The Messerschmitt Me 109, although an outstanding aircraft, still had room for improvement. Its most noticeable shortcomings included a rather small operational radius, significantly reducing its combat potential in prolonged engagements. To address this, Messerschmitt initiated the development of a successor model designated as the Me 309. However, from the outset, this new fighter was plagued with numerous mechanical faults that could not be resolved in the foreseeable future. Consequently, only four prototypes were built before the project was ultimately canceled.
The Me 309 first prototype. Source: https://www.luftwaffephotos.com/lme2091.htm
History
At the onset of the Second World War, Germany relied heavily on the Me 109 as its primary fighter aircraft. Renowned for its exceptional performance and cost-effectiveness, the Me 109 outmatched most of the enemy fighters it encountered over Europe. Following the fall of France in June 1940, Germany launched a significant bombing campaign against the UK. This prolonged engagement highlighted a critical issue: the Me 109’s limited operational range prevented it from carrying out long-range fighter sweeps, or being usable as a bomber escort.
Recognizing the urgent need for enhancements, Messerschmitt began experiments on improving the performance, and range, of the Me 109. Initial assessments underscored the necessity for substantial improvements, including an 85% increase in operational range and a minimum 25% boost in maximum speed. Additionally, there were aspirations to augment its firepower, introduce a pressurized cockpit, implement a tricycle undercarriage, and incorporate retractable radiators. Before commencing work on a completely new fighter, Messerschmitt opted to experiment with these features by modifying an existing Me 109F
Some of the changes such as the tricycle undercarriage were first tested on one Me 109. Source: https://militarymatters.online/forgotten-aircraft/the-messerschmitt-me-309-redundant-beauty/
The new fighter project was initiated by Messerschmitt in 1940. However, the German Aviation Ministry (RLM) was not enthusiastic about it, after significant delays. Actual work on the project didn’t commence until the end of 1941. The project, designated Me 309, was led by Woldemar Voigt and Richard Bauer. It’s worth noting that Messerschmitt’s previous attempt to develop a fighter, based on the record-breaking Me 209, failed because its airframe wasn’t suitable for military purposes. Despite the RLM’s initial skepticism towards the Me 309, they eventually ordered nine prototypes.
The side view of the Me 209V1 prototype. While initially used as a speed record-breaker, Messerschmitt tried to adopt it for the military role but ultimately failed in this. Source: ww2fighters.e-monsite.com
The first Me 309 V-1 (GE-CU) prototype was completed in June 1942, and immediately underwent ground trials at the end of that month. However, almost from the outset, a major issue became apparent, the new landing wheel configuration proved difficult to control on the ground. Subsequent flight tests revealed additional challenges, including strong vibrations at high speeds. In July 1942, after a series of modifications, the prototype underwent flight testing once more, only to encounter new problems with the landing gear. The hydraulic retraction system was found to be inadequate, and issues with engine overheating and aerodynamic instability persisted. On one occasion, test pilot Karl Baur was forced to abort the flight after just seven minutes in the air.
Addressing these issues required further modifications, including redesigning the tailplane and improving the hydraulic system for the landing gear. Despite these efforts, subsequent test flights did not yield significant improvements in the overall flight performance of the Me 309. Messerschmitt’s test pilot, Fritz Wendel, expressed dissatisfaction with the aircraft, noting that its flight characteristics were not markedly superior to those of the Me 109. He criticized the high landing speed and the poor design of the control surfaces.
Not ready to abandon the Me 309 prematurely, the first prototype underwent evaluation at the Rechlin test center for further assessment. On the 20th of November 1942, a report was issued deeming the overall performance of the Me 309 unpromising, even inferior to the new Me 109G. Consequently, the RLM reduced the initial production order from nine prototypes to just four. Initially, the RLM had little enthusiasm for the Me 309, and still preferred instead to prioritize increased production of the Me 109. Introducing another fighter design would inevitably cause production delays. Compounding the industrial challenges, perfecting the Me 309 design would likely require additional time, months if not years of work.
Despite these setbacks, the development of the Me 309 continued at a sluggish pace. The first prototype was initially equipped with a 1,750 hp DB603A-1 engine. It would later be replaced by a 1,450 hp DB 605B engine instead during the testing phase. During one landing, the front landing gear collapsed, causing the aircraft to nose down. Fortunately, the damage sustained was minor. However, the same couldn’t be said for the second prototype (GE-CV), which underwent flight testing on November 28, 1942. Upon landing during its maiden flight, the front landing gear failed, resulting in a hard impact on the ground. The force of the impact nearly split the aircraft into two parts, rendering it extensively damaged and subsequently written off. Despite this setback, two more prototypes were constructed during 1943.
The Me 309 had a troublesome landing gear and a tendency to flip over the nose. In one such accident, the second prototype was lost. Source: https://militarymatters.online/forgotten-aircraft/the-messerschmitt-me-309-redundant-beauty/
Technical characteristics
The Me 309 was conceived as a single-seat fighter, featuring an all-metal construction with a low-wing design. There is limited information available regarding its overall construction. The fuselage was of an oval shape, while the wings were characterized by a dihedral angle with rounded tips, accompanied by automatic leading-edge slots for better maneuverability at low speed. Notably, the wings also incorporated large flaps extending from the wing roots to the ailerons’ end. The canopy was fully glazed, affording excellent visibility of the surroundings.
There is some disagreement among available sources regarding the precise engine used in this aircraft. According to J.R. Smith and A.L. Kay in (German Aircraft of WWII) it was initially powered by a 1,750 hp DB 603A-1 engine, which enabled the Me 309 to achieve a maximum speed of 733 km/h at an altitude of 8,500 meters. This claim is supported by B.C. Wheeler in (Aviation Archive: German Fighters of WWII) although Wheeler does not specify which DB 603 engine was used. On the other hand, Jean-Denis G.G. Lepage, in (Aircraft of the Luftwaffe) mentions that the Daimler-Benz DB 603G engine model was used, with the same maximum speed being achieved. The DB 603G is the likely most correct engine used on the Me 309, considering it was an experimental high-altitude model that never entered mass use.
The later prototypes were powered by a smaller 1,450 hp DB 605B engine. Even the first prototype was eventually reequipped with this engine. As a result, the overall performance dropped significantly to 575 km/h, according to D. Nesić (Naoružanje Drugog Svetsko Rata-Nemačka).
With a fuel capacity of 880 liters, its operational range extended to 1,400 km. Equipped with a retractable ventral radiator positioned under the fuselage, the aircraft’s landing gear retracted inward into the wings. A notable departure from convention was the absence of the standard tailwheel; instead, it featured a nosewheel, retracting rearward into the fuselage’s front section.
The Me 309 was initially tested with the DB 603A-1 engine with which it achieved a maximum speed of 733 km/.h. Source: http://www.luftwaffephotos.com/lme2091.htmRear view of the Me 309. Source: http://www.luftwaffephotos.com/lme2091.htmThe Me 309 incorporated some new features such as the new landing gear and a retracting radiator both of which can be seen here. Source: airpages.ru
Fate
Despite the considerable investment of time and resources into the Me 309 project, its overall flight performance fell short, ultimately leading to the project’s demise. By the beginning of 1943, the RLM had lost interest in the aircraft, prompting the cancellation of the project after the completion of four prototypes. Despite the cancellation, Messerschmitt proceeded to develop two additional prototypes.
One of these, the Me 309V-3 (CA-NK or CA-CW), was intended as a replacement for the lost V-2 prototype. Its maiden flight took place in March or April of 1943. The fourth prototype marked a significant milestone as it was the first to be equipped with offensive armament, including four 13 mm MG 131 (300 rounds), two 20 mm MG 151 (150 rounds), and two 30 mm MK 108 (65 rounds) cannons. Alternatively, it could be outfitted with two 15 mm MG 151 cannons and three 13 mm MG 131s. Although these armaments were primarily experimental and not used operationally, they were essential for various testing purposes.
Unfortunately, the fate of the last two prototypes remains unclear, with records suggesting they were lost during Allied bombing raids in 1944.
Despite the Messerschmitt hope the Me 309 would not be adopted for service, and the few built prototypes would be mainly used for various testing and evaluation. Source: http://www.luftwaffephotos.com/lme2091.htm
Even before the official cancellation, Messerschmitt officials were hopeful for a larger production order. To this end, they presented several variant proposals for the Me 309. The Me 309A was designed as a fighter variant, equipped with one MG 151 cannon and two MG 131 machine guns. The Me 309B was intended to serve as a fighter-bomber variant, armed with two 250 kg (550 lbs) bombs. As for the Me 309C, it was designed as a destroyer, featuring three MG 151 cannons and up to four MG 131s. An intriguing proposal was the Me 309 Zwilling (Eng. Twins), which involved two aircraft joined together in a configuration reminiscent of the post-war US F-82, but ultimately, this concept did not materialize.
A drawing of the proposed Me 309zw aircraft. Source: D.Sharp Luftwaffe: Secret Designs of the Third Reich
Interestingly in 1944 Japan expressed interest in its design and asked for plans and drawings of the Me309V-3 aircraft. But nothing came of this in the end.
Prototypes
Me 309V-1 – First prototype powered by a 1,750 hp DB 603A-1 engine
Me 309V-2 – Second prototype lost during the first test flight
Me 309V-3 – This prototype was built in early 1943 as a replacement for the second prototype
Me 309V-4 – First prototype to be armed.
Proposed Variants
Me 309A – Proposed fighter variant
Me 309B – Proposed fighter-bomber variant
Me 309C –Proposed destroyer variant
Me 309zw- Proposed twi-aircraft configuration
Conclusion
The Me 309, despite the investment and the hope that it would be an adequate successor to the Me 109, proved to be a troubled design and pulled down by wartime pragmatism. From the start, it was plagued by various mechanical problems that were never resolved. The fact that RLM was never interested that much in such a project did not help either. As it would take considerable time to fully remediate all the noted issues, the project was abandoned in favor of the latter Me 262.
Me 309V-1 Specifications
Wingspans
11.04 m / 36 ft 2 in
Length
9.46 m / 31 ft 1 in
Height
3.4 m / ft
Wing Area
16.55 m² / 178.08 ft²
Engine
One 1,750 hp DB 603A-1
Empty Weight
3,530 5kg / 7,784 lbs
Maximum Takeoff Weight
4,250 kg / 9,371 lbs
Maximum Speed
733 km/h / 455 mph
Cruising speed
665 km/h / 413 mph
Range
1,400 km / 870 miles
Maximum Service Ceiling
12,000 m / 39,360 ft
Climb to 8 km
In 10 minutes
Crew
1 pilot
Armament
Illustration
Credits
Written by Marko P.
Edited by Henry H.
Illustrations by Oussama Mohamed “Godzilla”
Source:
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
D. Myhra (2000) Messerschmitt Me 209V1, Schiffer Military History
M. Griehl () X-planes German Luftwaffe prototypes 1930-1940, Frontline Book
D.Sharp (2018) Luftwaffe: Secret Designs of the Third Reich, Mortons
Jean-Denis G.G. Lepage (2009) Aircraft Of The Luftwaffe, McFarland & Company, Inc
B. C. Wheeler (2014) Aviation Archive German Fighters of WWII, Kelsey Publishing Group
Upon its introduction before the outbreak of the Second World War, the German Me 109 emerged as one of the premier fighter designs globally. While it proved formidable during the conflict, rival aircraft gradually matched and even exceeded its performance in several key areas. In a bid to secure a successor for the Me 109 late in the war, Messerschmitt endeavored to develop the Me 209A, a highly modified design based on its predecessor. Despite demonstrating promising flight attributes, logistical constraints hindered its adoption for active service.
While the Germans acknowledged the effectiveness of the Me 109, it became evident that a new fighter design, or serious enhancements to the existing model, would be necessary. In early 1941, Messerschmitt began developing a successor to the Me 109. This exploration resulted in the creation of the Me 309. It was a brand-new fighter aircraft that incorporated a new fuselage design, larger wings, and a tricycle undercarriage. It was powered by a 1,750 hp DB 603A-1. A few different armament systems were to be tested including four 13 mm MG 131 (300 rounds), two 2 cm MG 151 (150 rounds), and two 30 mm MK 108 (65 rounds) cannons. Alternatively, it could be outfitted with two 15 mm MG 151 cannons and three 13 mm MG 131s.
By June 1942, the prototype underwent flight testing. Despite an initially promising design, testing revealed that the Me 309 did not offer significant improvements over the Me 109G, which was already in mass production. Consequently, recognizing the impracticality of further investment, the Me 309 project was ultimately terminated.
The Me 309 was one of the Messerschmitt failed attempts to develop a successor for the Me 109. Source: www.luftwaffephotos.com
As the development of the Me 309 proved fruitless, Messerschmitt continued to strive towards a suitable replacement for the Me 109. Fortunately for the company, the German Air Ministry (RLM) initiated the development of a new high-altitude fighter on April 23, 1943. In response, Messerschmitt introduced the Me 209. Interestingly, this name was recycled from an earlier project, the original Me 209, which had been crafted specifically to set world-breaking speed records. However, it was ill-suited for military purposes and the project was ultimately shelved having fulfilled its original purpose. Despite this, Messerschmitt endeavored to develop a viable fighter based on the Me 209 but met with little success. To avoid potential confusion, the new project, which bore no resemblance to the record-breaking aircraft, was designated as the Me 209A (also occasionally referred to as the Me 209-II).
The Me 209 which had been crafted specifically to set world-breaking speed records, proved to be unsuited for fighter adaptation. Source: ww2fighters.e-monsite.com
In order to expedite development and minimize costs, the design of this new fighter used many components from the Me 109. A powerful engine was essential for achieving optimal flight performance. Thus, the prototype, powered by a 1,750 PS DB 603A-1 engine, underwent completion and testing in early November 1943, with Fritz Wendel as the pilot. To avoid confusion, it was designated as the Me 209V-5 (SP-LJ), distinguishing it from the original Me 209 prototypes, V-1 to V-4.
The success of the first prototype led to the completion and testing of a second prototype by the end of 1943, both exhibiting impressive flight characteristics. Encouraged by this achievement, construction of another prototype commenced. However, due to shortages of the DB 603A-1 engine, the decision was made to utilize the 1,750 hp Jumo 213E instead. This third prototype underwent flight testing in May 1944, prompting a designation change to Me 209A. The prototypes, with their alternate engine configurations, were then distinguished with the suffixes A-0, A-1, and A-2 for the first, second, and third, respectively.
Technical characteristics
Unfortunately given the obscurity of this project, its overall technical specifications are somewhat ambiguous. What is known is that it incorporated some 65% of its construction from the Me 109G. The original Me 109 fuselage was a monocoque design that was divided into two halves. These halves would be placed together and connected using simple flush rivets, thus creating a simple base on which remaining components, like the engine, wings, and instruments would be installed.
In order to accommodate the retracting landing gear, Messerschmitt deliberately opted for a single wing spar positioned towards the rear of the wing. This spar needed to be robust enough to withstand the flight’s load forces. The wings were attached to the fuselage by four sturdy bolts, simplifying the overall wing construction and reducing production costs. The Me209A boasted a larger wingspan and area, consequently increasing wing loading by 25% compared to the original Me 109. Furthermore, alterations were made to the wings and tail to address the Me 109’s strong yaw forces on takeoff. Whether these adjustments successfully rectified the issue in the Me 209A remains unclear according to available sources.
Initially, it was powered by a 1,750 hp DB 603A-1 engine which was provided with an annular radiator and a three-blade propeller. With this engine, a maximum record speed achieved was 724 km/h 450 mph at an altitude of nearly 7 km (22,960 ft). The third prototype (A-2) received a new 1,750 hp Jumo 213E engine. It too was provided with an annular radiator. With it, a maximum speed of 660 km/h (410 mph) was achieved at an altitude of 6 km (19/680 ft)
The canopy was placed in the center of the fuselage. It was a fully enclosed compartment that was riveted to the fuselage.
The Me 109 boasted an unconventional landing gear arrangement, at least for German standards, with the landing gear primarily affixed to the lower center base of the fuselage. This configuration centralized the aircraft’s weight at this pivotal point, while the two landing gear struts extended outward toward the wings. In contrast, the Me 209 utilized a wide-track undercarriage unit, with the pivot points being out on the wings.
Various sources have proposed different armament configurations for the Me 209. One suggestion was the installation of two 3 cm MK 108 cannons, each equipped with 70 rounds of ammunition, alongside two 2 cm MG 151 cannons with 250 rounds per cannon, all to be housed within the aircraft’s wings. Alternatively, another proposal suggested the placement of four MK 108 cannons within the wings and two MG 151 cannons positioned above the engine compartment. However, it remains unclear whether any of these proposed armament configurations were ever implemented on the Me 209A.
The side view of the only photograph of the Me 209A first prototype. Source: http://www.luftwaffephotos.com/lme2091.htm
Fate
In 1944, further testing ensued, yet for Messerschmitt, the advent of the new Fw 190D posed a challenge. The Fw 190D, slowly making its way into production, boasted better performance, being faster in both high and low altitudes. What ultimately sealed the fate of the Me 209A project was the swiftness and cost-effectiveness with which the Fw 190D could be put into production. While the Me 209 incorporated many components from the Me 109, setting up its production would demand considerable time. A luxury in short supply for the Germans in 1944. Additionally, Messerschmitt’s focus at that time was squarely on the new Me 262 production, leaving scant resources to spare for yet another piston-powered fighter.
Despite these challenges, Messerschmitt made a final push to advance the Me 209 project with the construction and testing of the fourth prototype, designated Me 209H V-1, in June 1944. This iteration underwent several modifications, including enlarged wings and propulsion by a DB 603G engine. Unfortunately, the first prototype fell victim to an air raid on August 14, 1944, casting uncertainty over the fate of the remaining aircraft. Although there were intentions to export the Me 209A to Japan, these plans never materialized. It was also competing with the Ta 152H, which was easier to put into production while also having better performance, at least on paper.
Prototypes
Me 209A-0- First prototype powered by a 1,750 hp DB 603A-1 engine
Me 209A-1- Secon aircraft is essentially a copy of the first prototype
Me 209A-2- Third tested with a new 1,750 Jumo 213E engine
Me 209H V-1 – The fourth prototype powered by a DB 603G engine and received larger wings
Conclusion
The Me 209A project ultimately reached a dead end, not because it was a poorly designed aircraft, but simply because it didn’t offer significant enough improvements to justify production. The new Fw 109D, boasting similar flight performance, was already in the production phase. Introducing yet another new design without any notable advancements in this fighter category would have been illogical and a waste of already meager resources.
Me 209A-2 Specifications
Wingspans
10.95 m / 35 ft 11 in
Length
9.62 m / 31 ft 6 in
Height
3.65 m / 12 ft 2 in
Wing Area
17.15 m² / 184.53 ft²
Engine
1,750 hp Jumo 213E
Empty Weight
3,475kg / 7,662 lbs
Maximum Takeoff Weight
4,200 kg / 9,261 lbs
Maximum Speed
660 km/h / 410 mph
Cruising speed
490 km/h / 305 mph
Range
690 km / 430 miles
Maximum Service Ceiling
13,000 m / 42,650 ft
Crew
1 pilot
Armament
None
Illustration
Credits
Written by Marko P.
Edited by Henry H.
Illustrations by Oussama Mohamed “Godzilla”
Source:
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
D. Myhra (2000) Messerschmitt Me 209V1, Schiffer Military History
B. C.Wheeler, German Fighters of WWII, Aeroplane Special
R. Jackson (2005) Infamous Aircraft, Pen and Sword
M. Griehl () X-planes German Luftwaffe prototypes 1930-1940, Frontline Book
Italy (1932)
Experimental Aircraft – One Prototype Built
In the history of aviation, there have been many projects that on paper promised outstanding flight capabilities, or offered other technical advantages. The time before the Second World War saw aviation advance at a breakneck pace, and is well known for such experiments. The so-called Stipa-Caproni was one such project, being an intriguing, and somewhat bizarre, experimental aircraft designed by Italian aeronautical engineer Luigi Stipa, and built by Caproni during the interwar period. It was characterized by its tubular fuselage, hence earning it the nickname Flying Barrel.
The unique design Stripa-Caproni experimental aircraft. Source: Wiki
History
In 1927 a young Italian aircraft engineer Luigi Stipa began working on an unusual tube-shaped aircraft. Like many other aviation enthusiasts, Stipa was very interested in how aircraft could achieve better performance through exploring unorthodox construction methods. Thanks to his studies in thermodynamics, he was aware of the so-called Venturi effect, named after Italian physicist Giovanni Battista Venturi. In essence, this effect describes the reduction of fluid pressure and increasing velocity when it’s moving through a cylinder of decreased diameter. In theory, using this principle, a special type of aircraft could be created that could achieve significantly higher speeds than the conventional models of the time. Stipa theorized that for this purpose, such an aircraft would have to have a tube-shaped fuselage with the engine being positioned near the front. After finding it theoretically possible, he moved forward to test if the Venturi effect could be implemented in his airplane concept. For this purpose, he began a series of different tests inside a wing tunnel, carried out at the Aerodynamic Laboratory in Rome, from 1928 to 1931. The main focus of this testing period was to find the adequate shape, and leading edges, of the tube-shaped fuselage. This also included finding the right position of the engine, its position inside that tube, and the ideal propeller rotation speed. Following a series of wind tunnel tests, Stipa concluded that it was possible to build a full-scale prototype by using a single tube-shaped fuselage.
Luigi Stipa in his younger years. Source: Wiki
At the end of his research, he concluded that such a project was viable and set the task of building a working prototype. To gain interest in his project, he wrote about his work in the Rivista Aeronautica journal in 1931, and even built a small working replica. The next logical step was to write to the Italian Minister of Aviation, in the hope of getting approval for the realization of his project. Luckily for Stipa, his work came to the attention of General Luigi Crocco, the Air Ministry’s director. Stipa’s work was well received and the project received a green light. To test the concept, a working prototype had to be constructed. It is important to note, that both Stipa and the Italian Air Ministry were aware that this project was merely to test his theories, and would not entail any further development of the prototype. In addition, both were aware that Stipa’s proposed principle was only practical on larger aircraft types.
For this purpose, the prototype was to be powered by a small 120-hp engine. The reason behind this decision lay in the fact that this aircraft was primarily built for evaluation and academic purposes. The Italian Air Ministry was not quite willing to invest huge monetary resources in it, beyond those necessary for the construction of the working prototype.
To help build the test aircraft, the Caproni aircraft manufacturer from Milan Taliedo was chosen. It was designated as Stipa-Caproni (sometimes referred to as Caproni-Stipa) referring to its designer and constructor. The prototype was built quickly and was ready for testing in October 1932.
It is perhaps a little surprising that such an unusual design would receive the necessary support for its realization. However, the exploration of new and unorthodox ideas in aviation was very popular in pre-war Europe. During the 1930s, Italy led the way in this aspect, perhaps even more than other countries, testing many unorthodox designs. What’s more, the Italian Fascist regime even encouraged different and unusual projects like this one, although many of them did not produce any meaningful results.
The Stipa-Caproni prototype was used for testing during 1932 and 1933. Source: en.topwar.ru
Technical specification
The Stipa-Caproni was a two-seater, mixed-construction aircraft, designed to have the simplest and thus cheapest fuselage. Its fuselage consisted of a tube which internally consisted of two large wooden round-shaped rings at the nose, followed by a series of similar but smaller rings. All of them were then connected with horizontal ribs which in turn were covered in fabric. The outer wooden rings served as the foundation, on which the wing and the cockpit would be connected. The fuselage design was, in effect, a large tube shaped airfoil.
A close-up view of the Stipa-Caproni internal fuselage construction. The two larger wooden rings serve as a base to which wings and the cockpit would be attached. Source: www.thevintagenews.com
The wings were mounted centrally on each side of the fuselage. These had a simple wooden construction, and were covered in fabric. They were also connected to the fuselage through metal bracing wires, which as a consequence increased the aircraft’s drag.
To the rear, a fairly large tail assembly was placed. During the design work of this aircraft, Stipa intentionally placed the rear control surfaces as close to the slipstream as possible. He hoped that this arrangement would greatly improve the aircraft’s handling and maneuverability.
On top of the fuselage, an elevated two-seat cockpit was placed. These were top-open with a small windshield placed in front of each position. There were also a pair of small doors that opened on the left side to give access to the seats.
The 120-hp de Havilland Gypsy III engine was placed inside this fuselage. It was centrally positioned and suspended using several steel bars that held it strongly in place. This was necessary to do so, as a weaker mounting could potentially endanger the aircraft during flight. The engine propeller was the almost the same diameter as the tube-shaped fuselage.
Given its overall design, and the position of the propellers inside the fuselage, the landing wheels were small and quite close to the ground. It consisted of three fixed road wheels. Two larger on the front and one smaller on the rear. Initially, wheel fairings were used but at some point, and for unclear reasons, these were removed.
A front view of the unusual engine installation. The engine itself was held in place by several metal bars. Source: WikiIt was provided with a small and fixed three-wheel landing gear. Source: en.topwar.ru
Testing and Final Fate
With this project approved, a prototype was constructed and air tested in October 1932 at the experimental field at Monte Celio near Rome. Despite its odd design, the prototype was able to take to the sky without any major problems. Furthermore, it made several successful flights around Taliedo and Guidnia. It was even presented to the Italian Air Force for future test flights. During this period the aircraft was jokingly nicknamed Flying Barrel or Aereo Botte (Eng. Wooden wine barrel aircraft) or Aereo Barile (Eng. Fuel-Barrel aircraft).
The weight of the aircraft during these flights was 800 kg (1,874 lb), while the calculated wing loading was 44,73 kg/m² (9,16 lb sq.ft.). The maximum speed achieved was 133 km/h (83 mph), and it needed 40 minutes to climb at a height of 3, 000 m. It needed an 800 m long airfield to be able to take to the sky.
The Stipa-Caproni during one of many test flights. Source: www.historynet.com
Despite Stipa’s hopes that the position and shape of the tail control surfaces would improve its mobility, several problems were noted by the test pilots. Firstly the elevator worked very well, which ironically proved to be a major problem. Even with a slight movement of the command control stick by the pilots, the aircraft could prove very sensitive to elevator inputs. On the other hand, the rudder controls were quite stiff, as a consequence the pilot had to use considerable force in order to use it effectively. Analyzing this problem showed that the rudder’s large surface area was to blame for its stiff control. But besides the two problems, the aircraft was reported to be easy to fly when being used in a gliding flight. These defects were of a more or less technical nature, which were not necessarily irremediable through further development of the overall design.
The design of the rear tail assembly proved somewhat problematic. Specifically, the elevator control was overly sensitive while the rudder was quite the opposite. Source: en.topwar.ru
The final results of evaluation flights showed that the Stipa-Caproni does not have any particularly great advantages compared to other more standard aircraft designs. In addition, Stipa-Caproni’s overall aircraft shape offered limited space within the fuselage for passengers or payload.
As Stipa predicted from the start, his principles would not offer any major advantage over a standard smaller-dimension aircraft. The real application of the Stipa-Caproni design was only feasible on larger aircraft. Stipa hoped that his further research would enable him to construct large aircraft powered by two to three tube-shaped engine mounts. Unfortunately for him, after a series of test flights during 1932 and 1933 the interest in his work died out. It was briefly used in various Italian aviation propaganda publications before being scrapped in 1939.
Despite being in general an unimpressive design, the French showed interest in it. Particularly the company ANF Lex Maureaux, which went so far as to acquire a license for the design in 1935. According to initial plans, a two-engine variant was to be built for testing and evaluation. The project did not go beyond basic work was later canceled.
Lastly, an interesting fact is that many people considered Stipa-Caproni to design some sort of proto-jet engine. Whether this was the case or not, Stipa felt his work was overlooked, and according to some sources, he remained bitter throughout his life until he died in the early 1990s.
Stipa hoped that with more resources he would be able to test his principle on a much larger scale, but ultimately nothing came of it. Source: L. Stipa, Stipa Monoplane with Venturi Fuselage
Replica
In 1996, aviation enthusiast Guido Zuccoli began working on a smaller replica of this aircraft. However, the death of Zuccoli in a landing accident caused a delay in the replica’s final delivery. It was finally completed in 2001 when numerous small flights were achieved. The aircraft, powered by a 72 hp Simonini racing engine, managed to achieve a flight distance of 600 m (1,968 ft). After that, the aircraft replica was stored as an exhibit at the Zuccoli Collection at Toowoomba, in Australia.
A smaller-scale replica was built and flight-tested in 2001. Source: www.uasvison.com
Conclusion
The Stipa-Caproni represented an intended for the purpose of testing his new concepts in practice. While surely an interesting and unusual concept, Stipa-Caproni’s overall design was not that practical in reality, offering little improvement over a standard aircraft design of similar dimensions.
Stipa-Caproni Specifications
Wingspans
14.3 m / 46 ft 10 in
Length
6.04 m / 19 ft 10 in
Height
3.2 m / 10 ft 7 in
Wing Area
19 m² / 204 ft²
Engine
One 120 hp (89.5 kW) De Havilland Gipsy III
Empty Weight
595 kg / lbs
Maximum Take-off Weight
850 kg / 1,874 lbs
Maximum Speed
133 km/h / 83 mph
Landing Speed
68 km/h / 42 mph
Climbing speed to 3,000 m
40 min
Maximum Service Ceiling
3,700 m / ft
Crew
1 to 2 pilots
Armament
None
Illustration
Credits
Written by Marko P.
Edited by Henry H. & Ed J.
Illustration by Godzilla
Source:
J. Thompson (1963) Italian Civil and Military Aircraft 1930-1945, Aero Publisher
R. Giacomelli, (1933) The Stipa-Caproni Monoplane, Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, Vol. 5
D. Nesic (2008) Naoružanje Drugog Svetsko Rata-Italija
L. Salari, Caproni Storia della nascitadell’ industria aeronautica
M Taylor, The Wolrd Strangest Aircraft, Metro Books
O. E. Lancaster (1959) Jet Propulsion Engines, Princeton University Press
L. Stipa (1933) Stipa Monoplane with Venturi Fuselage, Technical Memorandums Nation Advisory Committee For Aeronautics No.753
USSR (1921)
Experimental Single-seat light aircraft – 1 Prototype Built
While the Russian Civil War was raging on, there were early attempts to rebuild its shattered aviation industry. Aviation engineers and enthusiasts attempted, despite the chaos around them, to build small experimental aircraft to test their ideas and concepts. One such young individual was Andrei Nikolayevich Tupolev. His ANT-1 was a specialized design to test the concept of using metal alloys in aircraft construction.
Tupolev began his career as an aircraft engineer in 1909, when he was admitted to the Moscow Higher Technical School. There he met Professor Nikolai Yagorovich who greatly influenced Tupolev’s interest in aviation. In the following years, he spent time developing and testing various glider designs. When the First World War broke out Tupolev managed to get a job at the Russian Dux Automotive factory in Moscow, which produced a variety of goods, including aircraft. There he gained valuable experience of aircraft manufacturing.
Andrei Nikolayevich Tupolev was one of the greatest Russian/Soviet aviation engineers and designers. Source: Wiki
In 1917, the October Revolution plunged the disintegrating Russian Empire into total chaos. The few aircraft manufacturing centers were either abandoned or destroyed. All work on the design and construction of new aircraft was essentially stopped. The Dux was one exception and continued to work at a limited capacity. It was renamed to Gosudarstvennyi aviatsionnyi zavod (Eng. State aircraft factory) or simply GAZ No.1. Given that he was one of few aviation engineers left, with most skilled either being killed or fled the country, Tupolev remained working for the GAZ No.1. He spent a few years working on various projects such as designs improving weapon mounts for older aircraft that were still in service.
In 1921, Tupolev was elected as the deputy of the Aviatsii i Gidrodinamiki AGO (Eng. Aviation and Hydrodynamics Department). This department was tasked with developing various aircraft designs but also including torpedo boats. In 1921 he and his team from AGO began working on a new aircraft design that was to test new concepts. Two new innovative features were that it should be a monoplane, and be built using mainly metal alloy. Its primary purpose was not to gain any production orders, but instead to serve as a test bed for new ideas and concepts. The aircraft was named ANT-1, where ANT stands for the initials of Andrei Nikolayevich Tupovlev. This designation should not be confused with a snowmobile developed by Tupolev, which shared its name.
During this period, Soviet aviation officials and the German Junkers company spent years negotiating the possibility of producing a Duralumin alloy that could be used for aviation construction. Junkers proved the validity of this concept on the J.I saw service during the First World War. The German company wanted to avoid sanctions on arms and aviation development imposed by the Allies, while the Soviets wanted the technology for themselves, not wanting to depend on the Germans entirely. The Soviet Union in 1922, managed to produce their own copy of Duralumin known as Kol’schugaluminiyem alloy. The name was related to a small village Kol’chugino where this factory was located. Limited production of this alloy began in 1923.
Due to problems with the production of the new alloy, Tupolev was forced to postpone the development of his new aircraft until 1922. At that time the alloy was not yet available, so Tupovlev decided to go on with a mix-construction design, but mostly using wood. The benefit of using wood was that it was an easily available material, with almost unlimited supply in Russia. It was cheap and there were plenty of skilled woodworkers. However, there were also numerous flaws in using wooden materials. The greatest issue was a generally short service life in harsh climates as in Russia, in addition, standardization of spare parts is almost impossible to do.
Tupolev himself preferred the new metal technology believing that it would offer many benefits to the aircraft industry, giving new aircraft a lighter and stronger overall construction. Tupolev eventually decided to go for a mixed-construction solution. His decision was based on a few factors, such as the general lack of this new material, and he wanted to be on the safe side as using metal in aircraft construction was still a new and not yet fully proven concept. In addition, he wanted to be sure about the Aluminum alloy material’s quality before proceeding to design a fully metal aircraft.
Once the choice for the construction material was solved the next step was to decide whether it was to be a single or two-seat configuration. The wing design was also greatly considered. After some time spent in calculations and small wind testing, the choice was made to proceed with a single engine and low-wing monoplane.
For the engine, three different types were proposed including 14hp and 18 hp Harley-Davidson and a 20 hp Blackburn Tomtit. Despite Tupovlev’s attempts, he failed to acquire any one of these three. It was not until early 1923 that he managed to get his hands on an old 35hp Anzani engine which was over 10 years old by that point. Despite its poor mechanical state, Tupovlev knowing that nothing else was available decided to try salvage it.
Testing and the Final Fate
The construction of this aircraft took over a year to complete. Given the general chaos at that time, this should not be surprising. It was finally completed in October 1923, and the first test flight was carried out on the 21st of October of the same year. Despite using the older engine, the flight proved successful. It was piloted by Yevgeni Pogosski.
The completed ANT-1 test aircraft. Source: www.globalsecurity.org
Following this, the ANT-1 was used mainly for various testing and evaluation. It would see service in this manner for the next two years. In 1925 the aging engine finally gave up, and this made the aircraft unflyable. Tupovlev tried to find a factory that could potentially refurbish it. He ultimately failed, as the engine was simply beyond repair by that point.
The aircraft was for some time stored at Factory No.156. The fate of this aircraft is not clear in the sources, however, there are few theories about what happened to it. After Tupovlev’s imprisonment by Josef Stalin, his plans and documentation were confiscated. The aircraft was believed to be also confiscated and scrapped in the late 1930s. Another possibility is that it was moved to another storage facility where it was eventually lost during the Axis Invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941.
Specification
The ANT-1 was designed as a cantilever low-wing monoplane aircraft of mixed construction. The fuselage consisted of four spruce longerons. The lower two were connected to the wing spars and were held in place with four bolts. The parts of the fuselage starting with the pilot cockpit to the engine were covered in the metal alloy. This alloy was also used to provide additional strength of some internal wooden components of the aircraft fuselage. The pilot Pilot cockpit was provided with a small windscreen. Inboard equipment was spartan consisting only of an rpm counter, oil pressure indicator, and ignition switch.
The cantilever wings were made of single pieces. At the end of the two tips (on each side of the wings) large wooden spars were installed. Some parts of the wing were built using metal parts such as the wing ribs, The rest of the wing was mainly covered in fabric. The tail unit was made of wood, its surfaces were covered with a metal-fabric cover.
The fixed landing gear consisted of two large wheels. These were connected to a metal frame which itself was connected to the aircraft fuselage. Small rubber bungees acted as primitive shock absorbers.
Given that nothing else was available, the ANT-1 was powered by an old, refurbished 35-hp strong Bristol Anzani engine.
A good view of the ANT-1 internal wing and fuselage construction. Source: www.globalsecurity.orgThe cantilever wings received on each side one large wooden spar. Source: WikiThe pilot cockpit received only a few basic instruments and a small windshield. Source:www.globalsecurity.org
Conclusion
The ANT-1 despite its simplicity, and being built a single, cobbled-together prototype, could be considered a great success for Tupolev. Through this experimental aircraft, Tupovlev gained valuable experience in designing an aircraft by using metal alloy. This success emboldened Tupovlev to go even further and design and build the Soviet first all-metal construction aircraft known as ANT-2. The ANT-1 was Tupovlev’s first stepping stone in a long and successful career as an aircraft designer in the following decades.
ANT-1 Specifications
Wingspans
7.2 m / 23ft 7 in
Length
5.4 m / 17 ft 8 in
Height
1.7 m / 5 ft 7 in
Wing Area
10 m² / 108 ft²
Engine
One 35 hp Bristol Anzani engine
Empty Weight
230 kg / 5,070 lb
Maximum Takeoff Weight
360 kg / 7,940 lb
Maximum Speed
125 km/h / 78 mp/h
Range
400 km / 250 miles
Maximum Service Ceiling
600 m / 1,970 ft
Maximum Theoretical Service Ceiling
4,000 m / 13,120 ft
Crew
1 pilot
Armament
None
Gallery
Credits
Article written by Marko P.
Edited by Henry H.
Illustration by 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
In the later stages of the Second World War, it was becoming apparent to both the Luftwaffe (English German Air Force) and the German Government that the Allied air forces were gaining air superiority. This realization saw them turn to new and fantastical ideas in a desperate attempt to turn the tide of the war. Some of these represented new improvements to existing designs, the introduction of the newly developed turbojet engine, and even more esoteric and experimental methods. In many cases, these were pure fantasies, unrealistic or desperate designs with no hope of success. Few of them reached any significant development, and among them were the works of Alexander Martin Lippisch. While Lippisch helped develop the Me 163, the first rocket-powered interceptor, his other work remained mostly theoretical. One such project was the unusual P 13a, ramjet-powered aircraft that was to use coal as its main fuel source. While some work was carried out late in the war and soon faced insurmountable technical problems, thus nothing came of the project.
Artistic presentation of how the P 13a may have looked. Source: Luftwaffe Secret Jets of the Third Reich
History
Before the start of the Second World War, aviation enthusiast and engineer Alexander Martin Lippisch, was fascinated with tailless delta wing designs. Lippisch’s early work primarily involved the development of experimental gliders. Eventually, he made a breakthrough at the Deutsche Forschungsinstitut, where he worked as an engineer. His work at DFS would lead to the creation of the rocket-powered glider known as the DFS 194. As this design was a promising experiment in a new field, it was moved to Messerschmitt’s facility at Augsburg. After some time spent refining this design, it eventually led to the development of the Me 163 rocket-powered interceptor. While it was a relatively cheap aircraft, it could never be mass-produced, mostly due to difficulties associated with its highly volatile fuel. In 1942, Lippisch left Messerschmitt and ceased work on the Me 163 project. Instead, he joined the Luftfahrtforschungsanstalt Wien (English: Aeronautic Research Institute in Vienna) where he continued working on his delta-wing aircraft designs. In May 1943 he became director of this institution, and at that time the work on a supersonic aircraft was initiated.
In the later war years, among the many issues facing the Luftwaffe, was a chronic fuel shortage. Lippisch and his team wanted to overcome this problem by introducing alternative fuels for their aircraft. Luckily for his team, DFS was testing a new ramjet engine. They were designed to compress air which would be mixed with fuel to create thrust but without a mechanical compressor. While this is, at least in theory, much simpler to build than a standard jet engine, it can not function during take-off as it requires a high airflow through it to function. Thus, an auxiliary power plant was needed. It should, however, be noted that this was not new technology and had existed since 1913, when a French engineer by the name of Rene Lorin patented such an engine. Due to a lack of necessary materials, it was not possible to build a fully operational prototype at that time, and it would take decades before a proper ramjet could be completed. In Germany, work on such engines was mostly carried out by Hellmuth Walter during the 1930s. While his initial work was promising, he eventually gave up on its development and switched to a rocket engine instead. The first working prototype was built and tested by the German Research Center for Gliding in 1942. It was later tested by mounting the engine on a Dornier Do 17 and, later, a Dornier Do 217.
The Dornier Do 217 was equipped with experimental ramjets during trials. Source: tanks45.tripod.com
In October 1943, Lippisch won a contract to develop the experimental P 11 delta-wing aircraft. While developing this aircraft, Lippisch became interested in merging his new work with a ramjet engine. This would lead to the creation of a new project named the P 12. In the early stage of the project, Lippisch and his team were not completely sure what to use as fuel for their aircraft, but ramjets could be adapted to use other types of fuel beyond aviation gasoline.
Unfortunately for them, LFW’s facilities were heavily damaged in the Allied bombing raids in June 1944. In addition to the damage to the project itself, over 45 team members died during this raid. To further complicate matters, the scarcity of gasoline meant that Lippisch’s team was forced to seek other available resources, such as different forms of coal. This led to the creation of the slightly modified project named P 13. In contrast to the P 12, the cockpit was relocated from the fuselage into a large fin. This design provided better stability but also increased the aircraft’s aerodynamic properties. The overall designs of the P 12 and P 13 would change several times and were never fully finalized.
The P 12 and 13 small-scale models, in both configurations, were successfully tested at Spitzerberg Airfield near Vienna in May 1944. The project even received a green light from the Ministry of Armaments. In the early stages of the project, there were some concerns that the radical new design would require extensive retraining of pilots. However, the wind tunnel test showed that the design was aerodynamically feasible and that the aircraft controls had no major issues. Based on these tests, work on an experimental aircraft was ordered to begin as soon as possible.
A proposed P 12 aircraft. Its designs changed greatly over time, before being finally discarded in favor of the letter P 13. Source: The Delta Wing History and Development
The DM-1 Life Saver
While working on the P 12 and P 13, Lippish was approached with a request from a group of students from Darmstadt and Munich universities. They asked Lippisch to be somehow involved in the P 12 and 13 projects. Lippisch agreed to this and dispatched one of his assistants under the excuse that for his own project, a wooden glider was to be built and tested. The previously mentioned student’s and Lippisch’s assistant moved to a small warehouse in Prier and began working on the Darmstadt 33 (D 33) project. The name would be changed to DM 1 which stands for Darmstadt and Munich.
At this point of the war, all available manpower was recruited to serve the German war effort. For young people, this often meant mobilization into the Army. One way to avoid this was to be involved in some miracle project that offered the Army a potentially war-winning weapon. It is from this, that numerous aircraft designs with futuristic, and in most cases unrealistic, features were proposed. Many young engineers would go on to avoid military service by proposing projects that on paper offered extraordinary performance in combat.
The students and Lippisch managed to nearly complete their DM1 test glider when the war ended. Source: airandspace.si.edu
While it was under construction, preparations were made to prepare for its first test flight. As it was a glider it needed a towing aircraft that was to take it to the sky. A Sibel Si 204 twin-engine aircraft was chosen for the job. However, this was not to be done like any other glider, being towed behind the larger aircraft. Instead, the DM-1 was to be placed above the Si 201 in a frame, in a similar combination as the Mistel project. The estimated theoretical speeds that were to be reached were 560 km/h (350 mph).
Allegedly, there were four different proposals for the DM’s that were to be fully operational. The DM 2 version was estimated to be able to reach a speed of 800-1,200 km/h (500 – 745 mph). The DM 3’s theoretical maximum speed was to be 2,000 km/h (1,240 mph) while the fate of the DM 4 is unknown. Here it is important to note that these figures were purely theoretical, as there were no supersonic testing facilities to trial such a design. It is unclear in the sources if these additional DM projects even existed, even if in only written form. We must remember that the whole DM 1 glider idea was made to help the students avoid military conscription and that Lippisch himself never saw the DM 1 as any vital part of the P 13.
In any case, the glider was almost completed by the time the war ended and was later captured by the Western Allies. Under the US Army’s supervision, the glider was fully completed and sent to America for future evaluation. It would then be given to the Smithsonian Institution.
A DM 1 test glider being under construction. Source: hushkit.netThe Siebel Si 204 was to be used as a carrier for the DM 1 glider for the expected first-flight tests. Due to the end of the war, this was never achieved. Source: www.silverhawkauthor.com
Work on the P 13
As the work on the P 13 went on, the name was slightly changed. This was necessary as different variations of the P 13 were proposed. The original P 13 received the prefix ‘a’ while the later project’s designation continued alphabetically for example P 13b. After a brief period of examination of the best options, the P 12 project was discarded in favor of P 13. The decision was based on the fuel that the aircraft should use. What followed was a period of testing and evaluation of the most suitable forms of coal that could be used as fuel. Initial laboratory test runs were made using solid brown Bohemian coal in combination with oxygen to increase the burn rate. The fuel coal was tube-shaped, with an estimated weight of 1 kg, and encased in a mesh container through which the granulated coal could be ejected. The testing showed serious problems with this concept. While a fuel tube could provide a thrust that on average lasted 4 to 5 minutes, its output was totally unpredictable. During the testing, it was noted that due to the mineral inconsistency of the coal fuel, it was impossible to achieve even burning. Additionally, larger pieces of the coal fuel would be torn off and ejected into the jet stream. The final results of these tests are unknown but seem to have led nowhere, with the concept being abandoned. Given that Germany in the last few months of the war was in complete chaos, not much could be done regarding the Lippish projects including the P 13a.
As more alterations to the original design were proposed its name was charged to P 13a. Here is a drawing of a P 13b that was briefly considered but quickly discarded. Source: The Delta Wing History and Development
In May 1945, Lippish and his team had to flee toward the West to avoid being captured by the advancing Soviets. They went to Strobl in Western Austria, where they encountered the Western Allies. Lippisch was later transported to Paris in late May 1945 to be questioned about his delta wing designs. He was then moved to England, and then to America in 1946. The following year, American engineers tested the DM 1 glider at the wind tunnel facility of the Langley Field Aeronautical Laboratory. The test seems promising and it was suggested to begin preparation for a real flight. A redesign of the large rudder was requested. It was to be replaced with a much smaller one, where the cockpit would be separated from the fin and placed in the fuselage. Ironically Lippish was not mentioned in this report, as technically speaking he was not involved in the DM 1 project. Nevertheless, he was invited for further testing and evaluation of this glider. If this glider and the Lippish work had any real impact on the US designs is not quite clear.
Despite no aircraft being ever completed, one full-size replica of this unusual aircraft was built after the war. It was built by Holger Bull who is known for building other such aircraft. The replica can now be seen at the American Military Aviation Museum located in Virginia Beach.
An interesting full-size replica of the P 13 located at the American Military Aviation Museum. Source: Wiki
Technical characteristics
DM 1
The DM 1 glider was built using wooden materials. Given that it was constructed by a group of young students, its overall design was quite simple. It did not have a traditional fuselage, instead, its base consisted of a delta wing. On top, a large fin was placed. The cockpit was positioned in front of the aircraft within the large vertical stabilizer. To provide a better view of the lower parts of the nose, it was glazed. The landing gear consisted of three small landing wheels which retracted up into the wing fuselage. Given that it was to be used as a test glider, no operational engine was ever to be used on it.
The DM 1 side view. In contrast to the later P 13a design, the pilot’s cockpit position was placed above the wings. This was necessary as the engine was to be added. Source: airandspace.si.eduA DM 1 was captured by the Allies after the war. Its unique shape is quite evident in this photograph. Source: WikiA good example of DM 1 (to the right) and P 13a models that showed the difference between these two. The P 13a could be easily distinguished by its engine intake and the different position of the pilot cockpit. Source: Wiki
A good example of DM 1 (to the right) and P 13a models that showed the difference between these two. The P 13a could be easily distinguished by its engine intake and the different position of the pilot cockpit. Source: Wiki https://imgur.com/a/QW7XuO5
P 13a
The P 13 is visually similar but with some differences. The most obvious was the use of a ramjet. This means that the front, with its glazed nose, was replaced with an engine intake. Here, it is important to note, that much of the P 13a’s design is generally unknown, and much of the available information is sometimes wrongly portrayed in the sources. The P 13a never reached the prototype stage where an aircraft was fully completed. Even as the war ended, much of the aircraft’s design was still theoretical. Thus all the mentioned information and photographs may not fully represent how the P 13 may have looked or its precise characteristics, should it have been finished and built.
The exact ram engine type was never specified. It was positioned in the central fuselage with the air intake to the front and the exhaust to the back. As the main fuel, it was chosen to use small pieces of brown coal which were carried inside a cylindrical wire mesh container. The total fuel load was to be around 800 kg (1,760 lbs). Combustion was to be initiated by using small quintiles of liquid fuel or gas flames. The overall engine design was changed several times during the work on the P 13 without any real solution to the issues of output consistency. Given that the ramjets could not work without an air thrust, an auxiliary engine had to be used during take-off, though a more practical use would be to tow the P 13 until it could start its engine. A rocket takeoff ran the risk of the engine failing to ignite, leaving the pilot little time to search for a landing spot for his unpowered aircraft.
An illustration of the proposed P 13a engine interior. The use of coal as fuel may seem like a cheap alternative but given that this kind of technology was never employed may be an indication of its effectiveness. Source: theaviationgeekclub.com
The wing construction was to be quite robust and provided with deflectors that would prevent any potential damage to the rudders. The wing design also incorporated a sharp metal plate similar to those used for cutting enemy balloons cables. These proposed properties of the wings are another indicator that the P 13 was to be used as an aircraft rammer. Another plausible reason for this design was the fact that given it had no landing gear the aircraft design had to be robust enough as not to be torn apart during landing. The wings were swept back at an angle of 60 degrees. The precise construction method of the wings (and the whole P 13 a on that matter) are not much specified in the sources. Given the scarcity of resources in late 1944 it is likely that it would use a combination of metal and wood.
A drawing of the P 13a interior. Its overall construction was to be more or less standard in nature. This could not be said for the aircraft’s overall shape design. Source: D. Sharp Luftwaffe Secret Jets of the Third Reich
The fin had to be enlarged to provide good flight command characteristics. In addition, given that the position of the cockpit was in the fin, it had to be large. The fin was more or less a direct copy of one of the wings. So it is assumed that it too would share the overall design. The fin was connected to the aircraft by using four fittings.
The cockpit design was to be simple and cheap to build. The pilot was to have plenty of room inside the large fin. The cockpit was provided with a large glazed canopy that provided a good view of the front and sides. The seat and the instrument panel were bolted to the cockpit floor and walls. These could be easily detached for repairs. The instrument panel was to include an artificial horizon indicator, altimeter, compass, and radio equipment, Given that it was to operate at a high altitude oxygen tanks were to be provided too. Despite being intended to fly at high altitudes the cockpit was not to be pressurized. Another unusual fact was that initially the P 13 was to have a crew of two, but this was quickly discarded.
A possible example of how the inside of the pilot cockpit may have looked. Source: D. Sharp Luftwaffe Secret Jets of the Third Reich
Here it is important to note that the version of the P 13 with the large fin is often portrayed as the final version of this aircraft. However, Lippisch never fully decided whether he should go for this version or the second that used a smaller fin with the pilot cockpit placed above the engine intake. Depending on the proposed version they are drastically different from each other. Lippisch, for unknown reasons, presented the British intelligence officer with the version that used the smaller fin and the American with the second version.
During its development phase, many different alterations of the P 13 were proposed. Isource: D. Sharp Luftwaffe Secret Jets of the Third Reich
Landing operations were a bit unusual. To save weight no standard landing gear was to be used. Instead, Lippisch reused the Me 163 landing procedure. As the P 13 was immobile on its own, a small dolly would be used to move the aircraft. Once sufficient height was reached the dolly was to be jettisoned. In theory, this was an easy process, but in practice, this operation offered a good chance of failure and was much less safe than conventional landing gear. Sometimes the dolly either failed to eject or it bounced off the ground hitting the Me 163 in the process, with often fatal consequences.
The Me 163 which did not have traditional landing gear, had to be prior to the flight, transported to the airfield before launching into the sky. Source: warbirdphotographs.com
The aircraft was to land with the nose raised up from the ground. This limited the pilot’s view of the ground. In addition due to its small size and in order to save weight, nontraditional landing gear was provided, instead, it carried a landing blade skid. To help absorb the landing impact, additional torsion springs were to be used. This bar had to be activated prior to the landing, it would emerge from beneath the aircraft fuselage, with the rotation point located at the front. Once released it was to guide the aircraft toward the ground. After that, the torsion springs were to soften the landing. This whole contraption seems like a disaster just waiting to happen and it’s questionable how practical it would be.
A drawing that showed how the P 13a was to land using a guiding landing blade skid. Source: D. Sharp Luftwaffe Secret Jets of the Third Reich
One interesting feature of the P 13 was that it could be easily disassembled into smaller parts which would enable effortless transport. Another reason was that due to the engine’s position in order to make some repairs or replacement of the engine, the remaining parts of the wing and the large fin had to be removed.
Was it an aircraft rammer?
The precise purpose of the P 13a is not quite clear, even to this day. Despite being briefly considered for mass production, no official offensive armament is mentioned in the sources. So how would the P 13a engage the enemy? A possible solution was that it would be used as a ram aircraft that was supposed to hit enemy aircraft damaging them in the process. In an after-the-war interrogation by British officers, Lippisch was asked if the P 13 was to be used as an aerial ram aircraft. Lippisch responded the following “
“.. The possibilities of using the P.13 as a ramming aircraft had been considered but Dr Lippisch did not think that athodyd propulsion was very suitable for this purpose owing to the risk of pieces of the rammed aircraft entering the intake. This would be avoided with a rocket-propelled rammer…”
This statement contradicts the building description issued by the LFW issued in late 1944. In it was stated the following about this potential use. “…Due to tactical considerations, among other things, the speed difference of fighters and bombers, preferably when attacking from behind, though the thought was given to the installation of brakes .. and although ample room for weaponry is present, the task of ram fighter has been taken into account – so that the ramming attack will not lead to the loss of the aircraft, thanks to its shape and static structure.”
This meant that this concept may have been considered by Lippisch at some point of the project’s development. The P 13 overall shape resembles closely to aircraft that was intentionally designed for this role. That said, it does not necessarily mean that the P 13 was to ram enemy aircraft. The use of such tactics was considered but their use was discarded, as it was seen as a futile and flawed concept. The project itself never got far enough to have an armament decided for it.
The precise method of how to engage the enemy aircraft is not clear as the P13a was not provided with any armament. It is sometimes referred to in the sources as it was to be used as a ram aircraft. Source: theaviationgeekclub.com
Conclusion
The Lippisch P 13 is an unusual aircraft project in nearly all aspects. Starting from its shape, which proved, at least during wind tunnel tests, that the concept was feasible. On the other hand, its engine seems to have simply been abandoned after discouraging test results. It is unlikely that such a combination would have worked to the extent that the P 13 designer hoped it would. During the testing, they could not find a proper solution to providing a constant thrust with sufficient force to reach a speed that was expected of it. So the whole concept was likely to be doomed from the start.
The DM 1 however, while it was never seriously worked on by Lippisch himself, managed to save a group of young students who used the project to avoid being sent into combat.
DM-1 Specifications
Wingspans
5.92 m / 19 ft 5 in
Length
6.6 m / 21 ft 7 in
Height
3.18 m / 10 ft 5 in
Wing Area
20 m² / 215 ft²
Engine
None
Empty Weight
300 kg / 655 lbs
Maximum Takeoff Weight
460 kg / 1,015 lbs
Maximum Speed
560 km/h / 350 mph (gliding)
Landing speed
72 km/h / 45 mph
Release altitude
8,000 m (26,240 ft)
Crew
1 pilot
Armament
None
Theoretical Estimated Lippisch P 13 Specifications
Wingspans
5.92 m / 19 ft 5 in
Length
6.7 m / 21 ft 11 in
Height
3.18 m / 10 ft 5 in
Wing Area
20 m² / 215 ft²
Engine
Unspecified ramjet
Maximum Takeoff Weight
2,300 kg / 5,070 lbs
Maximum Speed
1,650 km/h / 1,025 mph
Flight endurance
45 minutes
Fuel load
800 kg / 1,760 lb
Crew
1 pilot
Armament
None mentioned
Illustrations
The Lippisch DM-1, unnecessary to the overall project, it none the less allowed a group of students to escape military service.
A possible silhouette of the P13.
Credits
Article written by Marko P.
Edited by Henry H.
Ported by Marko P.
Illustrated By Medicman11
Source:
A. Lippisch (1981) The Delta Wing History and Development, Iowa State University Press
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, Putham
B. Rose (2010) Secret Projects Flying Wings and Tailless Aircraft, Midland
D. Sharp (2015) Luftwaffe Secret Jets of the Third Reich, Mortons
Kingdom of Hungary (1939)
Fighter Aircraft – One prototype
In their search for a new fighter, the Magyar Királyi Honvéd Légierő MKHL (English: Royal Hungarian Home Defence Air Force), approached the Germans for help. Initially, a deal was made with the German Heinkel company for the delivery of new He 112 fighters and a production license. However, nothing came of this deal, which led to the Hungarians attempting to develop their own fighter, partially based on the He 112.
In the late 1930s, the Hungarian Air Force was slowly in the process of rebuilding its combat strength by the acquisition of new aircraft. For a modern air force, they needed better fighter designs, which they were then seriously lacking. Luckily for them, they began to improve their relations with Germany, so it was possible to acquire new equipment from them. In June 1938, a Hungarian delegation was sent to the Heinkel company, and the pilots that accompanied this delegation had a chance to fly the He 112 fighter. This aircraft was Heinkel’s response to the Reichsluftfahrtministerium’s (English: German Ministry of Aviation) request for a new fighter. While generally a good design, it ultimately lost to Messerschmitt Bf 109. While the He 112 project was canceled by the RLM, to compensate for the huge investment in resources and time to it, Heinkel was permitted to export this aircraft to foreign buyers. Several countries such as Austria, Japan, Romania, and Finland showed interest, but only a few actually managed to procure this aircraft, and even then, only in limited numbers.
He 112 the unsuccessful competitor of the Bf 109. Source: www.luftwaffephotos.com
The Hungarians were impressed with the He 112 and placed an order for 36 such aircraft. For a number of logistical and political reasons, the decision to sell these aircraft to Hungary was delayed. A single He 112 was given to Hungary in February for evaluation but was lost on its first flight. Realizing that the Germans would not deliver the promised aircraft, the Hungarians instead decided to ask for a license. This was granted and Heinkel also delivered two more He 112 B-1s. When the license arrived in Hungary in May 1939, a production order for the 12 first aircraft was given to Weiss Manfréd aircraft manufacturer.
The first He 112 to reach Hungary, it was lost in an accident during its maiden test flight. Source: D. Bernard Heinkel He 112 in Action
A New Fighter
Despite the best Hungarian attempts to put the He 112 in production, this was prevented by the war between Poland and Germany. At the start of the Second World War, RLM officially prohibited the export of any German aircraft engines and equipment. This meant that the vital Jumo 210 and DB 601 engines would not be available. Based on this fact, all work on the Hungarian He 112 had to be canceled.
The Hungarian Air Force only operated a few He 112, which saw limited service before being reused as training aircraft. Source: www.destinationsjourney.com
As the Hungarians had the license for the He 112, some parts could still be domestically produced. In essence, this offered the Hungarians the chance to develop a new fighter, based on the He 112 blueprints. Not wanting to waste this opportunity, the Hungarian Ministry of War Affairs issued a directive to commence developing a new domestic fighter by reusing some components from the He 112. The whole project was undertaken by WM’s own chief designer Bela Samu, who began development in early 1939. To speed up development, the He 112 wing design was copied, but given the comparatively underdeveloped Hungarian aircraft industry, the wing was to be built of wooden materials instead of metal, as it was on the He 112. Other differences included using an oval-section fuselage, different armament, a new engine, and a cockpit redesign.
The first prototype was completed quickly by the end of 1939. In its prototype stage, the aircraft was painted in a light gray livery, earning it the nickname Ezüst Nyíl (English: Silver arrow) from the personnel that worked on it. Once it was issued to the Air Force for testing, it received the standard Hungarian camouflage scheme, and the designation V/501 was also allocated to it. The maiden test flight was undertaken close to Budapest on the 23rd of February 1940. The flight proved successful and a maximum speed of 530 km/h (330 mph) at a height of 5 km (16.400 ft) was achieved. Some issues were detected, the most problematic proved to be the strong vibration caused by the exhaust system. Despite this, the project development pressed on.
The WM 23, possibly at an early stage of development. It was powered by a 1,030 hp WM K-14B engine which gave it comparable power to the He 112. Source: www.destinationsjourney.com
Short Service Life
Despite the time and effort put into the project, it all went for nothing as the prototype was lost in an accident in February, or April, depending on the source, 1942. During a test flight at high speeds, one of the ailerons simply broke off. The pilot lost control of the aircraft and had to bail out. The uncontrolled plane hit the ground and was utterly destroyed, and with it, the whole project was canceled.
Beyond this major setback, another reason why this project was canceled was the start of the license production of the German Bf 109G fighter. It was much easier, and faster, to commence production of this aircraft, thanks to German technical support, than to completely develop new tooling and equipment for the WM 23.
Technical Characteristics
The WM 23 was a mixed-construction single-engine fighter heavily inspired by the German He 112. Given its somewhat obscure nature, not much is mentioned in the sources about its overall construction. Given the urgency of the project, instead of the monocoque fuselage, the Hungarian engineers decided to use a simpler oval-section fuselage which consisted of welded steel tubes and then covered with plywood. The wings, as mentioned, were taken from the He 112, but had one huge difference, being made of wood, including its control surfaces.
The landing gear was another part more or less taken directly from the He 112. They consisted of two larger landing wheels that retracted into the wings, and one semi-retractable tail wheel. But based on the photographic evidence, their overall design changed during the prototype’s development. On the prototype, possibly at an early stage, a V-shaped front landing gear strut was used. This was later replaced by a large single-leg landing gear. The cockpit was equipped with a sliding canopy that slid to the rear.
The WM 23 was powered by a 1,030 hp WM K-14B (sometimes marked as 14/B) engine. This engine was developed based on the license of the French Gnome and Rhone 14K engine, a fourteen-cylinder radial engine equipped with a single-stage, single-speed supercharger. As mentioned, during the fifth test maximum achieved speed was 530 km/h (330 mph).
While the prototype was never fitted with an offensive armament, the Hungarians had plans for a potential armament In the wing, two 8 mm (0.33 in) machine guns were to be installed. In addition, two 12.7 mm (0.5 in) heavy machine guns were to be added atop the engine compartment. Lastly it was to have a payload of two 20 kg bombs (44 lbs).
There are very few surviving photographs of the WM 23. While showing promising performance, the destruction of the only prototype and the commencement of the Bf 109G’s production in Hungary ultimately lead to the cancelation of this project. Source: D. Bernard Heinkel He 112 in Action
Conclusion
The WM 23 was an interesting Hungarian attempt to domestically develop and build a fighter aircraft that was greatly influenced by the He 112. It showed to be a promising design, with the prospect of entering serial production. However, the loss of the single prototype put an end to this project. By 1942, the Hungarians simply did not have the time to start over again with the WM 23, so they abandoned it in favor of the license production of the German Bf 109G.
WM 23 prototype Specifications
Wingspans
31 ft 5 in / 9.6 m
Length
29 ft 10 in / 9.1 m
Height
10 ft 9 in / 3.3 m
Wing Area
199 ft² / 18.5 m²
Engine
One 1,030 hp strong WM K-14B
Empty Weight
4,850 lbs / 2,200 kg
Maximum Take-off Weight
5,733 lbs / 2,600 kg
Maximum Speed
330 mph / 530 km/h
Crew
1 pilot
Proposed Armament
Two 12.7 mm (0.5 in) heavy machine guns and two machine guns 8 mm (0.33 in) machine guns plus a bomb load of 20 kg (44 lbs)
Credits
Article written by Marko P.
Edited by Henry H.
Ported by Marko P.
Illustrated By Carpaticus
Illustrations
The WM-23’s factory test colorsWM-23 with Hungarian Airforce livery
Source:
D. Monday (2006) The Hamlyn Concise Guide To Axis Aircraft OF World War II, Bounty Books
D. Bernard (1996) Heinkel He 112 in Action, Signal Publication
G. Punka, Hungarian Air Force, Signal Publication
R.S. Hirsch, U, Feist and H. J. Nowarra (1967) Heinkel 100, 112, Aero Publisher
C. Chants (2007) Aircraft of World War II, Grange Books
J. R. Smith and A. L. Kay (1990) German Aircraft of the Second World War, Putnam
Side view of the Boulton Paul P.105C. This was the single-seat fighter version of the aircraft, armed with four 20mm cannons. (Boulton Paul Archive Photos)
The Boulton Paul P.105 was a concept for a multi-purpose, single-engine aircraft that was designed to fill a number of carrier based roles. To do so, the P.105 would utilize a unique and innovative method that would use interchangeable fuselage sections and cockpit modules that would allow the aircraft to perform different missions. These modules could be changed quickly to fill a needed role aboard carriers or airbases. The aircraft would not be chosen for production, and The P.105 would be developed further into the P.107, a land-based escort version. The P.107 would have a rear-facing turret and a twin boom tail design to allow greater traverse of the gun. This design wouldn’t be adopted either, and the program would conclude before the war’s end.
History
Late in the Second World War, the Royal Naval Air Arm began seeking out a new aircraft design that would be able to fill both the fighter and bomber roles aboard their carriers. Having one aircraft perform multiple roles would eliminate the need for specialized carrier-borne aircraft to fill the fighter, dive bomber, and torpedo bomber roles that were currently in operation. No official requirements were ever put out to build such an aircraft, but several companies had begun developing aircraft that would fit this role, which had become known as the “Strike Fighter”. Westland, Blackburn, Fairey and Boulton Paul would all develop designs that correspond to the strike fighter role. Boulton Paul’s aircraft design would be known as the P.105.
After the production of their Defiant turret fighter was finished, Boulton Paul began producing the Fairey Barracuda carrier bomber under license. After working extensively with a naval aircraft of this type, lead aircraft designer of Boulton Paul, John North, began to show interest in developing new aircraft to serve the Royal Navy’s carriers. The timing for this interest was beneficial too, as the Royal Air Arm began showing interest in new aircraft that were to be used in the Pacific Theater. He would first design a single engine fighter, dubbed the P.103 which would compete for the Navy’s Specification N.7/43 aircraft project. The P.103 was a heavily reworked Defiant with the turret removed and the design heavily cleaned up to make for a more effective fighter. Two designs existed for the P.103; the A and B, with the A using a Rolls Royce Griffon engine and the B using a Bristol Centaurus engine. The P.103 would utilize a number of innovative features, such as contra-rotating propellers, a low drag wing, specialized landing gear that became shorter when stowed, and elevators with automatic trim tabs. In addition, a more radical design was also submitted, the P.104, which was a twin-boom pusher. Despite both the P.103 and P.104 satisfying the specification, the Navy ultimately would find that a Hawker Tempest variant that was to be produced could easily be adapted to this role. This aircraft would become the Hawker Fury, and naval-ized into the Sea Fury.
While the P.103 wouldn’t be built, there were plans to test many of its design features on an existing aircraft. A Defiant was chosen to be extensively modified with most of the features found on the P.103, including the contra-rotating “dive-brake” propellers driven by a Centaurus engine, electric trim tabs, specialized shortening landing gear, and automatically closing landing gear doors. This aircraft, known as the Special Features Defiant, would also go unbuilt, with only a Defiant being modified with the elevator trim tabs. Boulton Paul wouldn’t yield any aircraft from this specification, but a new design would soon come from John North, who would continue working on Naval aircraft projects, looking to create an aircraft that would replace the Fairey Barracuda. Using design aspects intended for the P.103, and newer features found on the Special Features Defiant, he would design the P.105.
Static model of the standard P.105A. (British Secret Projects 1935-1950)
The P.105 was a small, high-performing aircraft that was meant to perform a number of duties aboard carriers. To achieve this the P.105 would have a unique design feature. To fill the variety of carrier-borne roles, the P.105 would have modular cockpit and bomb bay sections. Each of these modules would pertain to a particular role and would include necessary equipment to operate for the given task. The interchangeable modules included a two-seat torpedo-bomber with the necessary modifications to carry a torpedo (P.105A), a two-seat reconnaissance aircraft with an extended cockpit with changes to improve visibility (P.105B), a single-seat fighter armed with four 20mm cannons (P.105C) and a dive-bomber (P.105D). All aircraft aside from the C would be armed with four 12.7mm machine guns. With this system, it was thought more P.105 airframes could be stored inside hangars and carriers, while the unused modules could easily be stored and would take up less space, compared to having a number of different aircraft specified for specific roles, in theory, increasing the combat capacity of the carrier the P.105 would be stationed on. Boulton Paul expected the aircraft to be very high performance, and the P.105C fighter version, would be thought to serve as an excellent penetration fighter. Like its predecessors, the P.105 was originally going to utilize a Griffon 61 engine, but before performance predictions were done on the design, it would change to a Centaurus with counter-rotating propellers. The brochure on the details of the aircraft was submitted to the RNAA, but no order for production came about.While no particular reason was given for the design not being chosen, the modularity concept may have been less convenient in practice then on paper. Another reason could be that current aircraft at the time were deemed to have been performing adequately and didn’t need such an extensive replacement.
A side view plan drawing showing the layout of the Boulton Paul P.107. (Boulton Paul Archive Photos)
Although the P.105 wasn’t granted production, the design was further reworked into the Boulton Paul P.107. The P.107 was a return to basics for Boulton Paul, being a single-engine two-seat fighter with a turret. It can be assumed the P.107 began development during or shortly after the P.105 had been created. John North expressed many concerns with aircraft meant to operate in the Pacific War, with the biggest issue being the extreme range an aircraft would need in order to operate efficiently in this conflict. While details are sparse on its development, the P.107 extended range escort fighter appears to be his own attempt to create an aircraft meant to amend this issue. Overall, the P.107 shared many aspects of the P.105C, continuing to use the same overall design, Centaurus engine with contra-rotating propellers, and the same armament of four 20mm cannons. However, the P.107 wasn’t meant to operate from carriers, instead being designed as a land-based aircraft. Changes done to the design for this reason include the lack of folding wings and the removal of the torpedo blister. The aircraft would also benefit with the addition of a turret housing two 12.7mm machine guns. To improve the firing efficiency of the turret, the single fin of the P.105 was changed in favor of a twin fin design, which improved the firing range of the guns. The P.107 could also be configured for different roles, such as a dive bomber and for reconnaissance, but it is unknown if it used the same modular system the P.105 used. As was the case with his earlier designs, the P.107 wasn’t selected for production either.
Design
3-Way drawing of the P.105B. This was the reconnaissance version. (British Secret Projects 1935-1950)
The Boulton Paul P.105 had a conventional monoplane fighter layout. In the front, it would utilize a 6-bladed contra-rotating propeller that had reversible pitch. Originally, the design would have mounted a Griffon 61 V-12 inline engine but was changed in favor of the Centaurus 18-cylinder radial CE.12.SM engine instead. The wings on the P.105 were inverted gull wings, much like those on the Vought F4U Corsair or Junkers Ju 87 Stuka, which allowed the mounting of a larger propeller. To allow for easy storage aboard carriers, the wings were able to fold inwards. The fuselage had the most interesting aspect of the design overall, and that was its interchangeable cockpit and lower fuselage modules. Each variant of the P.105 would use different modules that would pertain to the intended role it served. The P.105A was a torpedo bomber and would use the torpedo blister present under the tail, and provisions for carrying another crewmember. The P.105B was a reconnaissance aircraft, and its cockpit would be lengthened to sit a pilot and observer. It would use a glass hull beneath the observer to assist in spotting. The P.105C was an escort fighter and would be a one-man aircraft. The last was a dive-bomber version, which only has very sparse details available. The dive bomber would carry up to two 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs, most likely in an internal bomb bay module. The tail of the aircraft would be a conventional single rudder and tailplane arrangement. The armament of the P.105 was a standard two to four 12.7mm machine-guns in the wings of the aircraft, with the only deviation being the P.105C, which would use four 20mm cannons instead.
3-Way view of the P.107. Notice the turret and twin tail. (British Secret Projects 1935-1950)
The P.107 borrowed many aspects of the P.105 design, but changed some details to better fit its role. The engine and front sections would stay the same, keeping the contra-rotating propellers and Centaurus engine. Reference materials refer to the aircraft as being able to convert from an escort fighter to either a fighter-bomber, or photo reconnaissance aircraft. However, whether it was a conventional conversion, or via the module system the P.105 used is unknown, the latter being most likely. The wing design would stay the same, with the inverted gull wing style. Given its land-based nature, the wings no longer needed to be folded to conserve space, and the torpedo blister under the tail was removed. Behind the pilot, a gunner would sit and remotely control two 12.7mm machine guns. The machine-guns would be housed within the aircraft, with only the ends of the barrel protruding out. To give the gunner a better firing arc, the single tailfin was switched to a double tailfin. The turret and twin tail design are the most obvious differences between the P.107 and P.105. The aircraft’s fuel would be stored in a main tank beneath the crew members and two smaller drop tanks. The fuel amount was expected to give the aircraft a 3,000 mi (4,827 km) range, with up to 30 minutes of combat. The drop tanks could be switched for 2,000 Ib (900 Kg) of bombs. For offensive armament, the P.107 would use four 20m cannons mounted in the wings.
Conclusion
While no P.105 or P.107 would be constructed, the designs do attempt to amend issues that were present at the time. The Strike Fighter designation would eventually become a standard type of aircraft aboard carriers, and aircraft meant to fulfill multiple roles would also eventually be developed, but none would ever use such a unique system as the interchangeable fuselage of the P.105. It is interesting to note that the P.105 and P.107 appear to be the last military propeller aircraft that Boulton Paul would design before their switch to trainers and jet powered research aircraft, the aircraft themselves being distantly related to their Defiant fighter that they became known for during the war.
Variants
Boulton Paul P.105A– Two-seat torpedo bomber version of the P.105.
Boulton Paul P.105B– Two-seat reconnaissance version of the P.105. This version would have a glazed hull for the observer.
Boulton Paul P.105C– Single-seat Fighter version of the P.105.
Boulton Paul P.105 Dive bomber– Dive bomber version of the P.105. No designation was given to this design. (P.105D?)
Boulton Paul P.107– Land-based escort fighter derived from the P.105. The P.107 shared many design aspects with the P.105 but would remove features that would be needed for carrier use, such as the lack of folding wings. The P.107 would also have a turret and the tailplane would be switched to a double rudder design to accommodate the turret’s firing arc. Photo reconnaissance and fighter bomber versions of the P.107 are also mentioned.
Operators
Great Britain – Had they been built, the P.105 and P.107 would have been used by the Royal Fleet Air Arm, with a focus of being used in the Pacific Theatre aboard carriers and from land.
Nazi Germany (1940)
Light Transport and Trainer – Number built: 1,175
While often seen as less exciting than their combat counterparts, transport and auxiliary aircraft provided vital services in moving cargo, and training new pilots. Light transports which could combine both duties were thus extremely desirable during the war as theaters stretched across continents and pilot attrition was high. Luckily for the Luftwaffe, the Siebel company provided them with a simple but effective aircraft that could easily fulfill both roles. This was the Si 204, which saw wide-scale use both during, and after, the conflict.
The Si 204. Source: www.airwar.ru/
Siebel company history
The story of Siebel began back in 1936 when Hans Klemm opened a new aircraft factory the, Flugzeugbau Halle GmbH. This company would go on to produce license-built aircraft, including the Focke-Wulf Fw 44, and Heinkel He 46. Between 1936 and 1937, a new project led by Hans Klemm was initiated. This was a light twin-engined transport aircraft designated as Fh 104. While the work was going on, Klemm decided to hand over the factory to well-known aircraft enthusiast Fritz W. Siebel. The same year the name was changed to Siebel Flugzeugwerke Halle GmbH. Under new management, the work on the renamed Siebel Fh 104 continued. The Siebel Fh 104 would prove to be a solid design and was pressed into Luftwaffe service as a communication and liaison aircraft. In 1942 the production of this aircraft was terminated, by which time only some 46 were built. The Siebel factory would survive the war and even produce a few new aircraft designs. It would continue to exist up to 1968 when it was merged with Messerschmitt-Bolkow GmbH.
The first aircraft to come out of the o Siebel Flugzeugwerke production was the Siebel Fh 104 Source: hwww.armedconflicts.com
The Siebel 204
Following the success of the Fh 104, Siebel received a request from the Luftwaffe officials in 1939 to design and build a new twin-engine, 8-passenger transport aircraft. So Siebel and his team of engineers began working on such a design. While they may have used the experience gained while working on the Fh 104, their next project was a completely new design. The first prototype Si 204 V1 (D-AEFR) was completed in early 1940, and was flight tested on the 25th of May the same year. Sources disagree about the year when the maiden flight was made. For example, D. Nešić and M. Fratzke mentioned that it happened in 1941 while M. Griel placed it in 1940. The test flight proceeded without any major issues, so the development of this aircraft carried on. In October 1940 the Si 204 V2 (D-IMCH) was flight tested. Both of these would serve as bases for the pre-production A-0 series which were to be operated by the German Lufthansa airline. The first prototype was scrapped in 1942 while the second remained in use up to early 1944 when it was lost in an accident.
Following its successful testing, the first production version known as Si 204A was built. It was powered by two 360 hp, or 465 hp depending on the source, Argus As 410 engines. The Si 204A-0 and A-1 were put into production in 1941, the precise numbers are not clear but were likely limited. As the war dragged on these were mainly used for crew training, a role to which they proved well suited.
The Luftwaffe was generally satisfied with the Si 204A’s performance as a trainer but requested that a new version of it be built. This version was dedicated to various crew training tasks including; radio navigation, instrument flying, bombing, and communication. Other requests were made regarding its front canopy design and stronger power units. For this reason, the engines were replaced with two 600-hp Argus As 411 12-cylinder engines. Additionally, the original stepped canopy was replaced with a fully glazed canopy.
The new version was to be designated Si 204D. The fate of the skipped B and C versions is unclear, but these were likely only paper projects. The Si 204V3 and V4 served as bases for the Si 204D aircraft. Both were flight tested in early 1941, withhe V3 being lost in an accident during mid-1942 while the fate of the V4 is not known.
Technical characteristics
The Si 204 was designed as a low-wing, twin-engine, all-metal transport, and training aircraft. Its fuselage was made of round-shaped formers each connected with a series of metal bars. These were covered with sheet metal plating. On the fuselage sides, there were four rectangular windows.
The wings and tail units were also of an all-metal construction. The wings were built using only a single spar. The dihedral tailplane was divided into two fins and rudders, which were located on their tips.
In the last months of the war, due to shortages of resources, Siebel attempted to replace some metal components using wooden materials. The end of the war prevented any of these wooden components from ever being used.
The pilot and his assistant were positioned in the front. As many German bombers had a fully glazed canopy, to help with the training and adaptation of new pilots, the Si 204 was also equipped with such a designed canopy. It largely resembled the one used on the He 111. Thanks to it the pilot had an excellent view during the flight.
As mentioned earlier, Si 204D was powered by two 600 hp Argus As 411 12-cylinder engines, these used two variable pitch blade propellers. The maximum speed achieved with these engines was around 364 km/h. With a fuel load of 1.090 liters, the maximum operational range was around 1.800 km.
The landing gear was more or less a standard design. It consisted of three wheels. The landing gear retracted back into the engine nacelles. These were not fully enclosed and part of the wheels was exposed. The tail wheel was not retractable.
While initially designed as a passenger transport aircraft, the Si 204 would be primarily used for crew training. For this reason, its interior compartment could be equipped with different training equipment depending on the need. Including radio, radar, or navigation equipment.
The Siebel 204D side view. Its overall design is quite similar to the German he 111 bombers. Source: www.airwar.ruSiebel pilot cockpit interior. The pilot and his assistant had an excellent view of the surrounding thank to the large glazed cockpit. Source: www.airwar.ruThe Siebel 204D had standard landing gear. The two front wheels retracted back into the engine nacelles. These were not fully enclosed and part of the wheels was exposed. Source: www.airwar.ru
Production
Despite being Siebel’s own design, the factory itself lacked production capabilities as it was already heavily involved in the manufacturing of other designs including the Ju 88. The actual production was redistributed to two occupied foreign factories. The first were the SNCAC factories located in Fourchambault and Bourges in France, which came under German control after the successful end of the Western Campaign in 1940. The second production center was located at the Czechoslovakian Aero factory, which was also occupied by the Germans even before the war started. Other companies like BMM and Walter were also involved in the production of this aircraft.
The production numbers were initially low, for example, the SNCAC only managed to build five aircraft per month during 1942. From 1942 to 1944 this company produced some 150 Si 204D aircraft. Czechoslovakian production capabilities proved to be better, managing to manufacture some 1007 such aircraft by the end of the war. The total production of all versions during the war is around 1.175 aircraft according to H. A. Skaarup. This number, as is the case with many German production numbers, may be different in other sources.
Service
As mentioned earlier the Si 204 was mainly used for crew training for various roles, transportation, and glider towing. While there is quite limited information on their precise service life, it appears to be quite a successful design and was praised by the Luftwaffe pilots. By the end of the war, some were even equipped with various radar equipment including FuG 217R and FuG 218V2R tail warning radars to train night fighter pilots. Interestingly the Si 204 was employed for the training of further Me 262 pilots.
It is often mentioned that the Si 204 was the last Luftwaffe aircraft to be shot down. Near Rodach in Bavaria, just a day before the Germans capitulated to the Allies. That kill is accredited to Lieutenant K. L. Smith, a pilot of a P-38 Lightning from the 474th Fighter Group. How valid this claim is difficult to know precisely due to the general chaotic state in Germany at that time.
During its service life, the Si 204 proved to be an effective aircraft, completely suited for its designated role. Source:www.airwar.ru
Combat adaptation attempts
For fighting against Partisan movements in occupied Europe, older or modified aircraft were often reused, preserving the more modern aircraft for the front line use. The Si 204 was seen as tempting for such a modification, so the Siebel engineers tried to develop a fully armed combat version of this aircraft. To fulfill this role some extensive modifications were needed.
Inside its front fuselage, two 13 mm MG 131 heavy machine guns were placed. Each was supplied with 500 rounds of ammunition, stored in a metal ammunition bin. These were to be operated by the pilot. For this reason, he was provided with a Revi 16A-type gun sight. For protection against enemy aircraft, on top of the fuselage, a fully glazed turret armed with one 13 mm MG 131 was added. The turret movement was electrically controlled. Elevation was -10 to +80 while it could achieve a full 360 rotation.
The interior of the Si 204 received a bombing bay that could carry 12 70 kg bombs. External bomb racks with a capacity ranging from 50 to 500 kg were added. The pilot seat received armor plates for his protection from enemy fire on the Si 204E. Due to its relatively slow speed, using this aircraft against a well equipped enemy was dangerous, so it was to be restricted to night bombing action only.
In 1944 two prototypes were completed and tested. Besides these two, the number of Si 204E’s built is unknown. Given its experimental nature, possibly only a few prototypes were ever completed. Allegedly these saw limited action fighting the Belarusian Partisans. The extent to which they were used in this role if used at all, remains unknown.
The Siebel 204E could be easily distinguished by its glazed turret, located on the fuselage top. This version is somewhat obscure as it is not known how many were built and if they ever saw action in combat. Source: www.silverhawkauthor.com
Carrier proposal
With the Allies slowly getting the upper hand in the air over Europe, the Luftwaffe became ever more desperate to find a solution to this problem. Mass production of cheap fighters was seen as a possible solution. One such project was proposed by Professor Alexander Lippisch, best known for designing a series of glider fly-wing designs. He was also involved in designing various bizarre aircraft projects, including the unusual P 13a aircraft.
A drawing of Professor Alexander Lippisch P 13a fighter. Source: D. Sharp Luftwaffe Secret Jets of the Third Reich
While working on the P 13, Lippish was approached with a request from a group of students from Darmstadt and Munich universities who wanted to avoid conscription to join his work. Lippisch agreed to this and dispatched one of his assistants under the excuse that for his own project, a wooden glider was to be built and tested. They together managed to build an experimental DM-1 glider.. However, this aircraft was not to be towed like any other glider. Instead, the DM-1 was to be placed above the Si 201 on brackets and carried. However, nothing came of this project, and no such attempt at deploying the glider was made as the war ended.
Professor Alexander Lippisch’s work involved designing unusual and unorthodox aircraft designs including the Li DM 1. Source: Professor Alexander Lippisch’s work involved designing unusual and unorthodox aircraft designs including the Li DM 1. Source: www.fiddlersgreen.net
After the war
When the war ended, the Si 204 would see more service in the hands of many other nations. The advancing Allies managed to capture a number of fully operational aircraft. These were immediately put to use either as transport, liaison, and evaluation purposes. At least one Si 204D 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 generally impressed with the Si 204D’s overall performance, performing many flights on it. He later wrote about its performance. “The Si 204D was really a viceless airplane to handle, with inherently good stability about all three axes and good harmony of control. It was very well equipped for its tasks, and the later model I flew had an autopilot fitted. Like all German aircraft of that era, it was a mass of electrics, with extensive circuit breaker panels, and all very reliable. However, the one thing the Germans never got right was wheel brakes, and the Sievel was no exception..”
A group of six or more Si 204 was captured by the Allies. Source: www.asisbiz.com
The Siebels that were moved to Farnborough were extensively used during 1945 for various roles, like communication, providing navigational guidance, and transporting pilots to various captured Luftwaffe airfields. The last operational flight of the Si 204D at this base was recorded at the start of 1946.
After the war, the Si 204 saw the most common use in French and Czechoslovakia, which actually continued to produce this aircraft. In French service, these were known t as NC 700, powered with As 411 engines, NC 701 ‘Martinet’, powered by two Renault 12S engines, and NC 702, a modified version of the Si 204A. In total the French constructed over 300 aircraft of this type. Some would see service in French Asian and African colonies. The last operational flight was carried out in 1964. Two NC 702’s would be given to Maroko in 1960, but their use and fate is unknown.
After the war, the French sold 7 NC 701 to Poland. They were used mainly for mapping photography. These were operated until the mid-1950s’ before being put out of service.
By mid-1960 some 5 French-built Siebels were given to the Swedish National Geographic Institut. These were mainly used for taking meteorological photographs.
The second country that produced the Si 204 was Czechoslovakia. They were built in two versions, the C-3 for the army and C-103 for civilian use. Both were mainly operated in their original transport roles. From 1945 to 1950 some 179 would be built.
The Soviets also managed to capture an unknown number of operational Si 204. These were briefly pressed into service before being replaced by domestic-built designs.
Switzerland also operated at least one Si 204D. This aircraft and its crew escaped from Germany on the 7th of May 1945 and landed at Belp near Bern. The Si 204D would remain in Switz use under the B-3 designation.
Soviets operated an unknown number of Si 204. Their use was brief as it was replaced with new Soviet-built designs. Source: www.armedconflicts.comDuring late 1945 and early 1946 the Si 204 were used by the Western Allies for transport and evaluation. Source: www.airwar.ru
Production Versions
Si 204 – Prototype series
Si 204A – Transport and training version built in small numbers
Si 204B and C – Unknown fate, but likely paper projects only
Si 204D – Model with a new glazed cockpit and powered with a stronger engine
204E – Experimental modification for combat operational use
Flying carrier – One Si 204 was to be modified as a carrier for the Doctor Alexander Lippisch experimental all-wing fighter, but was never fully implemented
Operators
Germany – Most produced planes were used by the Luftwaffe primarily used for crew training
Czechoslovakia – Produced some 179 additional aircraft for military and civilian use
France – Over 300 modified aircraft (with French engines) were produced in France and saw wide service up to 1964.
Soviet Union –Operated some captured Si 204
Poland – Brought 7 NC.701 from France after the war
Macoro – Operated two French NC 702
Sweden – Operated five French-built Siebels
Switzerland – Used at least one Si 204 under the designation B-3
American and Great Britain – Both briefly operated a number of captured Si 204 after the war
Surviving aircraft
Today there are a number of partially or wholly survived aircraft Si 204. For example, the French Aviation Museum in Paris had one Si 204A and another located in the Escadrille du Souvenir close to Paris. One Si 204 is located at Sweden Lygvapen Museum.
Conclusion
While Germany in the Second World is better known for designing and producing a series of combat aircraft, their auxiliary aircraft are often overlooked. The Si 204 was one such case, despite its successful design, it is rather poorly documented in the sources. Its design was a success which can be seen in its after-war use, most notably by the French up to the mid-1960.
Si 204 D Specifications
Wingspans
21.33 m / 70 ft
Length
12 m / 39 ft 3 in
Height
4.25 m / 14 ft
Wing Area
46 m² / 495 ft²
Engines
Two Argus As 411 engines
Empty Weight
1.500 kg / 3.300 lbs
Maximum Takeoff Weight
3950 kg / 8,710 lbs
Climb Rate to 1 km
In 3 minute 30 seconds
Maximum Speed
364 km/h / 226 mph
Cruising speed
340 km/h / 210 mph
Range
1,800 km / 1,120 miles
Maximum Service Ceiling
7,500 m / 24,600 ft
Crew
Pilot and his assistants plus eight-passenger
Armament
None
Illustrations
Si-204DSi-204E
Credits
Article written by Marko P.
Edited by Henry H. & Stan L.
Ported by Marko P.
Illustrated By Ed Jackson
Sources
D. Nešić (2008), Naoružanje Drugog Svetskog Rata Nemačka Beograd
H. A. Skaarup (2012) Axis Warplane Survivors
D. Mondey (2006). The Hamlyn Concise Guide To Axis Aircraft OF World War II, Bounty Books.
D. Donald (1998) German Aircraft Of World War II, Blitz Publisher
J. R Smith and A. L. Kay (1972) German Aircraft of the Second World War, Putnam
Jean-Denis G.G. Lepage (2009), Aircraft Of The Luftwaffe 1935-1945, McFarland & Company Inc
Captain E. ‘Winkle’ Brown (2010) Wings of the Luftwaffe, Hikoki Publication
M. Griehl (2012) X-Planes German Luftwaffe Prototypes 1930-1945, Frontline books
T. H. Hitchcock (1998) Jet Planes Of The Reich The Secret projects, Monogram Aviation Publication
Model 299G as it appeared in a microfilm document from a private collection on the B-17C. Note this is a recreation. (Bill Stanczak)
Introduction
There are very few planes in military and aviation history that have garnered as much attention or popularity as the Boeing B-17 “Flying Fortress”. The aircraft has been called by some “the best bomber of the Second World War”, although there are other contenders for that title. Opinions aside, one cannot dismiss the impact of the B-17 on military history and the evolution of strategic bombing. The development of the B-17 initially started with Boeing Model 299, often incorrectly called the Boeing XB-17 in various sources. Surprisingly, the B-17 was initially not selected for production, as the Model 299 prototype was destroyed in an accident and the US Army Air Corps’ limited budget did not allow for the purchase of the more expensive bomber. As this is such a popular aircraft, one would assume that quite a good portion of what there is to know about the plane and its development has already been researched, and documented. However, as is often the case, there are always discoveries waiting to be found, such as one particular obscure variant of the B-17, the Boeing Model 299G
To say that there is little to no information on this Model 299G would be quite an understatement as, aside from a few drawings, there is nothing that indicates why this aircraft was designed and what its exact purpose was. However, after studying the documents as well as consulting with several well-known aviation experts, it has become somewhat clear that what the Model 299G represents is not just an attempt to create a new and more effective variant of the B-17 based on the already in-production B-17B but, in fact, was a design concept that proved extremely influential in the design of the B-29 “Superfortress”.
Boeing: The American giant and a leader in aircraft design
The Boeing Company exemplifies the idea of rising from small beginnings. It was founded in 1916 on the shores of Lake Washington by a young timber baron by the name of William Boeing, who had an interest in aircraft. The first Boeing aircraft, a seaplane, took off from the shores of Lake Washington in January 1916. However, the company did not really take off until the 1920s and 30s, when Boeing achieved many great and public feats, including designing and building the first all-steel tube fuselage with its then-innovative arc welding process and even becoming one of the first companies to build dedicated mail aircraft. It was also during this time that Boeing would design and build some of its most legendary aircraft, such as the P-26 Peashooter, which, when introduced, was considered to be one of the fastest fighter aircraft in existence.
The company would gain even more fame and recognition with its construction of the Boeing Model 247 in the early 1930s, which allowed Boeing to dominate the early modern airliner market until the introduction of the Douglas DC-2 and the later Douglas DC-3. The Model 247 was considered to be extremely technologically advanced for the time and represented Boeing’s shift to all-metal aircraft construction. Boeing received even greater fame with its development and construction of the Boeing Model 299, which later became the B-17 Flying Fortress, an aircraft that was very well-liked by the top staff of the US Army Air Corps. The B-17 design would also later allow Boeing to create several other highly influential and popular designs based on the Model 299. These designs included civilian aircraft, such as the Boeing Model 307 Starliner and the famed Boeing Model 314 Clipper, which saw great fame while flying for Pan-American Airways in the late 1930s and even saw service as a Presidential transport aircraft for Franklin Delano Roosevelt. The Model 314, while externally quite different, used the same wing structure and design as the Model 299. The Model 299 design also brought forth various military variants which would see various uses, including transport aircraft in the case of the C-108 and VB-17. The Model 299’s development would ultimately culminate with the so-called “ultimate B-17”, the B-17G, which went on to become one of the most popular and well-known variants.
The Birth of Boeing’s big bombers
The development of the Boeing B-17 began in February of 1934, with a US Army Air Corps request for proposals for a new bomber with a range of 5000 miles (8046 kilometers) and a bomb load of at least 2000 pounds (907 kilograms). This request, designated “Project A”, was only a feasibility study for a production aircraft to these requirements. Even with it being a proposal, there was a chance the aircraft would be built, and Boeing put its best designers and engineers on the project and was clearly interested in developing the design. These designers and engineers soon found success, as they were able to successfully design and later build a very good aircraft. Initially, Boeing submitted the XBLR-1 (Experimental Bomber Long Range) for this program, which was later re-designated XB-15 upon its construction. Their competitor, Martin, also submitted a project, the XB-16, but that was later canceled before it actually left the drawing board, nor was a final design for it completed. Because of this, the XB-15 would remain the only bomber built in the XBLR program and was the largest until the Douglas XB-19 was built. The XB-15, while never serving as a bomber as intended, would eventually see service as a transport under the designation XC-105 and would serve until its retirement in 1944. Following its retirement, the aircraft would be partially dismantled and dumped in the so-called “Diabalo Dump”, where it remains to this day.
The Boeing Model 299 and the B-17
Boeing Model 299, often incorrectly called XB-17. (National Museum of the USAF)
In May of 1934, the US Army Air Corps announced a second competition, this time for a multi-engine bomber capable of carrying a ton of bombs, having a range of 2000 miles (3219 kilometers), and capable of flying at over 200 miles per hour (173 knots or 321 km/h). Unlike the previous competition, however, this aircraft would be built and brought into limited service, with a potential for full production. For this competition, Boeing decided to design and build what, in essence, was a scaled-down Model 294 (XB-15) under the designation Model B-299. The Model B-299 took many of the base features of the Model 294 and improved on them while scaling down the aircraft. In this regard, it was much like the 294, a twin-wing monoplane with four engines, but it also combined elements of Boeing’s successful Model 247 passenger aircraft. The prototype Model 299 first flew on 28 July 1935 and was very quick to impress the US Army Air Corps as well as the assembled press, with one reporter describing it as a “Flying Fortress”, and the US War Department describing it as an “Aerial Battle Cruiser”. On August 20, the Model 299 was flown to Wright Field, where it would spend the next two months being tested against the Martin 146 and the Douglas DB-1 (B-18 Bolo), where it eventually performed above and beyond the base requirements. The 299 would eventually get the US Army’s stamp of approval as well as an order for 65 YB-17s. However, on 30 October 1935, disaster struck and the Model 299 crashed and burned on takeoff. While the official cause was deemed to be a pilot error, as the pilot had forgotten, due to the lack of a checklist, to unlock the control surfaces (it was this accident that introduced checklists as standard equipment on aircraft), the US Army would cut the order to only 13 planes, designated Y1B-17, and instead ordered the production of 133 Douglas B-18 Bolos. The reason for this decision was twofold. While the destruction of the Model 299 did impact this decision, it was ultimately the US Army’s limited budget and their lack of funding that led them to ultimately choose the B-18 Bolo, as it was the only aircraft they could really afford a large number of. Despite this setback, the US Army was still enthusiastic about the design and allowed Boeing to submit another prototype for evaluation, which they did in the form of a modified Y1B-17 with more powerful engines and a crew of 6 instead of 7.
Boeing Model 299, note the distinctive nose with a small turret. (National Museum of the USAF).
The Boeing Y1B-17 did not differ too much from the original Model 299, however, some improvements were made, including switching the engines to the more powerful Pratt and Whitney R-1820s and changing the design of the landing gear arms. It was this prototype that ultimately won Boeing the contract and would go on into production as the Boeing B-17B.
The Model 299G: A modified B-17 or Something More?
When looking at the B-17’s lineage, one will notice that the very first mass-produced variant of the bomber was the Boeing B-17B or, as the Boeing Company knew it, the Model 299E (later changed to 299M). The B-17B followed a long line of prior limited or prototype variants, including the base Model 299, later Y1B-17, and Y1B-17A. The production run of the B-17B only ran for a total of 39 aircraft before it was switched to the B-17C (Model 299H). According to the documentation and the drawings found, the Model 299G was considered to be a very heavily modified B-17B which was re-engined with the Pratt and Whitney R-2180 Twin Hornets instead of the Pratt and Whitney R-1820-51 Cyclone. Beyond this, unfortunately, the drawings give very little information on this aircraft or really what exactly it was supposed to be. However, according to historians such as Mike Lavelle, this variant may be a link in the greater chain of designs that led to the Model 345, better known as the B-29 Superfortress.
The Design of the Model 299G
Boeing model 322 study, this one lacking the forward gun position but otherwise closely related to the 299G. (Lavell)
The Model 299G is unique compared to other B-17 variants and designs based on the B-17. It shares very little similarity with the Model 299 and Model 299M (B-17B) designs it is based on. Outside of the tail section and some other components, such as the general design of the wings, the rest of the aircraft is almost a completely different design from the B-17B on which it is based. Among the interesting features is the tricycle landing gear arrangement (one wheelset in the front, two on the wings). The aircraft also features a cockpit section very similar to that of the Boeing Model 307, completely eliminating the turtle deck. It shares a similar fuselage to the Stratoliner as well, as it was designed to test the feasibility of pressurization for use in bombers. Another major aspect that stands out about the aircraft is that it appears to have been both wider and longer than the B-17, with a slightly larger wingspan. Also featured were 4 defensive weapon blisters that almost seem like a cross of those on the early B-17s and those featured on the later PB4Y-2 “Privateer”. These were situated on the dorsal and ventral sections of the waist, with the ventral one just behind the wings and the dorsal one farther aft and closer to the tail.
Boeing Model 307 Stratoliner on display at the National Air and Space Museum Udvar Hazy Center. This is the sole preserved complete example. (Smithsonian)
The Model 299G also did not feature an astrodome. Rather, it featured what appears to have been a dedicated observation area above the cockpit. Perhaps the only major similarity it shared with the B-17 was that the 299G was a monoplane and, the wheels still receded into the engine nacelles. The design, as such, does not really seem to have been that of a B-17, bearing the most similarity to Boeing’s Model 307 Stratoliner, which was later adopted into US Army Air Force service as the C-75 Stratoliner. It also more clearly resembles Boeing’s later bomber designs, such as the Model 322, which eventually led to the development of the Model 345, better known as the B-29 Superfortress.
Conclusion
Boeing Model 316, a later design study possibly derived from the Model 299G. These two, and several others would go on to influence the further development of the B-17 and B-29. (Lavell)
While, ultimately, the Model 299G never left the drawing board, it certainly represents an interesting insight into the developmental history of Boeing’s large bomber projects. Based on conversations with several Aviation historians, it has been presented as a possibility that this Model 299G could also have been a very early attempt to design a sort of “Superbomber” that members of the so-called “Bomber Mafia”, including Jimmy Doolittle and General Hap Arnold, had been searching for. This conclusion would indeed make sense, as many of the features of the Model 299G do seem to correspond with later Boeing bomber designs. It has also been suggested that the Model 299G might have been a link in the greater developmental chain of the Boeing Model 345, which eventually saw service as the B-29 Superfortess. Some, however, have also suggested that this aircraft instead represented a link between Boeing Airliner development and their Military Aviation development. However, as of this writing, there is no concrete information or documentation that directly links the Model 299G to the Model 345, though it and other projects were part of the B-29 program’s design studies. Aside from general appearance, there is also really nothing concrete to link the 299G to airliner development either. What is undeniable though is that Model 299G does offer deeper insight into the continued development of the B-17 Flying Fortress and the influence, if indirect, it had on future projects.
Variants
Model 299G – The Boeing Model 299G was designed by Boeing and based on the Boeing B-17B. It never went past the design stage and was not selected for production.
Operators (Projected)
United States of America
US Army Air Corps (Presumed) – The Model 299G was designed by Boeing but never made it past the design stage.
Illustration
Credits
Article written by J. Manuel
Edited by Henry H. & Stan L.
Ported by Henry H.
Illustrated by Ed Jackson
Sources
Baugher, J. (1999, July 25). Retrieved from http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_bombers/b17_1.html
The Boeing Company (2020, December 20). Retrieved from
http://www.boeing.com/history/#/legacy
Harris, S. M., & Angelucci, E. (1983). The Rand McNally Encyclopedia of military aircraft: 1914-1980. New York: Military Press.
Model 299 Crash. (2009, June 25). Retrieved from https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/610002/model-299-crash/
Model 299 Press Release. (2009, June 25). Retrieved from https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/Museum-Exhibits/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/610003/AFmuseum/
Lavelle, Mike. War on the Home Front: Building the B-29 Superfortress. Chester River Press, 2011.
Lavelle, Mike, and Matzelle, Liz. “Fwd Boeing 299G.” Received by Jonathan Manuel, 21 Nov. 2021
Simons, Graham M. The Boeing B-29 Superfortress: The Giant Bomber of World War Two and Korea. Pen Et Sword Aviation, 2012.
In the years prior to the Second World War, in Europe, there was significant interest in the development of aircraft intended to be used for breaking various world records. International competitions and exhibitions of new aircraft technology were quite common in this period. While at first glance this may seem like a hobby or sports event, in reality, these were often used for propaganda purposes to glorify a nation’s own aviation industry as superior to those of other countries. Achieving the greatest possible speed was often regarded as a clear measure of engineering supremacy over other countries. Germany was one of these, which took up the task in the late 1930s to achieve the greatest possible speed. They successfully achieved with the Me 209, an excellent record-setter, but completely unsuited for military use.
History of the Me 209
Due to restrictions imposed by the Western Allies, the Germans were partially limited from researching certain aircraft technologies. This did not stop them, however, as German aviation enthusiasts and aircraft manufacturers found numerous ways to bypass these restrictions. In the early 1930s the German aircraft industry worked at full capacity in order to increase the production of ever-needed new aircraft designs, but also introduced a series of new technologies. When the Nazis came to power in 1933, huge investments were made in order to build one of the most modern air forces in the world. Thanks to these resources, the Germans introduced a series of excellent aircraft designs that would dominate the skies over Europe in the first years of the war.
Some of these aircraft were specially modified so that they could be reused as propaganda tools. Their purpose was to achieve as many world records as possible. On the other hand, these were never actually accepted for service. One aircraft developed by Heinkel, the He 100, managed to achieve great success by reaching a speed of 764 km/h. However, this was not enough in the minds of the leading officials of the Reichsluftfahrtministerium – RLM ( German Air Ministry) who wanted something more imposing to show to the world. Adolf Hitler himself wanted to show off the superiority of the German aviation industry. So to win worldwide prestige in aviation, in 1937 Messerschmitt was instructed by the RLM to begin developing an experimental aircraft that set the world speed record. Given its specialized nature as a high-speed record-breaker, Messerschmitt received production orders for three prototype aircraft.
Willy Messerschmitt and his team of engineers began working on such a project, codenamed P.1059 in the early stage of development, soon after the requisite was made and the first working prototype was now under the designation Me 209 V1 (D-INJR).
The Me 209 mock-up in its early development stage. Most evident is the unusually rear-positioned pilot cockpit. Source: ww2fighters.e-monsite.com
The Prototype Development
The Me 209V1 prototype made its maiden flight at the start of August 1938. This flight was rather short at only 7 minutes. It was flown by the Messerschmitt chief engineer J. H. Wurster who was also a pilot. It was initially planned to use the experimental DB 601ARJ engine. As it was not yet available, a more orthodox 1,100 hp DB 601A engine was used instead. Almost from the start, the Me 209V1 was shown to be a troublesome design. Numerous issues were detected during flight testing. Some of these included the aircraft’s tendency to abruptly dive in mid-flight, the controls being heavy and hard to work with either in the air or on the ground, cockpit ventilation was poor, engine overheating problems were evident due to insufficient cooling, and cockpit visibility was quite limited. During landings, the Me 209 showed that it had a high sinking rate which usually led to a harsh landing, potentially causing damage to the landing gear. Despite all of this, which would in other circumstances lead to a sure cancellation of the project, the RLM officials urged that the Me 209 development should go on.
The side view of the Me 209V1 prototype. Interestingly the Messerschmitt workers did not even border apply any paint job to it. The natural aluminum color is quite evident in this photograph.
The second prototype Me 209 V2 (D-IWAH) was completed in early 1939. It was flight-tested for the first time on the 8th of February 1939. At that time Wurster gave up his position as the Messerschmitt test pilot to Fritz Wendel. On the 4th of April, there was an accident where this aircraft would be lost. After a short flight, the pilot Fritz Wendel was preparing for a landing approach on Haunstetten airfield. Suddenly, and without warning, the engine stopped working and the aircraft rapidly lost altitude. In another version of this event, the engine stopped working shortly after take-off. Regardless of which event was true, the aircraft was lost but surprisingly the pilot Fritz Wendel survived the forced landing without injury.
The Me 209V2 aircraft during its construction. While it was to be used for breaking the world record, its early demise meant the V1 had to be used instead. Source: ww2fighters.e-monsite.com
In the meantime, with the loss of the V2 aircraft, the testing continued using the first prototype which was finally equipped with the DB 601ARJ engine. This engine was rated for 1800 PS on take-off, with its emergency power setting reaching 2,465 PS.
A New World Record
As the V2 was lost and the other two prototypes were still under construction, it was devised to use the V1 aircraft for the anticipated world record flight. On the 26th of April 1939, while piloted by Fritz Wendel, the Me 209V1 reached a phenomenal speed of 755 km/h. It would take nearly 30 years before the record was beaten by a modified American Grumman F8F-2 in 1969.
German Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels was quick to exploit this successful flight. Goebbels propaganda machine soon published this news as a great success of the German aviation industry. To hide the experimental nature of the Me 209, in propaganda news it was renamed Bf 109R. This was also done to deceive the general foreign public that this was an actual operational fighter. Shortly after that, all further work on beating the speed record was strictly forbidden. Following this success, Me 209 V3 (D-IVFP) was completed and flight-tested in May 1939. Its flight career would end shortly as its frame was mostly used for various testing and experimentation duties.
Technical Characteristics
The Me 209 was a low-wing, all-metal, single-seat, experimental record-breaking aircraft. Unfortunately due to its experimental nature, not much is mentioned about its precise construction in the sources.
The fuselage and the wings were made of a metal frame covered in aluminum sheets. The rear tail unit had an unusual design with the rudder being greatly enlarged. This was done to help the aircraft design cope with propeller torque.
The Me 209 landing gear consisted of two landing gear units that retracted outward towards the wings. The Me 209 used a more common type of landing gear that retracted inward to the wings. To the rear, a sliding skid was placed at the bottom part of the large tail fin. The skid was connected with a spring to the tail unit and could be completely retracted to reduce the drag.
The cockpit was placed quite to the rear of the aircraft fuselage. This design had a huge flaw, as it severely restricted the pilot’s front view. The canopy of this cockpit opens outwards to the right. It was likely taken directly from Messerschmitt’s early design of the Bf 109. In an emergency, the canopy could be jettisoned.
The Me 209 was to be powered by the DB 601ARJ engine, a twelve-cylinder, liquid-cooled V-12 engine. This engine used a Messerschmitt P8 three-bladed propeller. The engine cooling system was rather unusual. As the Messerschmitt engineer wanted to avoid using a standard radiator to avoid unnecessary drag, they came up with a new design. The engine was cooled with water, which was nothing unusual, but the way the water itself was cooled was quite a new and complicated process. The hot water steam from the engine was redistributed to the wings through pipes. Once in the wings, through a series of specially designed openings, the hot water stream would be condensed back to a liquid state. The cooled water would then be brought back to the engine, where the process would be repeated again and again. The negative side of this system was the constant loss of water due to evaporation, which depending on the conditions like speed may differ widely from 4 to 7 liters per minute. Due to this huge loss in a short amount of time, the aircraft had to be equipped with a 200 (or 450) liter water container. With this water load capacity, the Me 209 had an endurance time of only 35 minutes.
The Me 209 cockpit canopy opens outwards to the right. This design had a flaw as it could not be left open during takeoff or landing. In an emergency, the canopy could be jettisoned. Source: ww2fighters.e-monsite.comThe Me 209 was to be powered DB 601ARJ engine which used a Messerschmitt P8 three-bladed propeller Source: aviadejavu.ruThe rear view of the Me 209V1, where the enlarged vertical stabilizer could be seen. Its purpose was to help the aircraft cope with propeller torque. Source: ww2fighters.e-monsite.com
Attempt To Develop a Combat Version of Me 209
In May 1939 the Me 209 V4 (D-IRND) was flight tested. While the previous prototypes were to be used for beating international world records, the V4 was an attempt to adopt the Me 209 for potential military use. It was not requested by the RLM but instead a Messerschmitt private venture.
This prototype would receive a military code CE-BW in 1940. Its design was modified to include new and enlarged wings. The racing engine was replaced with a military model, the 1,100 hp DB 601. Due to the limitations of the wing-mounted cooling system, it had to be replaced with conventional radiators, which were changed several times in the Me209 V4’s development. The wing design was also changed as it was somewhat larger and longer than that used on the original Me 209. These were also provided with an automatic leading-edge slat.
In addition to its new purpose, it was to be equipped with offensive armament. The sources disagree on its precise armament. According to, D. Myhra (Messerschmitt Me 209V1) it consisted of two 7.92 mm MG 17 machine guns placed above the engine, a 2 cm cannon that would fire through the propeller shaft, and two 3 cm Mk 108 cannons to be installed in the wings. The potential use of this wing-mounted armament is quite questionable for a few reasons. The installation of such a cannon would not be possible given the limited room inside the wings. In addition, the MK 108 would be introduced to service in the later stages of the war, years after the Me 209 V4 was tested.
Authors J. R. Smith and A. L. Kay (German Aircraft of the WW2) on the other hand mentioned that the wing armament was to consist of two MG 17 machine guns, but this had to be abandoned as there was no room in the wings for them.
During testing of the much modified Me 209V4 it was shown to have weaker general flight performance than the already produced Bf 109. Attempts to further improve it by installing a stronger engine failed, as the Me 209 was still underpowered as its airframe was designed around a phenomenally powerful engine. Despite all this work the Me 209V4 was simply not suited for use as a fighter and thus the project had to be abandoned.
The Me 209V4 was a failed attempt to introduce to service a new and improved fighter aircraft that would potentially replace the Bf 109. It was not requested by the RLM but was instead Messerschmitt’s own private venture. Source: www.luftwaffephotos.com
The Fate of the Me 209 prototypes
Following the completion of its original goal, the Me 209V1 aircraft was given to the Berlin Air Museum in April 1940. While initially the Messerschmitt workers simply kept the natural aluminum color for the Me 209. This was not appropriate for an exhibit; it would be repainted in dark blue with its code painted to its fuselage sides. Interestingly during its brief service, the Me 209 was often nicknamed by its crew as Fliegend Eber (Eng. flight boar).
The Me 209V1 just prior to being allocated to the Berlin Air Museum in April 1940. The pilot is Fritz Wendler, and next to him it is Willy Messerschmitt. Source: ww2fighters.e-monsite.coml
In 1943 the Berlin Air Museum was hit during an Allied bombing raid and many aircraft were lost. The Me 209V1 was damaged but its fuselage was left relatively intact. It and other exhibits were moved to Poland for safekeeping, where it was simply forgotten. It was not until 1967 that Norman Wiltshire from the International Association of Aviation Historians actually discovered its remains during his visit to the Polish Air Museum in Krakow. The preserved Me 209V1 fuselage is still located at the Polish Museum, despite many attempts by the Germans to buy it back. The Me 209V3 was completely destroyed in one of many Allied bombing raids of Germany, while the V4 was scrapped at the end of 1943.
Me 209 fuselage at the Polish Aviation museum in Krakow, Poland Source: www.wikiwand.com
Japanese Interest
Despite being obvious from the start that the Me 209 would not enter production, a Japanese attaché showed interest in the project. In 1943 he approached the RLM officials with a request for technical data and that one aircraft to be shipped to Japan. In the end, it appears that nothing came of this and no Me 209 was ever sent to Japan.
An Me 209 but not a Me 209
As the war progressed, Messerschmitt engineers were trying to design a new piston-powered aircraft that would replace the Bf 109. That would initially lead to the creation of the Me 309 which proved to be a failure, and in 1943 a new project was initiated named Me 209. This project, besides having the same name, had nothing to do with the original Me 209 record holding aircraft. The first prototype of this new design was designated Me 209V5 in order to avoid confusion with the previous Me 209 aircraft design. It used many components of the already existing Bf 109G and had a fairly sound design. The few prototypes built would receive the designation Me 209A (sometimes referred to as Me 209II) designation. Despite their improved performance over the Bf 109G, the Luftwaffe opted for the Fw 190D instead, which proved to be a better use of the Junkers Jumo 213 engine.
The Me 209A, besides the name, had nothing in common with the first Me 209 aircraft. Source: www.luftwaffephotos.com
Production
Production of the Me 209 was carried out by Messerschmitt at Ausburg. The RLM ordered three prototypes to be built which were completed by 1938. The fourth prototype was Messerschmitt’s own project which ultimately proved to be a failure.
Production Versions
Me 209 V1 – First prototype was successfully managed to break the world speed record.
Me 209 V2 – Lost in a landing accident
Me 209 V3 – Third prototype that did see limited use
Me 209 V4 – This prototype was intended to serve as a base for a new fighter, but due to its poor performance, this project was canceled.
Conclusion
Despite its problematic design, it managed to reach an extraordinary speed of 755 km/h and thus set a record that would take decades to be beaten. For this alone, the Me 209 held a great place in aviation development and achievement history. That same could not be said for its attempt to be modified and used as a fighter aircraft. Despite a series of modifications and improvements, it was simply unfit to be used in this role.
Me 209V1 Specifications
Wingspans
7.8 m / 25 ft 6 in
Length
7.3 m / 23 ft 8 in
Wing Area
10.6 m² / 115 ft²
Engine (early rating)
1,800 hp DB 601ARJ
Maximum Takeoff Weight
2,512 kg / 5,545 lbs
Maximum Speed
755 km/h / 470 mph
Flight duration
35 minutes
Crew
1 pilot
Armament
None
Me 209V4 Specifications
Wingspans
10 m / 32 ft 11 in
Length
7.24 m / 23 ft 9 in
Wing Area
11.14 m² / 120 ft²
Engine
1,100 hp DB 601A
Maximum Takeoff Weight
2,800 kg / 6.174 lbs
Maximum Speed
600km/h / 373 mph
Cruising speed
500 km/h / 311 mph
Climb rate per minute
1,125 m / 3,690 ft
Maximum Service Ceiling
11,000 m / 36.080 ft
Crew
1 pilot
Armament
One 2 cm cannon and two 7.92 mm MG17 machine guns with additional weapons that were to be installed in the wing
Gallery
Me 209 v1Me 209 v4
Credits
Article written by Marko P.
Edited by Henry H. and Ed
Ported by Henry H.
Illustrated by Ed
Source:
D. Nesić (2008) Naoružanje Drugog Svetsko Rata-Nemačka. Beograd.
R. Jackson (2015) Messerschmitt Bf 109 A-D series, Osprey Publishing
J. R. Smith and A. L. Kay (1972) German Aircraft of the WW2, Putham
D. Myhra (2000) Messerschmitt Me 209V1, Schiffer Military History
M. Griehl () X-planes German Luftwaffe prototypes 1930-1940, Frontline Book
E. M. Dyer (2009) Japanese Secret Projects Experimental Aircraft of the IJA and IJN 1939-1945, Midland