Mitsubishi J2M Raiden “Jack”

Empire of Japan (1942)

Fighter – 621 Built

The Raiden proved to be an oddity during the Second World War. Beset by numerous technical challenges, it entered service amidst the most brutal air campaigns of the Second World War. (Phillip Jarrett)

Intro

The J2M Raiden, Japanese for Thunderbolt, was developed to provide the Japanese Navy with an interceptor for the defense of its bases in China and across the Pacific. While it was designed with many of the most advanced technologies available to Japanese aviation, its development was fraught with technical issues and resource competition with the Navy’s premier fighter, the A6M Zero. After several years in troubled development, it entered service in the last line of defense against the American Army Air Force and Navy, which had taken the war to the skies over Japan itself.

Foundations

Japanese military aviation began early, but ambitiously, with the Navy launching its first naval air attacks from the seaplane carrier Wakamiya against various German targets during the First World War. There was little damage done with these light, and very crude, seaplane bombers, yet it was clear that as the technology matured, aviation would take a key role in any future conflict.

Following the end of the first world war, Japan claimed former German territories across the pacific, and sought greater control over China, then embroiled in a brutal civil conflict. The Washington Naval treaty would affirm the integrity of Chinese territory regardless of the wars, and assure equal economic rights for those wishing to trade in the region, and the Empire of Japan would not contest these principles through the 1920’s. However, its armed forces nonetheless planned and lobbied for ambitious policies that would wrest control of most of Asia from the Chinese, and the Pacific from the Europeans and United States of America. However, as a still nascent industrial power, Japan had much to learn regarding the cutting military technologies that they would need to challenge their many planned opponents.

A longstanding alliance with the United Kingdom had brought rapid advancements in both military and related civil fields. This was only one part of a military partnership that had once challenged Russian ambitions in Asia, and had led them against the Germans in the Great War. By the end of that war, this alliance was wearing thin, with both sides now holding opposing goals across Asia and the Pacific. Yet one final major transfer of technology would catapult Japanese aviation ahead, before military coordination with Britain finally lapsed. Following a request for technological assistance in aviation in 1920, the Sempill mission was organized to bring Japanese expertise in aircraft design and development up to modern standards. While there were clear concerns that this technology might be used to challenge British interests in the future, major economic partnerships and sales with Japan proved a stronger motivation.

The mission arrived at Kasumigaura in 1921, led by former RAF officer Baron Sir Williams Frances-Forbes. Along with a cadre of experts in airplane design, construction, and use, the mission brought a collection of aircraft. Over a hundred planes in total were delivered to Kasumigaura, accounting for modern military aircraft of every type available to the mission planners. To the Japanese military, this technology exchange was as generous as they could have hoped for, and put them on a faster track to self-sufficiency. This massive leap in technical abilities would define Japanese aviation moving forward, giving their industry a firm grasp on modern construction techniques and technologies, but still lacking depth in manufacturing.

While they would continue to be reliant on licensed equipment for the years to follow, they now had a strong technical foundation from which to build on. Just as this assistance ended, so too did the alliance with Britain, which lapsed in 1923. The very same year, the Navy would select the United States as its chief ‘hypothetical enemy’, against which future war plans would be focused.

War Games

The aviation industry was slow growing, beginning with cottage industries that eventually grew into major enterprises, that later made the leap from licensed equipment to their own designs. The largest of these manufacturers were Mitsubishi, Nakajima, and Kawasaki, which provided the nucleus for the rest of the cottage industry based aviation sector. Arguably the largest of these was Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, through its branch, the Mitsubishi Internal Combustion Engine Co. at Kobe. Concurrent with the Sempill mission, the company’s aircraft manufacturing effort was shifted to Nagoya, which would remain the center for Mitsubishi’s aircraft development and production. In the years to come, additional production plants would sprout from the main facilities in Nagoya, with separate air frame and engine departments being founded by 1935.

Given the state of aviation in Japan in the late twenties, the first major war plans against the United States made very little use of aircraft, with the plan being to draw the US fleet into Japanese territorial waters where it could then be devastated in a decisive battle, the outcome of which would decide the fate of untold millions. The rationale and foundation for these plans was to develop superior technologies in key areas, and in all others, the supposed superior qualities of the Japanese soldier would allow them to persevere, confident in the belief that material shortcomings were minor impediments to seizing a victory that was destined. In practice, they initially sought to out-match the enemy in the areas of long range gunnery and torpedo warfare, to claim a decisive edge against an enemy which was beginning to eclipse them. Yet, in time, the need to master the air would come before all else, as it became clear air power could make up for disparities elsewhere.

The battleship defined naval might for nearly half a century. Against these behemoths, the airplane would maintain a small supporting role, before the technology matured and it took center stage. (oldtokyo)

Battleships defined the plan until the mid 1930’s, with aviation playing a very small role until several crucial technical developments were rolled out. Aircraft at the time had a very limited range of action, had small payloads, and were very fragile. The coming war for the Pacific would be waged against a number of very powerful opponents, and such a battlefield would be vast and feature the most powerful pieces of military equipment in existence, modern warships. It was the development of all-metal, streamlined, monoplanes that proved to be the deciding factor in shifting the idea of the airplane as a defensive weapon and reconnaissance tool, to a deadly offensive weapon. The ability to conduct strikes of greater power, and scout ever larger swaths of ocean continually pushed the boundaries of military planning. The hypothetical decisive battle was taking place further than the originally conceived battlefield in Japanese home waters, and by the late 1930’s, it was judged to take place around the Marianas.

In the Navy’s plans, torpedo and dive bombing aircraft were pursued enthusiastically, with fighters far less so. Seen as a mostly defensive weapon, there was little development in their advancement or tactics between the Sempill mission and the end of the 1920’s. This changed after a pair of RAF officers were invited to present a five month fighter course in 1930, and a larger fighter maintenance and employment course was provided the next year, again with RAF personnel. The naval air combat program would soon grow under Lt. Kobayashi Yoshito, Lt. Genda Minoru, and Lt. Okamura Motoharu at the Yokosuka Naval Air Base. By this time, there were two major issues with the program, the first being the general reluctance for defensive tactics by the Japanese Navy, and the fact that bombers by this time were capable of out-pacing their pursuers. With their relatively crude Nakajima Biplane fighters, there was little that could be done to face and bring down modern bombers. Yet the fighter advocates held out, and waited for new planes, ones that could demonstrate their necessity on carrier flight decks and naval air bases.

Horikoshi and the Zero

By the mid 1930’s, there was a swell of engineers who had been schooled in the advancements brought forth by the Sempill Mission, and a good number who had traveled abroad to see new technologies and techniques in use with the forerunners of aviation. It was this latter group that was the most pessimistic about Japan’s ability to wage war against the US, as they were witness to America’s vast manufacturing potential and technological expertise in all the fields relevant to the war in which their own work would one day contribute. During this time, Japan had invaded Manchuria, and planned for a greater war which could place China in their orbit. Needing to modernize, the Navy sought to push past the old Nakajima N4A, which had become very dated by 1934, and obtain a fighter which could match the performance of the bombers it chased. New high speed fighter requirements were prepared by Lt. Cmdr. Sawai Hideo from the Department of Engineering at the Naval Air Arsenal, and released to the industry.

Horikoshi Jiro had studied at the brand new Department of Aeronautics at the University of Tokyo, which at the time, numbered only 39 people, staff and students. From there he went on to work at the Mitsubishi Internal Combustion Engine Co. at its aircraft department, working first on the basic, yet essential tasks of running performance and strength calculations, and designing various components. In time, he would be selected to study foreign methods of aircraft construction, and would travel to Germany, France, Britain, and the United States to tour factories and study the planes they built. While Japan was clearly still lagging behind the leaders in aeronautics, he knew a quick path to design parity was only a few leaps away.

However, despite his belief Japan could find a way to produce its own cutting edge military aircraft, Jiro remained pessimistic about the Empire’s chances in a war with the United States, having toured the aircraft manufacturing plants in America himself. He would remark in later years, after learning of the attack on Pearl Harbor, that “-The majority of us who had truly understood the awesome industrial strength of the United States never really believed that Japan would win this war. We were convinced that surely our government had in mind some diplomatic measures which would bring the conflict to a halt before that situation became catastrophic for Japan.” Yet well before the dawning of the Pacific War, he continued his work in pushing the boundaries of aeronautics in Japan.

The Mitsubishi Ka-14 test aircraft would be developed into Japan’s first modern fighter, it was nothing less than the leap Horikoshi envisioned for Japanese aviation. (Aviation of Japan)

Understanding that the monowing fighter would be the future of its class, with its obvious advantages in drag reduction and strength, he would pursue designs of this type from his first attempt. It would not go well, as there were many technical challenges that had to be overcome, but overcome he would, and his next design would prove phenomenal. For the 1934 Naval requirements for the year 9 carrier fighter, he would submit the Mitsubishi Ka-14, later modified into the A5M fighter. A superlative modern fighter, it impressed the Navy enough to purchase a large number of the aircraft.

The A5M would prove to be the start of an exceptional career for one of the era’s foremost aeronautical engineers, a major leap for the Japanese aero industry, and it gave the Japanese Navy proof that fighters were an essential investment in any future war. It proved a decisive success in China, but as is always the case, a successor needed to be planned for. For the next carrier fighter, the Navy released the planning requirements for the year 12 carrier fighter. They had effectively asked for the impossible, a plane that needed to be able to act as an interceptor, a long range escort, and air superiority fighter. To make a long story short, Horikoshi managed to design a plane which met the requirements, and produced the A6M Type 0 fighter.

Horikoshi Jiro, pictured center. His meteoric rise with the A5M and A6M would see him at the center of a number of new projects. Soon overworked, he found himself trying to design two new fighters for the navy, while keeping the Zero up to date. (wikimedia)

In addition to this aircraft, which would become the primary fighter of the Japanese Navy, another design would be requested in October of 1938. A local fighter, a dedicated interceptor to defend Japanese positions in both China and the Pacific from enemy bombers. While a seemingly simple request, it represented a rapid and enormous shift in naval strategy. At the outset of the 1920s, the airplane was little more than a novelty which played a supporting role. Experience in the agonizing war in China showed that bombers could now threaten the Navy’s ports and airfields, such that a specialized aircraft was needed to counter them. Gone was the reluctance that dogged officers like Lt. Genda in pursuing a purely defensive aircraft.

The fact that the Navy was developing a land based fighter at all, while the Army had several designs at its disposal, was a factor of the vicious inter-service politics that defined their relationship. Both vied for supremacy over control of national politics and industrial resources, and so competitive that they denied each other use of the same designs. Concurrent with the Navy interceptor project, the Army was also seeking an aircraft for the same role, in their case the Ki 44 Shoki. Resources spent on these parallel efforts were a major handicap to both the Army and Navy, and would prove catastrophic to the overall Japanese war effort as later events would show.

The Navy’s request for the interceptor called for a maximum speed of 323 kts at an altitude of 6 km, a landing speed no greater than 70 kts, an endurance of 45 minutes, a take off run of 300 m at full load and with no wind, and it had to have the same armament as the A6M fighter, being two 20 mm machine guns, and a pair of 7.7mm guns. It was also the first Japanese fighter required to carry an armored plate behind the seat back to protect the pilot.

It was in many respects the reverse of the Zero, where maneuverability and range were sacrificed to achieve the highest possible rate of climb. However, unlike the Zero, significantly fewer resources would be available for the engineers working on the aircraft. With the Zero being made the premier fighter of the Japanese Navy, a constant stream of improvements would be ordered over the next several years, straining both the development of the Raiden, and other Mitsubishi aircraft, namely the G4M bomber.

A Troublesome Development

The original design of the Raiden featured only two exhaust stacks, and a cooling fan driven by airflow. Like many of its early features, they proved inadequate in their purpose and were replaced. (japanese-warship)

The first major design decision came in the form of the choice of engine, with two major contenders. The Aichi Atsuta, a 1200 hp V-12, and the Mitsubishi Kasei 13, a new 14 cylinder radial. The Atsuta was a licensed development of the Daimler Benz DB 601A, and as was the case with most licensed foreign designs, was being sold as it was no longer a cutting edge design in its own country. Nevertheless, the Army would use the licensed engine in their own Ki 61 fighter, developed by Kawasaki as the Ha40. Despite both engines looking identical, and being derived from the same common model, they had few interchangeable components and fittings due to conflicting Army and Navy requirements, and the differing manufacturing practices between the firms. This level of parallel effort was both extremely expensive, and not at all uncommon. For the Raiden design team, the DB 601 derivative presented a light, streamlined engine, but also one with more limited paths for improvement.

The Kasei was still in its teething period, but was substantially more powerful and had better prospects for further development. While the engine’s higher fuel consumption was not problematic given the short range requirements, its size forced some compromises. To reduce drag, the engine was set much further back from the nose of the aircraft, with an extension shaft running through the tapered cowling to the propeller. The space was also shared by the oil cooler, supplied with air from an air flow driven fan. Further aerodynamic streamlining came from setting the canopy in a shallow frame, and the use of an advanced high-speed wing with aerofoils incorporating research in laminar flow. While maneuverability was not a primary concern of the aircraft, it would receive ‘fowler flaps’ which could be deployed via a button on the yoke, enabling the aircraft to make tighter turns in combat, at the cost of speed.

The Raiden incorporated a number of advancements in aerodynamics, most notably “laminar flow” aerofoils. As with other nation’s attempts, they did not achieve laminar flow, but reduced drag and improved dive performance. (Lancero99)

The Raiden’s development was plagued by numerous technical issues from a very early stage. There were issues with the engine, the cooling system proved inadequate given the small inlet for air at the nose, and the canopy proved to be extremely cramped with major restrictions in visibility. Worse, it competed for resources with the Zero, which included the already overworked engineer Horikoshi himself, who was also tasked with designing its successor. While being developed well before the coming war with the United States, the prototype wasn’t ready until February, 1942.

The Raiden first flew on March 20, 1942 at Kasumigaura, revealing a number of major faults. Numerous engine related issues cropped up, most notably trouble with the propeller’s constant speed governor and heavy vibration. Navy pilots who went on to test the aircraft were also extremely frustrated with the curved canopy, which not only restricted the range of view, but also caused optical distortions at certain angles, which were especially pronounced on the landing approach.

However, it flew notably well, featuring high stability and responsive controls. These were not able to overshadow the aircraft’s more visible faults, and inability to meet project goals. It failed to exceed 311 kts at its target altitude, and failed to reach its time to altitude requirements. Beyond the need to increase its overall performance, members of the IJNAF’s Air Arsenal required a redesign of its canopy, and improvements to its constant speed propeller mechanism, which proved to be one of the most troublesome issues in their several weeks of testing.

The canopy was most easily remedied, replaced with a more conventional design with flat windscreen panels. However the engine remained a more vexing problem. Several issues were intertwining to make further development far harder. First was the relatively new Kasei 13 engine itself, with its own teething issues, second was the inadequate oil cooler, and there was the fact that the engine itself was to be replaced with an even newer model to allow the plane to reach its required performance, which brought its own uncertainties. The Kasei Model 23 would prove much more powerful, and a later model would add methanol-water injection, the anti-detonation properties of which allowed the engine to run at higher manifold pressures, allowing it to produce 1800 hp. There were also more minor improvements, such as the introduction of a new oil cooler beneath the nose, the air driven cooling fan was replaced with a mechanically driven one, and the addition of exhaust stacks for each cylinder. Along with the engine came a new four bladed VDM propeller with a re-balanced governor, to address the unreliability of the previous model. There was much confidence in the new engine, which was premature.

The J2M1 also had a low set canopy with a curved front windshield. While it was aerodynamically clean, it proved a serious handicap to pilots. The fowler flaps are shown deployed. (Aces Flying High)

Operating the engine at a high output would prove troublesome, with excessive exhaust smoke, and extreme vibration being apparent from the outset. The smoke proved simple enough to address via the fuel injection system, but the vibration would remain with the aircraft through its entire career. It was brought up to Horikoshi that the use of the extension shaft might be the cause, though he adamantly denied this. He was at least partially correct, as the propeller design left much to be desired. In time, the vibration issues were addressed through the use of rubber buffers on the engine mounts, which along with the redesigned propeller governor, reduced vibration to manageable, but still noticeable levels. While Japanese aviation had a number of enviable technologies at its disposal, its propeller designs lagged behind that of the US. Harmonics were thus an issue that limited the performance of all Japanese high performance engines, but were particularly harsh on the J2M.

The J2M2 resolved the canopy issues, added additional exhaust stacks, and an engine driven cooling fan. Later in its development an additional nose mounted oil cooler was added to improve cooling during long climbs in tropical heat. (zbiam)

The aircraft was re-designated J2M2, but prototyping and pre-production continued at an extremely slow pace. To make matters worse, a pair of J2M2 were lost in early testing, just as the aircraft was being prepared for large scale introduction. One was lost on a basic test flight on June 16, 1943. The test pilot, Lt. Hoashi Takumi, lost control of the aircraft and struck a barn after trying to regain control after take off. He died when the aircraft caught fire shortly after the crash. In a non-fatal incident that occurred a month later, test pilot CPO Sasakibara Masao managed to land the J2M2 after encountering major handling issues. This incident offered no explanation for its cause, which was only discovered weeks later. On another test flight, a Mitsubishi test pilot, Shibayama Eisaku, found that the yoke was pulled forward when the landing gear was retracted. Being at a higher altitude than Lt. Takumi was when he started to retract the gear, he was able immediately lower it, and regained control of the aircraft. On some aircraft, it was found that the retracting tail wheel was coming to rest against the elevator controls. The problem was remedied, though only by late 1943.

While technical issues continued to plague the development of the Raiden, the Navy was still conducting tactical and performance tests with the prototypes. In the autumn of 1943, the Navy had several prototypes of the new fighter at its disposal, a number of them the older J2M1. The Yokosuka Air Corps would put these aircraft in mock dogfights against their A6M3 Zeros, finding the J2M1 was at a serious disadvantage when using the typical Navy fighter tactics, which favored horizontal maneuvering over climbing and diving. Its true strength was in energy fighting, with the pilot keeping to a high speed and expending little energy through more aggressive horizontal maneuvers, and outmaneuvering them by attaining a higher energy state. Unfortunately, this point was not stressed in their reports, and pilots stuck to the more traditional tactics that the aircraft was less suited to.

Their attempts in mock interceptions of bombers also proved troublesome, not for any purely performance related reasons, but that the J2M1 fighters they were using were very unreliable. As was the case in earlier tests, the propeller governor failed when the aircraft was put through harsh maneuvers, and in another instance, a throttle had gotten stuck in the forward position. Veteran pilot and Ace, CPO Oh-hara Ryoji, experienced both such failures, and performed multiple unpowered landings in the fighter.

The J2M2 and J2M3 eventually resolved into a serviceable, but still rough around the edges interceptor. Its development was slow, as Mitsubishi was primarily concerned with producing the vital G4M bomber, and A6M fighter for the Navy, whose fortunes had turned for the worse. (Japanese-warship)

Troubles aside, development of the fighter continued, resulting in a new J2M3 model with a heavier armament of four 20 mm guns, and an improved oil cooler. The weight of the new equipment would again put it behind the performance figures set in place then five years ago, though the heavier armament would prove important in facing the resilient heavy bombers in service with the US. These improvements aside, they were unable to trace the issues of the harsh vibrations from the engine, and proceeded to production regardless, believing the measures in place to be sufficient. After much delay and considerable frustration, the Raiden was moved toward mass production at the end of 1943, at a relatively low figure of some 20 aircraft per month. Only 90 would be built in 1943, with only another 274 the following year, most being the J2M3 Model 21.

Its production was mostly motivated out of desperation. The Navy had at its disposal only one major fighter model at that time, the Zero, which had gone from dated, to obsolete, from mid 1943 to early 1944. It was supposed to have been succeeded by the A7M, which failed to proceed past prototyping. Making matters far worse, in the land based land interceptor role, the Raiden was now years behind schedule, leaving vital forward anchorages to be defended by the aging Zero. The Navy’s alternative to the troubled Raiden was the N1K-J Shiden, though it would not materialize in the numbers needed for many months. Thus the Raiden was to be produced in limited numbers, being the only fighter the Navy was confident could intercept American bombers, especially the newly discovered B-29 which intelligence services had identified well before its debut.

In dealing with this particular threat, there were attempts to fit the Raiden with a high altitude engine. A J2M4 was thus created with a turbo-supercharged Kasei engine, and a J2M5 was built with a three speed supercharger. The turbo-supercharger proved far too unreliable for service, with the three speed supercharger proving to be somewhat more manageable. While both experimental models did have much better high altitude performance, neither were able to be employed, leaving the Navy without a high altitude interceptor.

The Whirlwind

By the start of 1944 the war had been fully reversed against the fortunes of the Japanese. The long, grueling Solomons campaign had drained them of the corps of elite airmen they had carefully cultivated since before the start of the war, and US industry was producing enormous amounts of war materiel. The situation was soon to grow even worse as the United States began to prepare the deployment of one of its newest, and most advanced weapons.

Japanese intelligence services first became aware of the B-29 after reading of the death of a test pilot flying a new Boeing bomber in early 1943. They would soon produce speculative performance capabilities for the new bomber based on what they knew of the known abilities, and likely new improvements, of the US aviation industry. They proved to be reasonably correct in their efforts, and concluded that major raids against Japan could be expected by early summer 1944. The bomber was first deployed to a base in China, at the Chengtu complex, a distant and difficult to reach airfield, which proved to be far from ideal to keep supplied, and offered a limited ability to strike at the Japanese mainland. They first raided the rail lines in Bangkok in June of 1944, as they prepared for a greater offensive. Their first raid over Japan took place on the night of June 15/16, and mirrored the operations of RAF Bomber Command, with pathfinders going ahead of a long, dispersed line of bombers to mark targets. This effort, and the many that would follow would prove unsuccessful, night raids were an exceedingly difficult affair that demanded the highest levels of flying proficiency, and high altitude operations would be complicated by the powerful jet stream, which also reduced the accuracy of daylight raids considerably.

Basing the B-29’s would prove to be a challenge, with most locations being either too exposed, or too remote. American victories in the central Pacific opened the route for raids against Japan. (National Archives)

These many issues aside, the B-29 made a considerable impression across Japan. It was an opponent that was advanced as it was elegant, its tendency to catch fire due to the use of a magnesium alloy accessories case, was unknown to those who faced it in combat, or the civilians who endured its presence. Author Kosaka Masataka would note its “beauty and technological perfection” which to his mind symbolized the mark of “higher civilization” achieved by the United States. One of the first Japanese airmen to encounter the new bombers, ace and night fighter pilot 1st Lt. Isamu Kashiide, would be awestruck at the sight of a B-29 that had been coned by searchlight. Remarking, “I was scared! It was known that the B-29 was a huge plane, but when I saw my opponent it was much larger than I had ever expected. There was no question that when compared with the B-17, the B-29 was indeed the ‘Superfortress’!”

These encounters would grow in frequency and lethality as the raids mounted. The Chengtu complex was supplemented by new bases in the Western Pacific, notably the enormous base on Tinian, and the appointment of a new, aggressive commander, General Curtis LeMay. Against them was the dwindling cadre of experienced Japanese airmen, who had relatively few advanced interceptors to call on.

The Raiden In Combat

With the end of its less than ideal development cycle, the Raiden made its service debut with the 381st Air Group, in October of 1943. However, after constant teething issues with the aircraft, and a fatal accident resulting from an unidentified air frame failure, the squadron would have its Raidens exchanged for Zeros before their deployment to the Philippines, and the Dutch East Indies, in March of the following year. In September, after several months in combat, they received some ten J2M3 Raidens while deployed to the Celebes. The combat debut of the new aircraft came with some success, as during an intercept of a large number of American B-24 bombers, one victory was credited to the new fighter. They continued their service there, and found the new aircraft to be a potent combatant, with noted success against American P-47 and P-38 fighters, as unlike the zero, Raiden pilots could escape them at lower altitudes and were still able to comfortably outmaneuver them.

Long accustomed to the Zero, many struggled to make use of a plane whose strengths lay in its energy retention and dive speed. (Japanese-warship)

The 381st continued its service through the Battle for the Philippines, defending Japanese positions around Manilla, and later, the oil industries in the region. There were also Raidens in service with other units, notably the 301st Air Group which served in the central Pacific, which struggled, making use of the older and less reliable J2M2, and facing considerable opposition from massed American air power in the region. There were otherwise a handful of other aircraft serving in outlying theaters on a mostly provisional basis, with very little known of their use.

Aluminum Overcast

The American air raids against Japan were to enter their penultimate and most brutal stage in early 1945. Earlier raids were done from high altitude, and did so with the difficulties of having to juggle the difficult basing situation in Chengtu China, and the weather. The weather proved frustrating for lack of access to intelligence gathering in the region, save for the Soviets who refused the use of their services to maintain their neutrality, and whose broadcasts were shrouded by constantly changing codes. However, General Curtis LeMay would employ new tactics allowing him to side-step the issue of the weather, and the Americans had constructed new bases in the Marshall Islands which would allow for the comparatively easy amassing of bombers. LeMay chose low altitude, incendiary saturation bombing, the most blunt, and brutal of the methods available to him. Earlier, smaller scale incendiary raids, including one against the Mitsubishi works at Nagoya had proven successful, though they soon pivoted toward targeting cottage industries in urban areas, and the civilian population. This shift in tactics can occurred rapidly, seen in a single raid on February 25 of 1945, where some 200 B-29’s raided Tokyo which saw fires burn uncontrolled across a large swath of the city.

The B-29 was among the most advanced aircraft of the Second World War. Once they ranged over the skies of Japan in large numbers, the Pacific war was to enter its final phase. (National Archives)

To make a desperate situation worse, when LeMay’s XXI Bomber Command began raiding Japan in force, they weren’t alone. On February 16th, a major incursion performed by carrier based aircraft swept across the shores of Honshu, launched from Task Force 58, which accounted for 16 fleet carriers, and 116 warships in total. Admiral Mitscher would sortie 1,187 planes; 895 fighters, 201 torpedo bombers, and 91 dive bombers. They would contest control of Japanese airspace, and strike at the targets LeMay had not, mostly factories producing materiel for the Japanese war effort. The next day, he launched another 1,574 sorties before departing southward to engage the Japanese forces on Iwo Jima. In this uneven fighting, he lost only 80 planes to all causes with the Japanese claiming 134 kills. With the subsequent loss of Iwo Jima, came the first encounters with P-51 mustangs, now based from that island. They first came north on April 7th, where they quickly showed themselves to be a dangerous opponent.

The Japanese defensive situation during this time period grew from difficult to dire. The quality of the aircrews had declined even further after the disastrous encounter in the Philippine sea, and the following American invasion of the Philippines itself. There, the Navy had spent its last strength in an attempt to prevent American forces from staging a landing, following a plan which could never have hoped to succeed. The merchant marine had also been decimated, and the heart of the Empire was thus seeing shortages of every kind. There were no offensive means by which the war could be fought, and the enemy was closing in from all sides. Despite a situation which could only resolve itself in a painful defeat, the Japanese armed forces chose to continue the war in the hope for a conditional end to hostilities.

There was little hope for anything approaching a favorable outcome in continuing the war, yet fatalism ruled, and the country marched on. The exuberance of the early victories was gone, the hopeful energy of the early Solomon campaign had faded, and China remained vast and unconquered. In the Autumn of 1944, ace Navy Pilot Lt.jg Sakai Saburo returned to Tokyo, after several years on campaign and the loss of an eye. “The city appeared drab and lifeless. – Most of the stores were closed, their windows empty. The significance was clear. There were no goods to sell, and the owners were away, working in war plants. The few stores that remained open hardly resembled the colorful and well-stocked establishments I once knew. Few goods were on display, and for the most part these were crude substitutes.” It was this city that was to become a battleground in the months to come.

Just as pressing as the approaching American forces, the division between Japan’s air forces, Army and Navy, would prove a critical fault which saw them face this storm almost totally unprepared. Despite the early warning of the B-29 threat, there was no comprehensive plan for the defense of the Japanese mainland from air attack, the strategic outlook of both forces was one defined by delusion and self-sabotage. From the outset, the Army and Navy each had their own jealously guarded industrial complexes, possessed few compatible munitions, and operated aircraft with no common base for components. Army and Navy aircraft of similar design did not even possess a common voltage. They pursued aircraft development and research separately, further dividing the pool of expertise and industrial base, which were dwarfed by their rivals in America. The Navy commissioned some 53 models of aircraft for which there were 112 variants, and the Army 37 models with 52 variants. Making matters worse was the failure to prepare, and expand aircraft production in wartime. The Ministry of Munitions was only finally established in 1943 to better convert Japanese industries for military use. In 1944, its head, Fujihara Ginjiro, found that with the ideal utilization of Japan’s industries, the level of annual aircraft production could have been as much as 53,000, rather than the 8,000 to 10,000 which were being turned out. While the figure is purely theoretical, it nonetheless demonstrates the widely impractical decision making that dominated Imperial Japan’s industrial planning.

The P-51 would become a major threat to Japanese defenders, just as it had been over the skies of Germany. Here a fighter squadron flies assembled alongside a B-29. (National Archives)

Even critical pieces of equipment, such as early warning radar, were developed separately, and hoarded to build separate networks with little collaboration. The Army used its Tachi-6’s and 7’s, and the Navy its ground based Mark I radar system, serving only to divide the already relatively small Japanese radio industry. Any real potential for the defense of Japan had been sacrificed in favor of inter-departmental politicking. When the Americans returned to the skies of Japan in strength, the two Japanese air forces would meet them with too few aircraft, too poor early warning capabilities, and no real strategic plan.

What few hopes there were could be found in a new generation of fighters. During 1943 and 1944, Japanese fighters had lagged behind considerably their American opponents, largely due to their engines being less powerful. In the last months of the war, there were new models in service which gave some parity with the Allies. These new fighters were the Ki 84, N1K-J, Ki 100, and to an extent, the J2M3 Raiden, which was  at one point to be phased out by the Navy’s new N1K-J fighter. Given the desperate situation over the looming bomber offensive, and concerns over shortfalls in the supply of fighters, its production was instead boosted. With the proper planning, one or two of these fighter types could have taken up the bulk of the defensive effort in greater numbers, but the division of resources and the lack of any coherent strategy would prove fatal. In early 1945, the Japanese Air Forces had only some 500 fighters between acting in the defense of the homeland.

The Last Line – 302nd Air Corps

The 302nd Air Group would be the longest serving of the three units supplied with the Raiden to serve in the defense of Japan. The unit was formed March first, 1944, and was to be equipped with 48 Raidens, and 24 J1N1 night fighters, which was not irregular, as many other Japanese air corps operated more than one type of aircraft. This was often a mix of fighters and maritime bombers, though in the case of the home defense units, the combination of interceptors and night fighters was to give them a 24 hour, all weather defense capability.

Japan’s defenders employed a bewildering number of single-engined fighter types, mostly spawned from the total non-cooperation between the Army and Navy in developing and procuring aircraft. Left to right: J2M, N1K-J, A6M, Ki 44, Ki 61, Ki 84, Ki 100. The top three are Navy aircraft, the rest belonged to the Japanese Army Air Forces (wikimedia, rodswarbirds)

The 302nd was deployed to Kisarazu, and later Atsugi, in Tokyo, to act in the defense of the Kanto region. The 302nd was the first, and among the most colorful of the three Raiden units established for the defense of Japan. It was a mix of mostly green airmen with a few veterans, among whom was possibly the most irregular officer in the service of the Japanese navy. Lieutenant Junior grade, Akatsumaki Saadaki had nearly a decade of service under his belt, and had built a steady reputation for disorderly conduct, drinking, womanizing, casual violence, and being an otherwise first rate combat pilot. His stories of his combat prowess and carousing were legendary, and according to fellow airman Lt.jg Sakai Saburo, all lies. Nevertheless, he would be a pillar of the unit alongside CPO Nakamura Yoshio, a veteran of the withering Solomon Island campaign, and Ensign Isozaku Chitose, an ace pilot with over ten years experience, from China to Rabaul. The unit was led by the fiercely patriotic Captain Kozono Yasuna, another Solomon island veteran, and a night fighter pilot with considerable experience.

Along with its odd mixture of experience, the 302nd also lacked for its new aircraft, with the priority of new Raidens being the 301st, elsewhere in the central pacific. The unit thus initially flew a considerable number of zeros, and older Raidens that had remained in Naval inventory, these being old preproduction J2M2’s, delivered in their orange test liveries. These proved to be a more challenging aircraft for the green pilots that made up much of the air group, and Lt.jg Akamatsu set aside the Raidens for his veterans, ensuring they were well versed in emergency procedures and dead stick flying. This would prove vital, given the poor quality of many of the aircraft they were given. It was only in May of the following year that they would eventually receive their 48 Raidens, though the Zeros would remain to substitute for unserviceable planes, and for the use of pilots not experienced enough for the more powerful Raiden.

The self proclaimed “King of Aces”, Lt.Jg Akamatsu Sadaaki. (wikimedia)

The 302nd attempted several intercepts through 1944, most of these being lone, high flying F-13’s. They typically ended in failure. These aircraft were the photo reconnaissance model of the B-29 bomber, and free of a heavy bomb load, could prove very difficult to intercept without ample warning thanks to their high speed, and operating altitudes at and above 9 km. Other attempts to intercept larger formations also proved difficult, and success wasn’t noted until late in the year. On December 3, 1944, the 302nd sent 24 of its Raidens amongst the 74 Japanese fighters sortied against a raiding force of B-29’s. They saw some success, bringing down three B-29’s, with another two lost to the 244th Sentai’s “special attack” unit of the Japanese Army Air Force. Flying specially prepared, and armored, Ki-61’s, they performed ramming attacks against the American bombers. The ramming pilots survived their attacks, but Lt.jg Saadaki was deeply frustrated by these tactics, enough to discourage their use among his younger, and more impressionable airmen. There would be considerably more of these novices in their number, as many older veterans were eventually transferred away to establish new fighter units. In time, Lt.jg Akamatsu would also be transferred near the end of the war to train for a posting for a potential rocket-powered interceptor unit.

Shorn of some of its most venerable airmen, including Ens. Chitose, the 302nd would also soon find that following February, 1945, B-29 raids would be conducted at night, when only the unit’s J1N1s could pursue them. Despite the reduction in daylight raids, they would still have to contend with the presence of American fighters which began constant operations over Japan. The first encounters came as a result of Admiral Mitscher’s raids in mid February, 1945. Against them the Raiden crews proved their worth, claiming to have brought down eight Hellcats, for the loss of two Zeros, and three damaged Raidens. On the second day, they claimed a further seven Hellcats for the loss of two zeros, though the Raidens did not see combat that day. While they could contend well with the Hellcats, they would find a more dangerous opponent in the F4U Corsair, and the P-51D Mustangs, which they first encountered on April 7th.

In addition to the 302nd near Tokyo, two other Raiden units were raised for the defense of Japan, this included the 332nd near the Kure Naval arsenal, and the 352nd, near the Sasebo Arsenal. Here airmen of the 332nd pose before one of their interceptors. (rods warbirds)

Flying long sorties from Iwo Jima, American airmen fought cramps and the Pacific heat during their seven hour missions. Fatigued and bored, they nonetheless made for deadly opponents over Japan. The Mustang’s Packard Merlin engine was powerful from the sea level to high altitudes thanks to its two stage supercharger, its aerodynamic form saw it lose little speed in performing acrobatic maneuvers, and its laminar flow wings and sealed and balanced control surfaces gave it near unparalleled maneuverability at speeds other aircraft had stiff, and even unworkable controls. On the day they were first seen over the Kanto plain, they claimed three J1N1 night fighters, one D4Y2 dive bomber, and a Raiden. The heavier aircraft were capable bomber hunters when enemy fighters were of no concern, but as the Mustang had done in Germany when it made its appearance the previous year, it denied the use of these otherwise effective aircraft.

Despite complaints from Japanese Airmen, the Raiden could outperform the Hellcat comfortably, and its combat flaps gave it an edge in close-in maneuvers over the newer American P-51 and F4U Corsair. (Japanese-warship)

The 302nd would struggle to cope with the influx of Mustangs which made their presence immediate, and known. On April 12, while XXI Bomber Command was raiding the Musashino aircraft plant, they were joined by 104 P-51, who engaged Japanese fighters attempting to scramble, and strafed their airfields. Around the Kanto region, it thus became very difficult to actually reach the bombers given the presence of the P-51s, who were tasked with engaging the Japanese interceptors before they had a chance to make contact with the B-29s.

A small detachment of the 302nd was also sent to the southern home island of Kyushu, where they had more success against the smaller formations of raiders, which flew with a more modest escort. They still remained difficult targets, as bringing down a B-29 could take three passes, and the bombers were well defended by computer-assisted defensive guns.

In the last months of the war, the 302nd continued to take action against the American air forces which had become an immovable presence over Japan. However spirited the defenders may have been, they were contending almost exclusively with American fighter forces, and the B-29s were left to put entire cities to the torch by night. Between poor command and control facilities, crude early warning radar, and the constant inter service rivalry between the Navy and Army Air Forces, the defense of the Home Islands was failing. Despite having nearly two years to prepare for a potential strategic bombing campaign, there was no effective plan for the air defense of the Home Islands. In the final accounting, interceptors brought down a confirmed 74 Superfortresses, which flew some 31,300 sorties.

In the face of a disintegrating effort against an enemy that was only growing more numerous, the Japanese air forces continued their defense, largely without success. The Mustang, Hellcat, and Corsair, continued to roam the skies of Japan. On August 15th, In the last major battle between the air forces of the Japanese and US Navy’s, four Raidens and eight Zeros took off to engage a detachment of F6F Hellcats. Incensed by the declaration of surrender, the airmen of the 302nd ambushed the flight. Outnumbered and weighed down by external fuel and munitions, the Hellcats fought to escape, and in the ensuing dogfight, two Raidens and a Zero were lost for four of the US Navy’s fighters. An ace pilot was made in one Lt. Morio Yutaka, and the flight returned to base, concluding the final combat mission of the Raiden. The 302nd would mutiny in an attempt to continue fighting, but were discouraged when their messengers to other units were rebuffed and their commander fell ill. Divided and disheartened, they returned home.

Flight Characteristics and Pilot’s Remarks

Many Japanese Navy fighter pilots were unsure what to make of the stout, yet, powerful fighter. (lancero99)

The Raiden was fairly unique in that it was viewed very poorly by most Japanese airmen, yet American test pilots gave a fairly glowing account of it. Before all else, it must again be said that the strengths of the aircraft were not impressed upon Japan’s Naval Airmen before they were issued their planes. Its excellent rate of climb and impressive dive characteristics were noted in technical evaluations, but they were not emphasized enough in training. However, throughout its service, it did gain some good marks from Japanese pilots, notably from pilots in the Philippines who engaged American bombers at lower altitudes and found it far superior in this task than the other fighters available to them.

Both Japanese and American pilots were complimentary of the spaciousness of the cockpit. Of note is the large armor glass pane above the instrument panel, combined with the 8mm steel headrest, the Raiden provided considerably more protection than most Japanese fighters. (rods warbirds)

Most Japanese airmen coming to this aircraft did so with experience on the supremely agile, if slow, A6M Zero. The Raiden was practically the antithesis of this aircraft, with their strengths and weaknesses reversed. It thus proved categorically unpopular among Japanese Naval Pilots. The Raiden’s vibration at cruise and the poor build quality of the aircraft did nothing to improve its reputation. Poor visibility over the nose, rear, and the higher landing speed also presented challenges to those familiar with flying the Zero. They did, however, recognize it made for a superior interceptor over the A6M Zero, featuring an impressive rate of climb, and powerful armament. Its vertical maneuverability was also among the highest of all late war Japanese fighters, giving it a number of strengths over its allied opponents that the Zero lacked.

A wartime TAIC calculated performance report claims the Raiden was capable of climbing 4700 feet per minute (23.9 m/s) at its highest for its first supercharger speed at 4000 ft (1220 m), and 4100 feet per minute (20.828 m/s) at its second at 15,000 ft (4572 m). Its top speed was projected at 304 knots at sea level, 321 knots at 6,000 ft, and 369 knots at 17,500 ft. These figures are likely suspect and calculated based on an incomplete model, disagreeing considerably with other claims elsewhere.

A figure of top speed of 330 kts at 6km appears elsewhere in numerous, including Japanese publications, likely with better access to resources on the aircraft. It is also likely that its true performance lies somewhere in the middle. While this top speed isn’t particularly impressive, its maximum climb rate of approximately 4650 feet per second at sea level, was. This is considerably higher than the Mustang’s maximum rate of climb of 3600 feet per minute, when running at 67” manifold pressure and with a bomb rack on each wing, which would have been the case for those over Japan. These figures are likely more in line with its true performance, given that the aircraft was designed to achieve a very high climb rate, rather than the highest speed in level flight. Concurrently, its sustained turn performance was excellent compared to allied fighters, thanks to high power to weight ratio.

A veteran with over a decade of experience, Lt.jg Akamatsu taught the Raiden pilots of the 302nd how to best employ their fighter, ensuring his pilots knew how best to pursue their targets, and how to disentangle from unfavorable engagements. (TooBadAtNamingAccounts)

One of the most notable pilots to use the Raiden in combat was Lt.jg Akamatsu Sadaaki of the 302nd Air Group, who was as far removed from the picture of a Japanese wartime officer as was possible. He received his wings in the Naval Air Force in 1932, was a borderline dysfunctional alcoholic who was prone to insubordination, womanizing, striking those who irritated him, managed to survive the war without major injury, and he was said to have flown combat sorties drunk, among other wild claims. He would claim to have shot down over 200 enemy aircraft when sober, and 300 after a few drinks. He was officially credited with 27 victories. His eccentricities aside, he proved the Raiden was a capable combat aircraft in his role at the 302nd. In one engagement, he showed the excellent energy-fighting capabilities of the Raiden on April 19, 1945 when he and his wing man encountered a flight of five P-51s. With a height advantage, he dove beneath, and crept behind the enemy, shooting one fighter down, then and brought down another in a head-on pass before both sides broke away. His only real complaint was that the aircraft’s radius of action was short, but was otherwise seemingly the only advocate of this troubled aircraft.

A Raiden in American colors alongside a Seafire Mk IX, and an F6F Hellcat. In spite of its roughness, the aircraft was given favorable remarks by American evaluators. (National Archives)

With several airworthy Raidens having been captured in the battle for the Philippines, American evaluators were able to give an alternate perspective on the aircraft. Overall, it earned good remarks. The cockpit was spacious and well ventilated, especially valuable in the tropical climates of the pacific. The plane was judged stable on all axes, with good stall characteristics. Apart from a lack of warning, recovery was easy with no inclination to go into spins. Maneuverability was judged good, especially with the deployable fowler flaps that allowed for tighter turns. Harmony of control was acceptable but less than ideal, as the ailerons were heavy at cruise and became very stiff at 325 mph, the elevators also being noted for being light up to this speed, and with the rudder being judged effective at all speeds.

The engine ran roughly at the RPM’s for cruise, but at combat and takeoff power this was less pronounced. However, this rough running caused vibration and considerable noise, not enough to be considered excessive or uncomfortable, but enough to be noteworthy. The poor workmanship of the engine would make itself known during testing when an oil delivery hose failed during a long flight, causing the engine to seize and force the pilot to make a dead stick landing.

One Allied evaluation pilot, who filed a detailed report on the plane, would claim it to be the best of the Japanese aircraft he’d flown, which notably included the Ki 84. Overall, the aircraft judged well thanks to its good stability, stall characteristics, comfort, good combat related performance, and its combat flaps. Ironically, it was also said to have had good landing characteristics, which suggests much about the different expectations in aircraft handling between American and Japanese airmen.

Construction

Featuring numerous new advancements in aviation, the Raiden would be a remarkable, if flawed, interceptor. (rods warbirds)

The fuselage of the J2M was of a traditional construction, save for the deeper placement of the aircraft’s engine. This resulted in the spindle-like shape of the aircraft’s fuselage,  allowing for the fitment of a larger engine while still retaining a clean aerodynamic shape. It was of a typical duralumin monocoque construction, with 18 structural bulkheads and former sections from the engine to the tail. It was, however, noteworthy for the use of Sumitomo Super Duralumin, which could boast of higher strength than its contemporaries, comparable with post war 7075 grade aluminum alloy, and late war American alloys which had been developed in response to captured Japanese examples.

It was among the few Japanese fighters to incorporate protection for the pilot, though compared to foreign designs it was very lightly armored. This consisted of an armored steel headrest with a thickness of 8mm, and an armored glass screen, 50mm thick, at the front of the cockpit. In service, these plates were occasionally removed to lighten the aircraft.

From the prototype to the production models there were two major fuselage alterations, namely the addition of a canopy which sat higher atop the air frame to improve visibility and resolve optical issues, and the addition of an additional oil cooler for the engine. A more minor, yet essential, alteration was to shift the position of the tail wheel retracting mechanism, as on early models it could press against the elevator control, and render the aircraft uncontrollable.

The wings incorporated laminar flow theories into their design, which gave the aircraft improved dive performance, and provided high drag reduction. They also improved control through high speed ranges by keeping the destabilization of airflow across the wing’s surface, known as compressibility, from occurring up until the aircraft reached higher mach numbers. Each wing had landing gear which deployed outward, driven by an electric motor which also actuated the tail wheel and flaps. Fowler flaps were used to give the aircraft a tighter turning circle at the cost of speed, they could be deployed via a button on the control yoke, and set the flaps at a 16 degree deflection so long as the button was held.

Cooling was originally provided by an airflow, and later engine driven, fan which drew air through a small annular radiator at the nose of the aircraft. This proved to be inadequate due to the small inlet at the nose of the aircraft and the limitations of the engine driven cooling fan, forcing the addition of an under-nose radiator on the J2M2 model. This cooler was also enlarged on the next model, the J2M3, to provide better cooling for the longer, higher power climbs these interceptors would be making.

The plane was powered by various models of the Mitsubishi Kasei, a 42.1 liter, two-row, 14 cylinder radial engine equipped with a Mitsubishi fuel injection system, and a single stage, two speed supercharger. The original was the Kasei 13, MK4C, which operated at a reduced output of 1,420hp, this was done to try and keep issues of vibration to a minimum, but this failed due to issues with the constant speed propeller governor, which drove a three bladed propeller. It was noteworthy for its air driven cooling fan which sat at the front of the engine, and a 50cm extension shaft which was shrouded in an elongated reduction gear housing unit. Technical issues with this engine, and its insufficient output saw it abandoned for the Kasei 23.

The Kasei 23, note the propeller shaft extension and mechanically driven cooling fan. (sagamiharaheikishou)

The Kasei 23, MK4R, reduced the length of the extension shaft to 30cm, incorporated an engine driven cooling fan. Vibration issues were eventually relieved through the use of rubber buffers on the engine mounts and adjusting the propeller balancing mechanism along with replacement of the constant speed unit, which then drove a four bladed Sumitomo metal propeller. Some vibration was still noted in flight, but not enough to significantly affect the combat performance of the aircraft. It likely had an impact on the serviceability of Raiden, but far less so than most of the aircraft being produced by an inexperienced workforce.

This engine was further developed into the Kasei 23a, MK4R-A, with the addition of a methanol-water injection system. The anti-detonation properties thus allowed the engine to run at higher manifold pressures, allowing for an output of 1800hp. It was also equipped with individual exhaust stacks, providing thrust augmentation. This was the primary engine for the J2M2 and J2M3, after the Raiden’s protracted development. The engine had a bore and stroke of 150x170mm. It had a diameter of 134 cm, with a length of 274.32 cm.

At an RPM of 2600 and +450 mmhg over atmospheric pressure, the engine produced 1800 hp at takeoff. It produced 1575 at its first supercharger speed at 1800 m (5905 ft), and 1410 hp at its second speed at 4800 m (15748 ft). It could hold its maximum power setting for 1 minute, and military power, 2500 RPM at +300 mm hg, for 30. Its maximum continuous rating was at 2300 RPM and +150 mm hg of manifold pressure.

Fuel tankage comprised a pair of tanks at the wing roots containing 90 liters of aviation gasoline, along with a fuel tank ahead of the cockpit which initially contained 410 liters, later reduced to 390 liters after plane 3003. A centerline detachable drop tank could also be carried, increasing fuel supply by 250 liters. The oil tank was mounted aft of the engine and had a capacity of 60 liters. The methanol-water tank was sandwiched between the oil and fuselage fuel tank for a capacity of 120 liters. The aircraft was serviced with 92 octane aviation gasoline.

A Raiden carrying the more or less standard armament of four 20 mm Type 99 machine guns. (Japanese-warship)

The initial armament of the J2M2 Raiden comprised a pair of 7.7mm Type 97 machine guns mounted in the engine cowling, and a pair of wing mounted 20mm Type 99 Model 2 machine guns. The Type 99 was designated a machine gun, as compared to other calibers in use by the navy it was quite small and did not warrant being referred to as a “cannon”.

The Type 97 was a derivative of the Vickers class E aircraft machine gun. Each weighed 11.8 kg, was 104 cm in length, was belt fed, and had a rate of fire of 900 rounds per minute. The Type 99 no.1 model 4 20mm machine gun weighed 23 kg, measured 133 cm in length, was belt fed, and fired 520 rounds per minute, supplied with a 210 round belt.

This armament was also to be used for the J2M3 before the cowling machine guns were removed and a second pair of wing mounted 20 mm machine guns were added. These Type 99 no.2 model 4 20mm machine guns were mounted inboard of the initial guns, weighed 34 kg, measured 189 cm in length, were belt fed, and fired at 490 rounds per minute, with a 190 round belt. These featured a longer barrel and had a higher muzzle velocity.

A rare Raiden sporting a heavier 30 mm armament, a considerable upgrade in firepower though one that saw little to no operational use. (japanese-warship)

A very small number of J2M3’s were equipped with a pair of 30 mm Type 5 machine guns in place of the Type 99 no.2’s. These each weighed 70 kg, had a length of 207 cm, fired 500 rounds per minute, and were belt fed.

A very small number of Raidens received an upward firing 20mm mounted behind the cockpit for use against bombers. It was used only with the 302nd air group, and installed at the insistence of its commanding officer, a night fighter pilot who thought it would be useful against heavy bombers. Little has been written of its configuration or use, with the modification being stated to have been very unpopular with pilots who disliked the added weight of the questionable weapon.

A pair of 60 kg general purpose aviation bombs could be carried on outer wing shackles. They were compatible with air to air phosphorous bombs, though this capability was likely never used.

Attempts to produce high altitude series were made, though none produced a combat ready aircraft. The J2M4 possessed a turbosupercharged Kasei 23c engine with a slightly lengthened fuselage to accommodate the turbine, but it proved too unreliable for service. It proved capable of reaching 315 kts at 9.2 km. A second high altitude series was attempted in the J2M5, which took a more modest path in using a Kasei 26a, utilizing a three speed supercharger. It proved a far more reliable means of boosting high altitude performance, allowing it to make 331 kts at 6.8 km. It had a fairly small production run, but the escalating bombing raids against the Japanese mainland made any major modifications to the Raiden unacceptable, as they would have reduced the production output of an already much needed aircraft.

Variants

J2M1: Prototype series, Kasei 13, early windscreen. 3 produced. First aircraft completed March, 1942, flown March 23.

J2M2 Model 11: Kasei 23, new canopy design, air driven cooling fan replaced with engine driven, chin oil cooler added, propeller changed with new governor, numerous other mechanical improvements. Two Type 97 7.7mm guns in cowl, two Type 99 20mm guns in wings. Kasei 23a later retrofitted, vibrations issues reduced. First aircraft completed October 1942, first flown October 13.

J2M3 Model 21: Kasei 23a, oil cooler enlarged. Four Type 99 20mm guns in wings. Most produced type. First aircraft built October 1943.

J2M4 Model 32: Prototype series, Kasei 23c turbosupercharged engine, unreliable. Only 2 produced. First aircraft built August 1944, first flown September 24. Project canceled in February 1945.

J2M5 Model 33: Production series, finished trials May 1944, shelved. Kasei 26a with three speed supercharger. Enlarged cockpit frame to improve rearward visibility. 34 produced. First flown May, 1944.

J2M6 Model 31: Prototype, J2M3 with canopy and cockpit from J2M5. First aircraft built February 1944.

J2M7 Model 23: J2M3 with fuselage modifications to improve rearward visibility. None built.

Production

The Raiden was built at Mitsubishi Airframe Works No. 3 at Nagoya, and later at dispersal facilities and the Naval depot at Kanagawa. Production varied drastically, especially early on when cancellation of the program was being considered, only for it to be brought back when the need for interceptors of any kind became dire. The relationship between the plant and government was deeply strained during wartime, production decisions with long term impacts were judged to have been made too often by post war American evaluators, and the plant officials were disparaging of the government’s involvement in their business. Stress was felt strongest over production orders, where the military changed its mind too often in regards to order sizes and modifications. Where Mitsubishi would have preferred large orders with little modifications between batches, the military vacillated in their procurement.

The main works at Nagoya were a prime target for allied air raids, and the failure to properly disperse production had major effects on the supply of aircraft for the Navy. (National Archives)

As the war continued, more and more conscripted labor was used, and in its last year, a large number of teenage workers. They were not only inexperienced, but were categorized by the plant managers as “inefficient, inept, and indifferent”. To complicate matters, they had friction with the regular plant employees, a factor that was likely also cultural as these conscripts often came from territories outside Japan. Morale at the plant was low.

Nagoya Airframe Works No. 3, and its dispersal facilities produced 493 aircraft, with a further 128 being produced by the Koza Naval Air Arsenal in Kanazawa. Unlike in Germany, dispersal efforts largely failed due to poor long term planning and the USAAF’s ability to track the progress of alternate production sites. Production never ceased, but the quantity and quality of the aircraft that left the production lines was heavily impacted. According to Horikoshi Jiro, the efforts to disperse the factory were conducted too blatantly, and had the effect of dividing up experienced plant personnel and construction crews at a time where they were already spread too thin. The build quality of the J2M was thus fairly dubious during 1944 and 1945, which was well understood by aircrews.

Production Mitsubishi, Nagoya, All Types January February March April May June July August September October November December
1942 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 2
1943 0 0 1 2 0 0 3 4 5 16 21 22
1944 17 26 9 22 39 44 34 22 16 20 18 7
1945 17 12 29 16 0 8 7 27
Production Koza, Kanagawa Naval Depot January February March April May June July August September October November December
1944 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 6
1945 13 8 23 15 10 20 22 0

Specifications

J2M3 Raiden Specification
Engine Kasei 23a MK4R
Engine Output 1800 hp
Gross Weight 2861 kg
Empty weight 2191 kg
Maximum Range 968 nmi (calculated)
Maximum speed 330 kts at 6km
Armament 4x 20mm  Type 99 Model 2, no.’s 1&2
Crew 1, Pilot
Length 9.69264 m
Height 3.93192 m
Wingspan 10.78992 m
Wing Area 11.7058 m2

Conclusion

The only fully intact Raiden, at the Planes of Fame museum in Chino, California. (Planes of Fame Air Museum)

Few full-scale production aircraft had the developmental difficulties of the J2M Raiden, and of those that did, few of those ever reached the front line in appreciable numbers. Despite its development running through nearly the entire war, Horikoshi’s troubled plane did eventually find its way into service. Unfortunately it did so without pilots being well informed of the aircraft’s strengths, with most taking a dim view of the aircraft, one which ran roughly and was less maneuverable than the Zeros they traded it for. Yet, in service, the aircraft proved quite capable in combat, and received glowing endorsements from Allied evaluators.

Illustration

J2M3 Model 21. Flown by Akamatsu Saadaki of the 302nd Air Corps. He claimed 2 P-51 Mustangs in this aircraft.
J2M3 Model 21. Flown by Aoki Yoshihiro of the 352nd Air Corps.

 

Credits

Written By Henry H.

Edited By Henry H.

Illustration by Oussama Mohamed “Godzilla”

Sources:

Primary:

Flight Tests on the North American P-51D Airplane, AAF No. 44-1534. Memo Report No. TSCEP5E-1908. 15 June 1945.

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd (Mitsubishi Jukogyo KK) Corporation Report No. 1 (Airframes and Engines). United States Strategic Bombing Survey Aircraft Division. 1947.

Army Air Arsenal And Navy Air Depots. Corporation Report No.XIX (Airframes and Engines). United States Strategic Bombing Survey Aircraft Division. 1947.

Japanese Air Weapons and Tactics. Military Analysis Division. 1947.

Japanese Aircraft Performance and Characteristics TAIC Manual No. 1. Technical Air Intelligence Center. 1944.

Secondary:

Price, Alfred. Instruments of Darkness: the History of Electronic Warfare, 1939-1945. 2017.

Overy, Richard. The Air War 1939-1945. 2005.

Francillon R.J. Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War. 1970.

Goodwin, Mike. Japanese Aero Engines. 2017.

Williams, Anthony G. Flying Guns of World War II. 2003

Izawa, Yasuho; Holmes, Tony. J2M Raiden and N1K1/2 Shiden/Shiden-Kai Aces. 2016.

Peattie, Mark R. Sunburst: The Rise of Japanese Naval Air Power, 1909-1941. 2013.

Horikoshi Jiro. Eagles of Mitsubishi: The Story of the Zero Fighter. 1992.

Editorial staff of Maru Mechanic. Mechanic of World Aircraft, Series no. 4 Raiden/Reppu/Type 100 Reconnaissance. 1993.

Tacitus Publications. Fighter Combat Comparisons No.1 Grumman F6F-5 Hellcat Vs. Mistubishi J2M3 Model 21 Raiden (‘Jack’). 1989.

Samuel J. Cox. H-051-1: The Last Sacrifices. 2020.

Mitsubishi Kasei 23 ‘Ko’, Ha 32 Model 23 ‘Ko’, Radial 14 Engine. Smithsonian Air and Space Museum.

Masatake, Okumiya; Horikoshi Jiro; Caidin Martin. ZERO! The Story of Japan’s Air War in the Pacific 1941-1945. 1956.

 

Fairey Fulmar

UK Union Jack United Kingdom (1940)
Carrier-Based Fighter Number built: 600

In the late 1930s, the British Royal Navy was in desperate need of a modern carrier-based fighter. No existing aircraft in the British inventory could effectively fulfill this role; fortunately, the aircraft manufacturer Fairey was developing a versatile light bomber. Upon closer examination, it became clear that this aircraft could be adapted for carrier operations. The result was the Fairey Fulmar, which entered service in 1940.

With little time or resources on hand as a new World War loomed, the Royal Navy’s  need for a carrier-based fighter was the found in the Fairey Fulmar. (wikimedia)

History

By the late 1930s, Japan was expanding across Asia, and there were increasing signs that a new war in Europe was on the horizon. This prompted nations such as the United Kingdom to invest in new military developments, focusing on new weapons, aircraft, and nascent technological fields which might yield decisive advantages. The Royal Air Force (RAF) saw a surge of new aircraft designs, some of which would prove to be war-winning weapons, such as the Spitfire and Hurricane fighters.

In contrast, the British Royal Navy struggled to find a suitable fighter aircraft to protect its ships. Few existing designs met the requirements, and while some older designs still had some use left in them, like the venerable Gloster Gladiator, the need for modern fighters was becoming apparent. The main airborne threats were maritime patrol aircraft that could reveal the position of the Royal Navy’s fleets, but with rapid advancements in aviation happening year over year, new dangers were soon to emerge.

Ruggedness, endurance, and advanced navigational equipment were key aspects of carrier-based fighters, but for a short-legged, landbased day fighter, these design goals were secondary at best. As a result, the Royal Navy’s requirements for a new fighter prioritized long-range radio navigation equipment and a multi-crew design. While these additions reduced the aircraft’s speed, the trade-off was considered necessary for the sake of improved coordination and operational effectiveness. In addition, the new fighter needed to carry enough fuel for a flight of at least three hours.

Developing an entirely new design was likely to take years, and given the rising tensions in Europe, the Navy wanted a solution as soon as possible. Fortunately for them, the RAF had been experimenting with a high-speed light bomber concept. In response, several companies, including Fairey Aviation and Hawker Aircraft, submitted proposals, the Fairey P.4/34 and the Hawker Henley.

However, before either of these designs reached flight testing, the RAF abandoned the fast bomber concept altogether. The Navy, on the other hand, remained highly interested in a potential fighter based on the designs. Both aircraft demonstrated impressive speed and an endurance of over four hours, making them strong candidates for the naval fighter role the navy was seeking.

To further improve their options, a third aircraft, the Phillips and Powis M.9 Kestrel, was included in the evaluation as a private venture. However, as it was initially intended as a trainer, it lacked the long-range capabilities required for naval operations and was quickly rejected.

In January 1938, after meeting with representatives from the Air Ministry, it was suggested that the Navy select the Fairey entrant as the winner. This recommendation was not based primarily on overall performance, but rather on Hawker’s already overloaded production schedule. The company was heavily engaged in manufacturing the much-needed Hurricane fighter and could not afford to divert time and resources to another project.

After analyzing its limited options, the Navy agreed to the proposal but issued a series of requirements for the new fighter. Among these were an endurance of six hours at a speed of 220 km/h (138 mph) and three hours at 427 km/h (265 mph), all at an altitude of over 3,000 meters (10,000 feet). The aircraft’s armament was to consist of at least eight 7.62 mm (0.303 in) Browning machine guns. Navy officials determined that a rear-mounted machine gun would not be necessary. While not specifically intended for attacking enemy ships, the aircraft was to be capable of carrying two 113 kg (250 lb) bombs if needed.

A more significant requirement was that the fighter should be adaptable for floatplane operations, with the ability to be equipped with floats in the field by a four-man crew in a relatively short time. Additionally, the aircraft had to be built with a sufficiently strong structure to allow for carrier landings and catapult launches.

In February, representatives from the RAF and the Navy met to discuss the proposal further and refine the specifications. During these discussions, several additional modifications were agreed upon, including raising the canopy to improve visibility during landings, and the rear observer/navigator’s compartment was to be equipped with the necessary navigational instruments. If these requirements were met, production was estimated to begin in September 1939, with a planned output of 8 aircraft per month. The new fighter was designated as Fairey Fulmar.

In March 1938, Fairey was informed of the Navy’s request for a new fighter aircraft. After examining the details, Fairey’s engineers began assessing whether the necessary modifications could be made without compromising the aircraft’s performance. By May, they informed Navy officials that their P.4/34 prototype could be adapted for the role. Following this, Fairey received a production order for 127 aircraft. Interestingly, the contract did not include the construction of an additional P.4/34 prototype for testing.

However, the project came to a halt that same month. The main issue was that Fairey was already overwhelmed with other commitments. The P.4/34’s designer, Marcel J. O. Lobelle, was instead assigned to work on the Fairey Barracuda and Albacore torpedo bombers. With his focus diverted, he was unable to dedicate time to yet another project. Despite this setback, work on the fighter continued, albeit at a slow pace.

The Munich Crisis of September 1938, in which Britain and France negotiated the fate of Czechoslovakia with Germany, further heightened tensions in Europe. With the possibility of war increasing, the order for the new fighter was expanded to 250 aircraft. However, given the existing delays, Fairey informed Navy officials that production could not commence before March 1940, seven months later than originally intended. To compensate for lost time, the monthly production was to be increased to 25 aircraft and carried out at the newly constructed Stockport factory.

First Production Aircraft

During the spring of 1939, the P.4/34 prototype was modified and tested as a potential new fighter. Following its success, two more pre-production aircraft were completed in late 1939. The first of these underwent flight testing in January 1940, while the second was not tested until May of that year. The delay occurred because the designers wanted to evaluate the installation of the Rolls-Royce RM3M engine. However, despite this test, the production aircraft that were to be gradually introduced were to be powered by the Merlin VIII engine instead.

One of the five pre-production aircraft was used as a test prototype. (D. Brown Fairey Fulmar Mks I and II Aircraft Profile 254)

Testing of the first aircraft revealed that its performance was below expectations. It achieved a maximum speed of 410 km/h (255 mph), which was lower than intended, and its climb rate was also deemed insufficient. More importantly, its operational endurance was an hour below the originally promised six hours. The primary issue was that once armament and additional equipment were installed, the aircraft’s weight increased considerably, which negatively impacted its overall performance.

On the 6th of April 1940, the first production aircraft underwent flight testing at the Aeroplane & Armament Experimental Establishment in Boscombe Down, Wiltshire. The aircraft was described as pleasant to fly and highly responsive. However, much like the prototype, its performance was subpar compared to modern land-based fighters.

Further testing was conducted by No. 770 Squadron, a trial unit stationed at Lee-on-Solent Naval Air Station. The aircraft arrived at its unit on May 10, 1940—the same day Germany launched its invasion of Western Europe. There, it was used for takeoff and landing trials, both on solid ground and on a wooden dummy flight deck designed to simulate aircraft carrier runways.

In early June 1940, the aircraft underwent flight tests aboard the newly built HMS Illustrious. The Fairey Fulmar proved easy to land, thanks to its excellent forward visibility and responsive controls. However, during takeoff, pilots noticed a tendency for the aircraft to veer to the left.

Despite its mediocre capabilities, and with no viable alternative available, the Fairey Fulmar was put into production. Manufacturing began in April 1940, and between April and December of that year, approximately 159 aircraft of this type were built.

Despite the urgent need for such fighters, production was delayed. When it finally began, it began at a slow pace, meaning the aircraft were never available in significant numbers during the war. (https://hushkit.net/2020/03/24/fairey-fulmar-how-an-absurd-lumbering-thing-became-britains-top-scoring-naval-fighter/)

Improved Mk. II Model

As Fulmar production was underway, Fairey proposed an improved variant. Essentially, it was the same aircraft but powered by a 1,260 hp Merlin 30 engine. Additionally, it was estimated that the new model could have its weight reduced by approximately 160 kg (350 lb). Once approval was granted, Fairey modified one of its already-built Fulmar aircraft to create the prototype for the new version, designated as the Fulmar II (Mk. II). The prototype modification was completed by the end of 1940, and flight testing began after nearly a month. The conversion proved successful and straightforward, requiring no major retooling of the production process. As a result, manufacturing soon transitioned to the new Fulmar II. However, despite the more powerful engine, its overall performance saw only marginal improvement. The aircraft built using older airframes, but fitted with the new engine, were designated as Fulmar I/II. By February 1943, a total of 600 aircraft of both variants had been produced.

Night Fighter Role

When the war in Europe began, Britain was among the many countries that lacked a dedicated night fighter. By 1940, the situation had not improved significantly. In particular, night raids by the Italian Air Force inflicted damage on several British ships stationed in the Mediterranean. The Royal Navy’s Fulmar fighter was ill-equipped to counter these nighttime attacks, and naval officials requested Air Interception Radar Mk. VI sets from the RAF. However, the experiment proved disappointing, as the radar performed poorly at the low altitudes where anti-ship attacks were conducted.

From 1942 onward, the older Mark IV radar system replaced the Mk. VI. This upgrade involved installing three antenna masts on the wings and in front of the aircraft. Unfortunately, this installation further reduced the Fulmar’s already slow speed by an additional 32 km/h (20 mph). Due to these challenges, none of the 100 modified aircraft were deployed to the front lines until February 1944, and it remains doubtful whether they ever saw combat.

While the Fulmar failed in its night fighter role, approximately 50 aircraft were repurposed as night-fighter trainers, making up half of the originally modified night-fighter fleet.

Long-Range Reconnaissance Role

Beginning in April 1942, some Fulmars were tested with lightweight H/F W/T radio sets. The installation proved successful, leading to further modifications for use as long-range reconnaissance aircraft equipped with improved radio equipment. These aircraft were primarily deployed for extended patrols over the Indian Ocean.

In Combat

Northern Europe

As the first Fairey Fulmars entered service in 1940, Europe was already engulfed in war. The first operational unit to receive the aircraft was No. 806 Squadron. Initially, Fulmars operated from airfields in the UK, from which they were deployed to support the defense of Norway, and later played a role in the evacuation of Allied forces from Dunkirk. Their first assigned aircraft carrier deployment was aboard the newly commissioned Illustrious, beginning in August 1940.

Later in 1941, Fulmars were used to patrol, and escort convoys bound for the Soviet Union in the North Sea. While engagements with enemy fighters were rare, one notable encounter took place in late July 1941. During this engagement, a group of Fulmars intercepted German aircraft, resulting in the destruction of two Bf 109s and one Me 110. However, the Fulmars suffered losses as well, with two aircraft being shot down in the process.

Additional units were formed as more aircraft became available. Interestingly, some Fulmars from No. 804 Squadron were assigned to operate from Fighter Catapult Ships, escorting Atlantic convoys. These were actually modified merchant ships equipped with catapult rams. Once the fighter was launched, the pilot was to fly it until he ran out of fuel. After that, the pilot would use his parachute or ditch the aircraft in the path of a ship that could recover him.

While they were intended to function as carrier-based fighters, their early operational life saw them deployed from coastal airfields in the UK. (https://www.reddit.com/r/WeirdWings/comments/c2ivcq/fairey_fulmar/)

The last recorded sortie from an aircraft carrier occurred on the 8th of February 1945. On that day, a Fulmar night fighter was dispatched to intercept an enemy aircraft approaching a convoy destined for the Soviet Union. However, en route to its target, the Fulmar’s radar equipment malfunctioned, forcing the pilot to return to the carrier. During landing, the aircraft missed the arrestor wire and instead crashed into the safety barrier.

Mediterranean Theater of War 

As production increased, additional units were formed. Such as No. 804 Squadron, which was assigned to operate Fulmars from merchant ships fitted with catapults, escorting Atlantic convoys. These vessels would launch the aircraft when an enemy target was identified. Between June and September 1940, this tactic saw limited use, with the Fulmars managing only to inflict minor damage on a German Fw 200 bomber. The Fulmars also participated in the hunt for the German Bismarck battleship but played a minor reconnaissance role.

Their combat service was primarily seen in the Mediterranean, and in September 1940, HMS Illustrious was deployed to that theater of war. At the time, the British Navy operating there lacked any form of fighter support. This role was then fulfilled by the 18 aircraft of No. 806 Squadron.

For the remainder of the year, the squadron was mainly tasked with targeting Italian reconnaissance aircraft and enemy bombers. Despite their limited numbers, they managed to shoot down 26 Italian aircraft by the end of 1940. This success was achieved by effectively coordinating their operations with Illustrious‘ radar system.

However, the situation changed drastically in 1941 when the German Luftwaffe arrived in greater numbers. Illustrious was heavily damaged, forcing No. 806 Squadron to relocate—first to Malta and then to Crete in February 1941. There, they were attached to another carrier, Formidable, and effectively merged with No. 803 Squadron.

The squadron continued operations from Formidable until May 1941, when the carrier was severely damaged by German attacks. By that time, the Fulmars had managed to shoot down at least 56 enemy aircraft, but these successes came at a cost—more than half of their already limited numbers were lost.

In April 1941, the aircraft carrier Ark Royal was tasked with protecting Gibraltar, supported by No. 807 and No. 808 Squadrons. These squadrons remained active until August 1941, when Ark Royal was sunk. Following its loss, No. 808 Squadron was disbanded, while No. 807 Squadron continued operating in the area. They were primarily assigned to patrol missions, occasionally engaging German submarines. In June, while conducting operations around Malta, they managed to shoot down five enemy aircraft but suffered the loss of three of their own. Afterward, they were redeployed to the United Kingdom.

During August 1942, No. 807 Squadron played a role in protecting a supply convoy to Malta. The British forces were supported by 18 Fulmars from No. 809 and No. 884 Squadrons. Between the 11th to 12th of August, intense battles with Axis fighters took place. The Fulmars successfully shot down at least two enemy aircraft but lost three of their own in the process.

On a few occasions, they also engaged Vichy French aircraft near Syria. In one such encounter, a group of Fulmars clashed with French D.520 fighters. Although they failed to bring down any of the French aircraft, the British lost three of their own.

The Fairey Fulmar was predominantly employed in the Mediterranean against Axis maritime patrol aircraft. (https://www.armouredcarriers.com/fairey-fulmar-models)

Deployment to China Bay

In February 1942, a small contingent of Fairey Fulmar aircraft was dispatched to China Bay to support the Royal Air Force’s General Reconnaissance No. 273 Squadron. The Fulmar equipped two squadrons, No. 803 and No. 806. No. 803 Squadron suffered heavy losses in April 1942 when four of its six aircraft were shot down during an engagement with Japanese fighters. However, the squadron managed to achieve one air victory during the battle.

On April 9, the Fulmars saw action again when they engaged Japanese bombers attacking the British aircraft carrier HMS Hermes. Despite being at a disadvantage, they successfully shot down three enemy bombers but lost two of their own aircraft in the process.

End of Service

By 1943, most Fulmar aircraft that had been deployed as day fighters were withdrawn from frontline service. The remaining aircraft were repurposed for training or used as second-line night fighters for the remainder of the war. As the war in Europe neared its end, nearly all Fulmars were replaced by the improved Fairey Firefly. In total, approximately 40 Fulmars were lost in combat by the war’s conclusion.

Technical characteristics

The Fulmar was a single-engine, all-metal carrier-based fighter. Its monocoque fuselage was constructed using metal panels placed over a tubular framework. A similar design approach was employed for the rest of the aircraft, including the wings and tail assembly.

Since the aircraft was intended to operate from smaller aircraft carriers, where space was limited, its wings needed to be foldable to maximize available room. As a result, the inner section of the wings was fixed to the fuselage, while the outer sections were designed to fold back efficiently against the sides of the aircraft. The tail assembly followed a more conventional design, featuring two horizontal stabilizers and a single vertical stabilizer.

Since it was designed to operate from an aircraft carrier, where space was limited, its wings were modified to fold. (https://www.armouredcarriers.com/fairey-fulmar-models)
Its landing gear consisted of two main wheels that retracted inward into the fuselage, along with a small fixed tail wheel. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Fulmar)

The first prototype developed from the P.4/34 was powered by a 1,030 hp Rolls-Royce Merlin II V-12 engine. It was later replaced with a slightly more powerful Merlin VIII engine, producing 1,080 hp. With this upgrade, the aircraft achieved a maximum diving speed of 724 km/h (450 mph) and a cruising speed of 398 km/h (247 mph). The final improved variant was instead equipped with a Merlin 30 engine, delivering 1,300 hp. This modification increased the cruising speed to 417 km/h (259 mph).

Initially powered by a 1,030 hp engine, it was soon replaced with a later variant that produced 1,300 hp. While this upgrade didn’t significantly increase its maximum speed, it was certainly a welcome improvement in its rate of climb and sustained turn rate. (https://www.armouredcarriers.com/fairey-fulmar-models)

Beneath the fuselage, there were sets of catapult spools along with an arrestor hook. These components were essential for launching the aircraft from a carrier. The arrestor hook featured a V-shaped design and was secured in place by a snap lock. The pilot could release it when needed, and when not in use, only a small portion of the hook remained exposed.

The cockpit consisted of a position for the pilot and a rear, extended radio operator/observer cabin. To provide the best forward visibility, the pilot’s canopy was slightly elevated. The remaining crew compartment was fully glazed to ensure the best possible view of the surroundings. Given the distance between them, the crew communicated using a speaking tube or, when necessary, a sidetone. However, due to engine noise, the latter method was not always the most effective.

The Fulmar featured a raised pilot’s canopy, providing an excellent forward view. Additionally, its rear crew compartment was fairly long and enclosed by a glazed canopy, offering a good all-around view. (https://hushkit.net/2020/03/24/fairey-fulmar-how-an-absurd-lumbering-thing-became-britains-top-scoring-naval-fighter/)

The armament of this aircraft consisted of eight 7.62 mm machine guns mounted in the wings. Each gun was initially supplied with 750 rounds of ammunition, which was later increased to 1,000. While eight machine guns may sound formidable, in practice, they lacked the firepower needed to inflict serious damage on larger targets, given their relatively small caliber.

The ground crew in the process of loading each gun with 750-round belts. Later, this was increased to 1,000 rounds per machine gun. (https://www.destinationsjourney.com/historical-military-photographs/fairey-fulmar/)

For example, the British recorded an incident in which three Fulmar fighters engaged a single Blohm & Voss BV 138, a long-range maritime reconnaissance aircraft. Despite firing nearly 18,000 rounds at it, the German aircraft suffered no significant damage and managed to escape.

To address this issue, the British considered equipping the Fulmar with heavier 12.7 mm (0.5 in) machine guns. While the installation proved feasible, a shortage of these weapons meant that very few aircraft were ever fitted with them. Around 100 units were slated for modification to carry four of these heavy machine guns, but only a small number actually received the upgrade.

Despite having enough space, no attempt was made to mount a rear-positioned machine gun, despite the crew’s insistence on doing so. Instead, the crew improvised with whatever defensive weapons they could find. Some used Thompson submachine guns, while others relied on signal pistols. The most unusual weapon employed for self-defense was a bundle of standard-issue toilet paper, secured with an elastic band. When thrown out of the aircraft, the band would snap, creating an explosion of paper that, on rare occasions, helped distract or deter enemy pursuers.

The Fulmar was originally designed to carry a bomb load consisting of either two 45 kg or 113 kg (100-250 lbs) bombs. However, this was never actually implemented, as no bomb racks were installed to accommodate such a load. On rare occasions, small 9 to 18 kg (20-40 lbs) bombs were carried to engage enemy anti-aircraft batteries during support missions.

Production 

Production of this aircraft began in May 1940 and ended in February 1943. During that time, 250 units of the Mk. I variant was built, followed by 350 of the later Mk. II variant. In total, approximately 600 aircraft of this type were produced during the war.

Production Versions

  • Fairey Fulmar Mk.I– First production variant
  • Fairey Fulmar Mk.II– Second production variant equipped with a Merlin 30 engine
  • Night Fighter/trainer– Modified to act as a night fighter, supplied with radio equipment. In total 100 were converted to this role of which half were reused as night fighter trainers
  • Long-Range Reconnaissance – Equipped with long-range radio equipment

Surviving Aircraft

Only one of the approximately 600 aircraft of this type has survived to this day. This surviving example is actually the first prototype, which was later used for civilian purposes after the war. Today, it is on display at the Fleet Air Arm Museum in Yeovilton.

The only surviving Fairey Fulmar  can be seen at the Fleet Air Arm Museum in Yeovilton. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Fulmar)

Conclusion 

The Fairey Fulmar was an attempt to adapt an existing aircraft design into a fighter type that was in high demand by the British Royal Navy. While it met most of the required specifications, it was too slow and heavy to compete effectively against faster, purpose-built fighters. Its

armament, despite featuring multiple machine guns, was also still somewhat underpowered. However, this did not prevent the Fulmar from achieving remarkable success for a relatively large fighter. Despite its small production numbers, it proved effective against Italian aircraft and, on occasion, even German fighters. By 1943, however, it was becoming obsolete, and by the end of the war, all remaining Fulmars had been retired from service. Nonetheless, it paved the way for later, more advanced naval aircraft.

Fairey Fulmar MK.I  Specifications

Wingspans 14.14 m /  46  ft 4 in
Length 13.42 m /  40 ft 2 in
Height 4.27 m / 14 ft
Wing Area 31.8 m² / 342 ft²
Engine 1.080 hp Merilin VIII V-12 piston engine
Empty Weight 3,955 kg / 8,720 lbs
Maximum Takeoff Weight 4,853 kg / 10,700  lbs
Maximum Speed km/h /450  mph
Cruising speed 398 km/h / 247 mph
Maximum Service Ceiling m / 16,000 ft
Crew One pilot, one observer/navigator
Armament
  • Eight 7.62 mm Browning machine guns

Illustration

Credits

Source:

  • D. Brown (1973) Fairey Fulmar Mks I and II Aircraft Profile 254, Profile Publication
  • D. Nešić (2008) Naoružanje Drugog Svetskog Rata Velika Britanija, Vojnoizdavački zavod
  • D. Monday (2007) British Aircraft of World War Two, Chancellor Press
  • F. Crosby (2006) The Complete Guide to Fighters and Bombers Of The World, Hermes Hause
  • https://www.armouredcarriers.com/fairey-fulmar-models

 

 

Hafner Rotabuggy

UK Union Jack United Kingdom (1943-1944)
Rotor Kite Transport – One prototype

During the Second World War, airborne troops became an essential component of modern military strategy. They allowed armies to wreak havoc on unprotected rear areas by destroying critical targets, such as the enemy’s vital command structures, and the infrastructure supporting their army. However, one major drawback was that once on the ground, these troops were lightly equipped and moved at a walking pace. However, an engineer named Raoul Hafner proposed an innovative solution: airlifting light vehicles using unpowered rotary wings, similar to those later used in helicopters. His concept involved towing the vehicle, behind a truck or light aircraft until lift off. Once airborne, it would be released, and the pilot would use autorotation to fly the vehicle to the landing zone. A prototype was built and tested, but with the advent of larger gliders, the project was ultimately abandoned.

The experimental Hafner Rotabuggy. Source: www.macsmotorcitygarage.com

An Airborne Dilemma

With the abundance of US-supplied military vehicles, the British sought ways to incorporate them into various roles, and experiments. Among those interested was Raoul Hafner, a rotor kite enthusiast. Rotor kites were essentially unpowered rotary-wing aircraft that shared many design features with later helicopters. While helicopters can take off under their own power, rotor kites cannott, instead, they need to be towed by a larger aircraft, or a suitable ground vehicle. Once airborne, they rely on airflow over their rotary wings to generate lift and remain airborne. This can be achieved by descending to generate speed and lift, having a strong wind to keep the rotor wing turning, or remaining tethered to another vehicle for the entirety of the flight. Although this technology was inexpensive to build, it was never implemented on a larger scale.

Hafner was born in Austria in 1905. In his early twenties, he developed an early interest in rotorcraft design, and in 1928, he collaborated with Bruno Nagler on an early helicopter prototype. In the early 1930s, Hafner emigrated to the United Kingdom, where he began working on gyroplanes there, he designed and built a functional prototype known as the Hafner A.R.III Gyroplane. Hafner continued refining his designs, but with the outbreak of World War Two, he was briefly held in state custody due to his Austrian origin.

Raoul Hafner would go on to play a vital role in the history of helicopter development. However, his early work was primarily focused on an unpowered variant known as the rotor kite. Source: en.wikipedia.org

Upon his release, Hafner began working on a solution to Britain’s shortage of materials needed for parachute construction. His goal was to develop an inexpensive, one-man rotor kite to carry an infantryman deep behind enemy lines. The core principle behind his concept was that, given the scarcity of materials required for parachute production, a small, easy-to-build, and simple-to-control rotor kite could serve as a cost-effective alternative. These kites were designed to be towed into the air by another aircraft and then released near the designated target. Once released, the pilot/paratrooper would glide down slowly before proceeding to their objective. Hafner followed with a small prototype series of these aircraft, designated the Hafner Rotachute. While his work showed promise, it ultimately resulted in only a limited number of experimental prototypes, with no further large-scale implementation.

The so-called Hafner Rotachute was an experimental attempt to develop an alternative to parachutes. While the concept was intriguing, it never progressed beyond a small prototype production run. Source: en.wikipedia.org

He soon expanded on that idea, if he could devise a way to land soldiers, why not include light vehicles as well? Paratroopers, who were often dropped behind enemy lines to wreak havoc among key targets, were frequently left vulnerable as they were lightly armed and had limited mobility. The challenge, however, was that airdropping even light vehicles was no simple task. Hafner theorized that his rotor kite design could be expanded and enlarged to allow for the airlifting and deployment of light vehicles. If successful, this would provide paratroopers with a means of transportation, increasing their effectiveness in combat.

The overall design was intended to be as simple as possible. A standard light vehicle, left mostly unmodified, would be partially enclosed within an aerodynamic fuselage, likely made of plywood, to provide lift and protect the crew from the tow aircraft’s propeller wash, and the wind. A rotary assembly would be mounted on top, while a large tail section at the rear would ensure lateral stability. Upon landing ,assuming a safe descent, the crew would discard the fuselage, leaving the vehicle fully operational and ready for use without issue.

In 1942, with this idea in mind, he approached the Central Landing Establishment, later renamed the Airborne Forces Experimental Establishment, to present his proposal. While, at first, the concept of attaching a makeshift rotary wing to a lightweight wheeled vehicle may seem dangerous and wasteful, it would be phenomenally valuable should it succeed. Developing an effective method for transporting such vehicles over long distances would have provided significant combat advantages. This was especially crucial at a time when the Allies were considering various plans and strategies for invading occupied France, plans where airborne units played a star role. Thus the Central Landing Establishment saw potential in this idea, and Hafner received approval to move forward with its development. Now, Hafner needed to find a suitable light chassis for the job. Fortunately for him, he didn’t have to search for long, the answer was already in the hands of the UK’s ally across the Atlantic.

A Well-Known Icon

In the 1930s, the leadership of the US Army closely observed the rapid military developments unfolding in Europe and the Pacific. In response, the Army sought to modernize its forces, starting with an increase in mobility for its reconnaissance units and couriers, which at the time primarily relied on horses.

Initially, as in Germany, motorcycles were introduced for this role. While they were an improvement over horses, they had significant limitations, primarily their limited carrying capacity, as they could only transport the driver, one additional passenger, and a very small amount of cargo. It became clear that a larger, more capable vehicle was needed.

This led to the  development of small, relatively inexpensive, all-wheel-drive light vehicles. Throughout the 1930s, the Army conducted extensive testing and evaluation of several different designs. After these trials, a final decision was made to adopt Willys-Overland Motors’ design, known as the Willys MB, but generally, it was simply referred to as the  Jeep, as the Army’s standard lightweight reconnaissance vehicle. Unbeknownst to them at the time, they had just created one of the most iconic military vehicles in history.

The Willys MB would become one of the most iconic military vehicles in history. Source: en.wikipedia.org

While Willys was set to produce these new vehicles, the immense demand and the need to utilize the vast production capacity of its competitor, Ford, led to the company also receiving orders to manufacture the vehicle. Although Ford was allowed to make some modifications, the overall design had to remain to ensure all mechanical components for the vehicles were interchangeable. Between 1941, when production began, and 1945, over 600,000 of these vehicles were produced. They saw widespread service across the globe during and after the war, with a significant number still in use today.

Initially designed for reconnaissance operations, their sheer numbers and popularity led to their adaptation for various roles. These included medical evacuation, combat, self-propelled rocket launchers, and long-range raiders for missions against enemy rear positions. They were also used as command vehicles, among many other roles.

The vehicle was widely exported to Allied nations, including the UK, which received tens of thousands. Even the Soviet Union acquired them and eventually developed its own variant. Given the vast stockpile of these vehicles, it is unsurprising that Hafner chose to test his idea using one of them.

The Jeep saw extensive use by British special forces in North Africa, where it played a crucial role in raids targeting enemy rear positions. Source: wikipedia.org

Name

The unusual vehicle was known by many nicknames. It received the Air Ministry designation ML 10/42 Special Rotating Wing Glider. It was also called the Malcolm Rotaplane, Flying Jeep, and Blitz Buggy. Eventually, it became best known simply as the Hafner Rotabuggy. For the sake of simplicity, this article will refer to it as the Rotabuggy.

Building and Testing the Vehicle

After receiving approval, the next task was to find a suitable chassis, and someone capable of building the vehicle or aircraft. Given the abundance of options, Hafner decided to utilize the US-supplied Jeep light reconnaissance vehicle. For the construction of the working prototype, he approached R. Malcolm Ltd., a small company that had been building aircraft components during the war.

Once the base components were selected, the construction of the working prototype began. It was likely completed by mid-1943. The first flight trials of the Rotabuggy were scheduled for November 1943. These trials were planned to be conducted using a Diamond T 4-ton 6×6 truck as a tug vehicle. This was seen as a simple, cost-effective, and safe option, given the prototype’s early development stage, far too early for tests with aircraft. The flight tests were carried out on the 16th November, 1943. Despite numerous attempts, the crew was unable to get the Hafner Rotabuggy off the ground, as they could not achieve the necessary speed to generate lift.

The Rotabuggy’s shape in its early experimental phase was still evolving. Experimenting with the design led to many changes, such as the introduction of much larger tail fins. Source: www.nevingtonwarmuseum.com

Further tests were carried out on 27th November. This time, a stronger, albeit unspecified, tug vehicle was used. The initial test was successful, as they managed to lift the Rotabuggy into the air. The first flight test using a tug aircraft, specifically a Whitley Bomber, was conducted in December 1943. However, the first design problems were identified during this test flight. At a speed of 80 km/h (50 mph), the vehicle experienced strong vibrations, forcing an early end to the flight.

Subsequent tests with a similar tug vehicle showed that the vibrations persisted at speeds of 70 km/h (45 mph) and higher. Additionally, during one test flight, one of the rotors struck the tail fin, damaging it in the process. Following these tests, the Rotabuggy was temporarily grounded for various repairs and modifications.

By February 1944, the Rotabuggy achieved a speed of 112 km/h (70 mph), and many more tests were carried out throughout 1944. On September 11th, 1944, the first major test flight was undertaken. At a height of 120 m (400 feet), after being towed by a Whitley bomber, the small buggy was released. After some brief difficulty controlling the aircraft, the pilot managed to land the vehicle, though with some effort.

In later stages, it would look visually much different, having a fully enclosed cockpit. Source: www.macsmotorcitygarage.com

Fate

Given the extensive testing, it was clear that there was significant interest in this project. However, despite more than a year of development, the project was ultimately canceled. The primary reason for this was not the new concept itself but rather the fact that the British had begun mass-producing gliders, such as the Waco CG-4, which could carry a Jeep within its fuselage. As a result, the Rotabuggy was no longer needed.

While his Rotabuggy project reached an unsuccessful dead end, this was not the end of Hafner’s story. Given his expertise in rotor aircraft development, he was appointed Chief Designer and head of the newly established Helicopter Division at Bristol. Hafner’s work at Bristol was highly successful, and he played a pivotal role in advancing early British helicopter design. His contributions were instrumental in the development of aircraft such as the Type 171 Sycamore, and the large tandem-rotor Bristol Belvedere.

He was also among the first aircraft engineers to receive the Dr. Alexander Klemin Award, a prestigious honor in the field of vertical flight aeronautics. Tragically, in 1980, Hafner disappeared at sea when his boat went missing and was never found.

Technical characteristics

The Rotabuggy fuselage was an extension added to the U.S. Jeep, designed to enable controlled flight. During testing, it was concluded that the Jeep could be dropped from a height of up to 2.35 m (7.7 ft) without suffering any major mechanical breakdowns. It could thus theoretically survive rough landings on unprepared ground.

Essentially, it consisted of a standard Jeep with four metal bars arranged in a pyramidal shape at its base. To enhance structural integrity, two additional metal bars connected the front and rear pairs. Atop this framework, a rotor unit was intended to be installed.

Another metal frame was attached to the rear section, consisting of at least four long stringers reinforced with smaller crossbars. Surrounding this structure, a series of almost circular frames, decreasing in size toward the tail section, were added to shape the fuselage.

A clear view of the Rotabuggy’s internal framework, which consists of at least four long stringers reinforced with smaller crossbars and enclosed in a plywood skin. Source: www.macsmotorcitygarage.com

The structure forming the base of the fuselage was then covered with plywood for aerodynamics. The sides and top were essentially flat, without any noticeable features. Large windshields were added at the front and on the crew’s side doors, providing excellent, almost all-around visibility. This gave the crews a clear view, more than sufficient for landing the aircraft. While little data for its flight characteristics survive, its estimated rate of sink at a speed of 77 km/.h (48 mph) was 4.9 m/s (960 ft/min)

Large windshields were added at the front and on the crew’s side doors, providing excellent, almost all-around visibility. This gave the crews a clear view of their surroundings. Source: rafbeaulieu.co.uk
The rear part of the fuselage was essentially flat, featuring only a slight curve. Source: /www.nevingtonwarmuseum.com

To help provide lateral stability, a large tail assembly was added to the vehicle’s rear. It consisted of two fairly large vertical stabilizers. Interestingly, there were no rudders on these fins. Lastly, a small landing skid was located at the end of the vehicle’s tail.

 

The tail assembly features two large fins that provide much-needed lateral stability. Source: www.nevingtonwarmuseum.com

The crew consisted of two members: a driver and a pilot. The driver was seated on the left side, as in the original Jeep configuration. The pilot sat in the opposite seat and was responsible for controlling the rotor blades, which were used to lift the vehicle off the ground. To control the vehicle, the pilot was provided with a control column, a rotor tachometer, and a set of basic and glider navigational instruments. Once on solid ground, the vehicle would be driven like a regular Jeep.

The Rotabuggy used rather long rotor blades, with a diameter of 14.22 meters (47 feet). There were some issues with this length, as on at least one occasion, they damaged the rear tail assembly, luckily without injuring its crew.

The control column for the aircraft. Source: aviadejavu.ru
The Rotabuggy used rather long rotor blades. There were some issues with this length, as on at least one occasion, they damaged the rear tail assembly. Source: aviadejavu.ru

Surviving Aircraft

Since it never progressed beyond the prototype stage, it is not surprising that the vehicle did not survive to the present day. The prototype was eventually refurbished back to a standard Jeep . However, being such an intriguing design concept, a replica was built by the Wessex Aviation Society. can now be seen at the British Museum of Army Flying in Middle Wallop, Hampshire.

While the prototype did not survive, the Wessex Aviation Society managed to modify a Jeep and create a modern replica of the Hafner Rotabuggy. Source: www.reddit.com

Conclusion 

The Hafner Rotabuggy was surely an interesting and unique attempt at utilizing the relatively new rotorcraft design. In theory, this concept would allow for an alternative method of airdropping men and materials, including vehicles.

While the Rotabuggy had some issues, such as severe vibration during flight, it was generally considered a mechanically sound design. However, its main drawback was that, despite its novelty, it did not offer significant improvements over the gliders already in use. As stronger and more capable gliders were developed, which could transport both personnel and lightweight vehicles, the Rotabuggy became obsolete.

Although its service life was short, the project played a vital role in shaping Hafner’s future work in rotary-wing aircraft, ultimately contributing to the development of various helicopter designs.

Hafner Rotabuggy  Specifications

Length 2.9 m / 9  ft 6 in
Height 2.06 m / 6  ft 9 in
Main rotor Area 15.9 m² /  173 ft²
Engine None / ( 60 hp in Jeep)
Empty Weight (for Jeep only) 964 kg / 2,125lbs
Maximum Takeoff Weight 1,411 kg / 3,110 lbs
Maximum estimated speed 241 km/h / 150 mph
Cruising estimated speed 130 km/h / 80 mph
Crew Two – The pilot and the driver
Armament
  • none

Illustration

 

Credits

 Source:

   

Fw 189C 

Nazi flag Nazi Germany (1939)

Close-support ground attack aircraft : Two prototypes built

The Luftwaffe (Eng. German Air Force) entered the Second World War without a dedicated close air support aircraft, with their more infamous dive bombers carrying out their missions independently of ground forces. As this need became increasingly apparent, attempts were made to identify a suitable design, but any new aircraft would have to be as inexpensive as possible, as other aircraft projects were prioritized. With limited options, Focke-Wulf proposed adapting its Fw 189 reconnaissance aircraft for this role. While promising in theory, the adaptation proved flawed and ultimately unsuccessful in practice. Despite this, two prototypes were built and tested, but by 1940, the project was abandoned.

The Unsuccessful Ground Attack Variant of the Fw 189. (Source: planehistoria.com)

A Modern Reconnaissance Aircraft

The rise of Nazism in Germany during the 1930s led to a massive military buildup, defying the limitations imposed by the Treaty of Versailles, which by this time was little more than a formality, with few parties motivated to uphold it. Among the most rapidly expanding branches was the Luftwaffe, which received substantial investment and development, leading to the introduction of a series of modern aircraft designed for various military roles.

One of these roles, tactical reconnaissance, was initially assigned to the Henschel Hs 126. Despite its somewhat outdated design, this high-wing aircraft proved reasonably effective for its intended purpose. However, its relatively low speed and the absence of a dedicated observer limited its effectiveness in reconnaissance missions.

Even as the Hs 126 entered service, the Reichsluftfahrtministerium (RLM), or German Air Ministry, took steps to develop a more advanced replacement. In 1937, they initiated a program to explore new designs. Although multiple projects were tested, the Focke-Wulf Fw 189, headed by the engineer Kurt Tank, ultimately emerged as the chosen design.  While RLM officials were initially uncertain about the Focke-Wulf proposal, they eventually placed an order for three prototypes. Construction on the first prototype designated the Fw 189V1, began in April 1937 and was completed in 1938. It was soon followed by two additional prototypes.

As preparations for production were underway, the RLM initially decided to rely solely on the Hs 126. However, after the successful conclusion of the Western campaign against the Allies in France in June 1940, Luftwaffe officials reconsidered their stance on the Hs 126. It became evident that this aircraft would soon be extremely obsolete in its intended role, necessitating an urgent search for a replacement. The only aircraft that could potentially fulfill this role within a short timeframe was the Fw 189. Production began in the summer of 1940, and by 1944, fewer than 900 units of this aircraft had been built. Despite the limited production, the Fw 189 saw extensive service and proved to be both popular and highly effective throughout the war.

The first Fw 189V1 prototype. (Source: wikipedia)

A Modern Air Force With No Ground Attack Aircraft?

While the rearmament of the German military forces was underway, Luftwaffe officials recognized the need for a dedicated ground-attack aircraft to provide close air support. Although the Ju 87 Stuka was designed for precision bombing to neutralize fortified targets, it was clear that they needed a heavily armed and well-protected aircraft for close-in support near friendly units. Despite this need, early Luftwaffe development in this area lagged, for reasons that remain unclear. Kurt and his team at Focke-Wulf saw a potential business opportunity and decided to repurpose their Fw 189 aircraft to meet this demand.

Recognizing that the Fw 189’s glazed, unarmored fuselage was not equipped for the ground-attack role, the Focke-Wulf team set out to develop a more protected fuselage design, which would house both a pilot and a rear gunner. Eager to proceed quickly, Focke-Wulf engineers decided to modify the first prototype of the Fw 189. The aircraft was returned to the Focke-Wulf factory in 1938 so that work on the modifications could begin immediately. After several months of redesign and construction, the new prototype designated Fw 189V1b (later marked with the code NA+BW) was completed and underwent its first flight tests in 1939. It was powered by the two 430 hp Argus As 410 engines.

The results of these tests were disappointing, to say the least. The prototype was difficult to control, and its overall flight performance was poor. The added weight significantly affected its handling and maneuverability. Furthermore, the small armored glass windshield provided a limited view for the pilot, making it challenging to fly. To make matters worse, the rear gunner’s visibility was almost nonexistent.

Only two prototypes of this variant would be constructed. (Source: planehistoria.com)

With few other options, the aircraft was returned to Focke-Wulf for further modifications. Both the pilot’s and rear gunner’s visibility issues had to be addressed, necessitating adjustments to the overall design. After a series of modifications, the aircraft was deemed ready and submitted to the Luftwaffe for evaluation. Despite the promise of close-support ground attack aircraft, it attracted little interest from major German aircraft manufacturers, leaving the Henschel Hs 129 as its only real competitor.

After a series of test flights with both aircraft, Luftwaffe officials grew increasingly annoyed and disappointed.  The Fw 189 and the Hs 129 performed quite poorly. As a result, both aircraft were sent back for further improvements. However, the story of the Fw 189V1b came to an abrupt end shortly after this competition. During one demonstration flight, the pilot miscalculated his approach and collided with a building while attempting to land. Although he survived with injuries, the prototype was so severely damaged that it was written off entirely.

Future Development 

Despite a rough start, the project was not abandoned. Though the initial prototype failed, it still held interest with some Luftwaffe officials, leading to an order for Focke-Wulf to produce another prototype for further testing. Expectations were high, as this version was intended to enter production as the Fw 189C and to have corrected all the faults of the disappointing first attempt. To meet these demands, Focke-Wulf developed the Fw 189V6 prototype, which carried the code D-OPVN.

In appearance, the Fw 189V6 closely resembled the previous model, but it featured a slightly modified fuselage and was powered by a more powerful 465-horsepower Argus As 410 engine. The prototype was completed and tested in 1940, with trials conducted by the 5 Staffel of Lehrgeschwader 2. During testing, pilots who had the chance to fly both the Fw 189V6 and its competitor, the Henschel Hs 129, overwhelmingly favored the Focke-Wulf design.

However, the pressures of the ongoing war and reduced production capacity meant that the Luftwaffe needed an option that was quicker and cheaper to mass-produce. Ultimately, the Hs 129 was chosen, despite its reputation as a more cumbersome design. The fate of the Fw 189V6 is unclear, though it was likely scrapped. The close support role was later taken up by the Fw 190, with special fighter bomber variants being created to take up the mission and phase out the dated dive bombers.

The Fw 189V6 prototype was to serve as the base for the anticipated C variant, but in the end, nothing came of it. (Source: www.airwar.ru)

Although the Fw 189C never entered production, some Fw 189A models were modified for ground-attack roles during the war. Designated as the Fw 189A-4, these variants were armed with two forward-mounted 20 mm cannons and two MG 17 machine guns. Additional armor was installed to protect vital components, including the fuel tanks, engines, and fuselage. An unknown number of these modified aircraft were produced starting in late 1942.

Technical characteristics

The Fw 189C prototypes incorporated several components from the original Focke-Wulf design. The original glazed fuselage was replaced with a fully enclosed, two-man armored compartment. This updated cockpit featured an armored, pointed nose, designed to provide an improved forward view while maintaining some degree of aerodynamic efficiency. The canopy had three small windows, and directly behind it was a compact compartment for the rear gunner. The aircraft’s overall construction consisted of rounded metal frames covered with a stressed duralumin skin. The new fuselage was reinforced with armor plating, though specific details about the placement and thickness of the armor are not mentioned in available sources. Unfortunately, the design proved to be cramped and lacked consideration for the comfort of both the pilot and the gunner.

The aircraft’s wings consist of two primary sections: a central, square-shaped segment connecting the nacelles and engines, and an outer section extending from the booms. The wing structure has a steel spar framed by duralumin, while the ailerons and split flaps are covered in fabric. At the rear, the twin-tail assembly includes two large rudders connected by a single, extended elevator, with both tail control surfaces also being fabric-covered.  Since the wing root was designed to support heavy armament, the central part of the wing had to be reinforced to withstand the recoil forces.

The first prototype was powered by a  430-horsepower engine, while the second prototype featured 465-horsepower Argus As 410 A-1, both 12-cylinder air-cooled engines. Unfortunately, specific details about the aircraft’s flight characteristics were not mentioned in available sources. It is known, however, that the added weight of the armor and armament degraded its flight performance, though the extent of this impact remains unclear.

The main landing gear extended from beneath each engine nacelle, with smaller wheels extending from the rear tail assembly. Later in the war, the second prototype received reinforced landing gear to improve durability.

As it was intended for ground attack operations, the second prototype was armed with two 20 mm MG 151/20 cannons and four 7.92 mm MG 17 machine guns. For rear self-defense, a dual MG 81 machine gun mount was installed. Had it entered production, it is likely that bomb racks would have been added

Close up view of the Fw 189’s experimental fuselage. (Source: www.airwar.ru)
Top view of the new fuselage with the canopy removed. (Source: www.airwar.ru)
The two prototypes were provided with single-leg landing gear. (Source: www.airwar.ru)

 

Conclusion

The Fw 189C was an intriguing attempt to develop a ground-attack aircraft based on the successful reconnaissance version. While it performed effectively in its original reconnaissance role, the ground-attack variant proved far less successful, proving cumbersome and difficult to fly. Only two prototypes were ever built before the project was discontinued in 1940, with the Hs 129 deemed a more cost-effective alternative.

Fw 189C (Estimated) Specifications

Wingspans 18.4 m / 60 ft 4 in
Length 12 m / 39 ft 5 in
Height 3.1 m / 10 ft 2 in
Wing Area 38m² / 410 ft²
Engine Two 465 hp Argus As 410A-1 engines
Crew pilot, rear gunner
Armament
  • Two 2 cm MG 151.20
  • Four 7.92 mm MG 17
  • And two 7.92 mm MG 81

Illustration

Credits

Source:

  • D. Donald (1996) German Aircraft of World War II, Orbis Publishing
  • D. Nesic  (2008)  Naoružanje Drugog Svetsko Rata-Nemacka
  • D. Monday (2006) The Hamlyn Concise Guide To Axis Aircraft OF World War II, Bounty Books
  • J. R. Smith and A. L. Kay (1972) German Aircraft of the WW2, Putnam
  • G. Punka (1993) Focke-Wulf Fw 189 in Action, Signal Publication
  • Captain E. ‘Winkle’ Brown (2010) Wings of the Luftwaffe, Hikoki Publication
  • https://vintageaviationnews.com/warbirds-news/unique-focke-wulf-fw-189-offered-for-sale.html

 

 

73 mm Föhn-Gerät

Nazi flag Nazi Germany (1944)

Type: Ground anti-aircraft rocket – 83 Launchers Built

By late 1944, the Germans were losing on all fronts and the Allies were steadily advancing into Germany itself. To make matters worse, the extensive losses in manpower and equipment had become irrecoverable. As a result, various makeshift, improvised, and even obsolete weapons were brought to the front lines in a desperate attempt to halt the Allied advance. One such last-ditch effort was the creation of a 73 mm rocket launcher, intended as a close range anti-aircraft weapon by firing a volley of small rockets. While the official project name has been lost to history, it is often referred to as the 73 mm Föhn-Gerät.

The unusual 73 mm Föhn-Gerät rocket launcher. (Source: www.armedconflicts.com)

German Early Rocket Development

Throughout history, rockets in combat were typically a cheap complement to artillery. While early rocket designs lacked the destructive power of conventional artillery, their primary role was to disrupt enemy lines and instill chaos, acting more as psychological weapons than as tools of mass destruction. By the onset of the Second World War, however, rocket technology had advanced significantly, rockets could now fire over greater ranges and deliver larger payloads, making them far more effective in both tactical and strategic contexts.

In Germany, early rocket development was largely driven by civilian efforts to explore new technologies and their potential applications. Much of this work focused on using rockets to power aircraft, exemplified by Fritz von Opel’s experimental work in the 1920s. Von Opel was assisted by another prominent aircraft designer Alexander Martin Lippisch. While technically speaking these were not real rocket-powered flights, given that these gliders did not take to the sky using purely the rocket engine but were towed to altitude. Nevertheless, these flights showed that considerable investment was going into rocketry, with the desire for it to break into new roles.

The early German rocket program was mainly intended for civilian use, such as its use in Fritz von Opel’s experimental rocket-powered glider. Soon, the Army saw a potential use of rocket technology and tried to implement it for its own use. (Source: L. Warsitz The First Jet Pilot The Story of German Test Pilot Erich Warsitz)

Over the following years, Lippisch became quite interested in rocket technology and joined the Deutsche Forschungsinstitut DFS, where he worked as an engineer. There, he developed a series of new glider designs, like the DFS 40, to test rocket propulsion. This work would eventually lead to the creation of the Me 163 rocket-powered aircraft. Another major stepping stone in rocketry was the work of Wernher von Braun. In 1932 and 1934, von Braun managed to successfully launch two rockets using liquid-fuel rocket engines. In 1935 he managed to come into contact with Dr. Ernst Heinkel 1935. With financial and infrastructure support, von Braun would participate in the creation of the first operational rocket-powered aircraft, the He 176.

The He 176 Source:luft46.com

In the early 1930s, the German military began to take an interest in using rockets to produce new artillery systems. The Germans had a unique motivation to develop rocket technology, as it was not prohibited by the terms of the Treaty of Versailles. The pioneering work of engineers like Hauptmann Dr. Ing. Walter Dornberger and von Braun played a significant role in advancing German rocket programs. Their work made it possible to create rockets that rotated around their longitudinal axis, effectively stabilizing them during flight. This innovation reduced the need for specialized wings and fins that would otherwise be required to maintain stability. As a result, a simpler, smooth-barreled launcher could be used, significantly lowering production costs while also creating lightweight launchers.

Due to its unique characteristics and capabilities, the artillery rocket held great potential as a formidable weapon. With the ability to fire over long ranges, multiple rockets could be launched rapidly from a single launcher, allowing it to carry outa rapid salvo compared to contemporary artillery pieces. Additionally, rockets could carry a larger payload than artillery shells of the same caliber, increasing their impact. However, they lacked precision and were less effective against fortified targets.

The German army formed its specialized Nebeltruppe (Eng. Smoke Troops) in 1929. These were initially equipped with large caliber mortars. As rocket launchers became available, these were then integrated in Nebeltruppen. Initially, rockets were used primarily to obscure enemy positions with smoke-generating rounds, rather than for direct attacks. Although chemical rounds were also developed, these were not employed in combat. Interestingly, they also employed rocket launchers to deliver propaganda leaflets, although they were rarely employed.

The first mass-produced rocket launcher was the 15 cm Nebelwerfer (Eng. Smoke Thrower) 41. Development of this weapon began in 1934, and it officially entered service in 1940. Designed to be simple and cost-effective, the Nebelwerfer utilized existing components to streamline development. The base of the launcher was adapted from the 3.7 cm PaK anti-tank gun carriage, and with the gun and shield removed, it was fitted instead with a six-tube launcher, each tube 15 cm in diameter. A folding pad was added to the front of the carriage for stabilization during firing.

The 15 cm Nebelwerfer 41 was one of the first, and one of the most common, rocket artillery systems. It was a towed weapon and needed a prime mover to transport it over longer distances. (Source: en.wikipedia.org)

A Literal  Propaganda Weapon

Besides using rockets to deliver deadly payloads or smoke, the Germans also employed them in a rather unconventional manner: distributing propaganda leaflets over enemy lines. In 1941, they introduced the Propagandagranate 41 (Eng. propaganda grenade), a specialized 7.3 cm rocket designed for this purpose.

The Propagandagranate 41 was slightly over 3 kg in weight and about 40 cm long. It was launched from a metal frame stabilized by three fixed spades. After setting the correct firing angle, the rocket was placed into the mount and at a distance from the base of the tube. This arrangement was necessary because the rocket was ignited using a percussion-firing system, essentially functioning like a mortar.

To fire the rocket, the operator would retreat to a safe distance and pull a string to release the captive rockets. This action allowed the rocket to slide down into the base, striking a firing pin that ignited the percussion primer located at the rear.

These rockets were assigned to specialized propaganda units known as Propagandatruppen. While it is difficult to assess the exact effectiveness of this method, it was undoubtedly a unique way to distribute propaganda leaflets during the war.

The 73 mm rockets were originally designed to distribute leaflets over enemy lines (Source: www.lonesentry.com)

A New Life For The Failed Propaganda Weapon

While rockets developed during the war were primarily forms of artillery, they were not limited to this role. The flexibility of unguided rockets allowed them to be adapted for use against aerial targets and even ships. Once again, the Germans tested various such weapons when their fortunes declined, including ground-to-air missiles, intended to counter the escalating Allied bombing raids. These projects mixed results and failed to achieve the level of success their designers had hoped for. Notably, attempts to build various surface-to-air missiles were met with only limited success. As resources became scarce and the war more desperate, the Germans sought simpler, cheaper, weapon systems designed to saturate the sky with numerous rockets in the hope of bringing down enemy aircraft. One such project appears to have been initiated in 1942.

Starting such a project from scratch was not considered an option at this stage of the war. Instead, the Germans attempted to repurpose what they already had. This is where the 73 mm propaganda rocket came into play. Since the tooling for its production still existed, it was feasible to use it for creating new anti-aircraft rocket launchers. The overall design was quite simple, consisting of a box launcher, rail cages, and a control cabin, and was set on a fixed or mobile carriage.. By 1944, work on this project ran at a slow pace and not many such launchers were built.

As this was a late-war project produced under desperate conditions, not much is known about who precisely initiated it. It is known that they were developed by the Waffenprüfstelle der Luftwaffe Tarnewitz (Weapons Testing Center of the Air Force Tarnewitz). Based on several sources, it appears that the launchers were constructed by Rheinmetall. Other sources claim that Henschel built and developed it. What is certain, however, is that these weapons entered production and service in late 1944.

To provide a cost-effective means of defending vital installations, the Germans introduced the 73 mm Föhn-Gerät rocket launcher in late 1944. (Source:www.landmarkscout.com)

Production

The production of the launchers progressed at a slow pace. By 1944, only 50 units had been completed. By February 1945, this number had increased by 83, or increased to 83, though sources are somewhat unclear on the exact figure.

Designation

No official designation for this system is known to have survived. In available sources, it is often mentioned that the Germans simply referred to it as the 73 mm Föhn-Gerät. The word Föhn refers to a certain type of wind, while Gerät translates to Device.

Some internet sources also designate it as the Henschel Hs 297. Interestingly, captured systems examined by the Western Allies were designated as the 7.5 cm Multiple Fortress Rocket Launcher. This designation is incorrect in both caliber and intended purpose. For the sake of simplicity, throughout this article, we will refer to the system as the 73 mm Föhn rockets.

In Combat

A small number of these launchers were built and deployed for frontline use near the end of the war. They were primarily used to protect bridges over the German rivers on the Western Front. In particular, a few were defending the area around the Remagen bridge in 1945.

The 73 mm Raketen Sprenggranate was introduced to service near the end of the war. (Source: en.wikipedia.org)

Design

Cradle and Carriage

The 73 mm Föhn cradle features a simple conical base, above which is a saddle with two trunnions that securely hold the rocket rail box in place. The entire system could either be bolted to a concrete base, or mounted on an older 3.7 cm Flak 18, two-wheel carriage for mobility. The stationary configuration was chosen for defending critical ground targets where mobility was unnecessary. In contrast, the mobile version was likely intended for use by ground forces as a standard anti-aircraft weapon. When deployed in the field, the rocket system would be lowered to the ground, and the crew would unfold two sheet metal plates designed to provide them with a standing platform.

The 73 mm Föhn-Gerät in mobile (left) and static configuration. (Source: www.lonesentry.com)
Side view of the mobile launcher variant. This version seems to be much rarer, as significantly more photographs exist of the static variant. (Source:www.armedconflicts.com)

Controls

The controls for the 73 mm Föhn system were located on the left side of the assembly and housed within a partially enclosed cabin. The front and the right side, which faced the rocket launcher, were shielded by thin sheet metal plating. This housing was not designed to protect against enemy aircraft fire but rather to guard against the exhaust generated when firing the rockets.

At the upper front of the cabin, there was a large, curved glazed window, providing the operator with a mostly field of view. The controls themselves were straightforward; elevation was adjusted using a handwheel, while traversal was managed with a simple flat metal bar, likely welded to the right-side armor of the cabin. To traverse the system, the operator would push the bar forward or backward with their left hand, pivoting the box launcher on its mount.

This greatly illustrates the position of the operator and the two control units (a bar and hand wheel) for elevation and traverse. Interestingly this weapon appears to be a prototype, as it has more launchers than those found at the frontline. (Source: www.armedconflicts.com)
A rear view of the operator’s partially protected cabin. The armor was too light to provide effective protection against enemy return fire; instead, its primary purpose was to shield the operator from the rocket’s exhaust. (Source: www.armedconflicts.com)

Armament

The project was based on the 73 mm propaganda rocket but required several modifications. The rocket’s steel body was shortened to 28.2 cm, and weighed 2.74 kg, including 0.48 kg of propellant, and a 0.28 kg explosive charge. Propulsion was achieved through seven small venturi nozzles, which provided rotational stability during flight. This rotation ensured the rocket’s stability without the need for fins.

Two types of explosive charges were available. The first consisted of a mixture of 60% cyclonite (RDX) and 40% TNT, while the second comprised 55% cyclonite, 40% TNT, and 5% wax. The rocket’s 73 mm nose warhead was equipped with a percussion fuze, meaning it had to strike the target to detonate in mid-air. Although not intended, they could be used against ground targets in case of an emergency.

To prevent unexploded ordnance from littering the battlefield, the Germans incorporated a self-ignition detonator. This safety feature ensured that unused rockets would not remain a hazard after missing the intended target. The rocket had a velocity of 380 m/s, and could reach a maximum height of 1.2 km.

A close-up view of a surviving 73 mm anti-aircraft rocket. (Source: www.landmarkscout.com)

The rockets were launched from box-shaped launchers, each equipped with 35 guide rail tubes arranged in a grid of five rows horizontally and seven columns vertically. The dimensions of the launcher were 58.4 cm in width, and 81.3 cm in height, with each guide rail tube measuring 78.7 cm in length. The launchers had an elevation range of -12° to +90° and a full 360° traverse capability.

The loading process for the 35 rocket remains somewhat unclear. However, the launcher tubes were constructed in two distinct parts. The front section serves as a guide for the rocket, while the rear section is loaded separately, already containing the rocket inside.

Side view of the rocket guide rails. (Source: www.landmarkscout.com)
This photograph suggests that the launcher tubes were constructed in two distinct parts. The front section serves as a guide for the rocket, while the rear section is loaded separately, containing the unfired rocket. (Source: www.luftarchiv.de)

Once the system was prepared and a target identified, the operator aimed at the approaching enemy aircraft. Upon sighting the target and ensuring it was within range, the operator activated the rockets. All 35 rockets were fired in a single salvo. The idea behind this approach was to saturate the area around the target, increasing the chances that some rockets would hit.

However, this method had significant drawbacks. The rockets were low-velocity and imprecise, making them an unreliable means of bringing down aircraft beyond extremely close range. Additionally, the smoke generated during firing revealed the launch position. While mobile launchers could relocate after firing to avoid detection, stationary ones were left exposed and vulnerable to Allied aircraft.

Reloading the launcher was likely a tedious process, requiring considerable time to prepare all 35 rockets for another volley, or reload from additional racks. Once the rockets were expended, the ground crew could do little but wait for the enemy aircraft to move on. Theoretically, operators could control the number of rockets fired by removing or securing the rockets’ safety pins. How practical this would be is another question.

It was hoped that the 73 mm Föhn could be employed as a relatively cheap anti-aircraft weapon. As demonstrated, its accuracy could be suspect. (Source: www.armedconflicts.com)

Crew

The exact number of crew members required to operate this launcher is not specified in the limited available sources. However, at least one operator would have been necessary to operate the launcher. Additional crew members were likely stationed nearby to assist with loading the rocket launcher or preparing it for transport, and it is reasonable to assume that a commander was also part of the team.

Ground Attack Variant

During their advance toward Germany in 1945, the Allies managed to capture a vast collection of abandoned vehicles and weapons. Many of these were outdated and obsolete, brought into action out of desperation. Among the captured equipment were several improvised weapons, including a 73 mm rocket launcher that appeared to be designed to provide fire support against ground targets. However, little is known about this particular weapon, as it seems to have been a hastily constructed, improvised device created as a last-ditch effort.

An improvised launcher for the 73 mm rocket captured by the Allies at the end of the war. (Source: www.lonesentry.com)

Surviving Systems 

Despite its rarity and late introduction during the war, a few of these launchers have survived to the present day. One example is preserved at the Russian Military Historical Museum of Artillery in St. Petersburg, while another is housed at the Swedish Army Museum in Stockholm.

One surviving system can be seen at the Swedish Army Museum in Stockholm. (Source: www.stronghold-nation.com)
Another partially preserved launcher is located at the Russian Military Historical Museum of Artillery in St. Petersburg. (Source: www.landmarkscout.com)

Conclusion

The effectiveness of these weapons in combat remains uncertain, but they likely performed poorly. The rockets had a short range and produced excessive exhaust fumes which marked the position of the weapon. They could only be fired in single salvos, meaning that if they missed their target, enemy aircraft could return and engage them without fear of retaliation. Additionally, the rockets were notoriously imprecise, making the chances of hitting an enemy aircraft quite low despite the large salvo the weapon could deliver.

73 mm Föhn-Gerät Specifications

Caliber 73 mm
Crew One (likely more but it is unspecified in the soruces)
Length 28.2 cm
Wight 2.74 kg
Wight of explosive charge 0.28 kg
Velocity 380 m/s
Range 1.2 km
Elevation -12° to +90°
Traverse 360°

Illustration

 

Credits

Sources: 

  • T. J. Gander (1972) Field Rocket Equipment OF The German Army 1939-1945, Almark Publication
  • S. J. Zaloga (2006) Remagen 1945, Osprey Publishing
  • P. Chamberlain and T. Gander (1975) Mortars and Rocket, Arco publishing
  • T. Gander and P. Chamberlain (2005) Enzyklopadie Deutscher waffen 1939-1945 Handwaffen, Artilleries, Beutewaffen, Sonderwaffen, Motor Buch Verlag
  • T. J. Gander (1972) Field Rocket Equipment OF The German Army 1939-1945, Almark Publication
  • S. J. Zaloga (2006) Remagen 1945, Osprey Publishing
  • P. Chamberlain and T. Gander (1975) Mortars and Rocket, Arco publishing
  • T. Gander and P. Chamberlain (2005) Enzyklopadie Deutscher waffen 1939-1945 Handwaffen, Artilleries, Beutewaffen, Sonderwaffen, Motor Buch Verlag.
  • D. Nešić, (2008), Naoružanje Drugog Svetsko Rata-Nemačka, Beograd
  • P. Chamberlain and H. Doyle (1978) Encyclopedia of German Tanks of World War Two – Revised Edition, Arms and Armor press
  • T. Gander and P. Chamberlain (2005) Enzyklopadie Deutscher waffen 1939-1945 Handwaffen, Artilleries, Beutewaffen, Sonderwaffen, Motor buch Verlag
  • W. Kopenhagen (1998) Waffen-Arsenal, Waffen und Fahrzeuge der Heere und Luftstreitkräfte
  • https://www.lonesentry.com/ordnance/tag/rocket-launcher/

 

Fw 189A

Nazi flag Nazi Germany (1940)

Type: Reconnaissance aircraft

Number built: 864

In the late 1930s, the Luftwaffe received substantial resources which allowed for the development of many new series of aircraft. While the Luftwaffe would take on numerous new roles in the new modern military, reconnaissance of enemy territory would remain a crucial aspect of their operations. This reconnaissance work involved identifying weak points and reporting any enemy activity which could prove threatening to the situation on the ground, or presented an opportune target for the air force. The primary responsibility for these tasks fell to light, tactical reconnaissance aircraft. Initially, the Hs 126 was chosen for this role, early combat experience revealed the need for a modern replacement. This led to the development, and introduction, of the well-known twin-engine Fw 189, designed by Kurt Tank.

Fw 189A was Germany’s first modern tactical reconnaissance aircraft. Source: www.luftwaffephotos.com

History

Following the rise of the Nazi party in Germany, significant investments were made in both the Army and the Airforce. The latter, in particular, experienced rapid expansion, through the introduction of a series of new aircraft designed to fulfill various roles. This was no easy task for the Germans, as following the end of the First World War, they were prohibited from developing new aircraft. As a result, they essentially had to start from scratch. For short reconnaissance flights, the Hs 126 was selected. Despite its outdated appearance, this high-wing parasol aircraft proved to be well-suited for the role. However, it was not without flaws.

As production began, the first aircraft of this type was field-tested during the Spanish Civil War. While it performed excellently in its intended role, two major issues were identified. First, the rear gunner also served as the observer, requiring him to switch between these roles depending on the combat situation. The gunner/observer’s primary responsibility was to act as a vigilant lookout, constantly scanning for potential threats while simultaneously surveying the battlefield. This dual role required sharp focus and the ability to quickly assess and respond to emerging dangers, and naturally proved challenging. Second, the aircraft’s low speed, while beneficial for reconnaissance, made it vulnerable to enemy fighters. Essentially, a third crew member was needed, along with an increase in speed, to address these shortcomings.

The Hs 126 was chosen as the Luftwaffe’s first operational tactical reconissance aircraft. Source: en.wikipedia.org

The initial deployment of the Hs 126 in Spain quickly demonstrated to the Germans that the aircraft would soon become obsolete. In response, the Reichsluftfahrtministerium, or German Air Ministry, issued a request for a potential replacement in February 1937. The requirements were straightforward: the new aircraft needed to accommodate a crew of three, provide excellent all-around visibility, achieve a higher maximum speed, and carry an improved defensive armament. Additionally, the RLM decided to include a bomb rack capable of carrying at least 200 kg, reasoning that it would be advantageous to drop bombs during reconnaissance missions.

Three companies reached the final stage of this competition: Arado with the Ar 198, Focke-Wulf with the Fw 189, and Blohm & Voss with the BV 141. Among these, only the Ar 198 had a conventional design by the standards of the time. The Fw 189 featured a central glazed nacelle flanked by two tail boom-mounted engines. The BV 141, however, stood out with its highly unconventional asymmetrical design.

The Arado entry to this competition, the Ar 198. Source: en.wikipedia.org
Blohm & Voss’ asymmetrical BV 141. Despite its unusual design, the aircraft performed surprisingly well, but did not enter mass production. Source: en.wikipedia.org

The Focke-Wulf design team, led by renowned German aircraft designer Kurt Tank, and supported by E. Kosel conceived a twin-boom aircraft powered by two engines. The central section featured a large, fully enclosed, and heavily glazed fuselage. They also proposed that the aircraft could be adapted for various roles by simply using different fuselage sections. The paper proposal and calculations were completed quickly and presented to the RLM in February 1937. Although the RLM officials were initially uncertain about the Focke-Wulf design, they eventually placed an order for the construction of three prototypes. Interestingly, when the request for a potential replacement for the Henschel Hs 126 was issued, there was no specification that the aircraft had to be powered by a single engine.

Work on the first prototype, designated Fw 189V1 (D-OPVN), began in April 1937. This aircraft was powered by two 430-horsepower Argus As 410 engines. By 1938, the prototype was ready and underwent flight testing by Kurt Tank himself in July of that year. The prototype demonstrated excellent performance and had no major issues.

The first prototype, Fw 189V-1. Source: en.wikipedia.org

The second prototype, designated D-OVHD, was flight-tested in August 1938. It was used to test the installation of armaments, including machine guns and bombs. Two 7.92 mm MG 17 machine guns were mounted inside the wings, one (or possibly three, depending on the source) machine gun was installed in the aircraft’s nose, one in the dorsal position, and another in the cone-shaped turret at the rear of the fuselage. Four bomb racks were also added under each wing, each capable of carrying up to 50 kg of bombs. If necessary, the aircraft could be equipped with chemical containers filled with either poison gas or smoke.

A third prototype, designated D-ORMH, followed and was flight-tested in September 1938. This variant was essentially a direct copy of the previous two but without armament. It was primarily used for testing the installation of Argus automatic variable-pitch propellers.

All three prototypes demonstrated excellent overall performance, while their competitors were less fortunate. The Ar 198 was quickly eliminated from consideration due to its poor performance, with only one prototype ever built. RLM officials were uncertain about the next steps, as both the Fw 189 and BV 141 were unconventional designs that were considered unproven. It is not far-fetched to suggest that the RLM had concerns about whether the BV 141 could even be flown reliably in field conditions, leading them to favor the Fw 189 instead. As a result, Focke-Wulf received a production order for four additional prototypes.

Anticipating a major production order, the fourth prototype (D-OCHO) was designated as the basis for the first production variant, named the Fw 189A-0. This variant was powered by two more powerful Argus As410A-1 engines, each producing 465 horsepower. The armament was reduced to just two machine guns.

While Focke-Wulf was making plans for the potential production of the first Fw 189A-0 aircraft, the company’s officials were disappointed and shocked when the RLM informed them that the Hs 126 would not be replaced by the new Fw 189. The Luftwaffe had changed its mind, deciding that the Hs 126 did not, in fact, need to be replaced.

Finally, into the production

Despite its potential, Focke-Wulf could do little to advance the design at the time given the news from the Luftwaffe. Not wanting to waste a promising project, Kurt Tank and his team continued working on it at a slow pace, and at low cost. However, following the successful conclusion of the campaign in France in June 1940, Luftwaffe officials reassessed their opinion on the Hs 126. It became clear that this aircraft was obsolescent in its intended role, and an urgent replacement was needed. The only available aircraft that could potentially fill this role in a short time was the Fw 189.

As a result, Focke-Wulf received its first production order for 10 Fw 189A-0 models in the summer of 1940. The company was also instructed to proceed with the development of the A-1 variant, which was to enter production as soon as possible. However, Focke-Wulf was already heavily involved in the development and production of the new Fw 190 fighter, making it difficult to meet the demands for the Fw 189.

To expedite production, an aircraft manufacturer in Prague was contacted to assist with manufacturing. Even this was not sufficient, so Focke-Wulf moved the production of the Fw 189 to France, utilizing several captured aircraft manufacturing facilities. The Focke-Wulf factories in Bremen and the Aero factories in Prague ceased Fw 189 production in late 1942 and 1943, respectively. Production continued in the French factories until January 1944, when it was finally halted.

The production by years was as follows.

Year of Production Production numbers 
1939 6
1940 38
1941 250
1942 327
1943 226
1944 17
In total  864

 

Main Production Variants 

The A-series was based on the V4 prototype. Unlike the prototype series, it did not include the nose-mounted machine guns. Instead, its main armament consisted of two machine guns mounted in the front wing roots, with an additional one or two located at the rear. If needed, a bomb rack could be installed. Given the aircraft’s specific reconnaissance roles, it could be equipped with various types of cameras. The A-1 model was essentially a direct copy of the fourth prototype, with slight modifications made to the engine cowling to enhance its aerodynamic profile.

The V4 prototype served as the base for the Fw 189 A-0 series. Source: www.warbirdphotographs.com
Early produced Fw 189A-1 aircraft. Source: Pinterest

At least 30 Fw 189A-1 aircraft were modified for use as night interceptors for use against slow, low flying biplanes on the Eastern Front. To fulfill this role, they were equipped with a FuG 212 C-1 aerial interception radar, distinguished by its forward antenna. Additionally, a fixed MG 151 cannon, either 1.5 cm or 2 cm in caliber, was installed in the rear, angled upward to target enemy aircraft from below.

One of the 309 Fw 189A was modified to be used as a night interceptor. They can be easily identified by the front-mounted antenna and the rear MG 151 cannon. Source: www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org

Combat experience quickly revealed that the Fw 189 needed a stronger defensive armament. In response, the Fw 189V9 prototype was tested with the installation of two twin 7.92 mm MG81Z (Z stands for Zwilling – twin) mounts. As these proved reliable, they were adopted for the A-2 variant, which entered production around mid-1941.

Shortly after its introduction into service, it became evident that a dual-control training variant was necessary to properly train pilots. Since the B variant did not enter mass production, a solution was required. The most cost-effective option was to modify an existing Fw 189A with dual controls. This led to the creation of a small production series of training aircraft, designated as the A-3. Some of the older aircraft from the A-0 and A-1 series, as well as prototypes, were repurposed for this variant.

The A-4 was designed as a light ground-attack variant. It was armed with two forward-mounted 20 mm cannons and two MG 17 machine guns. Additionally, armor was added to protect vital components such as the fuel tanks, engines, and central fuselage. An unknown number of these variants were produced beginning in late 1942.

A few aircraft adapted for the African theater of war were equipped with dust filters and designated as the Fw 189A-1 Trop.

Nicknames

Interestingly, Kurt Tank himself nicknamed this aircraft Eule (Eng. Owl). Allegedly, the inspiration for this name came from the large, owl-like shape of the cockpit. The RLM media referred to it as Das Fliegende Auge (Eng. The Flying Eye), while those who operated it on the front lines called it Uhu (Eng. Eagle Owl).

In Combat

During 1940, the first produced Fw 189 aircraft were allocated to various Luftwaffe experimental and training units. Their purpose was to test and evaluate the new Fw 189’s performance. For example, the Lehrgeschwader 2 (Eng. Training Squadron) was supplied with five Fw 189A-0 aircraft, which were flight-tested against the Hs 126. After a series of evaluation flights, the Fw 189 was declared superior in all aspects. This conclusion was a key reason why Luftwaffe officials decided to adopt the Fw 189.

Due to the slow pace of production, when the war with the Soviet Union broke out in June 1941, only about 250 Fw 189s were available for service. This number was barely enough to outfit all units, so the Hs 126 had to remain in use.

By 1942, the Fw 189 began gradually replacing the Hs 126 as the main German tactical reconnaissance aircraft. According to German records from September 1942, out of 317 short-range reconnaissance aircraft, 174 were Fw 189A-1 and A-2 models.

Their service on the Eastern Front demonstrated that these aircraft, despite their seemingly fragile appearance, were quite robust and capable of withstanding heavy damage. For example, on the 19th  May  1942, a lone Fw 189 was attacked by Soviet fighters near the Taman Peninsula. The left engine of the Fw 189 sustained such severe damage that it fell off. Assuming the aircraft was doomed, the Soviet fighters broke off the attack. However, the pilot did not give up and managed to fly the damaged Fw 189 back to German lines, where he executed an emergency landing. The aircraft suffered additional damage during the crash landing, yet it was eventually repaired and returned to service. Despite their durability, several Fw 189s were lost, along with other equipment, during the encirclement of German forces at Stalingrad. In one unusual incident, a Soviet fighter pilot, after running out of ammunition, rammed a Fw 189 near Stalingrad, successfully severing its tail.

By 1943, the Soviet Union’s increased fighter production made short-range operations too dangerous even for the Fw 189. Reconnaissance missions became nearly impossible without a fighter escort. After 1943, the Fw 189 was primarily employed for ground attack operations against Soviet Partisan positions, achieving notable success. However, with the Soviet fighter force continually growing, the days of the Fw 189 were numbered. By 1944, it was rarely used in its original reconnaissance role and often became a priority target for Soviet fighters once spotted. Despite this, the aircraft remained effective in some areas, such as Finland, where it continued to be used until September 1944.

The Fw 189 was primarily operated on the Eastern Front, including Finland. The only other front where it saw limited use was in North Africa. A small number of night interceptor variants, some 30, were assigned to two units, Nachtjagdgeschwader 5 and 100 (NJG, or Night Fighter Squadron), and served late into the war. Tasked specifically with countering Soviet Po-2 biplanes that harassed German railroad lines, NJG 100 earned the nickname Eisenbahn-Nachtjagd (Eng. Railway Night Hunt). The Fw189 performed excellently in this role, bringing down many Soviet night bombers in the process.

Beyond its original role, the Fw 189 also saw service as a light bomber and VIP staff transport. For example, the A-1 variant was used as a personal transport for Field Marshal Albert Kesselring. By late 1944, most of the surviving Fw 189 aircraft were relegated to training duties.

Despite their modest numbers, the Fw 189 would see extensive use on the Eastern Front. Source: www.asisbiz.com
Near the end of the war, the few surviving Fw 189 were used as training aircraft, easily identified by the large painted number on their tails. Source:. G. Punka Focke-Wulf Fw 189 in Action

Failed Proposals 

Although the Luftwaffe initially did not adopt the A variant, they showed an interest for the crew training variant designated as the Fw 189B. This version featured a less-glazed fuselage and dual control units. However, only a small number of these variants were produced.

The Fw 189B variant. Source: /www.warbirdsresourcegroup.or

The first year of the war revealed that the Germans lacked a dedicated armored close support aircraft. In response, Focke-Wulf proposed the Fw 189C as a potential solution. This variant featured a small, cramped, but well-protected cockpit, replacing the previous large fuselage. However, due to poor visibility and handling issues, it was not adopted for service.

The Fw 189D was proposed for naval use and was equipped with twin floats. It was essentially based on the Fw 189B variant, but no further developments materialized.

Focke-Wulf also experimented with various engines. The Fw 189E was tested with the French GR14M 700 hp engine. Unfortunately, the prototype was lost in an accident while being transported from France to Germany in 1943. The Fw 189F, based on the A-2 variant, was powered by the As 411MA-1 600 hp engine and used to test electrically powered landing gear. Although the tests were successful, only 17 units were built in 1944 before the production of the Fw 189 was discontinued.

The Fw 189F-2 was an improved version with enhanced armor protection, but it did not progress beyond the proposal stage. The last proposed variant, the Fw 189G, was intended to be powered by As 402 950 hp engines, but it also failed to materialize.

Other operators 

During the later stages of the war, the Hungarians received over 28 Fw 189 aircraft. Despite the relatively small number of planes, these were used extensively by Hungarian forces. The Slovakians also received 14 Fw 189A-1s between 1942 and 1943, which were employed in the Crimea. Some surviving aircraft were even used against the Germans during the failed Slovakian uprising in late 1944, with at least six managing to escape to the Soviet Union. Bulgaria received several Fw 189s, which were deployed on the Eastern Front. Additionally, eleven Fw 189s were supplied to Romanian forces, primarily for training purposes, but most were eventually captured by the Soviets. After the war, one aircraft was operated by the RAF for evaluation purposes, but it was lost in a storm while being stored.

Hungarian operated Fw 189. Source: G. Punka Focke-Wulf Fw 189 in Action
A Soviet operated Fw 189, possibly one of the Slovakian managed to escape in late 1944. Source: www.luftwaffephotos.com
Smaller numbers were also allocated to the Bulgarian Air Force. Source: G. Punka Focke-Wulf Fw 189 in Action

After the war

When the war ended, there were few surviving Fw 189. The British managed to capture one in working condition. It was  extensively used by the British pilot Captain Eric Brown, who was the chief test pilot of the Royal Aircraft Establishment at Farnborough. He was involved in a British project tasked with taking over German war research installations and interrogating technical personnel after the war.

He was quite impressed with the overall performance of the Fw 189. After many hours of flying, he noted only one instance of engine failure. Even with just a single engine, the aircraft remained pleasant to fly without significant issues. The main drawback Captain Brown observed was the rather poor forward visibility, despite the extensive glass coverage in the front section. This limitation was primarily due to the shape of the nose. Nevertheless, Captain Brown described the Fw 189 as;

“… A Versatile little beauty to fly and a great asset to the German Army’s ground troop..”

Technical characteristics

The Fw 189 was designed as a twin-engine reconnaissance aircraft with a unique construction. Its centrally positioned fuselage featured extensive glazing and housed the cockpit at the front, followed by a small crew area and a gunner’s compartment at the rear. The fuselage was bulkier at the front and tapered toward the rear. Access to the crew area was provided through two hatches above the cockpit and a larger hatch at the rear. Although the extensive glazing left the crew more exposed to enemy fire, it was ideal for its reconnaissance role, offering excellent all-around visibility.

Font view of the Fw 189 pilot cockpit. Source: www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org
Side view of the glazed fuselage. Source: www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org
Access to the crew area was provided through two hatches above the cockpit and a larger hatch at the rear. Source: www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org

The wings are composed of two distinct sections. The central, square-shaped panel connects the nacelle and engines, while the second section extends outward from the booms. The wings feature a metal base covered with duralumin, though the ailerons and split flaps are clad in fabric. At the rear, the twin-tail assembly includes two large rudders, which are joined by a single long elevator. Both control surfaces on the tail are also covered in fabric.

 

A close-up view of the Fw 189 rear twin-tail unit. Source: www.luftwaffephotos.com

The aircraft was powered by two 465 hp Argus As 410 A-1 12-cylinder air-cooled V-12 engines. These engines demonstrated remarkable effectiveness and reliability, even under the harsh winter conditions of the Eastern Front. With these engines, the Fw 189 achieved a maximum speed of 335 km/h, though exact figures may vary between sources. Each engine drove a two-blade, constant-speed propeller. Fuel was stored in two 110-liter tanks, which were housed in the tail booms. The Fw 189 had a maximum operational range of approximately 670 km.

The landing gear consisted of larger road wheels positioned under each engine nacelle, with a pair of smaller wheels extending from the elevator. Initially, the aircraft used an ‘H’-shaped landing gear leg design, but this was modified during production. To enhance stability during landing, each landing gear leg was equipped with a shock absorber. The front landing gear units were lowered using hydraulic systems, while the rear smaller landing gear units descended under their own weight. When the aircraft’s speed dropped below 160 km/h, the landing gear automatically deployed in preparation for landing. If the pilot wished to override this action, they had the option to disable it by pressing a switch inside the cockpit.

The early prototypes had a single-leg landing gear unit. Source: www.luftwaffephotos.com
Later into production, these were replaced by more stable ‘H’ shaped landing gear legs. Source: www.luftwaffephotos.com

The aircraft’s crew consisted of three members: the pilot, the navigator, and the rear gunner. The pilot occupied the front of the cockpit, while the navigator sat directly behind him. In addition to navigation, the navigator operated the camera equipment and managed the upper rotating machine gun mount. He was also responsible for radio operations. The rear gunner, the final crew member, served as both machine gun operator and the flight engineer.

Most of the pilot’s instruments were were positioned near the cockpit roof, as shown here. Source: /www.luftwaffephotos.com

The primary armament of the Fw 189 consisted of two forward-mounted 7.92 mm MG 17 machine guns, operated by the pilot. The early design included a single machine gun in a rotating mount positioned on the dorsal side. A rear cone-shaped rotating turret housed additional machine guns, initially equipped with drum-fed MG 15s. These were later replaced by four belt-fed MG 81s, which offered a higher rate of fire. Additionally, the aircraft was equipped with two bomb racks under each wing, capable of carrying a 50 kg bomb or, alternatively, smoke gas or chemical containers though the latter were never actually used in combat.

The rear gunner operated a drum feed MG 15 or 17. Source:www.luftwaffephotos.com
These would be on A-2 variant replaced by two faster-firing MG 81 that were instead belt fed. Source: www.luftwaffephotos.com
A good view of the late improved twin machine guns in a rotating mount positioned on the dorsal side. Source: www.luftwaffephotos.com
The Fw 189 could also carry four 50 kg bombs. In this role as a light ground attack aircraft it achieved great success against Soviet partisans. Source: www.luftwaffephotos.com

For conducting reconnaissance operations, various camera equipment was utilized. Typically, an RB 20/30 camera was employed. However, depending on the specific task, this could be augmented or replaced by other models such as the RB 50/30, RB 21/18, or R.R 15/18. Additionally, the navigator was equipped with smaller handheld cameras. For communication, the FuG 25 radio was used.

Production Versions

  • Fw 189V– Small prototypes series
  • Fw 189A0 – Small pre-production series
  • Fw 189A-1 –  Main production variant
    • Fw 189A-2 – Improved model with better defense armament
    • Fw 189A-3 – Dueal control trainer, limited production only
    • Fw 189A-4 – Ground attack variant armed with two 2 cm cannons
  • Fw 189 Trop – A small number of aircraft modified for use in North Africa

Prototype and Proposed  Versions

    • Fw 189B – Trainer variant that was built in small numbers
  • Fw 189C – Ground attack variant, did not go beyond a prototype stage
  • Fw 189D -Experimental variant equipped with twin-floats,
  • Fw 189E – Powered by an As 411MA-1 600 hp strong engine. After the prototype was lost in 1943 the project was abandoned
  • Fw 189F-1 – Powered by an As 411MA-1 600 hp strong engines, A small series of 17 aircraft of this type were built in 1944
    • Fw 189F-2 – Slightly improved model, none were built
  • Fw 189G – Paper project powered by As 402 950 hp engines

Operators

    • Germany – Main use of this aircraft
    • Hungary – Operated less than 30 of these aircraft
    • Slovakia –  Received 14 Fw 189A-1s between 1942 and 1943,
    • Romania – Used an unknown number but mostly for training
  • Bulgaria –Opertaed 14 such aircraft
    • Soviet Union – The Red Army on occasion managed to capture some Fw 189 that they put into use
  • UK – British Force captured at least one working Fw 189 after the war

Surviving aircraft

It is believed that only one Fw 189 aircraft has survived to this day, and it has a remarkable history. The aircraft was shot down by Soviet fighters in May 1943 near Murmansk in northern Europe. It crash-landed in the woods, resulting in the deaths of the navigator and the rear gunner. The pilot, Lothar Mothes, survived the crash landing and managed to reach the German defense lines two weeks later. Although the Soviets recorded the crash site, they did not recover the wreckage. It remained there until 1992, when British aircraft enthusiast and restorer Jim Pearce initiated a recovery effort. Using a helicopter, Pearce salvaged the relatively well-preserved Fw 189 wreckage and transported it back to the UK for possible restoration.

The aircraft was publicly displayed at the Biggin Hill Air Show in 1996, where pilot Lothar Mothes had the opportunity to see his lost aircraft once more. Despite his hopes, Pearce was unable to secure the funds necessary for a full restoration, so the aircraft was sold to G. Allen’s Flying Heritage Collection in 2007. Over the following years, the aircraft underwent nearly complete restoration. Hopefully, one day, this sole surviving Fw 189 will once again take to the skies.

The only known Fw 189 that is being under restoration. Sourcewww.scramble.nl

Conclusion

Despite its unusual design, especially for the early stages of the war, the aircraft proved to be remarkable in many respects. Its glazed cockpit provided an excellent all-around view. The engine was reliable, with no major mechanical issues reported. Although it had a somewhat fragile appearance, the aircraft was noted for its robust performance.

Although originally designed for reconnaissance operations, the Fw 189 also proved successful in various other roles. In conclusion, the Fw 189 was undoubtedly one of the best German aircraft designs to see service during the Second World War.

Fw 189A-1 Specifications

Wingspans 18.4 m / 60 ft 4 in
Length 12 m / 39 ft 5 in
Height 3.1 m / 10 ft 2 in
Wing Area 38m² / 410 ft²
Engine Two 465 hp Argus As 410 A-1 engines
Empty Weight 2,805 kg / 6,185 lbs
Maximum Take-off Weight 3,950 kg / 8,708 lbs
Maximum Speed 335 km/h / 208 mph
Cruising Speed 315 km/h / 196 mph
Range 670 km / 416 miles
Maximum Service Ceiling 7,000 m / 22,965 ft
Crew pilot, rear gunner, and navigator
Armament
  • Four 7.92 mm machine guns
  • Four 50 kg (110 lb) bombs

Illustration

Credits

Source:

  • D. Donald (1996) German Aircraft of World War II, Orbis Publishing
  • D. Nesic  (2008)  Naoružanje Drugog Svetsko Rata-Nemacka
  • D. Monday (2006) The Hamlyn Concise Guide To Axis Aircraft OF World War II, Bounty Books
  • J. R. Smith and A. L. Kay (1972) German Aircraft of the WW2, Putnam
  • G. Punka (1993) Focke-Wulf Fw 189 in Action, Signal Publication
  • Captain E. ‘Winkle’ Brown (2010) Wings of the Luftwaffe, Hikoki Publication
  • T. Boiten () Nachtjagd Combat Archive – Eastern Front and The Med, Red Kite
  • https://vintageaviationnews.com/warbirds-news/unique-focke-wulf-fw-189-offered-for-sale.html

 

Source:  https://www.luftwaffephotos.com/#fightermenu

 

Fiat G.50 In Finnish Service 

Finnish flag Finland (1940-1944)
 Fighter – Number operated: 35

In late 1939, the rapid expansion of the Soviet Union in Eastern Europe caused great alarm in Finland. As a politically isolated nation with limited funds, Finland struggled to equip its military for a potential war with the Soviets. Despite the challenges they faced, they achieved some limited success in finding the equipment they needed. While the Finnish armed forces lacked for many modern weapons, they possessed a small number of advanced fighter aircraft, though not enough in the face of a Soviet invasion. To address this, they approached the Kingdom of Italy and acquired 35 Fiat G.50 Freccia fighters. While the G.50 was not an exceptional fighter in terms of overall performance, it was sufficient for the Finnish Air Forces and remained in frontline service until 1944.

The Fiat F.50 in Finnish service. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_G.50_Freccia

Finland’s Early Struggle to Survive 

Following the collapse of the Russian Empire, and the subsequent Civil War, Finland emerged as an independent state. While it did not have great relations with the neighboring Soviet Union, Finland’s first two decades of independent existence proved to be mostly peaceful. This changed drastically on 27th August 1939, when a secret meeting between German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop and Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov resulted in the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. This non-aggression pact had secret protocols dividing Eastern Europe into spheres of influence, which directly affected Finland. As part of the agreement,  Germany agreed to let the Soviets occupy former territories that had belonged to the Russian Empire. By September, the Soviets were in the process of occupying the Baltic states under the pretext of defending against a possible German attack. These countries were mostly too small to offer any real resistance to the Soviet demands.

Fearing a potential war with the rapidly expanding Soviet Union, Finnish military officials sought to acquire as many weapons and as much material as possible, including aircraft. As part of this, a delegation was dispatched to Italy. This delegation visited Turin in 1939, where new G.50 fighter was being tested. The Finnish representatives were impressed with the aircraft’s performance and promptly placed an order for 35 brand-new G.50s.

In November 1939, while testing the G.50’s capabilities, Finnish pilot Tapani Harmaja took a sharp dive from an altitude of over 3.5 km, reaching a remarkable speed of 830 km/h during his descent. Ironically, this was the highest speed achieved by any Italian aircraft up to that date.

Purchasing the 35 aircraft was the easy part; transporting them to Finland proved to be a much more challenging task. By then, the Second World War had already begun in Europe with the German invasion of Poland. With limited options, the aircraft were disassembled into smaller parts and transported by train to northern Germany. From there, they were loaded onto ships bound for neutral Sweden. Due to various delays, the first aircraft was not fully assembled until mid-December 1939, and the last of the 35 ordered fighters did not arrive in Finland until June 1940.

In the hope of acquiring more modern fighters Finland purchased 35 new Fiat G.50 fighters from Italy. Source:  airpages.ru

The Fiat G.50, a Brief History

During the 1930s, the Italian Ministry of Aviation (Ministero dell’aeronautica) was interested in adopting a new, all-metal monoplane fighter and ground-attack aircraft for the Italian Air Force (Regia Aeronautica). In April of 1935, engineer Giuseppe Gabrielli began working on a new low-wing, all-metal aircraft designated G.50. On 28th September 1935, Gabrielli submitted his project to the Ministry of Aviation. Military officials were impressed by the design and ordered him to proceed with his work. As Fiat’s production capacities were overburdened, work on this new project was instead moved to the Costruzioni Meccaniche Aeronautiche (CMASA) works at the Marina di Pisa, which had been a part of Fiat since 1931. By 1936, Giuseppe Gabrielli had completed his last drawings and the list of needed materials and equipment in.

The prototype was completed in early 1937 and was transported to the city of Turin for further testing. The prototype, under registration number MM 334, made its first test flight on 26 February 1937. Once accepted for service, the Fiat G.50 would become the first Italian all-metal monoplane fighter. Between 1938 to 1943, some 774 to 791 G. 50s would be built. These saw combat service starting from 1938 in the Spanish Civil War, until 1943 when the few surviving aircraft were reassigned to secondary roles.

G.50s flying in formation with a German Bf-110, possibly during the Battle of Britain Source; Wikipedia

In Finnish Service

While the G.50 proved to be a fairly modern fighter, they arrived too late and in too few numbers to have any real impact in the Winter War. The Soviet Union then demanded territorial concessions from Finland, particularly the lease of the Karelian Isthmus and other areas near Leningrad. The Finns were reluctant to comply, leading to unsuccessful negotiations. When diplomatic negotiations failed, the Soviet Union launched a military offensive against Finland on 30 November 1939. Despite being outnumbered and outgunned, the Finnish military, with their knowledge of the terrain and effective guerrilla tactics, inflicted significant casualties on the Soviet forces. The harsh winter conditions also worked to Finland’s advantage.

With the gradual arrival of the G.50, these aircraft were assigned to the  Lentolaivue 26, or shortened, LeLv 26 (REng. 26th Fighter Wing). This unit was based at Haukkajärvi. Although the G.50s arrived late, they still saw significant action. Between February and March 1940, Finnish pilots flying these aircraft managed to shoot down 11 Soviet planes, losing only one of their own.

There is some disagreement among sources and authors regarding the use of the Fiat G.50 during the Winter War. According to P. Vergnano (Fiat G.50), the aircraft was deployed in this conflict. However, other authors, such as G. Cattaneo (The Fiat G.50), state that 14 aircraft reached Finland by February 1940, and were assigned to the 26th Fighter Wing, but they did not see action until after March 1940. D. Monday (The Hamlyn Concise Guide to Axis Aircraft of World War II), simply mentions that they arrived too late to participate in the Winter War.

Despite the Finns’ valiant resistance, they were eventually forced into peace negotiations with the Soviets. The war concluded with the signing of the Treaty of Moscow on 12th March 1940. Though brief, the conflict was costly for both sides, and Finland was compelled to cede roughly 10% of its territory to the Soviet Union, including the Karelian Isthmus. Finnish military officials, however, recognized the need to prepare for future conflicts.

Camouflage And Marking

Initially, the G.50 would use camouflage of Italian origin, featuring a combination of green, brown, and sand backgrounds. In 1941, at the insistence of the Germans, the original Italian camouflage colors would remain unchanged for the Finnish planes. However, the Italian paint was prone to peeling, so ground crews used whatever was available to repair the damage. After 1942, most aircraft were repainted with Finnish camouflage colors, such as black, olive green, and light blue.

The first aircraft that arrived in Finland was designated with the code SA-1. This was later changed to FA-1 (up to FA-35) in late January 1940, with the capital ‘F’ standing for Fiat.

The standard Finnish Insignia was a Hakaristi cross, commonly referred to as a swastika, on either side of the fuselage. The Finnish Hakaristi is often conflated with the swastika used by Nazi Germany, however, the Hakaristi was not derived from the German swastika and had been used in Finland since 1918, drawing from much older cultural use. The Hakaristi markings were blue with a round shape and a white background.

Additionally, commanding fighters often had large numbers painted on their tails. The first squadron fighter leader’s aircraft had a light blue number, followed by a black number with yellow trim for the second, and a yellow number for the third. After 1942, the light blue color was replaced by a simpler white.

The first G.50 (initially marked as SA-1 later changed to FA-1) reached Finland. This aircraft used for initial testing and crew training. Source: en.topwar.ru
The standard Finnish roundel was a Hakaristi cross which as painted on the fuselage sides. Source: ww2aircraft.net
The first squadron fighter leader’s aircraft had a light blue number, followed by a black number with yellow trim for the second, and a yellow number for the third. After 1942, the light blue color was replaced by a simpler white. Source: ww2aircraft.net

Continuation War 

While not fully aligned with Nazi Germany, Finland did allow the Wehrmacht access to Northern Finland. Finland later signed the Anti-Comintern Pact, which was initially an anti-communist pact between Germany and Japan, with other minor nations signing throughout the war. Prior to this, relations had already been previously established, which was convenient for both nations, as Germany could stage their military in Lapland, and other areas of Finland, for Operation Barbarossa. In turn, Finland would be granted the military assistance they needed. However, this ended all support, both material and political, from the Western Allies. On the 22nd of June 1941, Germany’s invasion of the Soviet Union began, assisted by some Finnish forces. Three days later, the Soviets staged air raids against nearby Finnish cities, thus beginning the Continuation War. Finland never sought to gain any additional territory from the conflict, only to regain control of what was initially lost during the Winter War.

Just before the outbreak of the Continuation War, the Finns observed that the newly arrived G.50 aircraft were somewhat ill-suited for operating in the harsh Northern climate. This was not entirely unexpected, as the aircraft had been designed in Italy, a much warmer region, and the designers had not anticipated the need for the G.50 to function in colder parts of the world. In response, the Finnish Army attempted to modify the G.50 to enhance its effectiveness in these conditions.

The G.50s that the Finns received were from the first production series, which featured enclosed cockpits. This design element was not well received by Finnish pilots, leading to the replacement of the enclosed cockpits with open ones. Additionally, the aircraft’s variable-pitch propeller mechanism had a tendency to freeze in low temperatures, risking critical component failure. To address this issue, the Finns turned to Sweden for assistance, importing Swedish propeller spinners that were better suited for cold climates. These spinners were originally used on Swedish-imported CR.42 and J11 biplanes, which had faced similar issues.

Further modifications included replacing the original G.50 fins and rudders with improved versions. Finnish engineers also experimented with the installation of landing skis for use in snowy conditions.

To avoid freezing of some parts of the propellers, Finish engineers added a new Swedish propeller spinner, as seen here. Source: P. Verganano Fiat G.50

When the war resumed, the 26th Fighter Wing, stationed at an airfield near Utti, was tasked with defending the area around Lake Ladoga, where they saw the bulk of their action. From the outset, Finnish pilots operating the G.50 achieved remarkable success. On the first day of the conflict, the six G.50s managed to shoot down ten Soviet bombers without suffering any losses. One pilot, Oiva Tuominen, alone shot down four of these bombers within a matter of minutes. Tuominen would go on to become one of Finland’s top fighter aces, credited with a total of 23 air victories (though some sources claim 33 or even 43), with around 15 of these achieved while flying the G.50. For his service, he was awarded the Mannerheim Cross, Finland’s highest military decoration at the time. In 1941, following the German invasion, the number of Soviet aircraft on this front sharply declined.

In late August 1941, they successfully shot down nine Soviet fighters. By the end of the war, pilots of the 26th Fighter Wing had achieved approximately 88 air victories, with the loss of 11 G.50 aircraft. Of these, only two were downed by Soviet fighters, one was lost to anti-aircraft fire, and eight were lost due to accidents or mechanical failures.

By 1943, the introduction of newer Soviet fighter models and better-trained pilots forced the Finnish Air Force primarily into a defensive role. At this point, the G.50 was clearly obsolete as a frontline fighter, but due to a lack of alternatives, it remained in service until 1944. After May 1944, the surviving aircraft were withdrawn and relegated to secondary roles, such as training. However, by the end of the war, several operational G.50 fighters remained in use, with some continuing to serve until 1947.

Technical characteristics

The G.50 was a single-seat, low-wing, all-metal fighter plane. The fuselage was made from four angular longerons. The wing construction consisted of a center section which was made of a steel tube connected to the lower fuselage and two metal spars connected with ribs. The fuselage, wing, and tail were covered with duralumin sheets. The only fabric-covered parts of the aircraft were the movable control surfaces in the wings and the tail. The G.50 was powered by the 840 hp (626 kW) Fiat A 74 RC 38, a 14-cylinder radial piston engine, which drove an all-metal three-blade propeller produced by Fiat.

The G.50 was equipped, like most modern aircraft of the time, with inward retracting landing gear, but the rear tail wheel was fixed. In later improved versions, the rear tail wheel was changed to a retractable type as well.

The armament consisted of two forward-firing 12.7mm Breda-SAFAT heavy machine guns, with 150 rounds of ammunition for each gun. The guns were placed behind the upper engine cowl and were synchronized in order not to damage the propeller.

In Finnish service, these aircraft received several modifications as mentioned earlier. This included an open pilot cockpit, enlarged tail control surfaces, and propeller spinners which protected the variable pitch mechanism from the cold climate.

The Finnish version could be easily identified by the open cockpit and the use of an engine spinner, Source: www.militaryimages.net

Conclusion

The acquisition of the Fiat G.50 provided Finnish pilots with a more modern fighter aircraft. While the design was not exceptional from the start, the Finns managed to put it to good use, achieving relatively good success against the Soviet Air Force. The G.50 remained in service well into the later stages of the war.

Specification G.50 Fighter
Wingspan 35 ft 11 in / 10.9 m
Length 26 ft  3 in / 8 m
Height 10 ft 7 in / 3.28 m
Wing Area 196.5 ft² / 18.25 m²
Engine One 840 hp (626 kW) Fiat A.74 RC.38, 14 cylinder radial piston
Empty Weight 4,353 lbs / 1,975 kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight 5,324 lbs / 2,415 kg
Fuel Capacity 316 l
Maximum Speed 292 mph / 470 km/h
Range 267 mi / 445 km
Maximum Service Ceiling 35,100 ft (10,700 m)
Climb speed Climb to 19,700 ft (6,000 m) in 7 minutes and 30 seconds
Crew One pilot
Armament
  • Two 12.7 mm Breda-SAFAT heavy machine guns

Illustration

Credits

  • Article written by Marko P.
  • Edited by  Henry H.
  • Illustration by Haryo Panji

Sources 

  • V. Nenye (2016) Finland At War  The Continuation And Lapland Wars 1941-45, Osprey Publishing
  • V. Nenye (2015) Finland At War The Winter War, Osprey Publishing
  • P. Jowett and B. Snodgrass (2006) Finland At War 1939-45, Osprey Publishing
  • D. Nesic (2008)  Naoružanje Drugog Svetsko Rata-Italija. Beograd
  • C. Shores (1979) Regia Aeronautica Vol. I, Signal publication.
  • D. Monday (2006) The Hamlyn Concise Guide To Axis Aircraft OF World War II, Bounty Books.
  • V. Nenye (2016) Finland At War The Continuation And Lapland Wars 1941-45, Osprey Publishing
  • V. Nenye (2015) Finland At War The Winter War, Osprey Publishing
  • P. Jowett and B. Snodgrass (2006) Finland At War 1939-45, Osprey Publishing
  • P. Verganano (1997)  Fiat G.50, La Bancarella Aeronautica
  • A, Brioschi (2000) I Colori Del Fiat G.50, La Bancarella Aeronautica
  • G. Cattaneo The Fiat G.50, Profile Publication

 

Me 261

Nazi flag Nazi Germany (1938)

Type: High endurance experimental, reconnaissance aircraft

Number built: Three prototypes

Before the outbreak of the Second World War, the Luftwaffe (Eng. German Air Force) was undergoing a massive expansion. Numerous new aircraft designs were either being introduced into service or undergoing testing, with many being integrated into the military for various roles. A number of newly developed aircraft were also primarily used for evaluation and experimentation, and, there were also several designs created specifically to set records. One such aircraft, the Me 261, was built specifically at the request of Adolf Hitler to set long-range records. Due to its specialized role, and the fact that it was not initially ordered by the Luftwaffe, only three prototypes of the Me 261 were built.

The rather obscure Me 261 long-range transport and recconaissance aircraft. Source: alternathistory.ru

History

With the rise of Nazis in Germany, substantial financial resources were allocated to military projects. The Luftwaffe was founded, and saw massive expansion and the introduction of new aircraft designs. However, not all these designs were intended for pure military service. Some projects were mainly aimed at experimentation, and among these were aircraft designed solely to showcase technological advancements and break world records. This trend was quite common in the years leading up to the outbreak of the Second World War in Europe. For example, the Messerschmitt Me 209 was created to set a world speed record, with little to no concerns made over a possible military application.

Speed was not the only record to be pursued, there were others, such as long-range flight. This particular challenge fascinated Hitler, who in 1937, initiated the development of a long-range monoplane. Aside from the many things that might be learned from the experiment, Hitler envisioned this aircraft undertaking the long-range flight from Berlin to Tokyo for the 1940 Olympic Games, carrying the Olympic Torch from Germany over Asia. To meet this requirement, the initial requirements specified that the aircraft needed to have an operational range of over 13,000 km.

The Reichsluftfahrtministerium (RLM), or German Air Ministry, selected the Messerschmitt company for this task. Despite being a relatively small enterprise at the time, Messerschmitt had achieved great success with the Bf 109, one of the best fighters of its era. The official contract was signed on the 18th March, 1938. Under the designation P.1064, Messerschmitt presented a proposal to Hitler for a new aircraft. This aircraft was to be operated by a crew of five within a rather cramped, and elongated fuselage. Due to the aircraft’s specific role, the fuel load was prioritized over crew comfort. Hitler approved the proposal and ordered the construction of three prototypes. The project was subsequently renamed Me 261. Due to Hitler’s keen interest, the aircraft was nicknamed Adolfine by its crew.

In 1939, work began on the three Me 261 prototypes. Despite Hitler’s ambitions, the Me 261 was given low priority, and construction proceeded slowly, and anticipating a war with Poland, work on these aircraft was halted. However, recognizing its potential for long-range reconnaissance and the valuable information it could provide, work resumed in 1940.

The first prototype, Me 261 V1 (BJ-CP or BC-CP, depending on the sources), was flight-tested by Karl Baur in December 1940. The following year, the second prototype, Me 261 V2 (BJ-CQ), was tested. The V2 featured a glazed observation dome on the dorsal fuselage, replacing the rear dome used on the V1. The construction of the third prototype, Me 261 V3 (BJ-CR), faced delays and only completed its test flight in 1943. This version was distinct from the earlier prototypes, featuring a larger crew capacity of seven and being powered by two 2,950 hp DB 610 engines. On the 16th April, 1943, Karl Baur conducted a ten-hour test flight with the V3.

 

The last of the Me 261 was the V3 prototype, which was powered by stronger engines. Source: airpages.ru

Technical characteristics

Unfortunately, since the Me 161 did not progress beyond the prototype stage. It was designed as an all-metal, long-range transport and later as a reconnaissance aircraft. The fuselage was slim but cramped, made of metal, and covered in duralumin.

The wings of the Me 261 were constructed using a metal frame with a single spar. They were then covered with flush-riveted, stressed-skin metal panels. Notably, the section of the wing closest to the fuselage had a thick profile, which tapered to the wingtips. This design was intentional, as it allowed for a large fuel storage area. The aircraft also featured a twin-rudder tail at the rear.

For its long-range flight operations, the Me 261 had a crew of five: a pilot, co-pilot, radio operator, navigator, and flight engineer. The pilot and copilot sat side-by-side in the cockpit with the radio operator in a central compartment, and the flight engineer and navigator seated in the rearmost compartment, where the aircraft’s bunks were also located.

The first two prototypes were powered by twin 2,700 hp DB 606A/B twenty-four-cylinder engines. These engines were essentially two twelve-cylinder DB 601 engines coupled together to drive a single shaft, requiring two separate radiators and oil coolers. Each DB 606A/B engine was housed within a large nacelle and used four-blade propellers with a diameter of 4.6 meters.

The Me 261 DB 606A/B twenty-four-cylinder engine consisted of two coupled twelve-cylinder DB 601 engines. They worked well on the He 261 and no major issue was reported with it. Source: oldmachinepress.com

Despite frequent mentions of the aircraft being overburdened, sources do not specify a consistent maximum takeoff weight. Additionally, the total fuel capacity is also unspecified. Depending on the sources, the operational range varies from 11,000 to 13,200 km.

To accommodate the aircraft’s weight, it required large-diameter landing wheels that could retract up to 90 degrees into the wings. In addition to these, it had a fully retractable tail wheel retracted towards the front of the aircraft.

The Me 261 was designed as an all-metal, long-range transport and later as a reconnaissance aircraft source: Wikipedia
The first two prototypes were powered by twin 2,700 hp DB 606A/B twenty-four-cylinder engines. To cope with their weight, it was provided with two large-diameter landing wheels. Source: planehistoria.com
Side view of the second prototype. Source:  alternathistory.ru

Fate

Despite demonstrating some potential for long-range reconnaissance, the Me 261 was ultimately rejected from service due to the additional equipment requirements that would have further strained its already overburdened airframe, thereby compromising its flight performance. Despite its cancellation, the V3 prototype (and possibly the other two prototypes) saw operational use as reconnaissance aircraft during the war. In July or April of 1943, the V3 suffered an accident during landing that heavily damaged its landing gear. Although repaired and returned to service, the V3 was eventually scrapped by order of the RLM.

The V1 aircraft was lost during an Allied bombing raid on the Rechlin test center in September 1944, while the V2 was captured by the Allies at the same location in April 1945. Neither prototype survived the war; the captured V2 was scrapped a few weeks after its capture.

The V3 aircraft was damaged during a landing accident but was repaired and put back into service. Source: www.destinationsjourney.com
The V2 was captured by the Allies and was eventually scraped. Source: planehistoria.com

Conclusion 

The Me 261 was an aircraft that was not ordered by the Luftwaffe as a military aircraft and thus received low priority. Despite its initial potential for use as a reconnaissance aircraft, it quickly became evident that it would not be feasible for adoption in this role due to its considerable weight. Ultimately, only three were built, and none of them survived the war.

Me 261 V3 Specifications

Wingspans 26.9 m / 88 ft 1 in
Length 16.7 m / 54  ft 9 in
Height 4.72 m /  15 ft  5 in
Wing Area 76 m² /  817.8 ft²
Engine Two 2,950 hp DB 610 engines
Endurance 24 hours and 36 minutes
Maximum Speed 620 km/h / 385mph
Cruising speed 400 km/h / 248 mph
Range 11,000 km / 6,831 miles
Maximum Service Ceiling 8,250 m  / 27,060 ft
Crew 1 pilot
Armament
  • None

Illustration

Credits

  • Article written by Marko P.
  • Edited by  Henry H.
  • Illustration by Oussama Mohamed “Godzilla”

Source:

  • D. Herwig and H. Rode (2000) Luftwaffe Secret Projects Strategic Bombers 1935 to 1945, Midland Publishing
  • D. Nesić  (2008)  Naoružanje Drugog Svetsko Rata-Nemačka. Beograd
  • D. Monday (2006) The Hamlyn Concise Guide To Axis Aircraft OF World War II, Bounty Books.
  • J. R. Smith and A. L. Kay (1972) German Aircraft of the WW2, Putnam

 

ANT-2

USSR flag USSR (1923)
All-metal passenger aircraft – five Built

Following his successful first attempt to develop an aircraft, Andrei Nikolayevich Tupolev felt confident in his ability to attempt the design an all-metal aircraft. Although some European nations had already tested or built such aircraft during the First World War, this concept was still novel in the burgeoning Soviet Union of the early 1920s. With the advent of duralumin production in the Soviet Union, and the experimentation with various construction methods, Tupolev began work on the aircraft known as the ANT-2 in 1922. After a period of testing and evaluation, five aircraft of this type were constructed.

Tupolev ANT-2 was the Soviet first operational all-metal aircraft. Source: P. Duffy and A. Kandalov Tupolev The Man and His Aircraft

History

The success of the ANT-1 (standing for the initials of Andrei Nikolayevich Tupovlev) test aircraft prompted Tupolev to advocate for the development of fully metal-constructed aircraft. The harsh weather conditions in many parts of the Soviet Union caused wooden materials to decay quickly. Metal alloys, on the other hand, offered numerous advantages over wood: they were stronger, more durable, and allowed for overall more resilient aircraft designs. Tupolev saw the use of wood in modern aviation as an obsolete construction material.

His view was shared by others in the burgeoning Soviet aviation industry. In 1922, a commission at the Central Aero/Hydrodynamics Institute (TsAGI) was formed under the leadership of Andrei Nikolaevich. Its purpose was to spearhead the development of factories and facilities capable of producing duralumin. One such production center was already operating in Kolchuginsk, near Moscow, where the production of duralumin, nicknamed “Kolchugaluminium”, began in September 1922. This development enabled Tupolev to start working on an all-metal aircraft.

Tupolev established his design bureau with 15 supporting members. However, the initial phase was challenging, as the new technology required skilled workers who needed training in this new field. Additionally, many components used in all-metal aircraft construction had to undergo extensive testing. Tupolev, being a cautious man, did not want to risk any pilot’s life before he was certain that the new all-metal aircraft would perform as intended. Consequently, he spent considerable time refining various designs, mostly using speedboats and gliders. In 1921, Tupolev spent some time testing his ideas and designs using speedboats from his base of operations in Crimea. The experience he gained there greatly helped him in his further work.

Work On the ANT-2

As soon as Tupolev was sure that all crucial components were sufficiently tested, the work on the new all-metal aircraft, designated ANT-2, began in 1923. The design was largely driven by the requirements of the Soviet UVVS-RKKA (Directorate of the Air Fleet of the Workers and Peasants). This was the first official request for a new military aircraft, one capable of transporting two passengers, armed with two machine guns, and would most importantly, be inexpensive to build. Tupolev and his team established a small workshop in Kolchuginsk.

Initially, there were problems as the Kolchuginsk factory was only known for producing duralumin, not for shaping it into the various forms needed for aircraft construction. Time was needed to train the workers to effectively shape duralumin into the necessary parts.

During this period, while working on various proposed designs, Tupolev had the opportunity to inspect a Junkers K16 transport aircraft. The German company Junkers, wanting to avoid the sanctions on arms and aviation development imposed by the Allies, sought cooperation with the Soviets. They even managed to set up a small production plant in the Soviet Union.  The Soviets, in turn, were eager to acquire new technologies. The Junkers K16 featured a high wing and an open cockpit, design characteristics that Tupolev incorporated into his ANT-2 project.

The Junkers K16 served as inspiration for the ANT-2 Source: Wiki
The ANT-2, when compared to the K16, exhibits many similarities in overall shape. While Tupolev drew inspiration from the K16, he did not merely replicate it. Instead, he used it as a foundation to experiment with many of his own design elements, particularly in its wings. Source: en.topwar.ru

The prototype was completed in 1924 and underwent its first flight test in late May of that year, piloted by Nikolai Petrov. To simulate the weight of two passengers, two sandbags were used, as Tupolev did not want to risk any lives at the prototype stage. Further flight tests were conducted on May 28 by a Soviet military delegation. Starting from June 11, the ANT-2 was tested with two, and occasionally three, passengers inside its fuselage. Overall, the performance was deemed sufficient, though a significant modification was required for the rear tail assembly. The rudder and stabilizer size had to be increased, subsequently improving the aircraft’s performance. To conduct further tests, four more aircraft were built. By 1930, at least one of these aircraft was equipped with a more powerful 200 hp Wright Whirlwind engine.

Fate

A total of five ANT-2 aircraft were produced. While these were used for various tests, their specific operational roles are not well documented. The anticipated military variant, which was to feature a new cockpit positioned behind the wings and be armed with one or two machine guns, was never built. The first aircraft has been preserved and can be seen at the Aviation Museum in Monino, near Moscow. The fate of the remaining aircraft is unclear, but they were likely scrapped at some point.

The only surviving ANT-2 can be seen at the Aviation Museum Monino near Moscow. Source: Wiki
In recognition of its significant role in Soviet aviation history, the ANT-2 was featured on a Soviet postage stamp. Source: stock.adobe.com

Specification

The ANT-2 was designed as a high-wing, all-metal monoplane. Tupolev chose a triangular shape for the fuselage, with the sides sloping inward from top to bottom. This triangular design provided excellent structural integrity, reducing the need for additional fuselage struts. The fuselage was divided into three sections: the front section housed the engine, the open cockpit, followed by a small passenger compartment. The compartment could accommodate two passengers seated opposite each other. Although the aircraft was intended for three occupants, this was generally avoided due to weight limitations. Passengers entered the aircraft through a door on the left side of the fuselage.

The wing was located just behind the cockpit. It was constructed with two spars connected by 13 ribs on each side and covered with duralumin. Tupolev designed the wing with a curved, concave underside. The entire wing assembly was then attached to the top of the fuselage using four bolts. To accommodate the cockpit, part of the central section of the wing was cut off. Additionally, two handles were added to the ends of the wings on both sides, allowing the ground crew to maneuver the aircraft on the ground. The rear tail assembly consisted of a metal frame covered with duralumin.

The landing gear featured two fixed road wheels mounted on vertical struts, equipped with shock absorbers to ensure smoother landings. At least one aircraft was instead fitted with skis. A pivoting tail skid was used at the rear.

It was powered by a Bristol Lucifer three-cylinder engine producing 100 horsepower. With it a maximum speed of 170 km/h could be achieved. This engine, however, had some difficulties due to its significant torque, which could occasionally damage the engine mounts. Topolev, aware of this issue, designed a strong mount to counteract this problem. To allow access for repairs, the engine cover was secured with a few bolts. The engine drove a wooden two-blade propeller with a diameter of 2.2 meters. Fuel was stored in two 36 kg tanks located in the wings.

The cockpit was open, and to enter, the pilot used a small footrest on the left side of the fuselage. The cockpit was equipped with the basic and necessary controls and indicators, such as fuel level, RPM counter, and oil pressure gauge.

The ANT-2 was powered by a Bristol Lucifer three-cylinder engine producing 100 hp with a wooden two-blade propeller with a diameter of 2.2 meters. Source: Wiki
At least one aircraft was fitted with skis. Source: en.topwar.ru
The wings were constructed using two spars connected by 13 ribs on each side and covered with duralumin. Source:  en.topwar.ru
A good view of the real tail assembly. Source: www.valka.cz
The small passenger compartment was located inside the fuselage. Source: Wiki
Top view of the pilot’s open cockpit. Source:  en.topwar.ru

Conclusion

While the ANT-2 did not enter mass production, this was less important as it showed that the concept of using metal for the construction of a fully functional aircraft was feasible. It was the first stepping stone of the new, and slowly rising, Soviet aviation industry. It was the first such aircraft to be successfully tested by the Soviets, and paved the way for further Tupolev’s research and work, which enabled him to develop, in time,  more advanced designs. In addition, it was the first aircraft that was officially ordered by the Soviets for limited production.

ANT-2 Specifications

Wingspans 10.45 m / 34 ft 3 in
Length 7.6 m / 24 ft 11 in
Height 2.12 m / 6 ft 11 in
Wing Area 17.9 m²  / 193 ft²
Engine One
Empty Weight 523 kg / 1,153 lb
Maximum Takeoff Weight 837 kg / 1,846 lb
Maximum Speed 170 km/h / 106 mph
Range 750 km/ 466 miles
Maximum Service Ceiling 3,300 m / 10,926 ft
Crew 1 pilot
Armament
  • None

Illustration

 

Credits

  • Article written by Marko P.
  • Edited by  Henry H.
  • Illustrations by Oussama Mohamed “Godzilla”

Sources:

  • Duško N. (2008)  Naoružanje Drugog Svetsko Rata-SSSR. Beograd.
  • Y. Gordon and V. Rigmant (2005) OKB Tupolev, Midland
  • P. Duffy and A. Kandalov (1996) Tupolev The Man and His Aircraft, SAE International
  • B. Gunston () Tupolev Aircraft Since 1922, Naval Institute press

 

Dewoitine D.520 in Regia Aeronautica Service 

italian flag Kingdom of Italy/Italian Social Republic  (1941-1945)
Fighter – Approximately 60 Airframes Received

The Dewoitine D.520 was an advanced French fighter aircraft of the Second World War, which had been employed in large numbers during the Battle of France. After the French Campaign, the German forces captured dozens of Dewoitine D.520s in working order, of which 60 were delivered to the Italian Regia Aeronautica (Royal Air Force) in two separate batches of 30 planes.

Leftovers

Of those, some were never retrieved from the French airports they were left at, and others were disassembled, and cannibalized for spare parts. For these reasons, and the absence of data in Italian official documents, many of their stories have been lost to time.

Prior to being supplied any D.520 by the Luftwaffe, the Italian Regio Esercito (Royal Army) had captured about 30 Dewoitine D.520s during its involvement in the Battle of France. These were almost immediately delivered to the Regia Aeronautica. According to the official documentation, the first three specimens were assigned to 2° Stormo Caccia (Eng: 2nd Fighter Wing), even if it is not clear when they were delivered and to which squadron.

Regia Aeronautica D.520 of an unidentified squadron. The planes have by this point received Italian markings, such as the cross and the white band, but the base camouflage appears to remain the one featured on the original French planes, with the exception of the red propeller hub. Source: Pinterest

The command of the 2° Stormo was based at the Turin-Mirafiori airport after the 20th of January 1941, with 68 pilots and 119 mechanics, a total of 12 FIAT C.R. 42, and waiting for the new Macchi M.C. 202. For two months, they defended the largest industrial centers in northern Italy, such as Turin, Milan, Genoa, and Savona. At the end of February, the first Macchi M.C. 200 and some CR 42s arrived, bringing the department’s equipment to 62 MC 200s and 22 CR 42s, but with no mention of the Dewoitines.

There appear to have been three D.520s available. Due to a lack of spare parts and 20 mm ammunition (the Hispano-Suiza did not fire the same 20 mm cartridges produced in Italy), these were rarely used by pilots, except for training to fight against the French aircraft.

A Regia Aeronautica D.520. This picture is referred to as having been taken either in France, before the aircraft was transferred to Italy, or on an airfield in Southern Italy. Source: Pinterest

The remaining Dewoitines captured by Italy were kept at the airports of Montélimar, Orange, Istres, and Aix-en-Provence, and at the Toulouse factory until the beginning of 1943, when some Italian pilots, including Pilot Sergeant Luigi Gorrini (19 kills and 9 probable) had the task of transferring them to Italy.

Of these new D.520s taken over by the Regia Aeronautica, 8 went to equip the 22° Gruppo Autonomo Caccia Terrestre (22nd Autonomous Terrestrial Fighter Group) in late February 1943 at the airport of Capodichino. The French aircraft were deployed alongside the Macchi M.C. 202, the Reggiane Re. 2001, and some pre-series Reggiane Re. 2005. These aircraft were used to intercept the American B-24 bombers which increasingly hit the city of Naples.

The Dewoitine proved to be very efficient in this task, managing to damage several bombers, often causing the bombers to abort their missions. They were helped by their powerful 20 mm cannon, which at the time had no equivalent on the Italian fighters of the unit (except for the Re. 2005). This is not particularly surprising, as the cannon firing through the propeller hub, a feature of the D.520, and in general most French fighters of the era, was found to be highly accurate in most situations, though limited by a magazine of only 60 rounds. The Italian planes, such as the Macchis and the FIATs, were less precise, but had increased magazines that guaranteed the possibility to commit to several attacks.

On March 1st, 1943, Major Vittorio Minguzzi, commander of the 22° Gruppo Autonomo Caccia Terrestre, and a Reggiane Re. 2005 veteran, shot down a B-24 in the middle of a  bombing run over Naples with a D.520. This kill, considered probable for a long time until the discovery of the bomber’s wreck, was the first recorded victory by a D.520 of the Regia Aeronautica, even if it is likely some Allied aircraft had already fallen victim to Italian D.520s in the previous weeks.

Details of the nose of a D.520 during the plane’s showcase to General Mazzucco, 19th of May 1943. Source: Pinterest

On 19th May 1943 in Littoria, the 371ª Squadriglia Caccia Terrestri (371th Terrestrial Fighter Squadron) officially presented the French fighter to General Renato Mazzucco, commander of the 3ª Divisione Aerea (3rd Air Division), who had come to visit their airbase. This confirms that the 371ª Squadriglia Caccia Terrestri also had a certain number of Dewoitines in service.

On 21st May 1943, the Regia Aeronautica delivered 39 Lioré et Olivier LeO 451 bombers previously captured in the SNCASE factory in Lyon’s Ambérieu-en-Bugey to the Luftwaffe in exchange for the delivery of 30 French Dewoitine D.520s captured by the Germans and apparently never used after the French surrender.

Apparently, these aircraft were delivered without ammunition, without any spare parts, and with evident damage to the weapons and equipment on board. It is supposed this damage was sabotage performed by French pilots, before their aircraft fell into Axis hands during the Battle of France.

After Italian mechanics disassembled some of them to cannibalize the spare parts, these Dewoitines were supplied to the 161° Gruppo Autonomo Caccia Terrestre (161st Autonomous Terrestrial Fighter Group) based at several airports in southern Italy. The numbers are not known, but they were used by the 163a Squadriglia Caccia Terrestri (163rd Terrestrial Fighter Squadron) in Grottaglie, 162a Squadriglia Caccia Terrestri (162nd Terrestrial Fighter Squadron)  in Crotone, and 164a Squadriglia Caccia Terrestri (164th Terrestrial Fighter Squadron)  in Reggio Calabria together with a force of Italian fighters.

Other units that used the D.520 were the 355a Squadriglia (355th Squadron)  and the 370a Squadriglia (370th Squadron), with both units receiving three each, under the 24° Gruppo Autonomo Caccia Terrestre (24th Autonomous Terrestrial Fighter Group).

The 232a Squadriglia Caccia (232nd Fighter Squadron) of the 59° Gruppo Bombardamento Terrestre (59th Terrestrial Bombardment Group) received an unknown number of D.520s for escort duties alongside Savoia Marchetti S.M. 79 three-engine bombers. An unspecified number were used by the 167º Gruppo Autonomo Intercettori (167th Autonomous Interceptor Group) based in Guidonia with the specific task of defending the city from bombers. It is also known that  D.520s were used by the 60° Gruppo Bombardamento Terrestre (60th Terrestrial Bombardment Group), and the 13° Gruppo Caccia (13th Fighter Group), the latter being stationed at the Arena Metano Airport near Pisa.

According to official records, on July 31st, 1943, the Regia Aeronautica still had 47 Dewoitine D.520s in service, which were used mostly in the role of bomber interceptors.

In the confusion that followed after the armistice of 8th September 1943, the departments of the Royal Italian Army parted ways. Some, continuing to fight for the Axis, became part of the Aeronautica Nazionale Repubblicana or ANR (Republican National Air Force). The Aeronautica Cobelligerante Italiana (Italian Co-belligerent Air Force) fought for the Allies, but did not use the D.520.

Many Dewoitines were destroyed by pilots and mechanics, or were captured by the Germans, who re-used them in the Luftwaffe.

The ANR took possession of three D.520s previously in service with the 24° Gruppo Autonomo Caccia Terrestre. These three aircraft were assigned to the recently established 101º Gruppo autonomo caccia (101st Autonomous Fighter Group) in Turin-Mirafiori for training tasks with Macchi M.C. 200 and FIAT C.R. 42 and, disbanded some time later, without ever taking part in combat.

Italian Evaluation 

The Italian judgment of the Dewoitine D.520 was not entirely positive for two reasons. The first is to be found in a nationalist perspective, which gave a negative perception for the foreign D.520. Secondly, pilots such as the ace Luigi Gorrini, who had the opportunity to test it in simulated combat against other fighters, did not consider it agile enough compared to contemporary aircraft, such as the Macchi M.C. 200. Italian pilots considered the D.520 inferior to the Macchi in all areas except armament.

However, the spacious cockpit, the very efficient communication system (when not tampered with), and the 20 mm cannon were praised. These would only be introduced on Italian aircraft starting from 1943. Against US bombers, the guns made a marked difference even if the little ammunition on board was often a limiting factor. The same had been found by French pilots during the campaign of France, who often had to rely on the machine-guns if the mission went on for too long; this was more of an issue against the more robust bombers which were being fielded by 1943.

Italian camouflage and markings 

The typical camouflage used on the Italian planes was similar to the original French one. The coat of arms of the French Air Force was covered with new layers of paint, adding a band on both sides of the wings and one on the fuselage with white paint. The Croce di Savoia was painted on the rudder, a distinctive symbol of Italian aircraft since June 1940. An interesting note is that the Croce di Savoia on the Dewoitines was painted without the coat of arms of the Italian royal family.

A Dewoitine D. 520 of the 24° Gruppo Autonomo Caccia Terrestre with its distinctive coat of arms. Olbia, Sardinia 1943. Source: Pinterest

At least one specimen was painted in an aluminum color (since the photo is in black and white, for a long time, it was believed to be in Olive Green). It had the typical coat of arms of Italian fighters, the Fasci Littori, on the sides of the cockpit and the ‘Fasci Littori Alari’ symbol of the Regia Aeronautica on the wings. This unique example was painted on the occasion of General Mazzucco’s visit to Guidonia.

The 59° Gruppo Bombardamento Terrestre aircraft received the standard camouflage used in North Africa by the Royal Italian Air Force, khaki with dark green spots. These D. 520s were painted with the Savoia royal family coat of arms.

The ANR specimens were painted in light gray with dark gray spots, a tricolor on the fuselage and rudder and the ‘Fasci Littori Alari’ on the wings. According to evidence, at least one specimen remained in the classic French camouflage, perhaps being repainted into the ANR camouflage at a later time.

Conclusions 

Despite the little information on the operational history of the Dewoitine D.520s in Italian service, we can suppose that it was appreciated by the Italian pilots, even for their rancor against all aircraft of foreign origin. The limited numbers received and deployed by the Italian units did not permit a great service of these French aircraft by the Regia Aeronautica. For much of their service, these planes were held at airports for maintenance.

Dewoitine D.520C-1 specifications

Wingspan 10.18 m
Length 8.75 m
Height 2.55 m
Wing Area 16 m²
Engine Hispano-Suiza 12Y-45
Power at Critical Altitude 935 hp at 4,200 m
Max RPM 2,400 RRM
Propeller Three-bladed Ratier or Chauvière (3 m diameter)
Empty Weight 2,050 kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight 2,740 kg
Wing Load 195 kg/m²
Fuel Capacity 400 liters standard

640 liters with wing fuel tanks

Time to Altitude 4,000 m in 5’13”

6,000 m in 7’57”

8,000 m in 13’24”

Maximum Speed 425 km/h at sea level

535 km/h at 6,750 m

Cruising Speed 400 km/h
Stall Speed 125 km/h
Range Around 900 km with a standard fuel load

1,500 km at max fuel load (equipped w/ wing tanks)

Maximum Service Ceiling 11,000 m /
Crew 1 Pilot
Armament 20 mm HS-404 firing through the propeller hub with 60 rounds

4x MAC34M39 machine guns with 675 rounds per gun in the wings

Number Completed 60 officially delivered to Regia Aeronautica unknown used in active service

Illustrations

Credits

  • Written by Arturo Giusti
  • Edited by Henry H.
  • Illustrations by Oussama Mohamed “Godzilla”

Sources