target for aviators. Many of the special weapons employed against airships were used against observation balloons, such as incendiary rounds designed to ignite the flammable hydrogen gas, or the fabric skin of the balloon. It therefore became imperative that the balloons be protected and defensive measures be developed. German Drachenballons began to be defended by a number of anti-aircraft guns and patrolling fighters, to protect the observers as they did their duty. Another improvement made was enhancing the performance of the electric winches which lowered the balloons, allowing the balloon to be brought closer to its defensive guns more quickly. These countermeasures made ‘balloon busting’ a much more hazardous job than before, as pilots had to get in close to the balloon to avoid encountering enemy defenses, as defenders would likely stop shooting at close range to avoid friendly fire on their balloons. Despite these improvements to defenses, balloon busting was still a job many pilots had to undertake, and for some pilots this was their only duty. A handful of pilots would be given the title of ace on destroying observation balloons alone. Interestingly, Drachenballon observers were the first on all sides to use parachutes in war, starting with Germany in 1915.
A US-operated Drachenballon at Fort Omaha, Nebraska in 1919. [US National Archives]America at some point would acquire or build their own versions of Drachenballons, however they also had their own kite balloon design. Ralph H. Upson, a balloon pioneer and engineer at Goodyear, designed his own improved kite balloon based on the Drachenballon. It would use his own stabilizing fin design, as well as remove the steering bag altogether, instead replacing it with an aerodynamic keel shaped bag that he thought would better flow with the wind. Two versions of this balloon exist, with the first essentially being a slightly modified Drachenballon. Despite this original design in use, America still operated a number of the standard Drachenballon copies. Two were stationed at the Fort Omaha Balloon school for training purposes. The first was nicknamed “Old Dutch” and its design differs from the standard appearance with it having an apparently different method of construction, and the side wings being much thicker. The second one stationed at Fort Omaha resembles the standard design of the Drachenballon. No evidence has been found that America’s Drachenballons were used in the First World War. By the time of their entry in the war, more advanced types had already been fielded, and the remaining Drachenballons would be used for training of the various balloon corps. Exactly how many Drachenballons were either built or used by the USA is unknown, as details are lacking.
The End of an Era: The Caquot and Type Ae 800
Type AE 800 in action. This was a copy of the French Caquot Type M balloon and would replace the Drachenballon in late 1916. [US National Archives]Despite its success replacing the spherical balloon, the Drachenballon didn’t fix all of the issues of its predecessor. Although it was designed to face the wind, it was found that at higher altitudes, winds would still move the balloon around to an extent that would limit the maximum effective altitude. No attempts from the Germans would be made to address this problem, instead it would be the French who would come up with an improvement to the design. In 1916, a French officer by the name of Albert Caquot began working on an intended replacement. Using the Drachenballon as a base, Caquot would come up with a new, much more stable design, the Ballon Type L. The Type L resembled the Drachenballon but had a much bigger steering bag that wrapped all the way around the rear of the aircraft in a single big fin. The type was further improved on with the Caquot Ballon Type M. The Type M balloon would have a much rounder shape than the Drachenballon. Instead of a single large fin at the bottom and two smaller stabilizer fins on each side, Caquot’s balloon would instead have 3 large, air-inflated fins placed 120 degrees apart from each other at the rear of the balloon. Caquot’s new balloon design was found to be completely superior to the Drachenballon in terms of stability. The placement of the fins helped keep the balloon steady in high winds, allowing the type to be much more stable and able to fly much higher. In due time, Caquot balloons entered mass production and were sent to the frontlines, replacing both the spherical balloons still in service and the Drachenballons. Soon, Britain and other Allied countries like Romania, began operating Caquot balloons as well. America would start their entrance to the war using Goodyear-built Caquots for their observation role.
In the later months of 1916, the German Army would capture a British Type M balloon. Coming loose due to a broken mooring cable, the balloon managed to drift behind German lines where it was captured. The German Army was quick to study the new design, and like the Allies, found it a much more stable design over the Drachen. The Germans would copy the Caquot design under the name Type Ae 800 (English Type, 800m3 volume) and would begin mass producing the type to replace their older Drachenballons. The Type Ae 800 became the standard observation balloon from this point forward for the German Army, and the Drachenballon would be slowly retired from service. During the Second World War, Germany would use a derivative design of the Type Ae 800 in the early stages of the war, as well as on the Eastern Front against the USSR. No further work on the Drachenballon was done by Germany after this point.
The Aftermath: Postwar Use-1920s
Basket of an Austro-Hungarian Drachenballon. [US National Archives]A total of 1,870 German balloons of both types were delivered to the front by the end of the war. With the signing of the armistice in 1918, all German observation balloons were ordered to be destroyed by the Allies under the Treaty of Versailles.With the primary user of the aircraft no longer able to operate it, and it already being replaced by a new type, one would think the story of the Drachenballon would end with the First World War. However, it would continue to be used in several countries for nearly a decade.
America would continue to operate their Drachenballons until at least 1919. By this point they had already been widely replaced years prior by the Caquot types. Because of this they were only used for training. Interestingly, at the Fort Omaha Balloon School, every type of balloon then in service was used, Drachenballons, Caquot, Goodyear/Upson, the Italian Avorio-Prassone, and even spherical balloons were still being operated until its closure in 1919.
In 1919, Poland would acquire a Drachenballon from a former German facility in Winiary, Poland. This Drachenballon would be used for training purposes for only a few months before being given to a museum in 1920.
Two USSR operated balloons in Red Square during a celebration, 1920. The foreground balloon appears to be a Caquot-type with its upper fins deflated while the background is a Drachenballon. [Waffen Arsenal 161]After the fall of Imperial Russia and the rise of the USSR in 1922, the Drachenballons operated by the former Empire would end up in the hands of the Soviets. These Drachenballons were used until at least 1925, and would be seen in parades and other exercises. The USSR would use the Drachenballon for a very interesting purpose. On several of their armored trains, a Drachenballon would be deployed from the train and would direct its artillery from above. These were eventually phased out of service.
Conclusion
British Army operated Drachenballon. [Imperial War Museum]Parseval and Sigfeld’s Drachenballon was an important evolutionary step in the design of the observation balloon, but it wasn’t the last. Although slightly mending the issue it was designed to solve, it would never completely overcome its stability problems, and was eventually replaced by a more advanced successor. Despite this, it served a crucial role in militaries across the world for the purpose of observation and artillery rangefinding for several decades, on land and sea.
After creating the balloon back in 1898, the two creators August Von Parseval and H Bartsch von Sigsfeld would continue to work with each other designing lighter-than-air aircraft. The two began working on an airship together until von Sigsfeld’s death in 1902 due to a ballooning accident involving a Drachenballon. Parseval would continue creating and building airships, some would rival even the larger Zeppelin airships in size, but they did not capture the same level of success.
A Swiss-operated Drachenballon before liftoff around the time of the First World War [Swiss Federal Archives]Italian Drachenballon being prepared for flight. [Imperial War Museum]British Royal Navy Drachenballon. These would serve on designated balloon ships for observation duties. [Imperial War Museum]A RNAS Drachenballon aboard the battleship HMS Benbow, 1916. [Wiki]British Army operated Drachenballon. [Imperial War Museum]To protect the balloon from weather, small sheds would be constructed in the field for cover. [Waffen Arsenal 149]
Variants
Parseval-Sigsfeld Drachenballon – The standard Parseval-Sigsfeld Drachenballon came in several volumes/sizes, but all retained the same shape and overall design.
Copied Drachenballon – The Drachenballon was copied by several countries without license. The designs of these copies may be consistent with the German design but some of these appear with details differing from the German version. The American “Old Dutch” Balloon appears to be one such example.
Ballon Captif Type H – French-built Drachenballons were given this designation.
Drakballong m/09 – Name given to five Drachenballons bought by Sweden.
Operators
German Empire – The Drachenballon was created by and widely used by the German Empire as a replacement for the spherical type. These would be produced through the 1890s until 1916 when the type would be replaced by the Type Ae 800 balloon.
Austro-Hungarian Empire – Austria-Hungary would use the Drachenballon as their main observation balloon during the First World War, being given to them by Germany.
British Empire – The United Kingdom would copy the Drachenballon for their own use. The type would be used by the British Royal Army and the British Royal Navy during the First World War. Several of the Empire’s Dominions would use the balloon as well, such as Canada.
France – France would begin copying the design in 1914 as the Ballon Captif Type H and would be used until 1916 in the First World War. These were tested to find out what could be improved on the design, which led to the creation of the Caquot balloons.
United States of America – The USA would operate Drachenballons until at least 1919. Several would be used during the Mexican Border War. The Drachenballon would serve as the basis of the Upson kite balloon.
Belgium – Belgium would operate a number of Drachenballons for observation use against the Germans in the First World War. They would purchase one years prior from Germany.
Romania – Romania would operate a number of Drachenballons during the Romanian campaign of the First World War.
Italy – Italy would use the Drachenballon during the Italian-Turkish War, First Balkan War and First World War.
Russian Empire – Imperial Russia would operate the Drachenballon by the White Army and the Imperial Navy. These would see combat operations during the Russo-Japanese War and the First World War.
Soviet Union – After the October Revolution, the USSR would use the Drachenballons used by the former Russian Empire for their own balloon corps. These would be used until at least 1925 when they were replaced by more advanced models.
Sweden –Sweden would purchase five Drachenballons from Germany in the early 1900s. These were given the designation of Drakballong m/09. Three would go to the Swedish Royal Army and two would go to the Swedish Royal Navy.
Poland – Poland would capture a single Drachenballon in 1919 and would use it for training purposes until 1920.
Spain –Spain would license build a single Drachenballon. It was used during the Campaign of Millelan.
Bulgaria – Bulgaria would operate the Drachenballon during the First Balkan War.
Switzerland – Switzerland operated an unknown amount of Drachenballons around the time of the First World War
Due to it being copied, several other countries could have ended up building their own versions or received some from the Allies or Germans.
A German Drachenballon, note the rope colorsAnother example of German Drachenballon with a lighter colored balloon material
Credits
Written by Medicman11
Edited by Stan L. & Henry H.
Illustrations by Ed Jackson
Sources
Angelucci, Enzo, and Paolo Matricardi. The Rand McNally encyclopedia of military aircraft, 1914-1980. New York Distributed by Crown Publishers: Military Press, 1983. Print.
Ege, Lennart A., et al. Balloons and airships, 1783-1973. London: Blandford Press, 1973. Print.
WAFFEN ARSENAL # 149: Deutsche Fessel- und Sperrballone 1900-1945+
WAFFEN ARSENAL # 161: Sperrballone über London-Moskau-Berlin 1917-1945
WIDMER, EMIL J. MILITARY OBSERVATION BALLOONS (CAPTIVE AND FREE) : a complete treatise on their manufacture, … equipment, inspection, and handling, with special. Place of publication not identified: FORGOTTEN Books, 2016. Print.
The strange looking DFW T28 Floh. [DFW Aircraft of WWI]The DFW T28 Floh (Flea) was an early biplane fighter designed for use by the German Empire. To get an edge over then current monoplane fighters, the T28 was designed with aerodynamics and speed in mind. The result was an aircraft that looked straight out of a cartoon. Despite its appearance, the aircraft performed well during testing, maxing out at 112mph (180 km/h). Although its speed was good, its large body and the placement of the wings reduced visibility for the pilot, making landings with the craft difficult. This was enough for officials to decline production of the type despite its respectable top speed.
History
In times of emergent technology, it goes without saying that many new endeavors are tested out. Many of these may seem strange to us now, but something odd looking to us could have been revolutionary for the time. This was no exception for aircraft in the First World War. Many different ideas were tested in the name of advancing aerodynamics. Some of these would end in blunders while others would be influential to aircraft design. A curious case of attempted aircraft advancement was the DFW T28, a plane that pushed records for speed, while looking downright comedic.
A frontal view of the Floh during taxxiing, the pilot had to stand up to even see while doing this. DFW C.Is are visible in the background. [DFW Aircraft of WWI]The Deutsche Flugzeugwerke (DFW) was a German aircraft manufacturer formed in 1910 that license-built French aircraft before the war. During the early years of the First World War, they would design and produce a number of two-seater aircraft types, both armed (C-Type) and unarmed (B-Type). No work was done on a fighter aircraft by DFW at the beginning of the war. Fighter aircraft weren’t as common by this point in the war as they would soon be known, with most types in production being German Eindecker (monoplane) designs like the Fokker E.I. Very few actual biplane fighters (D-Type) had been developed at this time, aside from a prototype or two. Despite this, the Eindecker showed its effectiveness and led to a period of time in 1915 where the air was dominated by the Germans, known as the “Fokker Scourge” to the allies.
Herman Dorner with his Floh. [DFW Aircraft of WWI]In mid 1915, a new head engineer, Dipl-Ing (Engineer) Hermann Dorner was appointed at DFW. Dorner was a German early aviation pioneer in the 1900s and 1910s, building gliders and powered aircraft alike. He had formed his own aircraft company in 1910, but due to poor business decisions on Dorner’s end, the company would be liquidated in 1913. He would go on to work as a teacher at the Adlershof flight school, as well as working for the Deutsche Versuchsanstalt für Luftfahrt (German Research Institute for Aviation) before finally being employed by DFW during the war. After joining DFW, Dorner began working on a new fighter aircraft project. Dorner took issue with the Eindeckers in service at the time, particularly relating to their speed. Despite their effectiveness, all of the Fokker Eindeckers built (E.I-E.IV), could not attain a speed faster than around 87mph (km/h). With newer Allied machines on the horizon, this speed wouldn’t give the Eindeckers an edge forever and a replacement was needed.
Dorner had speed in mind with his fighter design. His vision had the aircraft streamlined for aerodynamic flow. Overall the aircraft would be small and light in construction to reduce weight. Work began on a prototype of Dorner’s fighter in late 1915 at DFW’s facility in Lubeck-Travemunde. This facility primarily served as a flight school for DFW, and wasn’t their main factory. The construction of the aircraft, now known as the DFW T28 Floh, was supervised by Theo Rockenfeller at the plant. The final T28 looked like it flew straight out of a cartoon, possessing a very tall fuselage with small wings. This proportional difference made the aircraft appear more like a caricature than a combat aircraft of the time period. Despite its design, the aircraft was still designed for speed, and would have a 100hp (74.5kW) Mercedes D I engine, which was completely enclosed in the fuselage. Armament would be a single machine gun mounted in front of the pilot. The T28 would take flight shortly after its construction, but the exact date is unknown. The design choices of the aircraft to make it fly faster worked well, as it was able to achieve a top speed of 112 mph (180 km/h), which was extremely impressive for the time period. However, its design wasn’t perfect and the choices made to improve speed negatively affected other aspects of the aircraft, in particular, its landing characteristics. The tall profile of the craft, the location of the upper wing, and the placement of the pilot’s position, gave him a superb view above the plane but was severely restricted frontally and below. The prototype Floh would be damaged due to this reason upon landing on its first flight, due to the pilot misjudging his height, as well as having a fast landing speed. This issue also affected takeoff, as the high placement of the pilot required him to stand up during taxiing to see. The design was reworked a few times after its first flight, mainly with improving the tail surfaces. Despite achieving the speed Dorner wanted, the military officials showed little interest in the design, with some sources citing that it was just too fast for the military. Further work on the aircraft was stopped after this. Exactly what happened to the aircraft after being declined for production is unknown, whether it was simply scrapped or if it was continually used at DFW’s facilities for training and testing are possible theories. Many prototype German aircraft of the First World War would go on to serve as trainers for their various companies once production declined. The facility the T28 was built served as a flight training school for DFW after all.
Design
Rear view of the aircraft. [DFW Aircraft of WWI]The DFW T28 Floh was a biplane fighter designed in 1915 to supersede then in use Eindecker fighters. It had a length of 14ft 9in (4.3 m), a wingspan of 20ft 4in (6.2 m) and a height of 7ft 6in (2.3 m). The aircraft had a tall, flat sided fuselage constructed of wood. The fuselage would be sleek and rounded in design to reduce drag. Buried in the fuselage was a 100hp (74.5kW) Mercedes D.I engine. The aircraft had a large wooden propeller, with a relatively small landing gear mounted far forward with two wheels almost at the nose of, accompanied by a landing skid at the end of the tail. The short wings were fabric covered with wooden ribs. The wings themselves were single bay, meaning only one pair of support struts between the upper and lower wing. The upper wings were placed in a way that restricted the pilot’s vision downward and forward. Behind the wings and engine in the fuselage sat the pilot. Two cutouts were made into the left side of the fuselage for the pilot to climb up into the cockpit. Toward the rear of the fuselage the tail would taper. At the end were the horizontal and vertical stabilizers. The vertical stabilizer itself acted as the rudder and was completely movable. The elevators were originally the same width as the horizontal stabilizers but these were modified later into testing to be wider to increase performance.
For armament, a single synchronized machine gun was fitted in front of the pilot.
A side view of the Floh, its strange proportions are clearly evident. [DFW Aircraft of WWI]
Conclusion
The T28 Floh was a very interesting concept for a fast fighter at a time where biplanes weren’t yet used in such a role in German service. Its design choices might seem strange now, but they meshed together to create a truly fast aircraft of the time. The design however, was troubled by problems that would see it fail to enter widespread production, and eventually more conventional biplane fighter designs would enter service less than a year after the Floh was built. DFW would eventually produce several conventional biplane fighter prototypes later on in the war in 1917 and 1918, but these all performed very poorly. Aside from having structural problems and a poor field of view, the last of these, the D.II, was in fact slower than the Floh.
Dorner would continue working for DFW designing aircraft. His next project after the Floh would be the much more successful DFW R.I Reisenflugzeug (Giant Aircraft), which would first fly in 1916. Dorner, however, wouldn’t stay with the company to see the completion of this project and its success, as he would move to Hannover Waggonfabrik AG in October of 1916 as their chief designer. Here he would design several successful two-seater aircraft, the CL.I through CL.IV, which saw widespread use during the war. He would survive the war and continue working on civil air projects.
Interestingly, this wouldn’t be the only type of aircraft to share this strange design idea during the war. The Austro-Hungarian Lohner Type AA fighter of 1916 also had similar proportions, with a very tall body and small wings to increase speed. This aircraft would have poor flight performance and would be heavily reworked to resemble the more standard biplanes then entering service.
Variants
DFW T28 Floh – The T28 was a small fighter designed to outperform Eindecker aircraft in terms of speed. 1 was built and tested.
Operators
German Empire – The T28 Floh was designed for use by the German Empire but wasn’t adopted for service.
DFW T28 Floh Specifications
Wingspan
20 ft 4 in / 6.2 m
Length
14 ft 9 in / 4.3 m
Height
7 ft 6 in / 2.3 m
Wing Area
162 ft² / 15 m²
Engine
1x 100 hp (74.5 kW ) Mercedes D.I engine
Propeller
1x 2-blade wooden propeller
Weights
Empty
926 lb / 420 kg
Loaded
1,433 lb / 650 kg
Maximum Speed
112 mph / 180 kmh
Crew
1 pilot
Armament
1x Machine Gun
Gallery
The DFW Flea – Illustration by Carpaticus
Credits
Written by Medicman11
Edited by Ed J. and Henry H.
Illustrations by Carpaticus
Sources
Green, W. & Swanborough, G. (2002). The complete book of fighters : an illustrated encyclopedia of every fighter aircraft built and flown. London: Salamander.
Herris, J. (2017). DFW Aircraft of WWI : a centennial perspective on Great War Airplanes. Charleston, SC: Aeronaut Books.
German Empire (1917)
Heavy Bomber Prototype- 4 Built
Linke-Hoffman R.I 40/16 side view. [The German Giants]The Linke-Hofmann R.I was an experimental heavy bomber developed by the German Empire in 1917. The R.I would be unique, as one of the first prototypes to be constructed mostly out of a translucent material known as cellon, with the idea that it aircraft would be harder to spot. Unfortunately for the designers, cellon is highly reflective and ended up making the craft a much more noticeable target. After the failure with cellon, more work continued on the prototypes, now of normal fabric skinned construction. Due to poor performance caused by several design choices, the type was not mass produced and was subsequently cancelled.
History
A drawing of the R.I done by Linke-Hoffman. Notice the 3 gun positions. [German Aircraft of Minor Manufacturers Volume II]During times of war, it is not too uncommon for companies, factories and other industrial firms to be drawn into the war effort and end up producing materials that are as far away from their specialty as possible. Sometimes, this can end in a surprise success or a total blunder. This was no exception in the first World War for the German Empire. The concept of the military airplane had seen its first successes early in the war,and the need for aircraft was on the rise, but a major problem came in the fact that there were few dedicated airplane companies in Germany at the time. Thus, the Empire would call upon many of its industrial manufacturers to begin designing and producing aircraft, even if they were not familiar with working in that field. Linke-Hofmannn would be one such company.
3-Way drawing of both versions of the R.I [The German Giants]Linke-Hofmann, sometimes misspelled Linke-Hoffman, was founded in 1912 and was a manufacturer of railroad components, mainly locomotives and rolling stock. In early 1916, the company would enter the field of aviation by using their factories for aircraft repairs and for license built construction of aircraft. Some aircraft types they built under license were the Roland C.IIa, Albatros C.III, Albatros C.X and the Albatros B.IIa. At the same time, Linke-Hofmann was also awarded a contract to produce their own aircraft. The first of their home built aircraft would be an R-Plane type or Riesenflugzeug (giant aircraft), which was the designation given to the largest multi-engine bomber aircraft of the Empire. Linke-Hofmann’s R.I design would be a strange looking machine. Its fuselage was short and tear-drop shaped to streamline the design . Each pair of wings would be mounted extremely high and low on the fuselage in an attempt to increase lift. Four internal engines would be connected to four propellers, two in pusher configuration and two in puller configuration. Most interestingly, a majority of the tail of the aircraft would be made out of a material called Cellon. Cellon (Cellulose Acetate) is a translucent, plant-based material similar to film that was tested on several German aircraft in WWI, swapping out the normal fabric. The idea behind having the airframe covered in such material was that it was thought to make the aircraft harder to see. In addition to the Cellon, the R.I also had a very large cockpit with a number of windows to give much better visibility. Many of these design choices were made as it was thought they would make the design perform better in the long run, but they would ultimately lead to its downfall.
The R.I 8/15 under construction. The Cellon is clearly visible [German Aircraft of Minor Manufacturers Volume II]The Cellon tail of 8/15 [German Aircraft of Minor Manufacturers Volume II]
The completed R.I 8/15
Work began on the first R.I in the later months of 1916 under Chief Engineer Paul Stumpf, who previously worked for the AEG aircraft works. The first R.I was completed in early January of 1917 and was named the R.I 8/15. Testing of the aircraft began, but its first flight was delayed due to the unconventional steel tires coming apart during taxiing attempts. Improved versions of the tires were built that were much more stable than the first. Shortly after, the R.I 8/15 would fly for the first time from the Hundsfeld Airfield near Breslau, but the exact date is unknown. Early test flights showed the design was flawed and as time went on, performance began to suffer, although the exact reason was not known. Noticeably, the wings seemed to be the root cause of the lag in performance. The aircraft’s controls would occasionally become heavy and unresponsive, resulting in a partial loss of control. To amend this to some degree, several additional struts were added to the main wings, but this would not save the aircraft from disaster. On May 10th 1917, during its 6th test flight, two of the wings on the R.I 8/15 would collapse mid-flight and the aircraft would slam into the ground at full speed. Remarkably, all of the crew of the aircraft would survive, but the airframe itself would be destroyed in a blaze of fire caused by the crash. Unfortunately, 1-2 ground crew would die from the flames while trying to put them out.
The destruction of the 8/15 would force Linke-Hofmann to look into designing an improved model. At this time, many of the design choices Linke-Hofmann made with the aircraft would show how ineffective and even detrimental they were. The wings themselves were the root cause of the crash, as they were not stable nor very well supported. The Cellon material, which was thought to make the aircraft invisible, actually ended up doing the exact opposite, as the material was highly reflective, especially while the aircraft was airborne. Cellon itself also was not the most stable material to make most of the tail section of the aircraft out of, as the material itself could easily bend and warp during rough weather. Even when the material worked as needed, it aged to a yellow color that would remove the translucency. Even before the aircraft took flight, Linke-Hofmann would be criticized for making an aircraft mostly out of the little tested material. In order to amend these issues, the Idflieg ,,the Imperial organization that handled aircraft development, ordered several improved models to continue the development of the type, as the 8/15 had crashed before most of the evaluation had completed. Linke-Hofmann would then begin construction on the improved models, serial numbers 40/16 through 42/16. These improved variants on the R.I attempted to fix many of the issues that plagued the 8/15. The wing structure was redesigned to be significantly more stable, with additional struts forming an overall better design. Most of the Cellon in the aircraft had been replaced with standard fabric, with only a few small patches of the tail containing it, likely to serve as observation windows. The landing gear was also heavily improved, something the Linke-Hofmann Engineers were quite proud of. Lastly, the new airframe was also built to accommodate three positions for machine gunners. These small improvements mended these few issues, but the aircraft’s design was still riddled with flaws.
40/16 in flight. [German Aircraft of Minor Manufacturers Volume II]Details regarding the history of the improved variants are, unfortunately, not well known. It is unknown exactly when the R.I 40/16 first flew or when it was even built, but the handling of the aircraft had been significantly improved upon over the 8/15. Maneuverability was especially stated to be superb compared to the older model, but its general performance was still considered to be unsatisfactory. Landing the aircraft was stated to be terrible due to the high location of the pilot and the slow landing speed.
The crashed 40/16 after a taxiing accident. [German Aircraft of Minor Manufacturers Volume II]During one landing attempt while testing the 40/16, the test pilot misjudged how close he was from the landing strip due to the height of the aircraft and damaged the landing gear. Due to the teardrop shape of the aircraft, the entire thing went nose down into the ground, crushing the entire cockpit section. It is unknown if anyone was killed or injured during the crash, but no attempt was made to repair the aircraft afterwards and it was likely scrapped. Details on the 41/16 and 42/16 are even more lacking. Some sources claim they were never completed, while other sources state they were complete and ready for inspection before the program concluded. 41/16, in particular, has virtually no information or photos of the aircraft, but two photos exist of a finished 42/16 sitting outside the Linke-Hofmann factory in Breslau.
Design
A direct frontal view of 40/16. The unique engine-propeller arrangement can be seen clearly, as well as the tall profile of the aircraft. [German Aircraft of Minor Manufacturers Volume II]Pilot’s position of the R.I [German Aircraft of Minor Manufacturers Volume II]The Linke-Hofmann R.I was a four engined R-Type aircraft with a large teardrop-shaped fuselage covered in fabric. The fuselage was designed in such a “whale” configuration to contain its engines and reduce drag, but this was only ever tested on smaller aircraft and likely detrimentally affected the R.I. The front of the aircraft was divided into three different floors. The first floor contained the pilot’s position and the wireless station for communication. This floor had extensive glasswork to provide a good view around the front of the aircraft. The large amount of glass used in the cockpit only helped during clear weather as, during rain or if illuminated by a searchlight, it would cause visibility to suffer from light reflection and condensation.
Engine Room containing the four Mercedes D.IVa engines
The second floor contained the four Mercedes D.IVa engines. The third and lowest level contained the bombardier’s station and four internal fuel tanks. The tail of the R.I differed between the two variants. On the earlier 8/15, the tail was composed mostly of Cellon, while on the later 40/16, it was covered in fabric. The tail of the aircraft had a biplane horizontal stabilizer and three vertical fins for vertical stabilizers. The two additional fins vertically and the upper wing of the horizontal stabilizers were used as control surfaces on top of the conventional placement of said control surfaces. The wings of the aircraft were placed high and low on the aircraft, with the fuselage height directly separating each wing. Only the upper wings had ailerons fitted. The wings on the 8/15 were actually the lightest of any R-Plane built, which was a likely factor in its crash. The 40/16 had improved and more stabilized wings compared to its predecessor. The aircraft originally was planned to have four propellers, two in tractor and two in puller configuration but this design aspect doesn’t appear to have ever left the drawing board. Instead, only two were used in tractor layout. The engines powered the propellers in a very unique way. Each side of the aircraft had one propeller, which was connected to a pair of engines via outrigger frames and powered through a drive shaft connected to a bevel gear. Each pair of engines powered one side. This was done so that, in the event one of the engines was disabled through either malfunction or combat, the propellers would still have power going to them. A disabled propeller would begin windmilling, or rotating without power, and cause significant drag. On larger aircraft, this would seriously alter performance and cause the aircraft to lose speed and airflow due to drag. This complex system was put into place to prevent this from happening.
R.I 40/16 outside of the Linke-Hofmann factory. [The German Giants]No armament was carried aboard the R.I, but several proposals were made. Three machine-guns of unknown type and caliber were to be located at three positions around the aircraft. Two were located on the tallest point of the body, with one facing forward and one facing backward to cover all angles. The third gun position was located in the middle of the aircraft, with two open windows on each side to provide maximum firing range to each side. Given it was an R-Plane, the R.I would have used bombs had it entered mass production, but it’s loadout was never addressed, since the type was considered a failure.
Conclusion
The only two images of the Linke-Hoffman R.I 42/16 near the Linke-Hoffman factory [The German Giants]With the destruction of two aircraft and the type severely underperforming to expectations, the Idflieg lost their faith in Linke-Hofmann’s R.I program and it was promptly cancelled before January 1918. The 41/16 and 42/16 were most likely scrapped before the end of the war. The type was riddled with flaws from the beginning due to the strange decisions made by Linke-Hofmann in designing their first aircraft. Despite their failure at the start of their aircraft manufacturing career, Linke-Hofmann would use the experience learned from the R.I to create an improved and much more traditional looking R-Plane aircraft, the R.II.
Variants
Linke Hofmann R.I 8/15 – First version of the R.I. This version’s tail and rear fuselage were constructed of the transparent material Cellon.
Linke Hofmann R.I 40/16 – Improved version of the R.I 8/15. This type had many slight modifications, such as a better wing structure, a more stable landing gear, and was no longer constructed of Cellon. 3 of this type were built.
Operators
German Empire – The Linke-Hofmann R.I was an R-type aircraft meant to be used in the heavy bomber role for the German Empire. However, due to poor performance, the type was never mass produced or sent into service.
The Linke Hofmann R.8/15 – Note the extensive use of transparent cellon for the aft portion of the fuselage.The Linke Hofmann R.40/163-Way drawing of both versions of the R.I [The German Giants]
Credits
Written by: Medicman11
Edited by: Stan L. & Henry H.
Illustrations by Ed Jackson
Sources
Kosin, Rüdiger. The German fighter since 1915. Baltimore, Md: Nautical & Aviation Pub. Co. of America, 1988. Print.
Herris, Jack. German Aircraft of Minor Manufacturers In WWI Volume 2: Krieger To Union, Columbia, SC: Aeronaut Books, 2020. Print.
Haddow, G. W., and Peter M. Grosz. The German giants : the German R-planes, 1914-1918. London: Putnam, 1988. Print.
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.
German Empire (1915)
Reconnaissance Aircraft – 267 Built
A Roland C.II in flight. [Roland Aircraft of WWI]The Roland C.II was a reconnaissance aircraft built by LFG Roland in 1915 as a new and innovative design. The type would see widespread use by the German Empire and, thanks to its highly advanced form, became the fastest and most maneuverable of its type when it was introduced. Overall improvements on the aircraft were done throughout the war to strengthen its performance, but by the end of the war, much more advanced aircraft had been deployed and made the Roland obsolete. The C.II was relegated to a training aircraft until the end of the war, when all were scrapped.
Development
In early 1915, the Luftfahrzeug Gesellschaft (L.F.G.), also known as Roland to avoid confusion with a similar sounding design firm, began building several Albatros aircraft under license. These aircraft were the Albatros B.I, B.II and the C.I, which were considered some of the most advanced in terms of aerodynamics for the current times. Around the same time, Dipl.-Ing. (Engineer) Tantzen would join Roland as chief designer. With Tantzen as the chief designer and their experience gained from license-building aircraft, Roland would begin designing a new and original plane, the C.II.
Work began on the C.II (C-types were two-seat armed aircraft) sometime in mid 1915. The C.II would have a very rounded, aerodynamic fuselage design, similar to the Albatros D.III fighters of the following year. The fuselage was created in a unique way, called Wickelrumpf (Wrapped body). Wickelrumpf involved using layers of veneer strips that were wrapped around a simple wodden frame. The shells created were then glued together around the wooden frame of the C.II and strengthened with fabric, making a very streamlined and sturdy fuselage. This whole process was an early attempt at monocoque construction, which involved having a shell built around a frame. However, the Wickelrumpf technique on the C.II used two stringers for the frame, a feature true monocoque aircraft don’t have. Like the fuselage, the wings were also designed to be very aerodynamic. Instead of having the wings connected with multiple spars and bracings, as was common with aircraft of the time, the wings of the C.II would be connected via a single wooden strut in a single bay wing.
The C.II prototype on October 24th, 1915, only hours before its disastrous test flight.
Before a prototype was completed, a C.II fuselage was mounted on a railcar for aerodynamic testing and other experiments. The train would swiftly go down a straight track between the cities of Schoneberg and Juterbog and data would be recorded on the aircraft. The first prototype C.II was completed in October of 1916 and its first test flight would happen between the 24th and 25th. This test flight would end in misfortune, with the D.III engine failing mid flight, resulting in a crash and subsequent damage to the aircraft. The prototype was quickly repaired and flying, with a second prototype completed soon after. In the test flights, it was found that, thanks to its aerodynamic design and powerful D.III engine, the C.II’s speed was extraordinary, surpassing all of the current C-type aircraft then in use. With such a feat, a production batch of 50 aircraft were ordered on December 23rd, 1915. Testing continued and it was found that the wing cells were slightly unstable, so an additional drag wire was added for stabilization. After this change was added to the design and prototypes, production of the type continued and, by March 7th, 1916, the first of the production aircraft were ready to be sent to the front.
Design
The last production batch of C.IIs [Roland Aircraft of WWI]The interior frame of the C.II. This would be covered by the Wickelrumpf shells. [Roland Aircraft of WWI]The Roland C.II was a two seat observation biplane. The body of the C.II was aerodynamic in shape and had a plywood frame, with the outer shell created via Wickelrumpf and made of veneer strips glued together and supported with fabric. Wickelrumpf produced a semi-monocoque fuselage. The body would have two seats, one for the pilot and one for an observer. On the sides of the fuselage were two pairs of celluloid windows for the observer to use. On several occasions, flight crews would paint curtains onto them. The windows themselves were modified by the crews to open by sliding backwards or downwards, but this was not a standard feature. Above the pilot’s position was a roll cage designed to prevent the pilot from being crushed in the event of a roll over on the ground. The initial design of the cage was circular but, once the frontal Spandau was added, the cage had to be redesigned and became more triangular in shape. No measure was given to protect the observer. The C.II used a Mercedes D.III engine mounted in the nose and driving a wooden propeller. The first two cylinders were exposed to the elements. The area surrounding the engine was the only part of the aircraft to have metal plating. Certain plates were hinged to allow for maintenance to the engine. For exhaust, the initial models used the “ocarina” style pipes, but later models would change between the ocarina style and others. The engines would have two ear radiators on each side of the craft. These protruding radiators obstructed airflow and caused drag. The tailfins were wooden and fabric covered. The control surfaces were made of steel tubes and covered in fabric. The tailfin was enlarged after the June 1916 batch to increase stability.
A sight all too common of the C.II. Due to its poor downwards visibility, Pilots had trouble landing the aircraft. [Roland Aircraft of WWI]The wings of the aircraft were made of wood and covered in doped fabric as was conventional at the time, with the control surfaces being made of steel tubes and also covered in doped fabric. The ailerons were originally in the lower wing but, starting with the C.IIa, these would be located in the upper wing. The wings themselves were the exact same length, shape and chord. Unique I-struts connected the wings together. The I-struts were of plywood construction and would have interior bracings in the shape of an X. The C.II would have a landing gear connected to the aircraft with v-shaped connectors. At the rear of the aircraft would be a landing skid.
Mid Production C.II [Roland Aircraft of WWI]For armament, the C.II initially only had a single Parabellum 7.92 mm for the observer to use. After the first 50 aircraft, a forward firing synchronized Spandau 7.92 mm was added for the pilot. If needed, four bomb racks could be fixed to the underside of the wings to carry small bombs. The aircraft also carried several flares. A radio could also be carried on the aircraft and used by the observer. This was powered by an airscrew-powered dynamo located near the landing gear.
The “Walfisch” In Action
Otto Czernak’s C.II. This aircraft was modified with a rudimentary machinegun mount and an input system for the observer to request certain flight movements. [Roland Aircraft of WWI]The Roland C.II arrived on the frontline in late March of 1916 and the effort put into its aerodynamic design was noted almost immediately. The C.IIs were the fastest aircraft used by the Luftstreitkräfte (German Air Force) at their introduction, outpacing all of their operational aircraft and almost all opposing Allied aircraft, only being superseded by a handful of Allied fighters. Because of its impressive speed, the Roland C.II was flown in special groups, as other two seater C-type aircraft could not keep up with the type. The Roland C.II was initially used as a reconnaissance plane, with the second crewman acting as the observer, but its speed allowed it to be used on escort duties as well. Despite its good speed, however, the C.II was not without its flaws. In the observer role, thanks to the crewmen being seated above the body, visibility above the plane was superb, but visibility in front of the aircraft was lacking, and visibility beneath the aircraft was poor. An attempt to fix this early on, before production began, was placing cutouts in the base of the wings, but this solution still do not provide adequate visibility. This flaw became fatal later on, once enemy pilots learned of this massive weak spot, as they would now dive beneath a C.II, then fly upwards towards it, firing their guns while the Roland crew had no means of detecting threats from that angle. This visibility issue also made landings especially dangerous, as the pilot had difficulty calculating how close the ground was. Aircraft of the time were well known to have difficulty upon landing, but the Roland C.II exhibited worse than average landing performance due to the visibility issue. Maneuverability and stability of the C.II was also lackluster at times and would need improvement.
Initially, the Roland C.II only had a single Parabellum 7.92 mm machine gun for the observer to use. The first fifty of these aircraft would have this small armament. Many of the pilots found this weak armament lacking. One pilot in particular, Lt. Otto Czernak of Schusta 28, would fix this issue on his own. He would rig up a forward firing apparatus for another Parabellum machine-gun that would allow the pilot to fire. Due to the propeller and machine-gun not being synchronized, the rig placed the gun well above the rotating radius of the propeller, making the rig very tall. Czernak’s own plane was modified in other ways as well, having a unique input system for his observer that would allow the 2nd crewman to communicate to Czernak to maneuvering instructions. No other C.II would have this system. After the first fifty aircraft, all C.II’s would have a synchronized Spandau machine-gun for the pilot to use. This gave the C.II some dogfighting ability, which is how it would end up being used for escort duties, along with its excellent speed.
A Linke-Hoffman produced C.IIa(Li). This particular aircraft has bomb racks installed. [Roland Aircraft of WWI]At some point, either during its career or while it was still being developed, the C.II was given the unofficial nickname of Walfisch (Whale). The origin of this name has been told many times but there is no concise point that has been confirmed. The most common of these origins is said to have come while it was still in development, from a German official observing the type. Another reason could have been its overall round shape and how the early models were painted a silver-white color. Nonetheless, the name stuck around. The name Walfisch did not seem to have any negative connotation for its pilots, as many of them would paint fish or shark faces on their aircraft. Some would even paint scales. The previously mentioned Otto Czernak would paint a fish face onto his aircraft. This tradition was seen throughout its lifespan, even after the later two-toned camouflage models were introduced with green and brown paint.
A production of 24 aircraft, after the initial batch, with the modified machine-gun was ordered in March of 1916. Another batch of 45 aircraft was ordered in April. However, the batch of Roland C.IIs after this set would aim to fix many of the stability issues found with the aircraft in the field. The tailfin was enlarged to improve flight performance. The wings were shortened and the I struts were moved inward to compensate for the wing flexing. These made the wings much more structurally sound. This reworked design of the C.II was known as the C.IIa and testing of the type began in April and May of 1916. The type would be sent to the frontline by the summer. All C.II aircraft after this point would be of the C.IIa model. A batch of 19 C.IIa was ordered in April of 1916 and another batch of 36 C.IIa was also ordered, but with the ailerons in the upper wing. All aircraft after this would have the ailerons this configuration. A batch of 40 C.IIas was ordered in June of 1916 and would have a larger vertical fin to improve stability.
Production C.II [Roland Aircraft of WWI]Most of the production Roland C.IIs were flying by the mid summer of 1916. The C.II was used extensively at the Battle of the Somme, where it was used in large numbers for recon and escort duties. On the second day of the Battle of the Somme, June 2nd, the soon-to-be-famous Albert Ball would go on a sortie in a Nieuport scout aircraft. While flying, his squadron would encounter 6 Roland C.IIs on patrol. The Allied squadron would begin their attack, while the Roland formation scattered. Ball was able to catch up to one and shoot it down, causing the C.II to plummet near the Mercatel-Arras road. This would be the first aircraft Ball completely destroyed in flight (There were several confirmed victories before this, but this was the first confirmed complete destruction of an aircraft). Many of Ball’s early kills were Roland C.IIs. Ball himself went on to compliment the C.II, stating it was the best aircraft the German’s had at the time, with a good defense to compliment its speed.
A C.IIa in two tone colors. This particular aircraft has been decorated by its crew, including painted on curtains over the celluloid covers and a shark mouth. [Roland Aircraft of WWI]The Roland C.II was continually used through the rest of 1916. By summer, the Linke-Hofman company would begin license building C.IIs. An initial batch of 16 aircraft was ordered. The aircraft built under license were known as C.IIa(Li). In July of 1916, a batch of 40 aircraft was ordered to be produced by Linke-Hofman. This would be the last batch of C.IIs built and would be sent to the front in the beginning of 1917. By this time, however, the C.II had lost its performance edge. The Allies had fielded newer and improved aircraft that were able to easily keep up with the C.II, and the Germans had also produced newer aircraft that performed better. The C.II was instead returned from the front lines and used as a trainer for the C-type in flight schools. The C.II would perform this duty until hostilities ended in 1918. The fate of the remaining C.IIs is unknown, but they were most likely scrapped. No aircraft survive to this day.
The Roland C.III: A Derivative Design
The Roland C.III. It is apparent its design is based off of the C.II. Very little is known about this aircraft. [Roland Aircraft of WWI]In mid-1916, a derivative design of the C.II emerged; the Roland C.III. The C.III shared many of the same design features of the C.II, such as a two-seat aerodynamic body with two windows on each side for observation purposes. However, most of the similarities stop there. The C.III was designed to use the more powerful 200 hp (149 kW) Mercedes D.IV engine over the C.II’s D.III. Based on the few pictures available, the prototype C.III appears to still use a D.III engine, most likely to test the airframe before the larger engine was placed. To compensate for a stronger engine, the wings of the C.II were made larger. The wings themselves were also reworked. Instead of having single bay wings with flat strut connectors, like the C.II, the C.III instead had the standard two bay wings typical of aircraft of the era. This was most likely done as the single struts of the C.II happened to obscure the vision of the frontal windows. The tail design of the C.III also differed from the C.II. Very little is known of the C.III outside of these few details, including whether or not it even flew or any further testing. The single C.III prototype was lost when LFG’s facility in Adlershof was destroyed in a fire on September 6th, 1916. This incident is cited to be caused by sabotage from British Special Forces. After the loss of the prototype, no further work on this type was done.
Conclusion
A lineup of several early C.IIs [Roland Aircraft of WWI]At the time of its introduction, the C.II was one of the most advanced aircraft Germany had. Its powerful engine and aerodynamic construction allowed it to outperform most of its opposition. As the war continued, more advanced machines eventually outpaced the Roland C.II. The aircraft did manage to influence other companies to attempt more aerodynamic designs. Roland would continue building planes, including newer C-types (C.V and C.VIII) and fighter types, both of which would use Wickelrumpf. Two other aircraft were built off of the C.II’s design, the D.I fighter and the WD floatplane. Despite continuing to make newer aircraft, none of Roland’s designs would ever garner the same fame as their “Walfisch”, and it would remain their most iconic design of the war.
Variants
LFG Roland C.II Prototype – The prototype model of the C.II differed from the production version in several ways. Notably, it only had one set of windows. Two of these were built.
LFG Roland C.II – Standard model for the Roland C.II. After the initial batch, all aircraft would use a synchronized machine-gun in the nose.
Otto Czernak’s LFG Roland C.II – A modified early production C.II used by Otto Czernak of Schusta 28. It had a makeshift machine-gun mount and a unique input system for the observer to request movements from the pilot.
LFG Roland C.IIa – Later modified model of the C.II, had improved wings and a larger tailfin.
LFG Roland C.IIa(Li) – Designation given to C.IIa planes license-built by Linke-Hofman.
LFG Roland C.III – Derivative aircraft based on the C.II. Heavily reworked the wings and was given a Benz B.IV engine.
Operators
German Empire – The Roland C.II served as a reconnaissance aircraft and an escort aircraft in several squadrons of the Luftstreitkräfte from 1916 to 1918
LFG Roland C.II Specifications
Wingspan
33 ft 10 in / 10.33 m
Length
25 ft 3 in / 7.7 m
Height
9 ft 6 in / 2.9 m
Mean Aerodynamic Chord
4 ft 11 in / 1.5 m
Wing Area
91.7 ft² / 27.96 m²
Engine
160 hp (119.3 kW) Mercedes D.III 6-cylinder inline engine
Roland C.II PrototypeRoland C.II Schusta 28 – Lt. Otto Czermack Note the forward firing Lewis Gun mounted high to clear the propeller arc.Roland C.II – Black Stripes over Pre-Production PaintRoland C.II featuring a Shark MouthRoland C.IIa – Note the Larger RudderRoland C.III Prototype
Credits
Article written by Medicman
Edited by Stan Lucian & Ed Jackson
Illustrations by Ed Jackson
Herris, Jack. Roland Aircraft of WWI : a centennial perspective on Great War Airplanes. Charleston, SC: Aeronaut Books, 2014. Print.
Gray, Peter L., and Owen Thetford. German aircraft of the First World War. London: Putnam, 1970. Print.
United States of America (1945)
Observation Scout Floatplane – 10 Built
XOSE-1 taking off. Notice it is painted in the wartime colors. [axis-and-allies-paintworks.com]The XOSE-1 was an observation float plane built by the Edo float company during World War II and was intended to be a possible replacement for the OS2U Kingfisher. Before being built, the type seemed promising and ten prototypes were ordered. Although development was slow, the aircraft would finally fly after the war had ended. Testing showed the design was riddled with flaws and, with the end of the war making the observation floatplane obsolete and unnecessary, the XOSE-1 program was cancelled.
History
Photo of the mockup XOSE-1.
Before America had entered the Second World War, it was realized that many assets in the United States arsenal were outdated to some degree. Many aircraft were unable to compete with their contemporaries around the world. One such piece of equipment would be the ship launched floatplane. A concept that originated in the 1920s and 1930s, it involved the use of small floatplanes that were carried aboard large warships and could be deployed via catapults for a number of tasks to assist their mothership. These missions included long range scouting, spotting for the warships’ main guns and also providing anti-submarine protection using depth charges or torpedoes. Most of America’s larger warships were equipped with catapults at the time for this purpose. The dedicated ship-based floatplanes the United States Navy (USN) operated at their entrance to the war was the aging Curtiss SOC biplane and the Vought OS2U Kingfisher. The latter would soon replace the former and would enter widespread service after the Attack on Pearl Harbor. Although the Kingfisher was just entering service, the search for a modern seaplane that would eventually replace the aircraft began. The new type was expected to carry out the same duties as its predecessor but also be able to effectively protect itself if needed. The OS2U only had one .50 caliber machine gun for offense, which wasn’t very helpful when against newer fighters. The first and most prominent aircraft that would rise to meet this role would be the Curtiss SC Seahawk, but it would not be the only type that would be built. In fact, a competitor would come from a little known company called Edo.
The Edo Aircraft Company is not a company often mentioned in history regarding the Second World War. The company was founded in 1925 by Earl Dodge Osborne, with the name being an acronym of his own name. Despite being rarely discussed among historians, Edo was immensely crucial to the war effort for the USN. Edo was a primary producer for aluminum floats before the war and would be the main producer for the floats on Navy floatplanes, like the OS2U. It was estimated that up to 95% of floats used on USN aircraft were built by Edo. Not only was Edo responsible for the production of the floats, they were also known for adapting said floats for use on the aircraft that would use them. Edo had become known for their work on floats, but they worked on a handful of their own floatplane designs in the years before WWII had started. However, this was around the time the company was created in 1925, and aircraft design had changed drastically since then. Given their background and knowledge with designing and fitting floats, the USN requested that the Edo company should attempt to design their own modern floatplane for the ship-based observation role. Eager to attempt building a modern aircraft, Edo eagerly accepted the request. On January 11th, 1944, they would begin work on their floatplane, which would be called the XS2E-1.
Frontal view of an XOSE-2 or XTE-1. The two were visually identical from the outside. [axis-and-allies-paintworks.com]The preliminary design of the XS2E-1 was deemed acceptable by the Navy and an order for ten prototypes was made. The XS2E-1 would be a two seat design with a Ranger V-770-8 engine. The engine mount and cowling would also both be designed by Ranger (this company would become Fairchild after the war.) Additionally, a Westinghouse 19 turbojet was to be installed in the rear of the aircraft to offer increased thrust for evasion or to give chase to an enemy aircraft. This would make the aircraft a mixed powerplant type. Another order for eight more units was made some time after the first order, but an exact date is unknown. On March 16th, 1944, the USN opted to change the floatplane’s design. The Westinghouse 19 turbojet that was planned for the project was experiencing its own difficulties in development.
When the XS2E-1 was drafted, the turbojet, due to its development, had become much heavier than what Edo was expecting. Due to this weight increase and a high demand for the jet engine on other aircraft projects, it was removed from the XS2E-1. This caused a weight problem in the aircraft’s design, as it no longer had the additional thrust needed to operate with its then-current weight. Edo changed the aircraft’s design drastically to make the XS2E-1 lighter. A significant revision done was the removal of the second seat, making the aircraft a smaller, single-seater aircraft. This, however, meant all the work the 2nd crewmen was intended to do was now transferred to the pilot, which would include operating the radar system in addition to flying and observing.
A frontal shot of an XOSE-1 demonstrating its folding wings. [axis-and-allies-paintworks.com]After the loss of the turbojet and the switch to a single seater design, it was decided to change the aircraft’s role to an Observation Scout floatplane. Another reason for the change was that, developing parallel to the XS2E-1, was the Curtiss SC-1 Seahawk mentioned earlier, an aircraft that was meant to fill the Scout role for the USN. Finding that developing two aircraft with the same role was redundant, the USN authorized the role change on the XS2E-1. With the new role, the XS2E-1 was redesignated as the XOSE-1. Not long after the role and design change, a full-scale wooden mockup of the new XOSE-1 was built and an inspection was held on November 24th, 1944. An early criticism of the design was linked to the removal of the second seat, as would-be operators complained the intense workload was too much to put onto the pilot. A variant was soon conceived, the XOSE-2, which would address this workload issue by reintroducing the second seat for another crewman. This second crewmen would be tasked with operating the onboard radar system and performing observation duties. An order for two XOSE-2s to be built, as well as for a derivative of the XOSE-2 that would be a dual-control training version, soon followed after conception of the two-seat variant. The trainer would be named the XTE-1. Progress on the program overall was slow up to this point, but Edo had added many innovative features to the design to improve its performance.
Side view of an XOSE-1 taking off. [axis-and-allies-paintworks.com]The war came to an end before the XOSE-1 could take flight. The end of the war saw most of the projects the USN was working on be terminated immediately, as there was no purpose in developing them anymore. The XOSE-1, however, was saved from this fate, as the USN allowed the floatplane to continue development after the end of the war. The XOSE-1’s first flight took place on December 28th of 1945, only a few months after the war had ended. Since there was no urgency to press this new type of aircraft to the frontlines anymore, funding to the program was cut and work slowed down in accordance. The XOSE-2 version finally flew on September 24th, 1947, two years after the war was over. Two XOSE-2s were built. It is unknown exactly when the first XTE-1 was completed and flew, but two of this type were built as well. Originally, during its debut, the XOSE-1 was painted in the standard blue-on-the-top-white-on-the-bottom that mid war USN aircraft used, but would later be colored in the dark blue that late/post-war Navy aircraft were painted in.
Rear view of an XOSE-1 with the floats detached and the wheels attached instead. [axis-and-allies-paintworks.com]Despite being a company that had only built a handful of planes two decades prior, the XOSE-1 was very promising from the outset, but problems soon began to arise during testing. The XOSE-1 experienced trouble with the Ranger built engines. The two seater XOSE-2 experienced many more problems and major changes had to be implemented in the design. Some remedies to the problems included increasing the height of the tailfin and the addition of a ventral strake below the tail to help with stability. Stability issues were found to be caused by the two seater’s larger canopy installed on the largely unmodified fuselage. By the time the stability issues were resolved, it was almost for naught, as the aircraft program was going nowhere.The shipborne floatplane type itself was beginning to show its obsolescence compared to newer technology. Exactly when the program ended or the whereabouts of the ten XOSE built are unknown, as details about the program during this time are sparse. It is unknown if the XOSE-1 was ever even tested from a ship, as many warships postwar would have their catapults removed. Most of the testing was done via land or sea takeoff, with wheels attached to the floats or a landplane conversion where the floats were replaced with a conventional landing gear. The type would be slowly replaced by ship-based helicopters, an idea that had begun during the Second World War and expanded upon thereafter. The era of the scout floatplane, especially shipboard ones, was over. It is most likely all of the XOSE-1s and its derivatives were scrapped before 1950, as all shipboard seaplane squadrons had been disbanded in 1949.
Design
An Edo XOSE-1 in flight [axis-and-allies-paintworks.com]The Edo XOSE-1 was a single-seat floatplane design of all metal construction. It’s floatation was provided by one large aluminum float under the hull, and two smaller aluminum floats on the wingtips. This layout was used on almost every USN floatplane. In addition to floats, the aircraft was also able to be launched via catapult aboard a ship. An optional wheeled undercarriage was also available for ground based takeoffs.
The body of the aircraft would be constructed of metal and would contain 135 lbs (61 kg) of armor. The overall weight of the aircraft would be 5,316 Ib (2411.3 kg) standard and 3,973 Ib (1802 kg) empty. The fuselage would have a length of 31 ft 1 in (9.5 m) and a height of 14 ft 11 in (4.5 m). The XOSE and its variants had a unique construction that allowed many parts of the aircraft to be easily accessible for maintenance.
A rear view of an XOSE-1 with its wings folded back. [shu-aero.com]The Edo XOSE-1 and all of its variants were equipped with the Ranger V-770-8 inline engine that gave it a top speed of 188 mph (302 km/h), a cruising speed of 111 mph (178.6 km/h) and a stall speed of 61 mph (98.2 km/h). The aircraft would have a climb rate of 1,350 ft/min (411.5 m/min) and a maximum service ceiling of 22,300 ft (6797 m). The XOSE-1 would also have a range of 600 mi (965.6 km).
The cockpit would allow protection for the pilot, as the canopy was bulletproof. The canopy was one piece and would slide down and behind the cockpit for easy movement in. On the XOSE-2/XTE-1, the cockpit would be lengthened to accommodate the additional crewman, who would do observation and radar tasks. The canopy on the two seater versions would be two parts and the forward segment would slide back over the rear section.
Fuel would be stored in the fuselage in self-sealing fuel tanks. The tail section of the aircraft would be of metal construction as well. The only differences between the two versions were on the two seaters, in which the tail of the aircraft had to be extended height-wise and a vertical strake beneath the tail was added. Both of these changes helped in the stabilization of the two seaters. The wings of the aircraft were also constructed of metal and would have a wingspan of 37 ft 11 in (11.6 m). The wings would utilize a unique feature for some of its control surfaces. The flaps, that extended outwards from the folding line, would retract automatically if enough water impacted them. This was put in place to prevent damage to these flaps. Additionally, there were retractable slats on the leading edge of the wings to increase drag. The wings themselves could be folded inward for easy storage aboard ships or hangars. Interesting to note, the wings had a manual folding system instead of a hydraulic system most aircraft at the time had.
For armament, the XOSE-1 was equipped with two M2 .50 caliber machine guns as standard. Two hardpoints were equipped on the wings that could allow the XOSE-1 to carry two 350 Ib depth charges or two 50 gallon drop tanks. Additionally, two emergency rescue racks could also be carried on the underside for air to sea rescue missions. A single hardpoint could also be used to carry a radar pod. There is also mention of the XOSE-1 having smoke projectors as well. The two-seat XOSE-2 would lose one of the M2 machine guns and only carry a single gun. The XTE-1 variant would be completely unarmed, given it was only a trainer.
Conclusion
With the Edo XOSE-1 program being terminated, this would be the last time Edo would build an aircraft all on their own. However, Edo would propose a very interesting concept to the US Navy in the 1950s for an amphibious fighter similar to the Convair F2Y Sea Dart. However, this type would never be built.
Variants
XS2E-1 – Initial design of the XOSE-1. The XS2E-1 was a two seater and mounted a larger engine as well as a Westinghouse J19 jet engine. This design was changed and became the XOSE-1.
XOSE-1 – Single seat reconnaissance floatplane. The XOSE-1 had two .50 Cal M2 machine guns mounted in the wings and two hardpoints for depth charges. 6 were built.
XOSE-2 – Two seat version of the XOSE-1. The E-2 version would have a radar operator, a lengthened canopy, and only a single .50 cal for defense. Two were built.
XTE-1– Tandem control version of the XOSE-1. This version would be unarmed and would be used for training purposes. Two were built.
Operators
United States of America – The XOSE-1 and its variants were only tested by the United States Navy.
Edo XOSE-1 Floatplane Specifications
Wingspan
37 ft 11 in / 11.6 m
Length
31 ft 1 in / 9.5 m
Height
14 ft 11 in / 4.5 m
Wing Area
237 ft² / 22 m²
Engine
520 hp (387.7 kW) Ranger V-770-8 Inline Engine
Propeller
2-blade Hamilton Standard constant-speed propeller (9ft / 2.7m diameter)
Powerplant Ratings
Horsepower output
Altitude
Take Off
550 hp
Sea Level
Normal
(Approx. 84% Throttle)
500 hp
800 ft / 244 m
Fuel Capacity
120+58 US Gal / 454+219 L
Weights
Empty
3973 lb / 1802 kg
Gross
5316 lb / 2411.3 kg
Maximum
6064 lb / 2750.6 kg
Climb Rate (at sea level)
1,350 ft / 411.5 m per minute
Maximum Speed
188 mph / 302.6 kmh
Cruising Speed
111 mph / 178.6 kmh
Stalling Speed
61 mph / 98.2 kmh
Range
600 mi / 965.6 km
Maximum Service Ceiling
22,300 ft / 6797 m
Crew
1 pilot
Armament
2x 12.7x99mm / .50 cal Browning AN/M2 machine guns
Edo XOSE-1 in Standard Wartime ColorsEdo XOSE-1 with the additional ventral stabilizers addedA view showcasing the retractable flaps on the engine.
Two Edo XOSE-1s in flight together [shu-aero.com]A side view of the XOSE-1 in flight A side view of the XOSE-1 in flight. [axis-and-allies-paintworks.com]Rear view of an XOSE-2 or XTE-1. [axis-and-allies-paintworks.com]
Credits
Article written by Medicman11
Edited by Stan L. and Ed J.
Illustrated by Ed Jackson
Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft 1947
Norton, Bill. American aircraft development of WWII : special types, 1939-1945. Manchester: Crécy Publishing Ltd, 2016. Print.
Wagner, Ray. American combat planes of the 20th Century : a comprehensive reference. Reno, NV: Jack Bacon & Co, 2004. Print.
United States of America (1953)
Long Range Interceptor Proposals [None Built]
Detailed drawing of the N-144, with cutaway section
Born from the Long Range Interceptor program, the first of Northrop’s contenders were three aircraft that had large delta wings and overall similar shapes and designs. The first, the N-126, started as a modified version of Northrop’s F-89D Scorpion fighter but would become its own unique aircraft by 1954. The second, the N-144, was a large four-engine interceptor design that dwarfed current bombers of the time and could carry an impressive arsenal. The third, the N-149, differed the most from its two siblings. It was much smaller and used General Electric engines over Wright engines. The N-144 was the most successful out of the entire program, but would prove to be too costly and a maintenance nightmare if produced. The N-126 and N-149 would also not meet expectations, as did none of the other competitors in the doomed program.
The LRI Competition
At the start of the Cold War, it was realized that if a Third World War would ever happen, defending the mainland United States from airborne threats would be a top priority. ICBMs and nuclear missiles are the go-to threat everyone imagines when they think of the Cold War, but these wouldn’t be operational until the late 1950’s. In the early years, nuclear weapons would be deployed by strategic bombers and these would be the major threat. Intercepting these long range aircraft would be of the utmost importance if the war went hot in the 1950’s. Developing an aircraft able to reach these bombers and destroy them led to the creation of the modern interceptor. Most countries had begun developing an interceptor of their own. At the forefront was the United States Long Range Interceptor program (LRI). This program originated in early 1952, with Major General L.P. Whitten of the Northeast Air Command noticing that a capable aircraft would be able to takeoff and intercept enemy bombers using the warning time of the Semi-Automatic Ground Environment (SAGE) system, which was an integrated defense network of SAM, radar and fighters across the US and Canada, able to intercept enemy bombers well before they were able to reach the United States. Although the idea was put out, no official requirements for the idea came about until December of 1953, when the Air Council put out extremely demanding needs. The aircraft would need to be airborne in two minutes from getting the scramble alert. Maximum speed would be Mach 1.7 with a range of 1,000 nm (1,850 km). Combat ceiling would be 60,000 ft (18,000 m) with a climb rate of 500 ft/min (150 m/min). The aircraft would be minimally armed with forty-eight 2.75 inch rockets, eight GAR-1A Falcon AAMs or three unguided nuclear rockets. This requirement became known as Weapon System WS-202A. Most companies developed submissions, but McDonnell and Northrop had an early start with a long range interceptor design being conceived very early on, well before an official requirement had been requested. Northrop had three aircraft designs that would fit the requirement for WS-202A; the N-126, N-144 and N-149. All three were visually similar to each other and shared concepts and equipment with one another.
Northrop N-126: The Delta Scorpion
Bottom view of the N-126 Delta Scorpion model [US Secret Fighter Projects]The first of the designs Northrop submitted was the N-126 Delta Scorpion. This aircraft actually began development months before an official requirement was put out. The design was submitted in February of 1953 and was essentially a Northrop F-89D Scorpion modified with a new delta wing design and Wright YJ67 engines. The aircraft received a performance review sometime in 1953 along with McDonnell’s two-seat version of the F-101 Voodoo. Neither design was chosen for production. The N-126 did show promise, as it came close to meeting the very first requirements and it was supported by the Air Defense Command. However, the predicted first flight in twenty-one months was a bit too optimistic and the design was disliked by the United States Air Force Headquarters, as it didn’t exactly meet requirements compared to the F-101 variant. Northrop pushed this early design and adamantly tried to acquire production.
Front quarter view of the N-126 Delta Scorpion model [US Secret Fighter Projects]They were quick to begin working on an improved design that would be longer and yield better results. It took over fifty concept designs before they found a suitable improvement. The aircraft itself no longer resembled the F-89D Scorpion it got its name from, but the name would stick until the end of the project. This new design was submitted in August of 1954. The N-126 was now much sleeker, with a forty-five degree delta wing and two underwing Wright J67-W-1 engines (Allison J71-A-11 engines were a weaker alternative choice). The delta wings all three projects used provided lower weight than generic straight wings and minimized drag. The trailing edge of the wing would have a split speed brake on the outer surface, an aileron located in the middle and a feature on the inboard section only referred to as an “altitude flap”. For the landing gear, a bicycle configuration with two wheels on each gear would be mounted directly under the aircraft, with a smaller landing gear being placed under the wings.
For armament, the aircraft would use the required eight Falcon AAMs and forty-eight rockets being mounted in a 20 ft weapon bay. Four external hardpoints would allow extra ordnance to be carried, such as bombs or extra missiles. Alternative loadouts included any combination of four AIR-2A unguided nuclear rockets, six Sidewinders, or two Sparrow guided missiles. The N-126 would use the Hughes E-9A fire control system, one of the few remnants carried over from the F-89. The E-9A would be linked to a long-range search radar that would have a range of 100 nm (185 km). For fuel, one large internal tank and two smaller tanks in the wings would hold 4,844 gal (22,025 l). Extra drop tanks could be mounted under the wings and offer an additional 1,600 gal (7,275 lit). For its predicted mission, the N-126 would be able to launch and engage enemy bombers twenty-seven minutes after scramble. Northrop expected a prototype would be ready for a first flight by June of 1957.
Northrop N-144: The Monstrous Interceptor
Color photo of the N-144 model [US Secret Fighter Projects]The N-144 was the second design Northrop submitted. It was made to offer the best results in regard to the WS-202A requirements. It resembled the N-126 but was much larger and had four J67 engines. The N-144 dwarfed its siblings, competitors, and even several current bombers of the time. With a wingspan of 78 ft and a length of 103 ft, this was no small aircraft. In comparison, the Convair B-58 supersonic bomber had a wingspan of 56 ft and a length of 96 ft (interesting to note, a plan to convert the B-58 into a long range interceptor was proposed).
Its appearance wasn’t the only thing carried over from the N-126. The E-9A fire control system, its accompanying scanner, and its landing gear design (now with four wheels on the main gear) were all reused in the N-144. The N-144 also had a forty-five degree delta wing like the N-126. The N-126 and N-144 would both have their engines on pylons on the wings. This configuration allowed much more powerful engines to be used and a simpler intake system compared to having the engines be built into the body, not to mention the layout being much safer in the event of a fire.
Top down view of the N-144 model. Note the 45 degree delta wing [US Secret Fighter Projects]The N-144 utilized many features that would directly improve the aerodynamics of the aircraft. The aircraft would have low wing loading which would increase its cruise altitude and improve takeoff and landings. The addition of a horizontal tail, which isn’t often seen in delta wing designs, gave the N-144 improved handling and stability over designs that lacked the horizontal tail (see the Convair F-102 Delta Dagger for example). When the aircraft would be supersonic, the wing would have a chord flap that would retract into the wing to reduce drag. Area ruling was a feature involving tapering the center of the fuselage which would reduce drag while the aircraft was flying at supersonic speeds. Most current delta wing designs utilized area ruling, but none of Northrop’s interceptors surprisingly did. Northrop ruled that the advantages would only affect supersonic flight, and not provide anything useful during subsonic flight. Having no area rule also made the aircraft simpler in design and easier to produce. Northrop’s studies into the delta wing expected to see performance increase as time went on, with more modifications and better engines being used on the N-144 if it went into production. With these expected improvements, Northrop theorized a 14% improvement in top speed and service ceiling.
Frontal view of the massive N-144 model. The size of its engine pods are evident. [US Secret Fighter Projects]For armament, the N-144 would still utilize the standard eight Falcon AAMs and forty-eight rockets, but could also carry twelve Falcon AAMs, six AIR-2A Genie (Ding Dong) rockets, 452 2.75 in FFAR rockets or 782 2 in (5.1 cm) rockets internally in any order. External hardpoints could also be fixed for carrying bombs or more ordnance. For fuel, a large fuel tank would be in the wings and fuselage and could carry 6,910 gal (31,419 l) of fuel. Given the size of the aircraft, Northrop advertised that it could be used in alternative roles.
Northrop N-149: The Opposite End
Model of the N-149. The additional fuel tanks can be seen. [US Secret Fighter Projects]The N-149 was the third and final design submitted by Northrop for WS-202A. Submitted in July of 1954, the N-149 was almost the polar opposite of the N-144. Instead of opting for raw power and utilizing four engines, the N-149 was meant to be the smallest option available while still performing just as well as its competitors. In comparison, the N-126 would be 85 ft (25.9 m)long with a wingspan of 62 ft (19 m), while the N-149 would be 70 ft (21.5 m) long with a wingspan of 50 ft (15.5 m). This size decrease would save cost, space and fuel consumption. The N-149 used the same wing layout as the previous entries and would also retain the E-9A fire control system and accompanying radar. Given the advancements of the N-144’s wings, it is likely the N-149 would also benefit from them as well. The N-149 did not use Wright J67 jet engines like the N-126 and N-144, but would instead use General Electric J79 engines. These engines were longer than the J67 but would benefit the aircraft, given its small size, to achieve the required speed and rate of climb. The bicycle landing gear with outer wing gear was once again used, but now with two wheels on each gear like the N-126. The armament for the N-149 was less than its predecessors, but it would make up for weapons in the amount able to be built. Once again, eight Falcon AAMs and forty-eight 2.75in rockets were standard, but alternative armaments would be a single Sparrow AAM, four Sidewinder AAMs, another 105 2.75 in rockets or 270 2 in rockets. Additional armament could be mounted on four external hardpoints like the N-126 and N-144, however, two of these would be taken up by external fuel tanks. These tanks would be 600 gal (2,730 l). The majority of the fuel would be in a large tank that spanned the fuselage and into the wings and would carry 2,050 gal (9,320 l) of fuel. Northrop expected a first flight of the aircraft by the summer of 1957.
The Program Concludes
Detailed drawing of the N-149 with cutaway
Although Northrop is the center of this article, Boeing, Douglas, Lockheed, Martin, McDonnell, North American, Chance-Vought, Grumman and Convair all submitted designs. When the assessment of all the designs was completed, it was concluded that none of the proposals exactly met up the set requirements. The N-144, however, came the closest to meeting the specification. After assessment, the N-144 had a predicted speed of Mach 1.76, a combat ceiling of 58,500 ft (17,800 m) and a combat range of 1,015 nm (1,880 km).
McDonnell’s design came close, as it could go faster and reach the same altitude, but its range was much less compared to the N-144. Materials Command was not too keen of the N-144 and it is obvious why. The cost, production and maintenance of it would be tremendous. Given its four engines, the aircraft would require much more maintenance compared to its two-engine competitors. Producing such a large aircraft would be extremely costly given its size and engine count. The best option for performance would also be the worst option considering its cost.
Its siblings didn’t meet the specifications as well. No reason was put out as to why the N-126 failed the competition, but given the state of the program, it can easily be assumed it didn’t meet either the range, speed, or altitude requirements. The N-149 did have a specified reason for its rejection, though. After taking off at full power and reaching its maximum height, it would only offer 20 minutes of flight, with 5 minutes at full power for combat. Having your aircraft destroy as many bombers before reaching their target is necessary and only 5 minutes wouldn’t be sufficient to fulfill its duty. Ultimately, WS-202A wouldn’t produce any aircraft. The requirements had gone too high, and the companies wouldn’t be able to produce a cost effective aircraft in time that would meet the expected specifications. The program would go on to become the new LRI-X program in October of 1954, and Northrop would be one of three companies tasked with creating a new interceptor, which their Delta-Wing trio would surely influence in a number of ways.
Variants
Northrop N-126 (February 1953) – The 1953 N-126 Delta Scorpion was an improvement upon the F-89D Scorpion by having a delta wing and YJ67 engines.
Northrop N-126 (1954) – The 1954 version of the N-126 no longer resembled the F-89 but was now longer and more streamlined.
Northrop N-144 – The N-144 would be the second design submitted to the LRI competition. It was much larger than the other two submissions and would utilize four engines.
Northrop N-149 – The N-149 was the smallest of the three designs and was meant to be the best performing for its size. It looked visually similar to the N-126 but would carry slightly less ordnance and utilize Gen Elec XJ79-GE-1 jet engines over the Wright J67-W-1s.
Operators
United States of America – All three designs would have been operated by the United States Air Force had they been constructed.
Northrop N-126 – Artist Impression of the Delta Scorpion in USAF Prototype StageNorthrop N-144 – Artist Impression of the N-144 the in Late Prototype StageNorthrop N-149 – Artist Impression of the N-149 in service with the 171 Fighter Interceptor Squadron, Michigan, circa 1960s
3-Way drawing of the N-126 Delta Scorpion [US Secret Fighter Projects]3-Way drawing of the N-149 [US Secret Fighter Projects]Underside quarter view of the N-126 model [US Secret Fighter Projects]
3 view drawing of the N-126 Delta ScorpionA photo of the N-126 Delta Scorpion in wind tunnel testing
3-Way drawing of the N-149 [US Secret Fighter Projects]Colored photo of the N-149 model. Note the tail has been slightly damaged. [US Secret Fighter Projects]Rear view of the N-149 model. Damage to the tail is evident here. [American Secret Projects: Fighters & Interceptors, 1945-1978]Credits
Static model of the standard P.105. [British Secret Projects]The Boulton-Paul P.105 is a little known single-engine aircraft meant to fill a variety of carrier-based roles. To do so, the P.105 would utilize a unique and innovative design that involved having interchangeable fuselage and cockpit modules that would pertain to a certain mission, and could be changed quickly to fill a needed role aboard carriers or other airbases. The design was not picked up for unknown reasons but its story doesn’t end there. The design would develop further into the P.107, a land-based escort version of the P.105. The P.107 would have a rear-facing turret and a twin boom tail design to allow greater traverse of the gun. This design wouldn’t be adopted either and the program would conclude before the war’s end.
History
Late in the Second World War, the Royal Naval Air Arm began seeking out an aircraft design that would be able to fill both the fighter and bomber roles. Having one aircraft perform multiple roles would eliminate the specialization of carrier-borne aircraft needed to fill the fighter, dive bomber, and torpedo bomber roles. No official requirement was ever put out to build such an aircraft, but several companies had begun developing aircraft that would fit this role, which had become known as the “Strike Fighter”. Westland, Blackburn, Fairey and Boulton-Paul would all develop designs that correspond to the strike fighter role. Boulton-Paul’s aircraft design would be known as the P.105.
Boulton-Paul is a lesser-known aircraft company which only had a single major type of aircraft enter mass production during the Second World War: the Defiant. The Defiant reflected a lot of their aircraft designs, which were all somewhat unorthodox. . In the Defiant’s case, it was a fighter with a rear turret. Boulton-Paul were much more successful in developing turrets for use on other aircraft, such as the Handley-Page Halifax, Blackburn Roc (which they co-developed alongside Blackburn), Lockheed Hudson and the late war Avro Lincoln. Despite having only one combat aircraft enter production, Boulton-Paul had a very active development section, although most of their designs would stay on the drawing board, with a few being lucky enough to receive prototypes. The designs came from an engineer named J. D. North, who was the main aircraft designer for Boulton-Paul. Before work started on their Strike Fighter design, North had been working on their P.103 and P.104 designs for the Naval Air Arm. The P.103 was an ultra-fast fighter design that utilized a contra-rotating propeller and a Griffon 61 or Centaurus engine. The P.103 wasn’t picked up for production, but North would use many aspects of the P.103 in the P.105. The contra-rotating propeller would once again be used, while the engine would start as a Griffon 61 but shift over to a Centaurus engine later.
3 way drawing of the P.105. Note the spotter’s lower window. [British Secret Projects]The P.105 was meant to be a small, high-performing aircraft that could easily be converted to fill other roles, even carrier duties. To do so, it would use a unique idea. To fill the variety of carrier-borne roles, the P.105 would have modular cockpit and bomb bay sections. The interchangable modules included a torpedo-bomber (P.105A), reconnaissance aircraft (P.105B), fighter (P.105C) and dive-bomber (No designation given). Each section would have minor differences between them that fit their respective roles. With this system, more P.105 airframes could be stored in hangars and carriers, while the additional modules would take up less space than other aircraft specified for specific roles, thus increasing the combat capacity of the carrier the P.105 would be stationed on. Boulton Paul expected the aircraft to be very high performance and the P.105C version would be an excellent penetration fighter. Before any specifications were estimated, it was decided to switch from a Griffon 61 engine to the Centaurus inline engine. The brochure on the details of the aircraft was submitted to the RNAA, but no order for production came about. Exactly why it wasn’t adopted is unknown. The reasoning may come from the module system, as it could have been novel in concept, but complex in reality. Another reason could be that current aircraft at the time were deemed to have been performing adequately and didn’t need such a replacement.
3 way drawing of the P.107. Note the sliding aft canopy and smaller profile of the twin tail rudders. [British Secret Projects]Although the P.105 wasn’t granted production, its story continues in the Boulton-Paul P.107. The P.107 is an intriguing design since very little information pertaining to its development history is available, but its design and specifications has been found. It can be assumed the P.107 began development during or shortly after the P.105 had been created. The P.107 wouldn’t be operated by the RNAA, but instead by the Royal Air Force as a long-range escort fighter. Major differences between the P.107 and P.105 include the lack of folding wings, the removal of the torpedo blister, the addition of a turret and the switch from a single rudder to a twin tail design to improve the firing angle of the turret. The P.107 could also be configured for different roles, but it is unknown if it used the same module system the P.105 used. The P.107 wasn’t selected for production either.
Design
The Boulton-Paul P.105 had a conventional fighter layout. In the front, it would utilize a contra-rotating propeller that had reversible pitch. Originally, the design would have mounted a Griffon 61 engine but was changed in favor of the Centaurus engine instead. The wings on the P.105 were inverted gull wings, much like those on the Vought F4U Corsair or Junkers Ju 87 Stuka. To conserve space in carriers, the wings would be able to fold. The fuselage had the most interesting aspect of the P.105 overall and that was its interchangeable cockpit and lower fuselage modules. Each variant of the P.105 would use different modules that would pertain to the intended role it served. The P.105A was a torpedo bomber and would use the torpedo blister present under the tail. The P.105B was a reconnaissance aircraft, and its cockpit would sit a pilot and observer. It would use a glass hull beneath the observer to assist in spotting. The P.105C was an escort fighter and would be a one-man aircraft. The last was a dive-bomber version, which only has very sparse details available. The dive bomber would carry two 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs, most likely in an internal bomb bay module. The tail of the aircraft would be a conventional rudder and tailplane arrangement. The armament of the P.105 was a standard two to four 12.7mm machine-guns in the wings of the aircraft, with the only deviation being the P.105C, which would use four 20mm cannons instead.
Papercraft model of the P.107 [Kartonbau.de]The P.107 borrowed many aspects of the P.105 design, but changed some details to better fit its role. The engine and frontal section would stay the same, keeping the contra-rotating propellers and Centaurus engine. Reference materials refer to the aircraft as being able to convert from an escort fighter to either a fighter-bomber or photo reconnaissance aircraft. However, whether it was conventional conversion or via the module system the P.105 used is unknown, the latter being most likely. The wing design would stay the same, with the inverted gull wing style. Given its land-based nature, the wings no longer folded to conserve space and the torpedo blister under the tail was removed. Behind the pilot, a gunner would sit and remotely control two 12.7mm machine guns. The machine-guns would be housed within the aircraft, with only the ends of the barrel protruding out. To give the gunner a better firing arc, the single tailfin was switched to a double tailfin. The turret and twin tail design are the most obvious differences between the P.107 and P.105. The aircraft’s fuel would be stored in a main tank and two smaller drop tanks. Fuel amount was expected to give the aircraft a 3,000 mi (4,827 km) range, with up to 30 minutes of combat. The drop tanks could be switched for 2,000 Ib (900 Kg) of bombs. For offensive armament, the P.107 would use four 20m cannons mounted in the wings.
Papercraft model of the P.107 [Kartonbau.de]
Variants
Boulton Paul P.105A– Torpedo bomber version of the P.105.
Boulton Paul P.105B– Reconnaissance version of the P.105. This version would have a glazed hull for the observer.
Boulton Paul P.105C– Fighter version of the P.105.
Boulton Paul P.105 Dive bomber– Dive bomber version of the P.105. No designation was given to this design.
Boulton Paul P.107– Land-based escort fighter derived from the P.105. The P.107 was near identical to the P.105 but had a twin boom tail to allow better vision and turn radius for a rear mounted turret. Photo reconnaissance and fighter bomber versions of the P.107 are also mentioned.
Operators
Great Britain – Had it been built, the P.105 would have been used by the Royal Fleet Air Arm. The P.107 would have been used by the RAF for escort duty had it been built.
Austro-Hungarian Empire (1916)
Triplane Bomber Prototype – 1 built
Front view of the Luftkreuzer colorized by Michael Jucan
The Lloyd 40.08 was a prototype triplane bomber built for Austria-Hungary under an order for a new bomber by the Luftfahrtruppen (LFT, Aviation Troops) in 1915. The 40.08 “Luftkreuzer” (Air Cruiser) was a twin boom design that would have carried 200 kg of bombs into battle. The aircraft had frequent problems with its design, such as being front-heavy and the center of gravity being too high. Attempts to fix the issues were minimal and it would never fly. The aircraft was sent to a scrapyard in the end, but it was an interesting venture of a now-defunct empire.
History
World War I showcased the first widespread use of combat airplanes and the subsequent specialization of aircraft to fit certain roles. Bombers proved their effectiveness and most countries involved developed some sort of bomber for their early air forces. One shining example is the Gotha series of bombers, which were able to bomb London and eventually replace Zeppelin raids entirely. The Austro-Hungarian Empire was no exception to building their own bombers. At the time, in 1915, Austria-Hungary was fighting on several fronts, with the ongoing Russian front dragging on and by May, Italy had joined and had begun fighting its neighbor. A new bomber would be a helpful addition to Austria-Hungary’s military.
Direct frontal view of the Luftkreuzer [armedconflict.com]In 1915, the Luftfahrtruppen sent out an order for a 3-engine bomber design. The exact date the order was given in 1915 is unknown, but it is very likely the order was a reaction to Italy joining the war, as similarly, Austria-Hungary attempted to buy Hansa-Brandenburg G.1 bombers to bolster their aircraft complement. The requirement specified that two engines would be mounted inside fuselages and the main engine in a central hull. The bomb payload would be 440 Ibs (200 kg) and defenses would be six machine guns mounted around the aircraft. Expected flying time was up to 6 hours. Given the long flying time, strategic bombing might have been in mind but the bomb load is much smaller compared to other bombers in the role. Tactical bombing would be more practical in the long run for the aircraft. Three companies would submit their designs and would be awarded funding: Oeffag, Phönix, and Lloyd.
Lloyd was one of several aircraft manufacturers in Austria-Hungary. Most of their aircraft that entered production were reconnaissance planes, but they had designed and built several experimental designs as well, some of which had unique and unorthodox designs, such as their FJ 40.05 Reconnaissance/Fighter hybrid. Their bomber design would also verge on to the strange. This would be the only bomber the company would produce. Lloyd came forward with two designs in January of 1916, the Luftkreuzer I and the Luftkreuzer II. The first would eventually be redesignated the 40.08 and the second would be redesignated the 40.10. A complete 40.08 was constructed by June 20th, 1916 and was ready for testing. Given there is no further evidence of work on production examples of the 40.10, it can be assumed the 40.08 was chosen over this design.
Engine testing would shortly begin with the 40.08 at the Aszod Airport. Early testing showed the design was severely flawed. The center of gravity was too high and the aircraft was too front heavy. During ground testing, this problem became clear with the aircraft tipping forward, resulting in damage to the front. A frontal wheel was added to fix this problem, as well as other minor changes. With the modifications completed in Aspern (a section of Vienna), the aircraft was slated to finally take off, with a pilot being assigned to the aircraft. The aircraft would attemp a take off in October of 1916, with Oberleutnant Antal Lányi-Lanczendorfer at the controls. Attempts at flight proved the aircraft was too heavy as well and it would never get truly airborne. A solution came with reducing the bomb load to decrease the takeoff-weight, but at the cost of ordnance.
Little work was done on the aircraft between October and November. In December, large rails were fixed to the bottom of the aircraft, replacing the tailings on the aircraft in February of 1917. With the number of problems the Luftkreuzer faced, it was obvious it would not be possible to improve the plane fast enough for it to have any value on the battlefields of Europe. In March of 1917, all work had stopped on the Luftkreuzer after an attempt to revise the aircraft was denied. The sole Luftkreuzer was sent to storage where it would remain for almost a year. In January of 1918, what was left of the aircraft was taken to an aircraft boneyard and destroyed in Cheb (located in soon to be Czechoslovakia). Thus concludes the story of Austria-Hungary’s attempted triplane bomber.
Austria-Hungary itself wouldn’t survive by the end of the year and would dissolve into Austria and Hungary and new national states such as Czechoslovakia. This wouldn’t be the only bomber built nor used in Austria-Hungary. Several other companies had designed large bombers, but none of these would enter production either. The only bombers that would be operated by the Luftfahrtruppen and see combat would be German and license-built Hansa-Brandenburg G.1s. These were bought in 1916 and would go on a single sortie before being sent to training duty, as they were found to be heavily outdated by the time they arrived on the battlefield. In the end, Austria-Hungary wouldn’t see itself using a mass-produced bomber.
Design
Side view of the Luftkreuzer, notice the absence of a frontal wheel and the side window of the cockpit. [armedconflict.com]The Luftkreuzer was a large triplane, twin-boom design. On the end of each boom, an Austro-Daimler 6-cylinder engine was mounted in tractor configuration (engine faced forward) and ended with a wooden propeller. These propellers did not counter rotate. Each boom itself was a reused fuselage taken from the Lloyd C.II aircraft. Each wing on the aircraft was actually a different length; with the top wing having a 76.3 ft (23.26 m) wingspan, the middle wing with a 73.42 ft (22.38 m) wingspan and the lower wing being 55.2 ft (16.84 m) wingspan. The central wing would be connected to the main fuselage and booms while the upper and lower wings would be connected via struts.
The main hull was rather tall and was one of the causes for why the aircraft was so front heavy and had such a high center of gravity. The cockpit was located beneath the upper wing and had several windows on both sides. The lower extended area was where the bombardier would sit, and was between the middle and lower wings. The central hull also contained the main engine, an Austro-Daimler 12-cylinder water-cooled engine in a pusher configuration. This engine was linked to a wooden two-bladed propeller. The hull was designed in a way so that the gunners would have a clear field of vision. Despite its prototype status, the aircraft was fully marked with the Luftfahrtruppen’s insignia, including one very large symbol painted directly in the front of this aircraft. The Luftkreuzer originally only had two main landing gear legs, with 4 wheels being mounted to each leg. When it was realized the aircraft was front heavy, a 3rd landing gear leg was directly in front of the central hull. No photos exist that show this third landing gear leg.
The armament would consist of 4 machine guns and 440 Ibs (200 kg) of bombs. The bombs would be mounted in the main central hull. The machine guns would most likely be Schwarzloses. These guns would be placed around the airframe, with two being in the central hull and the other two being located in the side hulls. Certain gunner stations would be equipped with a searchlight to aid in night missions. The aircraft was never fully armed before being scrapped, but it is likely it was loaded with bombs or ballast, given that the aircraft had weight issues before taking off and the solution given was to lower the bomb load.
Variants
Lloyd 40.08 – The only version of the aircraft built. Never truly flew.
Operators
Austro-Hungarian Empire– The Lloyd 40.08 was built in and for the Austro-Hungarian Empire’s Lufthahrtruppen, but did not see action.
*Given that the aircraft never truly flew, speed and similar flight statistics were never found.
Lloyd 40.08 Specifications
Wingspan
76 ft 3 in / 23.26 m
Length
31 ft 3 in / 9.6 m
Height
16ft 5 in / 5 m
Wing Area
110.0 ft² / 10.2 m²
Engine
1 × Pusher Austro-Daimler 12-cylinder water cooled engine 300 hp (224 kW)
2 × Tractor Austro-Daimler 6-cylinder inline water-cooled engines 160 hp (120 kW)
Weight
10,670 Ibs / 4840 kg
Endurance
Maximum 6 hours of flight
Crew
4-5
Armament
440 Ibs (200kg) of bombs
4 × 0.315 in (8 mm) Schwarzlose machine guns
Gallery
Lloyd-40.08 Side Profile View by Ed JacksonFrontal shot [dieselpunks.com]
United Kingdom (1915 & 1917)
Anti-Airship Fighter – 1 Each Built
Supermarine PB.31E Nighthawk
In 1915, Germany began bombing Great Britain by Zeppelin. For the first time, Britain itself was under threat by enemy aircraft. Early attempts to counter the Zeppelins were ineffective. The Royal Air Corps needed an aircraft to be able to endure long, nighttime missions to chase the Zeppelins. The Pemberton-Billing aircraft company designed the PB.29E quadruplane for this task. The aircraft didn’t perform as hoped, but before a final conclusion could be made it was lost in a crash. Years later in 1917, with the company under new management and renamed Supermarine, the program would rise again as the PB.31E. The PB.31E was dubbed the Nighthawk, and like its predecessor, proved to be ineffective in the role. The fighter is significant for its unusually large quadruplane layout and the first aircraft to be built by Supermarine.
History
The arrival of the Zeppelin in 1915 as a new type of weapon was an unwelcome one. It offered a new way of strategic bombing, as Zeppelins were faster and able to ascend higher than aircraft at the time. Zeppelins also served as a weapon of terror, as the civilians of England had never been faced with anything like it before, especially since the Zeppelins attacked mainly at night. Early attempts to counter Zeppelin raids proved ineffective, as anti-aircraft guns had a hard time spotting and aiming at the Zeppelins. Early forms of countermeasures involved aircraft dropping flares to illuminate the Zeppelins for gunners to see. None of these aircraft were used to actually intercept the airships. The Royal Air Corps needed an aircraft that would be able to reach and pursue Zeppelins on the homefront and on the battlefield. A potential solution came from a man named Noel Pemberton Billing.
Noel Pemberton Billing (1881-1948)
Noel Pemberton Billing was a man of many talents. He was an inventor, aviator, and at one point a member of Parliament. At the time, he was invested in many forms of new technology and aircraft was one of them. Having formed his own aircraft company in 1913, he built several aircraft types for the Royal Naval Air Arm (RNAA), such as the PB.25. He had taken a short break from designing planes for the RNAA and wanted to pursue aircraft to help in the war effort. The task of taking on Zeppelins got him interested in designing a plane to fill the role.
His answer was the PB.29E, a quadruplane aircraft. Information regarding the PB.29E is sparse and no specifications can be found for it. To get the aircraft to the altitudes at which Zeppelins usually lurked, Pemberton Billing applied triplane principles in making the aircraft, except taking it a step further and adding an extra wing. Having more wings, in theory, would assist with lift, a necessary factor when trying to chase the high-flying Zeppelins. Work began in late 1915, with the aircraft being finished before winter. The PB.29E was intended to fly for very long missions and needed to operate at night. To assist in spotting the behemoths, a small searchlight was to be mounted in the nose of the aircraft. The sole PB.29E crashed in early 1916. From test flights, the aircraft proved to be cumbersome and would not have been able to pursue Zeppelins. The two Austro-Daimler engines did not prove to be sufficient for the intended role, and performance suffered from it.
German Navy – R Class Zeppelin L 31
On September 20th, 1916, Noel Pemberton Billing sold his company to Hubert Scott Paine so he could become a member of Parliament. His career in Parliament was full of slander and conspiracy, and ultimately negatively affected the war effort. Soon after being acquired, Paine renamed the company as the soon to be famous Supermarine Aviation Works, in honor of the firm’s telegraph address. Work continued on a Zeppelin interceptor, which would eventually become the PB.31E. The PB.31E was technically the first aircraft built by Supermarine and it resembled a larger and more advanced version of the PB.29E. It retained many aspects from its predecessor: the quadruplane layout, the mounted searchlight, and endurance for long nighttime missions. The armament was expanded with a second Lewis gun mounted in the rear cockpit as well as a Davis gun mounted on top of the cockpit above the wings. To make the crew more comfortable, the cockpit was fully enclosed, heated, and had a bunk for crewmembers. The Austro-Daimler engines were replaced by 100hp Anzani radial engines. Expected speed was 75 mph (121 km/h) and it was to operate up to 18 hours.
The design team poses in front of the newly completed Nighthawk, fourth from the left is R.J Mitchell.
The aircraft was constructed in February of 1917, with a second in the works. On board the project was R.J Mitchell, the future designer of the Supermarine Spitfire. He began as a drafstman for the company and several designs concerning the fuselage and gun mounts of the PB.31E are labeled with his name. To the engineers, the aircraft was dubbed the Supermarine Nighthawk, however, this name was never official. Early flights were conducted at the Eastchurch airfield by test pilot Clifford B. Prodger. Tests showed that, like its predecessor, the engines weren’t capable of propelling the aircraft to its desired level of performance. To reach altitudes most Zeppelins were found at took an hour. Not to mention, newer Zeppelins could go even higher. Its expected 75 mph (121 km/h) top speed was never reached, with the aircraft only going 60 mph (96 km/h). However, it had a safe 35 mph (56 km/h) landing speed, which would have given the aircraft easy landing capability. With the performance lacking, the RAC deemed the project to be a dead end.
With the introduction of new incendiary rounds which easily ignited Zeppelins, Britain could defend itself with the improved AA guns. Along with the new rounds, the RAC started using the Royal Aircraft Factory B.E.2 to intercept Zeppelins at night. Originally intended for dogfighting, the B.E.2 proved to be ineffective and slow against fighters, but Zeppelins were easier, and much larger targets. With the Nighthawk now not needed, Supermarine ended up scrapping the first and incomplete second prototypes in 1917. Although the Nighthawk would never have been successful had it entered production, it still represents major innovations in aircraft design. It was one of the first true night-fighting aircraft to be designed, a concept later heavily utilized in the Second World War. The honor of being the first aircraft built by Supermarine under their name also goes to the Nighthawk.
Design
Overhead and side schematic views of the PB.29E
The PB.29E was a quadruplane designed to chase and intercept Zeppelins. Its fuselage was mounted between the lower two wings, with a gunner port being mounted in the upper two wings, leaving an opening in the middle between the two. Two crewmembers occupied the central fuselage with a single gunner gunner position in a seperate section above. The cockpit was open to the elements, as well as the gunner port. For armament, a single Lewis gun was mounted for attacking Zeppelins. For engines, the PB.29E had two Austro-Daimler six-cylinder engines in a pusher configuration. The tail itself was doubled.
Schematics for the Nighthawk with R.J Mitchell’s initials.
The PB.31E was a quadruplane like the PB.29E, but it was larger utilized a different fuselage design. Instead of having the fuselage between the lower two wings, the PB.31E positioned its body between the middle two wings. The body itself was of all wooden construction. To reduce splinters if the aircraft was fired upon or in the event of a crash, the fuselage was taped and covered in heavy fabric. To make the long missions more comfortable the cockpit was heated and completely enclosed by glass. A bunk was added for one crew member to rest during the flights as well, as the expected flights could last up to 18 hours. A searchlight mounted protruding from the center of the nose for use in patrols at night. The searchlight was movable to allow pointing it at different targets. It was powered by an onboard dynamo hooked up to a 5hp A.B.C petrol engine. For fuel storage, the PB.31E had 9 individual petrol tanks located around the cockpit area. The tanks were built to be interchanged if they were damaged or empty. In the front of the aircraft were several slits behind the searchlight that would assist in cooling. The wings of the PB.31E had significant cord to them. The tailplane was doubled like on the PB.29E, and the tail itself was lower to allow the rear mounted Lewis gun more range
The newly completed PB.29E, the gunner position between the two topmost wings is easily visible
of fire. For engines, the PB.31E had two Anzani radial engines in tractor configuration. These engines gave the PB.31E its slow speed of 60 mph (96 km/h), and its hour-long ascent to 10,000 ft (3000 m). The fluid lines, controls and other parts connected to the engines were placed outside the fuselage in armored casings. For armament, the PB.31E carried a frontal Lewis gun, a top mounted Davis recoilless gun and a rear Lewis gun. The Davis gun was built on a mount that allowed an easy range of motion in most directions. Lewis gun ammo was stored in six double cartridges and 10 Davis gun rounds were stored onboard as well. Also on board were an unknown amount of incendiary flares to be dropped should a Zeppelin be directly below the craft.
Variants
29E– First aircraft built for the Anti-Zeppelin role. Armed with a single Lewis gun. Crashed during testing.
31E– Second aircraft. One prototype and one unfinished plane. Resembled a larger version of the PB.29E. Carried a Davis gun and two Lewis guns. Scrapped once the design was deemed unworthy.
Operators
Great Britain – The two prototypes were built and tested in England.
Pemberton-Billing PB.29ESupermarine PB.31 NighthawkThe PB.29E under construction in WoolstonA frontal view of the PB.29E, note the searchlightThe newly constructed Nighthawk sits in a hangar at WoolstonThe Nighthawk on the runway, notice the weapons and spotlight are absent
German Empire (1898)
Nazi Germany (1944)
German Empire (1915)
United States of America (1945)
United Kingdom (1944)
Austro-Hungarian Empire (1916)
