Nazi Germany (1936)
Shipborne and coastal reconnaissance aircraft – 98~118 Built
The He 114 Source: www.warbirdphotographs.com
In the mid-thirties, the German Ministry of Aviation (Reichsluftfahrtministerium – RLM) tasked the Heinkel company with developing a replacement for the He 60 shipborne and reconnaissance aircraft. While Heinkel fulfilled the request by building the He 114, its overall performance was deemed insufficient for German standards.
History
During the early thirties, the He 60 was adopted for service as the main German shipborne and coastal reconnaissance aircraft. As it was considered outdated, in 1935, the RLM issued to Heinkel a request for a new shipborne and coastal reconnaissance aircraft that was to replace the He 60. The next year, two prototypes were completed. While it was originally planned to test these aircraft with the BMW 132 engine, due to lack of availability, this was not possible. The first prototype (with D-UBAM marking) made its maiden flight in September 1936. It was powered by a Daimler Benz DB-600A which gave out 900 hp. The test results of the first flight were disappointing, as it proved difficult to control on the water but also in the air. The second prototype, V2 (D-UGAT), powered by a 740 hp Jumo 210 E, made its first flight in December 1936. It was used to test the catapult launching capabilities of this aircraft. It had some modifications in comparison to the first prototype, like having a larger tail and redesigned floats. Despite some improvements, the catapult launch testings from the Gneisenau showed that the He 114 was not suited for this role.
Despite not having a promising start, further prototypes were ordered. The V3 (D-IDEG) prototype was powered by an 880 hp BMW 132 K (or D, depending on the source) engine. The floats were once again redesigned and the pilot had a better-glazed shield. This aircraft was tested in April 1937 with similar performance as previous versions.
V4 (D-IHDG) made its maiden test flight in August 1937. It had many modifications in order to improve its performance. The wing’s edges were redesigned, new floats were used and it was also fitted with machine gun armament. V5 (D-IQRS) had new improved floats which enabled it to take-off even from ice. While most sources mention only five prototypes, some note that there were two more. The V6 and V7 prototypes were tested with similar equipment and were armed with two machine guns, one firing through the propeller and the second mounted to the rear. Additional armament tested consisted of two 50 kg (110 lb) bombs.
A side view of the V4 prototype, during a test flight. Source www.warbirdphotographs.com
Technical characteristics
The He 114 was designed as a single-engine, all-metal, twin crew biplane aircraft. It had a monocoque oval-shaped fuselage design. It was powered by one BMW 132K 960 hp nine-cylinder radial engine. The fuel load consisted of 640 l.
The He 114 BMW 132K 960 hp nine-cylinder radial engine. Source: www.warbirdphotographs.com
Somewhat unusual for biplanes of the era, the lower wings were much smaller than the upper ones. They had a half-elliptical design and were thicker than the upper wings. The upper wing was connected to the fuselage by two ‘N’ shaped struts. There were also two ‘Y’ struts connecting the lower and the upper wings. The upper wing was constructed using three parts with two ailerons. The upper wing could, if needed, be folded to the rear. The landing gear consisted of two floats which could also act as auxiliary fuel storage tanks with 470 l each.
On later models, the floaters were used as auxiliary fuel tanks. Source www.warbirdphotographs.com
The crew consisted of the pilot and the rear positioned machine gunner/observer. The armament consisted of one MG 15 7.92 mm (0.31 in) machine gun placed to the rear. The ammunition load for this machine gun was 600 rounds. Additionally, there was an option to externally mount two 50 kg (110 lb) bombs.
Close up view of The He 114 pilot control table. Source: www.warbirdphotographs.com/luftwaffephotos
Further development
Despite being shown to have poor performance, a small production run was made by Heinkel. Some 10 (or 6 depending on the source) aircraft of the A-0 series, together with 33 of the A-1 series would be built. The only difference was the use of a larger rear tail design on the He 114A-1 series. The small number of He 114 built were given to various test units and flight schools, where its performance was often criticized by all. During its introduction to service, the much more promising Ar-196 was under development, but it would need some time until production was possible. As a temporary solution, the Luftwaffe officials decided not to retire the He 60 from service yet. Heinkel was informed that, due to the He 114’s overall poor performance, it would not be accepted for service and that it would be offered for export if anyone was interested. For this reason, Heinkel developed the He 114A-2 series. The He 114A-2 had a reinforced fuselage, floats that could be used as fuel storage tanks, and, additionally, it was modified to have catapult attach points. The He 114A-2, while tested, was not operated by the Luftwaffe, and it was used for the export market.
The following B-series (including B-1 and B-2) were actually just A-2 planes with some slight improvements, meant primarily for export. The history of the C-series is somewhat unclear, as it appears to be specially developed for Romania. It was much better armed, with either two 20 mm (0.78 in ) MG 151 cannons, two 13 mm (0.51 in) MG 131 heavy machine guns, or even two MG 17 7.92 mm (0.31 in) (the sources are not clear) placed inside the lower wings. Some sources also mention that additional machine guns were installed inside the engine compartment and could be fired through the propeller. Additionally, it appears that its fuselage was modified to be able to carry two additional 50 kg (110 lb) bombs. The rear positioned MG 15 was unchanged. This version also had a new Junkers type 3.5 m diameter propeller. The floaters were also slightly redesigned and it received smoke screen trovers. Additionally, to provide better stability while positioned near shore, a small anchor could be realized.
Operational use
Despite not being accepted by the Luftwaffe, due to the Kriegsmarine’s (German war navy) lack of sufficient seaplanes, some He 114 had to be used for this purpose. The distribution of the He 114 began in 1938 when the 1./Küstenfliegergruppe 506 was equipped with this aircraft. In 1939, it was 43equipped with the older He 60, as these proved to be better aircraft. Some German ships, like the Atlantis, Widder, and Pinguin, received these aircraft. During their use, the He 114 floater units proved to be prone to malfunctions. These were reported to be too fragile and could easily be broken down during take-off from the sea during bad weather.
While designed to be able to take-off from German ships, the He 114 construction was not strong enough and was prone to breakdowns with many aircraft being lost this way. Source /www.warbirdphotographs.com/luftwaffephotosDespite intended as a replacement of the He 60 this was never implemented due to He 114 poor performance. Source www.warbirdphotographs.com/luftwaffephotos
A group of 12 He 114 C-1 aircraft that were to be sold to Romania were temporarily allocated to the 2nd Squadron of the 125th Reconnaissance Group (2/125 Aufkl.Sta.). These units operated in the area of Finland’s shore. When the Bv 138 became available in sufficient numbers, the He 114 C-1 was finally given to Romania.
Foreign use
While the He 114 failed to get any large production orders in Germany, it did see some export success. These included Denmark, Spain, Romania and Sweden. The B-series was sold, which was more or less a copy of the A-2 series.
In Danish service
The Danish use of the He 114 is not clear. Depending on the source, there are two versions. In the first, Denmark managed to buy 4 He 114 aircraft and even ordered more, but the German occupation stopped any further orders. In the second, while Denmark wanted to buy some He 114, nothing came of it, once again due to German occupation.
In Spanish service
During 1942, Spain obtained some 4 He 114s from the Germans. In Spanish service, these were known as HR-4. Despite their obsolescence and lack of spare parts, these would remain in use up to 1953.
Small numbers of He 114 were supplied to Spanish State during 1942. Source: www.warbirdphotographs.com
In Romanian service
Romania received a group of 12 He 114 in 1939. During the war, the number would be increased to 29 in total. These would be extensively used to patrol the Black Sea. At the end of the war, these were captured by the Soviets, who confiscated them. Some would be returned to Romania in 1947, which would continue to use them up to 1960, when they were scrapped.
The He 114 in Romanian Service.Source: www.warbirdphotographs.com/luftwaffephotos
In Swedish service
Sweden bought some 12 He 114 in March 1941. In Swedish service, these would be renamed to S-12. Despite being an unimpressive design and prone to malfunction, the Swedish used them extensively during the period of 1941 to 1942, with over 2054 flight missions. They would remain in service up to 1945, with six aircraft being lost in accidents.
One S-12 (as it was known in Sweden) of 12 in total was sold to Sweden. Source: www.warbirdphotographs.com/luftwaffephotos
Production
Despite its poor performance, Heinkel undertook a small production of the He 114. The number of produced aircraft ranges from 98 to 118 depending on the source.
He 114 Prototypes – Between 5 to 7 prototypes were built
He 114 A – Limited production series
He 114 B – Export version of the A-series
He 114 C – Slightly improved version with stronger armament
Operators
Germany – Small numbers of these aircraft were operated by the Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine, but their use was limited
Denmark – Possibly operated four He 114 before the German occupation
Spain – Bought four He 114, and operated them up to 1953
Sweden – Bought 12 He 114 in March 1941, which remained in use until 1945
Romania – Operated 29 He 114, with the last aircraft being scrapped in 1960
Surviving aircraft
While there are no complete surviving He 114s various parts and wrecks have been found over the years. Parts of one wreck were found in lake Siutghiol near Mamaia, on the Romanian Black Sea coast, in 2012. There is a possibility that the wreck of another lays in a lake near Alexeni as well.
Conclusion
The He 114 was an unsuccessful design that failed to gain any larger production orders in Germany. It had difficult controls both in the air and on the water. While it would see some limited service with the Luftwaffe, most would be sold abroad, where some were used up to the ’60s.
He 114C-1 1./SAGr.125 -Baltic Area 1941He 114A-2 1.-KuFlGr-506 Devenow 1938He 114A 1./SAGr.125 Baltic Area 1941He 114B in Romanian Service Circa 1943
Sources
D. Nešić (2008), Naoružanje Drugog Svetskog Rata Nemačka Beograd
M. Griehl (2012) X-Planes German Luftwaffe Prototypes 1930-1945, Frontline Book.
S. Lonescu and C. Craciunoi, He 114, Editura Modelism
Jean-Denis G.G. Lepage Aircraft Of The Luftwaffe 1935-1945, McFarland and Company.
Ferenc A. and P. Dancey (1998) German Aircraft Industry And Production 1933-1945. Airlife England.
https://www.cugetliber.ro/stiri-eveniment-hidroavion-din-al-doilea-razboi-mondial-descoperit-in-lacul-tasaul-201060
Nazi Germany (1939)
Experimental jet-engine powered aircraft – 2 prototypes and 1 mockup
The He 178 has the honor to be the first aircraft that made it to the sky solely powered by a jet engine. It was mainly designed and built to test the new jet engine technology. Two would be built, of which the first prototype made its maiden flight in late October 1939, just weeks after the start of the Second World War.
A photograph of the He 178 taken during its first test flight. Source: airwar.ru
Early German jet engine development
The leading German scientist in jet engine development was Hans Joachim Pabst von Ohain. He began working on jet engine designs during the thirties, and by 1935 managed to patent his first jet engine while working at the University of Göttingen. The following year, the director of this University, seeing the potential of the Hans Joachim jet engine, wrote a letter to Ernst Heinkel (the owner of the Heinkel aircraft manufacturer). Ernst Heikel was very interested in the development of jet-powered aircraft, seeing they had the potential of achieving great speed and range. After a meeting with Hans Joachim (17th March 1936), Ernst immediately employed him and his team (led by a colleague named Max Hahn) to work for his company.
In 1936, Hans Joachim and his team began building the first working prototype jet engine, using hydrogen gas as the main fuel, the HeS 1 (Heinkel-Strahltriebwerk 1). The HeS 1 was not intended as an operational engine, but for testing and demonstration purposes only. It was built and tested in early 1937, and was considered successful, so the research continued. The HeS 2 was the second test jet engine that initially used hydrogen gas fuel, but this would be changed to gasoline fuel. While this engine had some issues, it helped Hans Joachim and his team in gaining important experience in this new technology.
In September 1937, a series of modifications were made in order to improve its performance. By March 1938, the third HeS 3 jet engine was able to achieve 450 kg (1,000 lbs) of thrust during testing, much lower than the estimated 800 kg (1,760 lbs). Further modifications of the HeS 3 jet engine would lead to an increase of only 45 kg (100 lbs) of thrust.
Experimenting with the HeS 3 engine mounted on the He 118
In May (or July depending on the source) of 1939, testing of the improved HeS 3A engine began. At the same time, field testing done by attaching this engine to a piston-powered aircraft was being planned. For this reason, an He 118 was equipped with this auxiliary test jet engine. The He 118 was Heinkel’s attempt to build a dive bomber, but the Junkers Ju 87 was chosen instead. Having a longer undercarriage, the He 118 was able to mount the jet engine without any major problem. In order to keep the whole flight testing a secret, the tests were scheduled to start early in the morning.
Drawing of the He 118 equipped with the experimental HeS 3A jet engine. An improved version of this engine would later be mounted in the He 178. Source: www.fiddlersgreen
The pilot chosen for this test flight was Erich Warsitz. When the He 118 reached the designated height using the piston engine, the pilot would then activate the auxiliary jet engine. During this flight, the He 118 powered by the HeS 3A jet engine managed to achieve 380 kg (840 lb) of thrust. More test flights were carried out with the modified He 118 until it was destroyed in a fire accident during landing. Despite this accident, the final version of the HeS 3B jet engine was intended to be mounted in the Heinkel designed He 178 aircraft. While this engine was far from perfect and did not manage to achieve the designer’s expected thrust, Ernst Heinkel urged its installation in the He 178 as soon as possible.
The He 178 history
Interestingly, the whole He 178 development began as a private venture. It was also under the veil of secrecy and the RLM (Reichsluftfahrtministerium), the German Aviation Ministry, was never informed of its beginning. Ernst Heinkel gathered the designers and technical directors to reveal to them ’…We want to build a special aircraft with a jet drive! The RLM is not to know anything about the 178. I take full responsibility!..’
Heinkel was possibly motivated by a desire to get an early advantage over the other German aircraft manufacturers. The main competitor was the Junkers Flugzeugwerke, which would also show interest and invest resources in developing this new technology.
While Hans Joachim was in charge of developing the proper jet engine, work on the He 178 airframe was led by the team of Hans Regner as main designer and Heinrich Hertel, Heinrich Helmbold, and Siegfried Günter as aircraft engineers. The first He 178 mockup was ready by the end of August 1938. Ernst Heinkel was, in general, satisfied with the design, but asked for some modifications of the cockpit and requested adding an emergency escape hatch door for the pilot on the starboard side. The following year, both the He 178 airframe and the HeS 3B jet engine were ready, so the completion of the first working prototype was possible.
Technical characteristics
The He 178 was designed as a shoulder wing, mixed construction, jet engine-powered aircraft. As it was to be built in a short period of time and to serve as an experimental aircraft, Ernst Heinkel insisted that its overall construction should be as simple as possible. It had a monocoque fuselage which was covered with duralumin alloy. The wings were built using wood and were sloping slightly upwards. The wing design was conventional and consisted of inboard trailing edge flaps and ailerons. The rear tail was also made of wood. The pilot cockpit was placed well forward of the wing’s leading edge.
The jet engine used initially was the HeS 3B, but this was later replaced with a stronger HeS 6 jet engine. The He 178 jet engine was supplied with air through a front nose Pitot-type intake, then through a curved shaped duct which occupied the lower part of the fuselage, leading directly to the engine. The exhaust gasses would then go through a long pipe all the way to the end of the fuselage. At the developing stage, there were proposals to use side intakes but, probably for simplicity’s sake, the nose-mounted intake was chosen instead. The He 178 fuel tank was placed behind the cockpit.
The He 178 was to be equipped with a retractable landing gear with two larger wheels in the front and a small one at the rear. All three landing gear legs retracted into the aircraft fuselage. For unknown reasons, this was not adopted early on and many test flights were carried out with landing gear in the down position. One possible explanation was that the Heinkel engineers may have left it on purpose. They probably wanted to have the landing gear down in order to be able to land quickly if the engine failed.
First test flights
The first He 178 V1 prototype was completed by June 1939, when it was transported to the Erprobungsstelle Rechlin (test center). Once there, it was presented to Adolf Hitler and Hermann Göring. Interestingly, prior to the flight testing He 178 V1, another Heinkel innovative rocket-powered aircraft, the He 176 was demonstrated. On 23rd June 1939, the He 178 pilot Erich Warsitz performed a few ground test runs. During this presentation, the He 178 was not taken to the sky, mostly due to the poor performance of the HeS 3A jet engine.
Following this presentation, He 178 V1 was transported back to the Heinkel factory in order to prepare it for its first operational test flight. The first He 178 test flight was achieved on 27th August 1939 at the Heinkel Marienehe Airfield near Rostock. At this stage, the pilot, Erich Warsitz, was instructed by the Heinkel engineers not to fly this aircraft at high speeds, mostly due to the fixed undercarriage. In addition, the HeS 3B could only provide enough thrust for only six minutes of effective flight. During this flight, there was a problem with the fuel pump but, despite this, the pilot managed to land with some difficulty but nevertheless successfully.
While there are only a few photographs of the He 178 V1 prototype, this was taken during its maiden flight on the morning of 27 August 1939. Source: airwar.ru
The flight is best described by the pilot’s own words. ‘…As the aircraft began to roll I was initially rather disappointed at the thrust, for she did not shoot forward as the 176 had done, but moved off slowly. By the 300-meter mark, she was moving very fast. The 176 was much more spectacular, more agile, faster, and more dangerous. The 178, on the other hand, was more like a utility aircraft and resembled a conventional aircraft …In this machine, I felt completely safe and had no worries that my fuel tanks would be dry within a minute. She was wonderfully easy to hold straight, and then she lifted off. Despite several attempts, I could not retract the undercarriage. It was not important, all that mattered was that she flew. The rudder and all flaps worked almost normally, the turbine howled. It was glorious to fly, the morning was windless, the sun low on the horizon. My airspeed indicator registered 600 km/h, and that was the maximum Schwärzler had warned me. Therefore, I throttled back, since I habitually accepted the advice of experienced aeronautical engineers. The tanks were not full and, contrary to custom, I did not want to gain altitude for a parachute jump should things go awry. It was supposed to be a short flight. At 300 to 400 meters altitude I banked cautiously left – rudder effect not quite normal, the machine hung to the left a little, but I held her easily with the control stick, she turned a little more and everything looked good.
After flying a wide circuit my orders were to land at once, this had been hammered into me, but now I felt the urge to go round again. I increased speed and thought, ‘Ach! I will!’ Below I could see the team waving at me. On the second circuit – I had been in the air six minutes – I told myself ‘Finish off!’ and began the landing. The turbine obeyed my movement of the throttle even though a fuel pump had failed, as I knew from my instruments and later during the visual checks. Because the airfield was so small for such flights I was a little worried about the landing because we did not know for certain the safe landing speed: we knew the right approach, gliding and landing speeds in theory, but not in practice, and they did not always coincide. I swept down on the heading for the runway. I was too far forward and did not have the fuel for another circuit. Now I would have to take my chances with the landing, losing altitude by side-slipping. I was flying an unfamiliar, new type of aircraft at high speed near the ground and I was not keen on side-slipping. It was certainly a little risky, but the alternative was overshooting into the River Warnow. Such an ending, soaking wet at four on a Sunday morning, appealed less. The onlookers were horror-struck at the maneuver. They were sure I was going to spread the aircraft over the airfield. But the well-built kite was very forgiving. I restored her to the correct attitude just before touching down, made a wonderful landing, and pulled up just short of the Warnow. The first jet flight in history had succeeded! …’’ Source: L. Warsitz (2008) The First Jet Pilot The Story of German Test Pilot Erich Warsitz.
An interesting fact is that pilot Erich Warsitz managed to be the first man that flew on both a rocket-powered (He 176) and a jet-powered (He 178) aircraft in history.
Heinkel’s attempt to gain the support of the Luftwaffe
During the following months, Hans Joachim tried to improve the HeS 3B jet engine, which would lead to the development of the HeS 6. This jet engine managed to achieve a thrust of 1,300 lb (590 kg), but due to the increase in weight, it did not increase the He 178’s overall flight performance.
As the He 178 was built as a private venture, Heinkel’s next step was to try obtaining state funding for further research from the RLM. For this reason, a flight presentation was held at Marienehe with many RLM high officials, like Generaloberst Ernst and General Erhard Milch. During the He 178 V1’s first attempt to take off, the pilot aborted the flight due to a problem with the fuel pumps. During his return to the starting point, a tire burst out. The pilot, Erich Warsitz, lied to the gathered RLM officials that this was the reason why he aborted the takeoff.
After a brief repair, Erich Warsitz managed to perform several high-speed circuits flights. During the presentation flight, Erich Warsitz estimated that he had reached a speed of 700 km/h (435 mph), which was incorrect, as later turned out… Interestingly, even at this stage, the He 178 was still not provided with the retractable landing gear. The RLM officials were not really impressed with the He 178’s performance, and for now, no official response came from them.
This was for a few reasons. The Luftwaffe had achieved great success during the war with Poland, which proved that the piston-powered engines were sufficient for the job. In addition, Hans Mauch, who was in charge of the RLM’s Technical Department, as opposed to the development of jet engines. He was against the development of jet engines by any ordinary aircraft manufacturer. Another problem was the He 178’s overall performance. During the test flights, the maximum speed achieved was only 595 km/h (370 mph). Hans Joachim calculated that the maximum possible speed with the HeS 6 was 700 km/h (435 mph). The speed was probably affected by the landing gear, which was still deployed and not retracted.
While the RLM did not show any interest in the He 178, Heinkel would continue experimenting with it. While the He 178 did perform many more flight tests, these were unfortunately not well documented. What is known is that, in 1941, the He 178 (with fully operational landing gear) managed to achieve a maximum speed of 700 km/h (435 mph) with the HeS 6 jet engine.
The He 178’s final fate
By this time, Heinkel was more interested in the development of the more advanced He 280. In addition, the use of the HeS 3B jet engine was completely rejected, being seen as underpowered. The interest in the development of the He 178 was lost and it was abandoned. The second prototype, which was similar in appearance, but somewhat larger in dimensions, was never fitted with an operational jet engine. It was possibly tested as a glider. There was also a third mockup prototype built that had a longer canopy.
This is a wooden mockup of the third prototype. While it is somewhat difficult to spot, the front landing gear wheels are actually made of wood and not rubber. Source: airwar.ruFront view of He 178 V2. Strangely, more photographs of the second prototype survived the war than of the first prototype. Source: airwar.ruRearview from the second He 178 V2 prototype. Source: airwar.ruThis is the second V2 prototype which was to be powered by the HeS 6 jet engine but was never equipped with it. Source: Source: airwar.ru
The He 178 V1 was eventually given to the Berlin Aviation Museum to be put on display. There, it was lost in 1943 during an Allied bombing raid. The fate of the second prototype is unknown but it was probably scrapped during the war. While no He 178 prototypes survived the war, today we can see a full-size replica at the Rostock-Laage Airport in Germany.
An He 178 replica can be seen at Rostock-Laage Airport in Germany. Source: Wiki
Conclusion
Today, it is often mentioned that the He 178 was Germany’s lost chance to get an edge in jet-powered aircraft development. What many probably do not know is that the He 178 was not designed to be put into production, but to serve as a test aircraft for the new technology. We also must take into consideration that the jet engine technology was new and needed many years of research to be properly used. While Germany would, later on, operate a number of jet aircraft, they were plagued with many mechanical problems that could never be solved in time. Regardless, the He 178 was an important step in the future of aviation development, being the first aircraft solely powered by a jet engine
Heinkel He 178 (HeS 6 jet engine) Specifications
Wingspan
23 ft 7 in / 7.2 m
Length
24 ft 6 in / 7.5 m
Wing Area
98 ft² / 9.1 m²
Launch Weight
4.405 lbs / 2.000 kg
Engine
One HeS 6 jet engine with 590 kg (1,300 lb) of thrust
Maximum speed
435 mph / 700 km/h
Cruising speed (when towed)
360 mph / 580 km/h
Crew
Pilot
Armament
None
Gallery
Illustration’s by Ed Jackson
He-178 V1
He 178 V2
Sources
C.Chant (2007), Pocket Guide Aircraft Of The WWII, Grange Books
D. Nešić (2008), Naoružanje Drugog Svetskog Rata Nemačka Beograds
Jean-Denis G.G. Lepage (2009), Aircraft Of The Luftwaffe 1935-1945, McFarland & Company Inc
M. Griehl (2012) X-Planes German Luftwaffe Prototypes 1930-1945, Frontline Book
T. Buttler (2019) X-Planes 11 Jet Prototypes of World War II, Osprey Publishing
L. Warsitz (2008) The First Jet Pilot The Story of German Test Pilot Erich Warsitz Pen and Sword Aviation
By the middle of the Second World War, the Germans were losing control of the skies over the occupied territories. Even the Allied air attacks on Germany itself were increasing. In an attempt to stop these raids, the Blohm und Voss company presented the Luftwaffe with a new project which involved using cheap gliders in the role of fighters. While a small series would be tested nothing came from this project.
The Bv 40 was designed as a cheap, armed, and armored fighter glider. This is the first prototype (PN + IA) which was lost on its second test flight. Source: https://www.flugrevue.de/klassiker/kampfgleiter-blohm-voss-bv-40/
History
By 1943, the German Luftwaffe (air force) was stretched to limits in an attempt to stop the ever-increasing number of Allied air attacks. The Allied Bombing campaign particularly targeted German war industry. During this time, there were a number of proposals on how to effectively respond to this ever-increasing threat. Proposals like the use of a large number of relatively inexpensive fighter aircraft, that were to be launched from larger aircraft, were considered with great interest. One proposal went even further by suggesting the use of an inexpensively modified glider for this role. This idea came from Dr. Ing Richard Vogt who was the chief designer at Blohm und Voss.
In mid-August 1943, Dr. Ing Richard Vogt handed over the plans of a cheap and easy to build (without the use of strategic materials which were in short supply) glider that could be built by a non-qualified workforce to the German Ministry of Aviation (Reichsluftfahrtministerium – RLM). The pilots intended to fly this glider were to be trained in basic flying skills only. The initial name of this Gleitjäger (glider fighter) was P186 which would later be changed to Bv 40. After receiving the initial plans the RLM responded at the end of October 1943 with a request for six prototypes to be built. The number of prototypes would be increased to 12 December 1943 and again to 20 in February 1944. If the project was successful, a production order of some 200 per month was planned.
One of the few built prototype is preparing for a test flight. Source: https://www.flugrevue.de/klassiker/kampfgleiter-blohm-voss-bv-40/
Design
The Bv 40 was designed as a partly armored and armed, mixed construction, fighter glider. Its 0.7 m (2ft 3 in) wide fuselage was mostly constructed using wooden materials, while the cockpit was provided with armored protection. The front armor of the cockpit was 20 mm (0.78 in) thick, the sides were 8 mm (0.31 in), and the bottom 5 mm (0.19 in) thick. Additionally, the cockpit received a 120 mm thick armored windshield.
The wings and the tail unit were also built mostly using wooden materials. The rear tail had a span of 1.75 m (5ft 9in). For towing operation, the Bv 40 was provided with a jettisonable trolley that was discarded once the Bv 40 was in the air. Once it was back to the airbase it was to land using a skid.
What is interesting is that in order to have as small a size as possible, the cockpit was designed so that the pilot had to be in a prone position. While a pilot prone positioned design offered advantages like being a smaller target and having an excellent view at the front, it also caused some issues like a bad rearview. While this design was tested in Germany (like the Akaflieg Berlin B9 for example), it was never implemented. Inside the cockpit, there were only basic instruments that were essential for the flight. In addition, due to the high altitude that it was supposed to operate, the pilot was to be provided with an oxygen supply system and a parachute. The side windows had sliding armored screens with integral visor slots that could offer extra protection.
Close up view of the small pilot cockpit. Source: https://www.flugrevue.de/klassiker/kampfgleiter-blohm-voss-bv-40/
The armament of this glider consisted of two 3 cm (1.18 in) MK 108 cannons. These were placed in the wing roots with one on each side. This was serious firepower which could cause a huge amount of damage to the target it hit. Due to its small size, the ammunition loadout was restricted to 35 rounds per cannon. The ammunition feed system was quite simple; it consisted of a rectangular ammunition feed hatch placed in the middle of each wing. Inside the wings, an ammunition conveyor chute was placed to guide the rounds directly to the cannons. There was also a secondary option which included the use of one cannon together with the ‘Gerät-Schlinge’ 30 kg (66 lb) towed guided bomb. This bomb was to be guided by the Bv 40 toward the enemy bombers and was then detonated at a safe distance. In practice, during testing, this proved to be almost impossible to achieve success.
The front view of the Bv 40. Note the towing cable and the release mechanism just behind it. The pilot was beside he armored cockpit also protected by a 120 mm thick armored windshield. The large box with the round capcel (marked as number 5) is the compass housing. Source: https://www.flugrevue.de/klassiker/kampfgleiter-blohm-voss-bv-40/
Other weapon systems were also proposed. For example the use of R4M rockets placed under the wings. There was also a proposal to use the Bv 40 in the anti-shipping role by arming it with four BT 700 type torpedoes or even using 250 kg (550 lbs) time-fused bombs. Due to the extreme weight increase, this was never possible to achieve.
How should it be used?
In essence, the glider was to be towed by a Me-109G to a height of around 6 km before being released. Once released, it was to engage incoming enemy bombers with its two 3 cm (1.18 in) cannons. If circumstances allowed, a second attack run was to be launched. After the attack, the pilot simply guided the glider to the nearby airbase. It was hoped that the small size and armored cockpit would be the pilot’s best defense.
Testing of the Prototypes
Once the first prototype (marked PN+UA) was completed in early 1944, the first test flight made at Hamburg-Finkenwerder was unsuccessful as it was not able to take-off from the ground. A second more successful attempt was made on the 6th (or 20th depending on the source) May 1944 at Wenzendorf. Despite being intended to have an armored cockpit, the first prototype was tested without it. It appears also that during the maiden flight it was towed by another unusual Blohm und Voss design: the asymmetrical Bv 141. But according to most sources, the Me-110 was to be used, which seems more plausible. After the first flight, some modifications to the jettisonable undercarriage were made. On the 2nd June 1944, the first prototype was lost during a crash landing.
The Bv 40 small size is evident here. Source: Pinterest
A few days later the second prototype (PN+UB) made its first test flight. During a dive, it managed to reach a speed of 600 km/h (370 mph). Its final fate is unknown but it was probably scrapped. The third prototype never took off from the ground as it was used for static structural tests. The fourth prototype (PN+DU) was lost during its first test flight but the precise date is unknown. The fifth prototype (PN+UE) made its first test flight on 6th July 1944, but its fate is also unknown. The last prototype (PN+UF) was tested with a new fin section and made its maiden flight on the 27th of July 1944.
During these test flights, the Bv 40 was able to achieve a flight speed of up to 650 km/h (404 mph). During dive testing, the following speeds at different altitudes were achieved: 850 km/h (528 mph) at 4,000 m (13,120 ft), 700 km/h (435 mph) and an astonishing 900 km/h (560 mph) at 5,000 (16,400 ft). Nevertheless, the results of the test flight appear to have been disappointing due to Bv 40’s poor overall flight performance.
The Bv 40 interior of the pilot cockpit. The Pilot was placed in a prone position. While this arrangement was tested on some German aircraft design in practice it was never implemented. Source: https://www.flugrevue.de/klassiker/kampfgleiter-blohm-voss-bv-40/
Rejection of the Project
Once the project was properly revised by the RLM officials, the obvious shortcomings of the Bv 40 became apparent. The Bv 40 was simply deemed too helpless against the Allied fighter cover. In addition, when the report of the first few prototypes was studied, it became clear even to the RLM that the Bv 40 was simply a flawed concept and so it decided to cancel it in mid-August 1944. The next month the Allies bombers destroyed the remaining 14 Bv 40 which were in various states of production.
Not wanting to let their project fail, the Dr. Ing Richard Vogt and the Blohm und Voss designers proposed to mount either two Argus As 014 pulsejets or two HWK 109-509B rocket engines under its wings. Nothing came from this as the Me-328 and Me-163 proved to be more promising (these ironically also ended in failure). There was even a proposal to modify the BV 40 to be used as a Rammjäger (ram fighter) which was never implemented.
Production
Despite initial requests for the production of 200 such gliders only a small prototype series would be built by Blohm und Voss during 1944.
Bv V1 – Lost during its second test flight.
Bv V2 – Fate unknown.
Bv V3 – Used for static testing.
Bv V4 – Lost during it’s first flight.
Bv V5 – Flight tested but final fate unknown.
Bv V6 – Tested with modified fin section.
Bv V7-V20 – Lost during one of many Allied bombing raids on Germany.
Operators
Germany – While testing was conducted on a small prototype series no production order was given.
The Bv 40 side view. Source: http://www.histaviation.com/Blohm_und_Voss_Bv_40.html
Conclusion
The Bv 40 on paper had a number of positive characteristics; it was easy to make, could be available in large numbers, was cheap, well-armed and it did not need skilled pilots. But in reality, the poor performance, lack of a power plant, low ammunition count, and its vulnerability to Allied escort fighters showed that this was a flawed concept. This was obvious even to RLM officials who put a stop to this project during 1944.
The Bv 40 drawings. The small rectangles in the middle of the wings are ammunition feed openings. Source: http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/luftwaffe_blohm_und_voss_bv40.html
Gallery
Illustration by Ed Jackson
Blohm und Voss Bv 40
Blohm und Voss Bv 40 Specifications
Wingspan
25 ft 11 in / 7.9 m
Length
18 ft 8 in / 5.7 m
Height
5 ft 4 in / 1.63 m
Wing Area
93.64 ft² / 8.7 m²
Empty Weight
1.844 lbs / 830 kg
Launch Weight
2.097 lbs / 950 kg
Climb rate to 7 km
In 12 minutes
Maximum diving speed
560 mph / 900 km/h
Cruising speed (when towed)
344 mph / 550 km/h
Maximum Service Ceiling
23,000 ft / 7,000 m
Crew
Pilot
Armament
Two 3 cm (1.18 in) MK 108 cannons
Or one 3 cm (1.18 in) MK 108 cannon and a glider bomb
Sources
J. Miranda and P. Mercado (2004) Secret Wonder Weapons of the Third Reich: German Missiles 1934-1945, Schiffer Publishing.
R. Ford (2000) Germany Secret Weapons in World War II, MBI Publishing Company.
Jean-Denis G.G. Lepage Aircraft Of The Luftwaffe 1935-1945, McFarland and Company.
M. Griehl (2012) X-Planes German Luftwaffe Prototypes 1930-1945, Frontline Book.
D. Herwig and H. Rode (2002) Luftwaffe Secret Projects, Ground Attack and Special Purpose Aircraft, Midland.
Nazi Germany (1938)
Multi-role Fighter – 12 ~ 18 Built
Rear Quarter Drawing of the 240 [Luftnachrichtenhelferin]The Ar 240 was designed as a possible replacement of the Me 110. While initially it seemed to have great potential, problems with handling and mechanical breakdowns proved to be too much for this aircraft. As it would not be accepted for service, only a small number were actually built. While a few were used by the Luftwaffe, their operational usage was limited.
History of Arado
Werft Warnemünde, later known as Arado, was an aircraft manufacturer that was founded during the Great War, in 1917, as a subsidiary of Flugzeugbau Friedrichshafen. In 1921, this company was purchased by an engineer, Heinrich Lübbe, who was more interested in designing and building ships. In 1924, it was once again engaged in development of aircraft designs, mainly intended for foreign markets. For the position of chief designer, Walter Rethel, who previously had worked for Fokker was chosen.
Werft Warnemünde would be renamed in 1925 to Arado Handelsgesellschaft and renamed again in March 1933 to Arado Flugzeugwerke GmbH. At this time, Walter Blume was appointed as the new chief designer. During his supervision, several projects that were later used by the Luftwaffe were built, including the Ar 66 trainer and the Ar 65 and Ar 68 fighter aircraft.
At the start of the Second World War, Arado was mostly engaged in licenced aircraft production for the Luftwaffe. But work on its own aircraft designs was not discarded. The most important of these upcoming designs were the Ar 96 trainer, Ar 196 reconnaissance plane and the Ar 234, which would become the first operational jet bomber in the world. While these proved a huge contribution to the German war efforts, the Ar 240 design proved to be a failure.
Development of the Ar 240
During 1938, the German Ministry of Aviation (Reichsluftfahrtministerium, RLM) was interested in the development of a new multi-purpose twin engine aircraft that would replace the Me 110. Besides Messerschmitt, which began development of the Me-210, the Arado company would also be involved. In early April 1939 or 1938, depending on the source, the Arado company received a contract for the construction of three prototypes of the new multi-purpose plane initially called E-240. The development of this new aircraft was carried out by an Arado team of designers and engineers led by Walther Blume and by Dipl.-Ing. Wilhelm van Nes.
Interestly, possibly for reasons such as good connections with the Nazi Party or Arado’s good reputation as an aircraft manufacturer, even before the completion of the first prototype, an order for 10 additional prototypes was given by the RLM. While these would be built, a number of problems were identified which would prove to be the downfall of the aircraft.
Technical Characteristics
Front view of the Arado Ar 240 V3 prototype. [Luftwaffe Resource Center]Close up of the extended flap system [Luftnachrichtenhelferin]The Arado 240 was designed as a two seater, twin-engined, mid wing monoplane. The fuselage had a monocoque design and stressed-skin. The fuselage was oval-shaped, with the rear part being more round shaped. The rear tail of the Ar 240 consisted of two fins and rudders, but also had dive brakes installed.
The central parts of the wings were rectangular, while the outer part was trapezoidal in shape. The wings were constructed using a two-part spar structure. The Ar 240 used Fowler type flaps, which covered the entire trailing edge. What is interesting is that the Ar 240 flaps were integrated with the ailerons and that this configuration was previously tested on the Ar 198. Another innovation was the use of automatic leading edge slats, but this system was used only on the first few prototypes and abandoned later on. The wings also housed four fuel tanks on each side, which had a total fuel load of 2,300 liters (600 US gallons). The fuel tanks were built using a new self-sealing system that used thinner tank liners, which enabled the aircraft to have a much increased fuel load.
Ar 240 front view. This picture was taken during March 1944. [WarBirds Photos]The Ar 240’s cockpit interior. [WarBirds Photos]The cockpit was initially positioned directly over the place where the wing root. After the third prototype, the cockpit was moved forward. The cockpit used a back to back seat configuration, with the pilot positioned on the front seat and the radio operator, who was also acting as the rear gunner, being positioned in the rear seat. The Ar 240 cockpit was completely pressurized. The cockpit was directly connected to the fuselage, but was provided with a jettisonable canopy in case of emergency. The well designed glazed canopy provided the pilot and crewman with an excellent all-around view.
The Ar 240 used a conventional retractable landing gear which consisted of two front wheels and one smaller tail wheel. The two front wheels retracted outward into the engine nacelles, while the third wheel retracted into the rear tail fuselage section.
The Ar 240 was tested with a number of different engine types, as the designer had problems in finding an adequate one. The prototype series was powered by Daimler Benz DB 601A and DB 603 A. The later built A series would also be tested with a number of different engines, including the DB 601 A-1 and DB 603, BMW 801 TJ etc..
Different armaments were proposed for the AR 240, including a pair of remotely controlled defence turrets. The control of these turrets was hydraulic and they were equipped with periscope aiming sights. The bomb load would consist of around 1 to 1.8 tons, placed under the fuselage.
Development and Usage of the Ar 240 Prototype Series
Another view of the V3 prototype. [WarBirds Photos]Note: Due to differing information depending on the author, the following information was mostly taken from G. Lang. (1996), Arado Ar 240, A Schiffer Military History Book.
The first operational Ar 240 V1 prototype (markings DD+QL), powered by two 1,157 hp DB 601 engines, was completed in early 1940 and was flight tested on the 10th of May the same year. The next flight tests were made on 25th June and 17th July 1940. In May 1941, the engines were replaced with two DB 603 E. More tests were carried out until October 1941, when the prototype was removed from service for unknown reasons. According to M. Griehl, it was destroyed on the 18th April 1941. The test results of the Ar 240 V1 showed that this aircraft had huge problems with the controls and was difficult to fly, a trend which will be inherited on all Ar 240 planes.
The second prototype, V2, is somewhat shrouded in mystery, as the date of its first operational test flight is unknown. A possible date for the first test flight is 15th September 1940. While it is not clear, the V2 prototype probably received the DD+CE markings. Arado test pilots made several flight trials during September 1940. By the end of February 1941, the Ar 240 V2 prototype was relocated to Rechlin for future tests. By May 1941, the V2 prototype received new DB 603 engines. At the same time, it was also fitted with two 7.92 mm (0.311 in) MG 17 and two 20 mm (0.78 in) MG 151/20 cannons. In November 1941, this plane was modified to be used in dive bombing trials. An additional change was the installation of two DB 601 E engines. The final fate of the V2 prototype is not known precisely, but it was probably scrapped.
The Ar 240 V3 (KK+CD) prototype was first flight tested on 9th May 1941. In comparison to the earlier two prototypes, this model had the cockpit moved forward. The rear tail-positioned dive brakes were replaced with a cone and ventral fins. Numerous engines were tested on this aircraft, including two Jumo 203 and DB 601 E. In early 1942, a number of pressure cabin tests were conducted on the V3 prototype. This aircraft also served as a test bed for the new FA-9 remote controlled system developed in cooperation between Arado and the DVL (aviation research institute), but proved to be problematic. V3 would be used operationally as a reconnaissance aircraft over England. It was piloted by Oberst Siegfried Knemeyer, and while his plane was unarmed, thanks to its high speed, he managed to avoid any confrontation with British planes. The fate of this aircraft is not known, as (depending on the sources) it could have been lost in either April 1944 or May 1942.
Row of three Ar 240 prototypes. [Luftwaffe Resource Center]The V4 prototype was to be tested as a dive-bomber variant. The first test flight was made on 19th June 1941. It was powered by two 1,750 hp DB 603 A engines. It was modified with added dive brakes and was capable of carrying up to eight 50 kg (110 lb) bombs under the fuselage. Its fuselage was also elongated to 13.05 m (42 ft 9 ¾ inches). Many detailed tests with the V4 were carried out in France and in the Mediterranean. The V4 prototype was lost in August 1941 in an air accident.
The V5 (GL+QA or T5+MH) prototype made its maiden flight test in September 1941. What is interesting is that it was not built by Arado but by AGO Flugzeugwerken from Oschersleben. It was powered by two 1,175 hp DB 601 E engines and was provided with a tail cone. It was armed with two wing root MG 17 machine guns and two same caliber MG 81 machine guns placed into two (one above and under the fuselage) FA-13 type remotely controlled turrets. In late March 1942, this aircraft was given to the Aufklärungsgruppe Oberbefehlshaber der Luftwaffe (reconnaissance unit/group belonging to the Commander in Chief of the Luftwaffe). It was then, possibly in late 1942, allocated to Versuchsstelle für Höhenflüge VfH (research station for high-altitude flight).
Ar 240 with tow ropes attached in the Soviet Union during the winter of 1942/1943 [Luftnachrichtenhelferin]Ar 240 A-01 used around Kharkov in late 1942. [Luftnachrichtenhelferin]The V6 (GL+QA or T5+KH) prototype was also built by AGO, and while most parts were ready during November 1941, the aircraft was only completed in early 1942. It was flight tested in January 1942, but if this was its first test flight is not clear. It was given to the Luftwaffe in early March 1942 and moved to Oranienburg for future tests. It was similar in appearance and equipment with the previous V5 aircraft. While it was used mostly for testing, it saw front line service during the winter of 1942/43 around the Kharkov area. The plane is listed as destroyed but under which circumstances is not known.
The V7 (DM+ZU) prototype made its first test flight in October or December 1942. It was designed to be used as the basis for the Ar 240 B high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft. It was to be provided with a pressurized cockpit and a heating system. V7 was powered by two 1,475 hp DB 605 A engines, which were specially designed to use a methanol-water injection in order to increase the engine overall performance and output. Armament consisted of two wing mounted MG 17s and a rear mounted remotely-controlled turret armed with the MG 151/20, and two 50 kg (110 lb) bombs. Operational range was 1,900 km (1,180 mi) and it a was capable of climbing to 6 km (19,685 ft) in 10 minutes and 6 seconds.
The V8 prototype was a direct copy of the V7 and possibly made its first test flight in December 1942 or March 1943 depending on the sources. The final fate of this and the previous aircraft is not known.
The V9 (BO+RC) prototype was designed as a Zerstörer (heavy fighter) aircraft. It was to be used as a test base for the planned Ar 240 C version. The V9 had redesigned longer wings and fuselage. It was powered by two DB 603 A engines which were also equipped with a methanol-water injection system. The main armament consisted of four forward and two rear MG 151/20. While this version had a great priority and was even considered for acceptance for production. This was never achieved, mostly due to a lack of necessary equipment and parts. The final fate of this aircraft is not clear, as it was possibly never even fully completed, but some sources also mention that it was lost in a landing accident.
The V10 prototype was designed as a night fighter aircraft, powered by two Jumo 213 engines. The first test flight was made in September of 1943, while more tests would be carried out up to late 1944. Arado reused this aircraft for the new improved version called Ar 440.
The V11 prototype was tested as a heavy fighter-bomber and was to be used as the base of the Ar 240 F aircraft. Due to many delays, it was actually never fully completed. It had the heaviest armament, which included a mix of MG 151 and 30 mm (1.18 inch) MK 103 cannons forward mounted, rear mounted MG 151 and 13 mm (0.5 inch) MG 131 and a bomb load of 1,800 kg (3,970 lbs). V12 was a direct copy of V11 and, as these two aircraft were never completed, both were scrapped. V13 was to be used as a test base of the Ar 240 D equipped with two 2,020 hp DB 614 engines, but none were built.
V14 was probably never fully constructed. It was to be used as a base for the Ar 240 E project and powered by two DB 627 engines. V15 was to be used in a reconnaissance role and equipped with the FuG 202 Lichtenstein radar. The V15 prototype was probably never built.
An Ar 240 during its short operational life in the Soviet Union during the winter of 1942/1943. [WarBirds Photos]There are two more Ar 240 aircraft only known by their serial numbers (240009 and 2400010). While the usage and fate of the first aircraft is generally unknown, the second was used by the Luftwaffe operationally in the Soviet Union during 1943. It was damaged during a landing in August the same year. Its final fate is unknown.
Development of the ‘A’ Version
An Ar 240 during a flight test. [WarBirds Photos]After a series of prototypes were built, work on the first Ar 240 A version was also undertaken by Arado. Initially, the Ar 240 A aircraft were to be powered by two 1.750 hp DB 603 A-1 engines equipped with four blade metal propellers. Armament chosen for this version consisted of two MG 151/20 (with 300 rounds of ammunition for each gun) placed in the fuselage floor and two more MG 151/20 (with same ammunition load) placed in the wings roots. There was an option for increasing the fire power by adding two more MG 151/20. For rear defence, two defense turrets equipped with MG 131 machine guns could be placed under and above the fuselage. The bomb load could have different configurations, like: One 1,000 kg (2,220 lbs) or 1,800 kg (3,930 lbs) bomb, two 500 kg (1,100 lbs) bombs, eight 50 kg (110 lbs) bombs or even 288 smaller 2.5 kg (5 lbs) incendiary and fragmentation bombs. As the Ar 240 was never accepted for service, only few of the A version aircraft were ever built.
Ar 240 A-01 (GL+QA possible marking) made its first test flight on 28th June 1942. The test flights were carried out until September 1942, when this aircraft was to be given to the Luftwaffe. After a series of further flight and weapon tests conducted at Rechlin and Tarnewitz, the Ar 240 A-01 was to be allocated to the front. It was used around Kharkov in late 1942. On 16th February 1943, Ar 240 A-01 was lost during a flight due to mechanical failure. Both crew members lost their lives during the fall.
The second Ar 240, A-02 (GL+QB), was completed by September 1942. On 13th September, the first test flight was made. The aircraft was damaged in a landing accident in late January 1943. The final fate of this aircraft is not known.
Many Ar 240 were lost in crash landings.[Luftnachrichtenhelferin]Ar 240 A-03 (DI+CY) was initially powered by two DB 601 engines, but these were replaced with BMW 801 TJ. This aircraft had a change in the cockpit configuration, with the radio operator/observer facing forward. This aircraft was stationed at Rechlin, where it was tested from May to June 1943. During testing, Ar 240 A-03 showed to have better stability and handling during flight in contrast to previous built aircrafts. From June to late July, it was tested at Brandenburg. After these tests were completed, the aircraft was allocated for operational front use. It was given to the Aufklärungsgruppe 122, a reconnaissance unit stationed in Italy at that time. This aircraft had the same fate as most previous Ar 240, as it was heavily damaged in a crash. As the damage was extensive, it was never repaired.
Ar 240 A-04 (DI+CG) was initially equipped with two DB 601 E engines, but these would be later replaced with DB 603. It made its first flight test in late September 1942. Ar 240 A-04 was allocated to the Aufklärungsgruppe 122 as a replacement for the previous aircraft. Ironically, it suffered the same fate, but it was repaired and sent back to Arado.
Ar 240 A-05 was powered by two 1880 hp BMW 801 TJ engines equipped with a Rateau type turbo supercharger. It was possibly allocated to Aufklärungsgruppe 10 stationed in the Soviet Union.
Proposed Versions
During the Ar 240’s development, the Arado officials proposed several different variants of this aircraft, but as the whole project was not going well beside a few experimental attempts, nothing came from most of them.
Ar 240 B
This was a high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft version that was to be equipped with a pressurized cockpit and a heating system. Nothing came from this project.
Ar 240 C
On 10th March 1942, Arado officials proposed that the Ar 240 should be modified for the bomber role. For this reason, the wings were modified and its size increased. The tail design was also changed, with added tail dive brakes. As the attempt to increase the size of the internal fuel tanks proved a failure, external tanks were to be used instead. The armament consisted of two MG 151/20 and two rear mounted MG 81. It is not clear, but it is possible that at least one aircraft was built.
Ar 240 D
A proposed paper project version powered by two DB 614 engines.
Ar 240 E
A proposed version with reinforced fuselage, added bomb rack for two 500 kg (1,100 lbs) bombs and increased fuel load. Different engines were also proposed for this version, including DB 603 G, DB 627 or BMW 801 J.
Ar 240 F
A proposed heavy fighter/bomber version to be powered by two DB 603 G engines.
Ar 240 mit 7.5 cm Bordwaffen
During the war, Arado and Rheinmetall discussed the installation of a 7.5 cm gun in the Ar 240. In September 1944, it appears that one plane was actually equipped with this weapon, but was probably never operationally flight tested.
Ar 240 TL
In 1942, Dr. Ing. Walther Blume proposed a heavy fighter and night-fighter version of the Ar 240. This version was designated as Ar 240 TL, which stands for Turbinen-Luftstrahltriebwerk (turbojet). This plane was to be powered by two jet engines placed in the fuselage. It remained only a paper project.
Ar 440
With the cancellation of the Ar 240 project, Arado tried to improve the Ar 240’s overall performance by building a new version, named Ar 440. The Ar 240 V10 prototype served as a base for this modification. Beside this prototype, three more were built using already existing Ar 240 components. After some time in testing, the Ar 440 was officially rejected in October 1943 by the RLM.
Overall Performance and Cancellation of the Ar 240 Project
The Ar 240 possessed several advanced characteristics like a pressurized cockpit, remote-controlled defensive turrets, traveling flaps which provided this aircraft with good low-speed overall lift performance and fuel tanks with a new self-sealing system that used thinner tank liners. But, almost from the start of first flight testing, things turned from bad to worse for this aircraft. Almost from the start, the Ar 240 was plagued with extremely bad handling on all three axes. There were also huge problems with the controls during landing, with most aircraft being lost due to this. As the aircraft proved to be dangerous to fly, it was never adopted and the initial orders for production of 40 aircraft were never materialized.
Allied Examination After the War
Strangely, despite being a rare aircraft, the Allies managed to capture at least one Ar 240 during their advance in the West in 1944/45. This aircraft was tested by Allied pilot Captain Eric Brown. He was Chief test pilot of the Royal Aircraft Establishment at Farnborough. He was involved in a British project of taking over of German war research installations and interrogating technical personnel after the war. After the war, he managed to find the single surviving Ar 240 and, after a flight on it, made a report on its performance. The source for this account is Wings Of The Luftwaffe Flying The Captured German Aircraft of World War II by Eric Brown. This aircraft would be given by the Allies to the French and its fate is unknown.
In his report, he stated. “When the Ar 240 was wheeled out of the hangar, I was struck by its angular appearance. The wings, fuselage, and tail unit all seemed to be straight-edged, with very few curves to be seen. The engines looked very large, the airscrew spinners being level with the nose of the cockpit and well ahead of the wing leading edge, while the nacelles protruded well aft of the trailing edge. I had the feeling that, if this aeroplane was as fast as it was reputed to be, then brute engine force must be the answer … The cockpit layout was neat and the instruments were quite logically arranged, while the view was good all around except downwards on either side, where the engines interfered. Take-off was quite long, even with using 20 degrees of flap, and the initial climb rate was just over 600 m/min (2,000 ft/min). Longitudinal stability was poor, lateral stability neutral, and directional stability positive. The rate of climb fell off very little as I climbed to 6,096 m (20,000 ft), where I levelled out and settled into the cruise at what I calculated was a true airspeed of 580 km/h (360 mph). In the cruise, the aeroplane could not be flown hands-off because it diverged quickly both longitudinally and laterally, and would be tiring to fly for a long time. An autopilot was fitted, although not serviceable in my case, but I believe it would have been essential for instrument flying in bad weather. On opening up to full power, I estimated that after three minutes I was hitting an impressive true airspeed of 628 km/h (390 mph), but it was obvious that the Ar 240 was a poor weapons platform. The harmony of control was terrible, with heavy ailerons, light elevators. and moderately light rudders. ….
My assessment of the Arado Ar 240 is that it was an aircraft of outstanding performance for its class and era, but it could not capitalise on this because of inferior, and indeed dangerous, handling characteristics. According to German information, it had a service ceiling of 10,500 m (34,450 ft) and a maximum range of 1,186 miles, so it had great potential as a reconnaissance intruder, and indeed it is claimed that it made such sorties over Great Britain in 1941 and 1944. Be that as it may, there can be little doubt that the Ar 240 was a failure ..”
Production Numbers
While the Ar 240 production was initially to begin in 1941, due to many problems and delays, this was not possible. While there were attempts to start production, by the end of 1942, the RLM officially terminated the program.
How many aircraft were built depends on the source. According to author G. Lang, the problem with identification of the production numbers is complicated by the fact that some prototype aircraft were allegedly modified and used for the few A-series aircraft built. Another issue, according to Lang, is that the highest known serial number production was 240018 (starting from 240000), which suggests that at least 18 were built, but it is not completely clear. Authors Ferenc A. and P. Dancey mention that at least 15 were built by 1944. Eric Brown claims that 12 prototypes were built.
Main Production and Prototypes
Ar 240 V1-V14 – Prototypes series used to test different equipment, armament and engines.
Ar 240 A – Was to be main production version, but only few aircraft were actually built
Ar 240 B – High-altitude reconnaissance version, possibly few built.
Ar 240 C – A bomber version, unknown if any were built.
Ar 240 D – Proposed version powered by two DB 614 engines.
Ar 240 E – Proposed modified Ar 240 version.
Ar 240 F – Proposed heavy fighter/bomber version to be powered by two DB 603 G engines.
Ar 440 – An improved version of the Ar 240. Only a few were built. The project was cancelled in 1943.
Ar 240 mit 7.5 cm Bordwaffen – A proposed version armed with a 7.5 cm gun, possibly one built, but its fate is unknown.
Ar 240TL – A jet-powered paper project.
Operators
Germany – Operated small numbers of these aircraft, mostly for testing and reconnaissance operations.
France – Captured one, but the fate is not known.
Conclusion
While the Ar 240 was, on paper, an excellent design with many innovations and advanced technology, in reality it did not live up to expectations. The plane proved to be dangerous during flight and many were damaged during landing, with fatal outcomes. Because the Ar 240 proved to be difficult to control, the RLM simply decided to stop the project, as it was probably unwilling to waste more time and resources on it.
Arado Ar 240 A-0 Specifications
Wingspan
14.3 m (47 ft)
Length
12.8 m (42 ft)
Height
3.95 m (13 ft)
Wing Area
31 m² (333 ft²)
Engine
Two liquid cooled twelve-cylinder 1,750 hp DB 603 A-1
Empty Weight
6,350 kg (14.000 lbs)
Maximum Takeoff Weight
10,500 kg (23,150 lbs)
Fuel Capacity
2,300 liters (607.6 US gallons)
Maximum Speed at 6 km
670 km/h (415 mph)
Cruising Speed
600 km/h (370 mph)
Range
2,200 km (1,370 mi)
Maximum Service Ceiling
11,500 m (37,730 ft)
Climb speed
Climb to 6,000 m in 9.7 minutes
Crew
Two pilot and the rear radio operator/gunner
Armament
Four 2 0mm (0.78 inch) MG 151/20
Two 13 mm (0.5 inch) MG 131
One 1,000 kg (2,220 lbs) or one 1,800 kg (3,930 lbs) bomb
Or two 500 kg (1,000 lbs) bombs,
Or eight 50 kg (110 lbs) bombs,
Or 288 2.5 kg (5 lbs) incendiary and fragmentation bombs
Nazi Germany (1942)
Transport Floatplane – 1 Built
BV238 on the Water [Colorization by Michael Jucan]With the success of the previous Blohm & Voss Bv 222 flying boat, Dr. Ing. Richard Vogt, chief designer at Blohm & Voss, began working on an even larger improved design in the form of the Blohm & Voss Bv 238. As the Bv 238 development began in the late stages of the war, only one aircraft was ever completed and used only briefly.
Dr. Ing. Richard Vogt’s Work
In 1937, Lufthansa opened a tender for a long-range passenger flying boat transport that would be able to reach New York in 20 hours. Blohm & Voss eventually would go on to win this tender. The chosen aircraft was the Blohm & Voss Bv 222, designed by Dr. Ing. Richard Vogt.
During 1941, Dr. Ing. Richard Vogt began working on a new aircraft larger even than the already huge Blohm & Voss Bv 222. In July the same year, he presented to the RLM, the German ministry of aviation (Reichsluftfahrtministerium), the plans for the new Blohm & Voss Bv 238. This aircraft was, in essence, a modified and enlarged version of the Bv 222 powered by six Daimler-Benz DB 603 engines. Three aircraft powered with this engine were to be built, belonging to the A-series. Six more aircraft were to be powered by six BMW 801 engines and these would be designated as B-series.
To speed up the development and avoid wasting resources if the project proved to be unsuccessful, the RLM officials asked for a smaller scale flying model to be built first instead of a working prototype. This scale model plane was named FG 227 (or FGP 227, depending on the source) and was to be built and tested at Flugtechnische Fertigungsgemeinschaft GmbH located in Prague.
The FG 227 scale flying model
To speed up the development and avoid wasting resources, the RLM officials asked for a smaller scale flying model to be built first. How it turned out the FG 227’s overall performance was disappointing and it didn’t play any major role in the Bv 238 development. [Histaviation]The construction of this scale model was undertaken by a group of Czech students under the direction of well-known glider pilot Dipl.Ing. Ludwig Karch. It was to be powered by six ILO Fl 2/400 engines pushing 21 hp each. As it was meant to be tested on the ground and not in water, the FG 227 was provided with landing gear which consisted of two wheels in the nose and two more wheels placed on each side of the fuselage.
The small scale model, designated the FG 227 [Histaviation]When the FG 227 was completed, it was to be flight tested. From the start, there were issues with it, as it was unable to takeoff under its own power. After the unsuccessful start, it was disassembled and transported to Travemünde for future testing. During transport, French prisoners of war deliberately damaged one of the wings. Once the damage was repaired, it was flight tested. But during the flight, made in September 1944, all six engines stopped working, which caused an accident where the FG 227 was damaged. After yet another major repair, a few more flights were carried out. The FG 227’s overall performance was disappointing and it didn’t play any major role in the Bv 238 development.
The FG 227’s small scale engines being serviced [Histaviation]The Bv 238
Rear view of the Bv 238 [Warbird Photographs]Construction of the first Bv 238 parts began in early 1942. The final assembly was not possible until January 1944. Due to a shortage of materials and the increasing assaults by the Allied Air Forces, the Bv 238 V1 first prototype could not be completed until March of 1945. The first flight test we conducted immediately after its completion. However, sources do not agree on the exact year when this happened. This is the timeline of development and construction according to author H. J. Nowarra.
Author M. Griehl states that the first flight test was made on the 11th of March 1944. Author C. R. G. Bain states, according to post war testimonies of Dr. Ing. Richard Vogt, that the first test flight was actually made in 1943. According to D. Nešić, the first flight was made in April 1944. The results of this test flight showed that the Bv 238 prototype had surprisingly excellent flying performance. For this reason, it was immediately put into operational service.
Front view of the Bv 238 with the nose hatch doors open [Warbird Photographs]Throughout the Bv 238 development phase, it was often discussed precisely which role it could fulfill. While it was primarily designed as a transport plane, a new idea was proposed to act as a U-boat support aircraft. This would include carrying supplies, fuel, torpedos and men to the U-boats operating in the Atlantic. Of course, by the time the first prototype was near completion, the war was almost over, so this proposal was realistically not possible. Plans to use it as a long range bomber, carrying six 2,400 kg bombs, also never materialized.
Bv 238 V1 was meant to operate from Shaalsee, and for its service with the Luftwaffe, it received the RO+EZ designation. As the Allied bombing raids effectively destroyed the Blohm & Voss factory in Hamburg, orders came down to hide the Bv 238 from the Allied Air Force. The question was how to hide such a huge aircraft. The Germans did try to do so but the aircraft was eventually found by the Allies who managed to sink it. The circumstances are not clear to this day, as both Americans and the British pilots claimed the kill. According to the most well-known story, it was destroyed by a group of American P-51 Mustangs belonging to the 131st Fighter Group. The kill was made by the leading P-51 piloted by Lt. Urban Drew. According to the testimony of the Blohm & Voss workers, the British, in their advance discovered the hidden craft. Once spotted, the British sent attack aircraft to sink it. Its remains would finally be blown up during 1947 or 1948 to make the scrapping process easier. All the remaining Bv 238 that were under construction were also scrapped after the war.
Technical Characteristics
The Bv 238 was designed as a six-engined, high wing, flying transport floatplane. The Bv 238 fuselage was divided into two decks. On the upper deck, the crew and the inboard equipment were housed. The lower floor was designed as a storage area during transport flights. In theory, there was enough room for around 150 soldiers in the Bv 238. A huge front hatch door was provided for easy access to the fuselage interior.
The wings were constructed using large tubular main spars. The wings were used to provide additional room for spare fuel and oil tanks. The wings were provided with flaps running along the trailing edge. The large size of the wing construction allowed passageways for the crew to be installed, in order to have easy access to the engines. Unlike the Bv 222, which had a pair of outboard stabilizing floats mounted on each side, the Bv 238 had only two. The Bv 238 was powered by six Daimler DB 603G engines.
For self defense, the Bv 238 was to be provided with two HD 151 twin-gun turrets with 20 mm (0.78 in) MG 151 cannons, two HL 131 V turrets with four 13 mm (0.51 in) MG 131 machine-guns and two additional MG 131s mounted in the fuselage sides. Despite the plans to arm the V1 prototype, this was never done.
The crew number is mentioned as 11 or 12 depending on the source. The sources do not specify the role they performed. It can be assumed, based on what is known from Bv 222, that there were at least two pilots, two mechanics, a radio operator and machine gun operator.
Production
Despite being based on the large Bv 222, the Bv 238 was even larger [Warbird Photographs]The production of the Bv 238 was carried out by Blohm & Voss factory at Hamburg. Only one completed prototype would be built during the war. There were also at least two to six more prototypes under construction (depending on the source), but due to the war ending, none were completed.
The small number under construction may be explained by the fact that, in the late stages of the war, the Luftwaffe was more in need of fighter planes than transports planes. In addition, there is a possibility that the Bv 238 project was actually canceled by the RLM officials.
Versions
Bv 238 A – Powered by Daimler-Benz DB 603 engines, only one built
Bv 238 B – Powered by six MW 801 engines, none built
Bv 250 – Land based version, none built
FG 227 – Scale test model of the Bv 238, used for testing
Land Based Version
There were plans to adapt the Bv 238 for land based operations by adding landing gear wheels. The project was designated Bv 250 but none were ever built. It was planned to provide this version with heavy defence armament consisting of twelve 20 mm (0.78 in) MG 151 cannons. The engine chosen for this model was the six Jumo 222. As this engine was never built in any large numbers, the DB 603 was meant to be used instead.
Escape Aircraft
There are some rumors that the Bv 238 was actually developed as an escape aircraft for high ranking Nazi officials. It was rumored that Martin Bormann had plans to use it to escape Germany in early 1945. Of course, due to Allied Air Force supremacy and the Bv 238’s large size, this may have not been a viable plan if ever attempted.
Conclusion
The V1 Prototype after its maiden test flight [Warbird Photographs]If it was put into production, the Bv 238 would have had the honor of being the largest flying boat that saw service during the war. While it only performed test flights and was never used operationally, it was nevertheless an astonishing engineering achievement.
Blohm & Voss BV 238 V1 Specifications
Wingspan
196 ft / 60 m
Length
145 ft / 43.4 m
Height
35 ft 9 in / 10.9 m
Wing Area
3,875 ft² / 360 m²
Engine
Six 2900 hp Daimler-Benz DB 603
Empty Weight
120,500 lb / 54,660 kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight
207,990 lb / 94,340 kg
Maximum Speed
220 mph / 355 km/h
Cruising Speed
210 mph / 335 km/h
Range
3,790 mi / 6,100 km
Maximum Service Ceiling
20,670 ft / 6,300 m
Crew
11-12 (2 pilots, 9 airmen)
Armament
none
Gallery
The sole completed Bv238V1 Prototype by Ed Jackson
The Fi 167 was developed out of a need for a dedicated torpedo-bomber to be operated on the first German aircraft carrier. While its overall performance proved to be satisfactory, due to the cancellation of the aircraft carrier project, only a small number were ever built. Unfortunately, information about the Fi 167 is not available or precise enough, with many disagreements between different authors.
Fieseler Flugzeugbau
In the early 1930’s, World War I fighter veteran Gerhard Fieseler (1896–1987) bought the Segelflugzeugbau Kassel Company, which mostly produced gliders, and renamed it to Fieseler Flugzeugbau. Gerhard Fieseler had gained experience in aircraft design while working as a flight instructor for the Raab-Katzenstein Aircraft Company in Kassel. In 1926, he managed to design his first aircraft, named Fieseler F1, which would be built by the Raab-Katzenstein company. By the end of twenties, Gerhard Fieseler designed another aircraft, the Raab-Katzenstein RK-26 Tigerschwalbe, of which 25 were built and sold to Swedish Air Force.
With his own company, he changed to focus on sports aircraft. In 1935, Gerhard Fieseler managed to obtain a licence for the production of military aircraft. While his best known design was the Fi 156 ‘Storch,’ he also designed the less known Fi 167 torpedo-bomber. The Fi 167 was built in small numbers and never managed to reach the fame of the Storch.
History of the Fi 167
Engine view of the Fi 167. [Valka.cz]As the German Navy began construction of its first aircraft carrier, the ‘Graf Zeppelin,’ in 1937, there was a need for a completely new torpedo bomber. For this reason, the German Ministry of Aviation (Reichsluftfahrtministerium) opened a tender for all German aircraft manufacturers who wished to participate to present their designs for such aircraft. The new aircraft was requested to have folding biplane wings, the best possible STOL (short take-off and landing) capabilities, and that the whole construction should have sufficient strength to successfully endure offensive combat operations at high speeds.
Only two manufacturers, Fieseler and Arado, presented their designs. For Fieseler it was the Fi 167 and for Arado the design was the Ar 195. In the summer of 1938, after a series of flight tests, the Fieseler Fi 167 was declared the better design. For this reason, another prototype was to be built for further testing.
The first prototype built, Fi 167 V1 (serial no. 2501), was powered by a DB 601 A/B engine. It was used mainly for testing and evaluation purposes. The second prototype (serial no. 2502) had some changes to the design, such as a modified undercarriage and was powered by the DB 601B. This engine would be used on later production versions. While most sources state that only two prototypes were built, some authors, like M. Griehl (X-Planes German Luftwaffe Prototypes 1930-1945), mention a third prototype being built. This third prototype, Fi 167 V3 (serial no. 2503), according to Griehl, was used to test the equipment used on this plane. While the sources do not give precise details about the fate of the Fi 167 prototypes, after May 1940, they were not present in the Luftwaffe inventory anymore. This may indicate that all three were scraped. After a number of tests with the Fi 167 were completed, series production of 80 aircraft was ordered.
Short lived operational service life
Fi 167 during flight in German service [Nature & Tech]Despite having promising overall performance, the Fi 167 was directly connected with the Graf Zeppelin project. While the production of a small series was underway, the construction of the Graf Zeppelin aircraft carrier was stopped in 1940, so the same fate befell the Fi 167, as there was no longer a need for a carrier capable fighter. In 1942, there was a brief revival of the aircraft carrier concept, but by that time the Ju 87C was deemed better suited for this role. This decision was not without merit, as the Ju 87 was already in production and it would be much easier, quicker, and cheaper to simply modify it for the role of aircraft carrier torpedo bomber than to put the Fi 167 back into production.
As a small number of 12 Fi 167 A-0 were built, they were sent to Holland for evaluation and testing purposes in order not to waste the resources invested in them. These were used to form Erprobungstaffel 167 which operated in Holland from 1940 to 1942. In 1943, the Fi 167 were returned to Germany and Erprobungstaffel 167 was disbanded. Their use by the Germans from 1943 onward is not completely clear in the sources. While the majority were given to Germany’s allies in late 1944, the final fate of the remaining aircraft is not known, but they were probably either lost or scrapped.
Technical characteristics
Designed to operate from an aircraft carrier, the folding wings were necessary [Nature & Tech]The Fi 167 was an all-metal, single engine biplane designed as a torpedo bomber. The Fi 167’s fuselage was constructed by using thin but with high-strength steel tubes that were welded together and then covered with duralumin sheet metal.
In the glazed cockpit there was room for two crew members, the pilot and the observer/rear gunner. The cockpit was covered with plexiglass but was open to the rear in order to provide the rear gunner with a good arc of fire. The Fi 167 was powered by the Daimler-Benz DB 601B 12-cylinder inverted-V engine putting out 1,100 horsepower. The total fuel load was 1,300 liters.
The Fieseler Fi 167 had a biplane layout. The upper and lower wings were the same in size and had a rectangular shape with rounded edges. The wings were divided into three parts in order to make any necessary maintenance or disassembly easier. Being designed to be used on an aircraft carrier, the Fi 167’s wings could also be folded. In order to be adequately structurally stable, the upper and the lower wings were interconnected by ‘N’ shaped metal rods. There were four of these ‘N’ shaped metal rods in total. These were then held in place with steel cables. For better control during flight, both wings were provided with flaps.
The landing gear consisted of two independent fixed landing wheels which were provided with shock absorbers to ease the landing. The forward landing gear units were covered with duralumin coating to help reduce the aerodynamic drag. To the rear there was a smaller fixed landing wheel. The Fi 167 landing gear was designed to be easily discarded in the case of a forced landing on water. The idea was that it would enable the Fi 167 to float on the water surface and thus provide more time for the crew to successfully evacuate the aircraft.
The armament consisted of two machine guns, one forward mounted 7.92 mm MG 17 with 500 rounds of ammunition and a second MG 15 of the same caliber mounted in a rear, flexible mount with 600 rounds of ammunition. The Fi 167 could be additionally armed with up to 2,200 lbs (1,000 kg) of bombs or one torpedo. In some sources, it is mentioned that there were actually two forward mounted machine guns.
Production
The German Navy was trying to build its first aircraft carrier, the Graf Zeppelin, but due to various reasons it was never completed. [Vaz]The Fi 167 production run was quite limited, mostly due to cancellation of the Graf Zeppelin aircraft carrier. Besides the two or three prototypes, only a small series of Fi 167 (A-0) pre-production aircraft were made. How many were built varies depending on the source. Authors C. Chant (Pocket Guide: Aircraft Of The WWII) and D. Nešić (Naoružanje Drugog Svetskog Rata Nemačka) mention that, besides two prototypes, 12 pre-production aircraft were built. Authors F. A. Vajda and P. Dancey (German Aircraft Industry And Production 1933-1945) give a number of 15 aircraft produced. They also mention that a serial production of 80 Fi 176 was to be completed by June 1941 but, due to the cancelation of the project, this was never achieved. On different internet websites, the total number of Fi 167 built varies between 14 and 29.
Fi 167 V1 – Powered by the DB 601 A/B engine.
Fi 167 V2 – Had modified undercarriage and was powered by the DB 601B engine.
Fi 167 V3 – Possibly-built third prototype, but sources are not in agreement about its existence.
Fi 167A-0 – 12 aircraft built.
In Romanian hands?
It is commonly stated in many sources that the Fi 167 were sold to Romania in 1943. These were allegedly used to patrol the Black Sea. This is likely incorrect, as another German ally, the Independent State of Croatia ‘NDH,’ received nearly all Fi 167 produced. There is a possibility that the Fi 167 were given to Romanians and then returned back to Germany. But due to the lack of any valid documentation, this is only speculation at best.
In NDH service
Fi 167 (serial no. 4808) in NDH service. This is the aircraft that pilot Romeo Adum deserted to the Partisan side. [Vaz]A group of 11 (or 10 depending on the source) Fi 167 (serial no. 4801-4812) arrived in NDH during September 1944. These aircraft were given to the 1st Squadron stationed in Zagreb for the necessary pilot training. While during its service in the NDH, the Fi 167 was used in bombing combat operations, but was mostly used as a transport plane for food and ammunition. Due to having no problem carrying significant loads and its ability to take off or to land on short airfields, they were ideal for supplying many NDH garrisons besieged by Yugoslav Partisans.
Due to the overall difficult situation of the Axis forces on all fronts, the NDH Army and Air Force were plagued with frequent desertions, including a number of pilots. On 25th September 1944, while flying a Fi 167 (serial no. 4808), pilot Romeo Adum escaped to the Yugoslav Partisan held airfield at Topusko.
There is an interesting story about one Fi 167 piloted by Mate Jurković, as it is claimed he managed to avoid being shot down by five American P-51 Mustangs. This engagement happened on 10th October 1944 during a Fi 167 ammunition supply mission to Bosanska Gradiška. During this flight, the Fi 167 was attacked by a group of five Mustangs. Outgunned and outnumbered, the pilot could only hope to escape by using the Fi 167’s excellent maneuverability at lower altitudes. He eventually managed to escape his pursuers without taking any damage.
Due to a lack of spare parts, Allied air supremacy and Partisan advance, by April 1945 there were only four Fi 167 still present in the NDH Air Force. The condition of these planes is not known. Of these, at least three would be used after the war by the new JNA (Yugoslav People’s Army) army. During its operational use by the NDH Air Force, the Fi 167 was known as ‘The Great Fiesler’.
In Partisan hands
The Fi 167 operated by the Yugoslav Partisans during the war. The Red Star can be seen painted under the lower wings. [paluba.info]As mentioned earlier, the Partisans managed to acquire one Fi 167. It would be redeployed to the island of Vis and included in the group of NDH aircraft that had defected earlier (one FP 2, two Saiman 200s, one Bü 131, and one Fiat G. 50).
On the 17th of October 1944, while on a liaison mission from Vis to the village of Vrdovo, after delivering orders to the command of the Partisan 20th Division stationed there, the Fi 167 piloted by M. Lipovšćak and with General Ćetković as a passenger began taking to the sky. Unfortunately for them, a group of four P-51 Mustangs attacked the lone aircraft. The Fi 167 was hit in the engine and the tail and the wounded pilot was forced to land on a nearby open plateau. While the pilot was only wounded, General Ćetković was dead, being directly hit by machine gun fire. Circumstances of this accident are not clear even to this day. The P-51 pilots later claimed that, due to bad weather, they could not see the Partisan markings. By the later account of the Fi 167 pilot, he claimed that the visibility was such that the Partisan markings could have been easily seen.
In JNA service
At least three Fi 167 were put into use by the JNA (Yugoslav People’s Army) after the war. Due to the lack of spare parts, their use was probably limited. They would remain in use up to 1948, but unfortunately they were probably all scrapped, as none survive to this day.
Conclusion
Despite being considered an overall good design, the Fi 167 was never put into mass production. The main reason for this was the cancellation of the Graf Zeppelin aircraft carrier. Nevertheless, the Fi 167 did see some limited service within the Luftwaffe, mainly for testing, but also with the Croatia NDH, where its performance was deemed sufficient.
Operators
Nazi Germany – Used the small number of Fi 167, mostly for various experimental purposes.
Romania – Allegedly supplied with Fi 167 in 1943, but this is not confirmed.
Independent State of Croatia NDH – Operated 10 to 11 aircraft between September 1944 and April 1945.
SFR Yugoslavia – Operated a small number of Fi 167 during the war and up to 1949.
Specification: Fi 167
Wingspan
44 ft 3 in / 13.5 m
Length
37 ft 5 in / 11.4 m
Height
15 ft 9 in / 4.8 m
Wing Area
490 ft² / 45.5 m²
Engine
One 1100 hp (820 kW) Daimler-Benz DB 601B
Fuel load
1,300 l
Empty Weight
6170 lb / 2,800 kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight
10,690 lb / 4,860 kg
Maximum Speed
200 mph / 325 km/h
Cruising Speed
168 mph / 270 km/h
Range
800 mi / 1,300 km
Maximum Service Ceiling
26,900 ft / 8,200 m
Crew
One pilot and one observer/rear gunner
Armament
One 7.92 mm MG 17 forward-firing machine gun
One 7.92 mm MG 15 rear mounted machine gun
Bomb load of 1.000 kg (2.200 lbs)or 750 kg (1650 lbs) torpedo
Fi 167A-0 in service with Erprobungsstaffel 167 in the Netherlands 1940 – Equipped with a centerline rack and torpedoFi 167A-0 (W.Nr.08) in service with Erprobungsstaffel 167 in the Netherlands 1940 – Seen here sporting a different camo patternFi 167 No. 4806 in Croatian ServiceFi 167 in Partisan Yugoslav service circa 1944Artist Concept of the Fi 167 in Romanian Service in 1943
While the Fi 167 proved to have excellent handling characteristics, due to the cancelation of the German aircraft carrier project, it was not accepted for service. [Vaz]Another view of a flying Fi 167. [Valka.cz]Sources
An alternate side view of the Fw 190 mit DB 609 model. [Falko Bormann]The Focke-Wulf Fw 190 mit DB 609 was a 1942 design venture to provide the Luftwaffe with a successor to the Fw 190 and its troublesome BMW 801 radial engine. Intended, to mount the envisioned experimental 16-cylinder Daimler-Benz DB 609 engine to produce around 2,600 hp (later 3,400 hp), the new power plant would have required a drastic redesign to the forward section of the Fw 190 as well as parts of the fuselage. In the end, the Fw 190 mit DB 609 was canceled due to flaws with the design and Daimler-Benz’s cancellation of the DB 609 project. Similar to many of the other designs produced in 1942, the Fw 190 mit DB 609 remained a paper design only, although an airframe was provided for the intent of mounting and testing the engine. Obscure in nature and short-lived, much of the project’s specifications and estimated performance are unknown.
History
The original blueprint illustration of the Fw 190 mit DB 609. [War Thunder Forums]The Focke-Wulf Fw 190 Würger (Shrike) was one of Nazi Germany’s most iconic fighters of the Second World War. First introduced in August of 1941, the Fw 190 gave contemporary Allied fighters a run for their money and proved to be a relatively successful design. However, the air-cooled 14-cylinder BMW 801 radial engine which powered the Fw 190 proved to be troublesome at times. The BMW 801’s cooling system was inadequate, which caused overheating and production of fumes, which would leak into the cockpit and could suffocate the pilot. Despite the relatively successful introduction of the Fw 190, it was not known if the Reichsluftfahrtministerium (RLM / Ministry of Aviation) would make further orders for the aircraft. However, the spring of 1942 was a prosperous time for the Focke-Wulf firm and assured the Fw 190’s future. The RLM put in orders for large quantities of Fw 190, which in turn boosted the firm’s budget. As such, designers at the Bremen-based Focke-Wulf firm initiated a design venture to produce a successor for the Fw 190 by replacing the troublesome BMW 801 engine with more advanced engines being developed by BMW and Daimler-Benz.
As such, the Focke-Wulf firm produced several drawings in late 1942 which saw the Fw 190 mounting experimental engines. The designs are as follows:
Drawing Number
Project Title
10 10 05-201
Fw 190 mit BMW P. 8028
10 10 05-202
Fw 190 mit BMW 801 J
10 10 05-203
Fw 190 mit DB 609
10 13 141-02
Fw 190 mit DB 623 A
10 13 141-16
Fw 190 mit DB 614
11 19 05-502
Fw 190 mit BMW P. 8011
Unknown
Fw 190 mit DB 603
Unknown
Fw 190 Strahljäger
In order to provide a suitable testbed for these engines, Fw 190 V19 (Werknummer 0042, rebuilt from a Fw 190 A-1) was allocated for engine installation tests. Curiously enough, Fw 190 V19 would be later be redesigned for the “Falcon” wing design which saw a drastic redesign of the wing to a swept, bent design. Conversion to this wing type was meant to take place on February 16, 1944 but this would never occur. Nonetheless, Fw 190 V19 would maintain the regular wings for engine testing.
A closeup of the Fw 190 mit DB 609 model’s cockpit and fuselage section, highlighting the supercharger radiator’s placement. [Falko Bormann]Although the Fw 190 mit DB 609 showed potential, there were several problems which plagued the design. For one, the rather heavy and bulky engine severely affected the aircraft’s center of gravity. As such, the engine’s radiators had to be moved down the fuselage behind the cockpit. The engine also would have put too much stress on the landing gears which could potentially result in a fatal crash if landing conditions were rough. On top of the airframe design issues, the intricate design of the engine also proved a problem for the Daimler-Benz designers, who would terminate the DB 609 (and its subprojects) in April 1943. As such, the Fw 190 mit 609 project would be dropped as well without the experimental engine ever being mounted on V19. Many of the other designs produced by Focke-Wulf in 1942 would also meet the same fate, for more or less similar reasons.
Due to the short-lived conceptual nature of the design, detailed specifications and estimated performance do not appear to have survived. As such, much of the aircraft’s intricate details and specifications are unknown. One could only hope that, in the near future, more details of the Fw 190 mit DB 609 and it’s contemporary designs will surface.
Design
A model of the Fw 190 mit DB 609 in a hypothetical livery with a drop tank. [Falko Bormann]The Focke-Wulf Fw 190 mit DB 609 was a 1942 project to produce a successor to the Fw 190 by replacing the troublesome BMW 801 engine with more promising experimental engines being developed at the time. As the name of the project suggests, this design would have seen the implementation of a Daimler-Benz DB 609 V16 engine. The Daimler-Benz DB 609 was a development of the company’s DB 603 engine. Unlike its predecessor, the DB 609 would have 16 cylinders in contrast to the former’s 12 cylinders. The DB 609’s output was estimated by Daimler-Benz designers to be approximately 2,600 to 2,660 hp, though it would later be upped to 3,400 hp. The benefits of this engine were the ability to function normally upright and inverted, but the bulky engine design required a drastic redesign of the engine cowl and parts of the fuselage. The cowl would have been extended to accommodate the DB 609 engine, the length of which would have measured at 115 in / 2,935 mm compared to the BMW 801’s 79 in / 2,006 mm length.
According to the official blueprints for the Fw 190 mit DB 609, the two large radiators intakes required for the engine’s supercharger were moved to the cockpit’s rear, on the side of the fuselage. This was done to pull the center of gravity back, as placing them in the front would make the aircraft too nose heavy. The placement of the supercharger radiators is similar to that of the American Republic P-47 Thunderbolt. It would appear that internet sources claim the radiator placement was nicknamed the Hamsterbacken (Hamster Cheeks), but it is unknown whether or not this was an official nickname.
Fw 190 V19 (Werknummer 0042), which was intended to mount and test the DB 609 engine, was rebuilt from a Fw 190 A-1, but it is unknown which variant precisely the hypothetical production variant would be based upon. Armament wise, the official project blueprints show two 7.92x57mm Mauser MG 17 machine guns mounted on top the engine cowl. What appears to be a 20x82mm Mauser MG 151/20 cannon would be installed in the engine hub and would fire out through the propellers. It is unknown what wing armament (if any) the Fw 190 mit DB 609 would have had.
Due to the rather short-lived and conceptual nature of the Fw 190 mit DB 609, not many of the plane’s specifications are unknown. Performance estimations do not appear to be available, nor are aircraft dimensions.
Operators
Nazi Germany – The Focke-Wulf Fw 190 mit DB 609 was intended to be a successor to the Fw 190. However, development was dropped due to various problems with the design and engine.
Gallery
Artist Concept of the Fw 109 with the DB 609 Engine [Ed Jackson]A retouched blueprint of the Fw 190 mit DB 609. [Heinz J. Nowarra]Credits
Primary Sources
Fw 190 mit DB 609 (Drawing. No. 10 10 05-203). (1942). Bremen: Focke-Wulf Flugzeugbau AG.
V1 being piloted by Kurt Tank. (Monogram Close-up 22)
Designed as a stopgap to combat the ever-growing numbers of Royal Air Force bombers and de Havilland Mosquitos, the Focke-Wulf Ta 154 was a project plagued with problems, from the glue used for its wooden construction to the unreliable landing gear. After the construction of dozens of prototypes and variants the project was eventually canceled due to inadequate performance and the lack of skilled workers available able to handle the plane’s specialized wooden construction process.
Development
Until the large RAF (Royal Air Force) bomber offensive on Cologne (Köln), Essen, and Bremen in mid-1942, the Luftwaffe had focused on developing offensive aircraft. Shortly after these raids, Generalfeldmarschall (Field Marshal) Erhard Milch, the Minister of Air Armaments, held a development conference to spark ideas for possible uses of the Jumo 211 engine. Afterward, Milch made it clear that using “homogenous wood” was a viable option for producing light airplane airframes. The term ‘homogeneous’ refers to the fact that the construction material was all of the same type of plywood. Coincidentally, Milch was also very interested in the creation of a new light, high-speed night bomber.
Blueprint of the Ta 154 before receiving its final designation. (Monogram Close-up 22)
In September of 1942, Focke-Wulf presented the concept of developing a plane equivalent to the De Havilland Mosquito to the Reichsluftfahrtministerium (RLM, the Nazi Ministry of Aviation). It was detailed as being a high-speed, dual-engined, and unarmed bomber. Focke-Wulf’s proposal would be constructed of 50% wood, 39% steel, and 11% fabric (it is not specified whether this was by weight or volume). The RLM immediately gave Focke-Wulf a high-priority contract. The design continued to be refined as a high-speed bomber until 16 October 1942, when Generalfeldmarschall Milch decided to voice the importance of the aircraft’s secondary role as a night fighter. At the time, Germany was in dire need of twin-engine fighters with a large operational range in order to combat the growing waves of Allied bombers, which carried out their missions day and night. In order to satisfy Milch’s requirements, the aircraft was now to be equipped with a FuG 212 search radar and a fixed armament of two MK 103 and two MG 151 cannons.
Cutaway of the Ta 154’s wing spar. (National Air and Space Museum Archives)
With the Ta 154 being constructed mostly of plywood and having promising performance estimates, the Technische Amt (Technical Research Office) was highly interested. They believed they had finally found a second generation night fighter that could adapt to the material shortages facing the Reich at that point and capable of replacing the aging Bf 110. Consequently, Erhard Milch focused his attention even more on the Ta 154’s night fighter capabilities and decided to stop pursuing high-speed bomber research. On 13 November 1942, the Technical Research Office continued their support for the project, then known as the “Ta 211” or the “Focke-Wulf Night Fighter,” and urged Focke-Wulf to continue developing the aircraft. Shortly after, the aircraft received the designation “Ta 154,” which it would keep for the duration of its existence.
On 8 January 1943, just days after Focke-Wulf was told to construct ten prototypes of the Ta 154, the “Ta 154 Startup Conference” took place. At the conference, it was made clear that while the project was promising, there were not enough skilled woodworkers to produce the aircraft. In addition, it was correctly theorized that the Jumo 211 wouldn’t produce enough horsepower at altitude to match the enemy’s aircraft development. The Technische Amt requested an armament of four MK 103 cannons, but in March of the same year, an analysis of the plane revealed that the nearly eight foot long cannons would not be able to fit. It was decided in June 1943 that production of the Ta 154 would be separated into three areas, Silesia, Thuringia, and the Warthe District, with the Warthe District being responsible for the most variants.
Kurt Tank at the controls of the V1 shortly before takeoff. (Tank Power No.304: Focke-Wulf Ta 154)
After only 9 months in the making, the first prototype took flight in early July 1943, flown by Hans Sander. It is often publicized that Kurt Tank, designer of the plane, piloted the Ta 154 on its maiden flight, but this is incorrect, as he was too important to risk in such a potentially dangerous test. Sander later described the plane as being easier to control than the Heinkel 219, which he had flown prior. However, performance was not up to par with the estimates Focke-Wulf started with. Problems continued when it was speculated that installing the FuG 212 radar, flame dampers, and drop tanks requested by the Technische Amt would slow the Ta 154 down to an estimated 360 mph (580 km/h) at altitude. Not only would it slow the aircraft significantly, but it would also lower the service ceiling from 34,100 ft (10,400 m) to 30,800 ft (9,400 m). Due to this, Focke-Wulf demanded the delivery of the more powerful Jumo 213 engines the aircraft desperately needed. Focke-Wulf was promptly declined and were told the engines would be ready in mid-1944.
Kurt Tank taxiing the V1. (Monogram Close-up 22)
On 29 October 1943, a very successful Luftwaffe pilot by the name of Thierfelder test flew the Ta 154. Although he praised the Ta 154, RLM’s head of planning, Oberst Diesing, criticized the plane just months later, stating that any ordinary pilot would not have the same positive experience. The Oberst’s critiques didn’t stop there, however, as he alleged that pieces of the aircraft fuselage fell off when firing the guns and airframe vibrations would discourage pilots from flying the aircraft.
During another conference on 17 March 1944, a date for the start of production could not be set due to the lack of trained workers experienced with handling the plane’s bonding materials and insufficient bonding resin. In addition, the delivery of the Jumo 213 engines was set back further, and it was decided to complete the first production model in the coming months. On 12 April 1944, flight captain Hans Sander, who test flew both the Fw 187 and Ta 154, presented a prototype to Hermann Göring. Göring already had a massive interest in the development of the Ta 154, and the demonstration only fortified his overinflated view of the plane. Soon afterward, the prototype construction program called for prototypes V1 through V9 to be fitted with new metal control surfaces. Unfortunately, the V3 had recently crashed, and the V4 was being repaired after it had crashed.
V1 being towed prior to taking off. (National Air and Space Museum Archives) [Colorized by Michael Jucan]In mid-1944, trials at Langenhagen uncovered more problems, including the weakness of the landing gear and its hydraulics. Focke-Wulf released a report soon after detailing the total number of crashes so far. V1, V3, V4, V5, V8, and V9 had all crashed from 1943 to May 1944. The crash of the V8 had been caused by an engine fire, resulting in both the pilot and radio operator dying in the crash. Had the cockpit been made of metal, the crew would have survived. This motivated all those working on the Ta 154 to produce a metal fuselage or continue working on the C model, which possessed a metal nose and cockpit.
On May 29, 1944, RAF bombers bombed the factory in the Posen province, as well as destroying the glue manufacturing facility owned by the Goldschmitt Company (Tegofilm). There was also an attempt by Allied fighters to strafe the Langenhagen airfield where the Ta 154 was being tested. This was planned by the Allies to stop the planned production of the Ta 154, as it was believed that it could prove a worthy opponent to their air superiority. In the end this, along with shifting priorities, contributed to the termination of the Ta 154 program.
The V7 at Langenhagen shortly before takeoff. (Monogram Close-up 22)
More problems continued to arise in late-1944, as the mounts for the MK 108 cannons could not handle the recoil of the large caliber gun. Consequently, any Ta 154’s that did see combat were only fitted with the remaining two MG 151/20 cannons and did not have a metal fuselage. Those aircraft were deployed in Northern Germany. Furthermore, finding a suitable source for resin was proving ever more difficult. More prototypes had been planned under the names V1a, V11, V14a, and V24, with the last two being planned for static testing of the C variant. During another meeting on May 24th between Kurt Tank, Milch, Galland, Heinkel, Vogt, Frydag, Saur, and Göring, Tank finally admitted that the project was stalled because of the lack of the necessary resin. Moreover, Göring was becoming disappointed in the engine’s performance affecting the entire aircraft and feared that upgrading to the Jumo 213 would still leave much to be desired. Göring continued to voice his concerns with the wooden underside of the aircraft which made belly landings impossible. Tank’s Ta 154 was now on the chopping block. On 6th July, 1944, GFM Milch notified Focke-Wulf that the Ta 154 and Ta 254 programs would be terminated immediately.
All the remaining aircraft were left to sit at airfields. This resulted in most being destroyed in air raids and strafing attacks by Allied planes. Of the few remaining Ta 154’s used by separate night-fighter groups, many were destroyed to prevent capture by Allied troops. Of the 50-100 complete aircraft and many incomplete airframes, the Allies found a single Ta 154 A-1 intact, formerly used by NJG 3 (Nachtjagdgeschwader 3 / Night Hunter Squadron 3) at Lechfeld. The Ta 154 was placed behind a stack of jet engines waiting to be scrapped. It is likely that any captured Ta 154’s were scrapped, as none survive today. There is, however, a replica of the forward sections of the V3 at the Luftfahrttechnisches Museum in Rechlin, placed there in 2006. Many replicas exist at the museum, including the Me 262 HG I, He 162, and Ju 388.
Variants
V1 after it has received its designation. (Monogram Close-up 22)
There were many different variants of the Ta 154 built or proposed despite its relatively short lifespan. The first prototype was completed in July 1943, with prototype numbers ranging from V1 to V23. V1 through V10 were the first batch of prototypes ordered by the RLM. V11 through V14 were static airframes meant for destructive tests, with the former three resembling A models, and V14 resembling the C variant. V15 was a prototype of the A-2 variant. The use of V16 through V21 is not clear, but V20 is thought to have been the prototype for the C-1 variant, which was never produced. V22 was particularly special because of its lengthened fuselage, and there exists a photo of its wreckage. V23 is less known, but both the V22 and V23 were test beds for the Jumo 213 A. There is close to no information detailing prototypes past V10. Only brief explanations of their purpose is available.
The A-0 model was the pre-production version, of which a total of about twenty-two were constructed. They were equipped with FuG 220 radar, but had their flame dampers removed. The A-1 was the first production variant, very similar to the A-0, of which six were built. The A-2 variant was almost identical to the A-1 in all aspects, and four were built. The A-4 variant featured the addition of upturned wing tips to aid in lateral stability. Only two A-4s are known to have been built.
After the first A model Moskitos were tested, the B model was drawn up. It was based on the A-4, but incorporated a bubble canopy and a metal nose section to protect the pilot in case of belly landings. In early December 1943, however, Technische Amt decided to abandon the Ta 154 B model, and instead focus on the production of the C model, which also had a bulbous canopy, but now had an extended fuselage. It was during this time that the D variant was also realized, but was soon renamed the Ta 254. It would be equipped with Jumo 213 engines, MW 50 injection, and larger wings. No B, C, or Ta 254 models were built.
Production
The backside of the A-1. (Tank Power No.304: Focke-Wulf Ta 154)
The process to build the Ta 154 was not expensive in regards to the amount or costs of the necessary materials, but was pricey in terms of the manpower required for its careful assembly. The fuselage of the Ta 154 alone took four hundred hours to complete. All kinds of jigs and presses were constructed to aid in the process of molding the wood to the correct shape. The key to making so many Ta 154s was having as many workers as possible, but the curing process for the glue resin that was used took up to a full day to cure, which meant lots of time was spent waiting rather than working. Unfortunately for Focke-Wulf, the amount of workers that were experienced in working with these materials were few and far between. This meant the quality of the planes came down to the craftsmanship of each individual worker. Compared to the quality of the RAF Mosquito, the Ta 154 was inferior. The German wood workers were not used to the pressures of wartime production that the British were accustomed to.
The Ta 154 was trialed in some unorthodox ways. To test the strength of the components, a mockup missing both engines and a large portion of its wings was built specifically to be dragged underwater by a towing unit. This was done in 1943 at Lake Alatsee in Füssen, Bavaria. The towing unit was an “FGZ”, a trio of pontoon boats with a large crane in the center of the three. The mockup was dragged underwater at speeds up to 8.45 m/s (16 knots, 30 km/h) to simulate the pressure of flying. There were a total of six of these tests, and on the sixth test, the damage to the mockup became extensive. The nose cone became deformed, each end of the cut-off wing sections were mangled, and the canopy was broken.
Role
The Ta 154, although originally intended to be a high-speed bomber, was fully realized as a night fighter. The purpose of a night fighter is to counter aircraft, specifically bombers in this case, at night or in low visibility conditions. Such an aircraft was highly valued by the Luftwaffe in their efforts to counter the nightly RAF bombing raids targeting German industrialized zones.
Operational Service
Very limited information is available on the actions of the Moskitos assigned to 3.NJGr 10 and NJG 3, however, on March 22, 1945, four Ta 154s were spotted at Stade Airfield. They were observed next to Ju 88 and He 219 night fighters, as well as one undergoing armament tests at a range on the base. Three of the four Ta 154s were covered in light-colored paint, while the last was in a spotted camouflage. To back up the evidence that several were in operational service, a document from Junkers on March 16, 1945, details several Ta 154s being assigned to III./NJG 3. The document proceeds to tell of the experience of the Ta 154s against De Havilland Mosquitos, a fight during which the British plane usually came out on top. Another document from the British, ATI 2nd TAF Report A 685, was made on May 10, 1945. This report detailed the discovery of a crashed Ta 154 in operation as a night fighter on May 6, 1945. The camouflage pattern was a light blue on the majority of the aircraft, with gray spots decorating the top half of the plane. The crew of the aircraft was nowhere to be found, and the aircraft was looted by locals. In addition, the horizontal stabilizer was completely metal, and an angled wing tip device was fitted to improve stability. This points to one of two A-4s produced.
Design
V1 in its original paint scheme. Note the absence of flame dampers. (Monogram Close-up 22)
The Ta 154 “Moskito” was a twin-engined heavy fighter with shoulder-mounted wings, fuselage-mounted horizontal stabilizers, a tricycle landing gear arrangement, while being composed almost entirely out of wood. Perhaps the least noticeable characteristic of the Ta 154 that gave it major problems was its wings. They had no dihedral, which resulted in instability in turns. This problem was fixed in the A-4 variant that took advantage of upturned wingtips. The problem that affected the Ta 154 the most was failure of the front landing gear assembly. Because of the tricycle landing gear arrangement, the front gear had to be long enough to allow clearance for the propellers on the ground. The length of the front landing gear and the lack of thick supports meant failures happened often. The crew of the Ta 154 almost exclusively consisted of a single pilot and a radio operator. The Ta 154 was equipped with a multitude of different radio and radar instruments. This includes the FuG 212 or FuG 220 search radar, FuG 17 VHF Transceiver, PeilG VI direction-finding set, FuBL 2F, FuG 101 altimeter, FuG 25 IFF set, and FuG 28a transponder.
The Ta 154 was often equipped with flame dampers, which are fitted to the exhaust of the engines. The purpose of flame dampers is to dampen engine noise and decrease the visibility of flames exiting the exhaust. The Ta 154, with the exception of very few variants, was equipped with two Jumo 211 F/N/R engines. The variants that did not have those specific engines were provided with Jumo 213 A/E engines that marginally improved the Ta 154’s performance. The A-1 and A-2 variants were equipped with MW 50 injection, which was a combination of water and methanol that both increased boost pressure substantially and allowed the engine to suck in more air. This injection could result in up to hundreds more horsepower than the engine would normally run, but could only be used in short bursts. GM 1, a nitrous-oxide injection system, was also proposed for the A-2 variant. Concerning armament, the Ta 154 was armed with two 20 mm MG 151/20 and two 30 mm MK 108 cannons, although field modifications were made to individual planes. Some modifications included replacing the original armament with two or four MG 151/20’s, or, in rare cases, four MK 108 cannons. The typical ammo count for an armed Ta 154 was 300 rounds total for the MG 151s, and 200 round total for the MK 108 cannons. A bomb load of a single 500kg bomb was proposed for the A-2 variant, but it is unknown whether or not this was attempted. More than one Ta 154 is alleged to have been converted to A-2/U4s, which were equipped with Schräge Musik. Schräge Musik was the German name for upward firing guns that allowed an aircraft to fire on enemies without facing directly at them. This allowed night fighters like the Bf 110 and Do 217 J to catch enemy bombers unaware with gunfire from below them.
At the end of the Ta 154 program, a radical idea to rig up an Fw 190 on a superstructure above spare Ta 154s was realized. The interior of the Moskito would be filled with explosives, as well as replacing unneeded fuel tanks with more explosives. The Ta 154 fly unmanned, and the pilot of the Fw 190 would maneuver both planes on a course into an enemy bomber formation, where the pilot would detach from the Moskito fully laden with explosives. Once the Moskito reached the middle of the formation, it would be remotely detonated by the pilot of the Fw 190. Just like many variants of the Ta 154, this was also never completed.
Variants
Prototypes
Ta 154 V1 – First prototype, designated TE+FE, not fitted with armament or flame dampers and equipped with Jumo 211F engines powering three-bladed VS 11 propellers, later retrofitted with Jumo 211N engines. Its first flight took place on July 1, 1943, and it crashed during testing on 31 July 1943 due to landing gear legs collapsing upon landing.
Ta 154 V2 – Second prototype, designated TE+FF, fitted with flame dampers and FuG 212 C-1 radar but unarmed. Later retrofitted with Jumo 211N engines. Destroyed in an air raid on August 5, 1944.
Ta 154 V3 – Third prototype, designated TE+FG, identical to V2 except for a larger vertical stabilizer. Crashed on 28 February 1944 due to the nose wheel buckling and destroying the nose section. Later damaged beyond repair in an air raid in mid-1944.
Ta 154 V4 – Fourth prototype, designated TE+FH, first flight took place on 19 January 1944. Later retrofitted with a raised canopy and an MG 81 in the dorsal position behind the pilot. Crashed on 18 February 1944 due to landing gear experiencing an uncommanded retraction upon landing.
Ta 154 V5 – Fifth prototype, designated TE+FI, crashed on 7 April 1944 due to landing gear failure on landing.
Ta 154 V6 – Sixth prototype, designated TE+FJ. Possibly captured by Soviet troops at Rechlin.
Ta 154 V7 – Seventh prototype, designated TE+FK, painted in RLM 75/76 camouflage pattern, fate unknown.
Ta 154 V8 – Eighth prototype, designated TE+FL, first Ta 154 equipped with Jumo 213 engines and VS 111 propellers. Crashed on 6 May 1944 due to an engine fire, both crew members, Otto and Rettig, were killed on impact.
Ta 154 V9 – Ninth prototype, designated TE+FM, crashed on 18 April 1944 due to the right wingtip striking the ground, killing H. Meyer on the ground.
Ta 154 V10 – Tenth prototype, designated TE+FN, equipped with Jumo 213A engines, fate unknown.
Production Variants
Ta 154 A-0 – Pre-production variant fitted with FuG 220 Lichtenstein SN-2 radar and flame dampers removed.
Ta 154 A-1 – Production variant, fitted with Jumo 211F, N or R engines
Ta 154 A-1/R1 – equipped with GM 1 and an MG 81 in a new dorsal position.
Ta 154 A-2 – Fitted with two MG 151/20s and two MK 108 cannons, proposed to equip GM 1 NOS injection and one 500 kg bomb.
Ta 154 A-2/U4 – Night fighter variant, same armament as A-2, with the addition of two diagonally placed MK 108 cannons in the rear fuselage. (Schräge Musik)
Ta 154 A-4 – Fitted with two MG 151/20 (200 rpg) and two MK 108 (110 rpg) cannons and FuG 218 radar. The most interesting part of the A-4 was the addition of upturned wingtips.
Ta 154 B-1 – Proposed two-seat night fighter variant with a raised canopy, metal nose section, drop tanks, and Jumo 211N engines. Research discontinued in favor of the C variant with Jumo 213 engines.
Ta 154 C – Proposed variants to be fitted with Jumo 213A engines and incorporating a metal nose section as well as a raised canopy.
5 cm B.K. armed Ta 154 C – A concept of a Ta 154 C variant armed with a 5 cm B.K. 5 cannon conceived in early 1944. None were produced.
Ta 254 A – Proposed variant family with Jumo 213E engines, MW 50, four broad-blade VS 9 airscrew assembly and longer wings, enlarging the wing area to 452 ft2 (42 m2)
Ta 254 B-1 – Proposed two-person night fighter variant with metal nose section, powered by two DB 603L engines driving VDM propellers.
Ta 254 B-2 – Proposed three-person day fighter variant with metal nose section, powered by two Jumo 213F or G engines equipped with three-bladed VDM propellers.
Ta 254 B-3 – Proposed one-person all-weather fighter, powered by two DB 603L engines and to be fitted with MW 50 field modification.
Ta 154 Mistel – A proposed variant of an unmanned Ta 154 A-4/U3 filled with explosives with an Fw 190A attached above via a detachable superstructure. The 190 pilot would fly the two planes into an enemy bomber formation, detach the superstructure, and detonate the Ta 154’s explosives.
Operators
Nazi Germany – A-1 variants were used by the 3rd Staffel of the Nachtjagdgruppe 10 (3.NJGr 10) and Nachtjagdgeschwader 3 (NJG 3). It is not known whether they were lost in combat or achieved any air victories.
Nazi Germany (1945)
Rocket Interceptor Trainer – 1 Built
A rear 3/4 view of the Soviet captured “White 94” Me 163S. Colorization by Michael Jucan [Yefim Gordon]The Messerschmitt Me 163S (Schulflugzeug / Training Aircraft) Habicht (Hawk) was an unarmed two-seat training glider based off of the famous Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet. Originally designed for the purpose of training novice pilots for landing, the Habicht ultimately never saw active service with the Germans and only a single example was produced through the conversion of a serial Me 163B-1. With the sole example captured by the Russians after the war, the Habicht underwent extensive testing by the Soviet Air Force which helped them understand the flying characteristics of the Komet and prepared Soviet pilots for flying the powered Komets. The Habicht undoubtedly played a part in helping Soviet engineers understand the Komet and thus played a part in the future development of Soviet rocket aircraft.
History
A closeup view of the Me 163S showing the right wing. [Yefim Gordon]The Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet was one of Nazi Germany’s most famous aircraft produced during the Second World War. Although bearing the title of the world’s first mass-produced rocket-powered interceptor, the Komet did have its fair share of flaws, such as the volatile and sometimes dangerous Walter HWK 109-509 rocket engine, which prevented it from becoming an effective weapon against the Allies.
As the Komet was designed to have a limited amount of fuel to engage Allied bombers, pilots were expected to glide the Komet back to friendly airfields once they disengaged from combat. With gliding landings as a potential problem for the less experienced pilots, one of the ideas proposed by Messerschmitt designers in 1944 was to introduce a dedicated trainer variant of the Komet which would have a student pilot accompanied by an instructor pilot. Designated as the Messerschmitt Me 163S (Schulflugzeug / Training Aircraft) Habicht, the trainer glider differed from the production model with the addition of an instructor’s cockpit behind the forward cockpit. This addition was accompanied by the removal of the Walter HWK 109-509 rocket engine and the Habicht would have to be towed by another aircraft in order to get airborne. Another interesting addition to the Habicht was a second liquid tank behind the instructor’s cockpit for counterbalancing. All the liquid tanks would be filled with water for weight simulation and ballast. A total of twelve examples were planned for production, but only one was produced due to wartime production constraints.
The sole example of the Habicht was built by converting an earlier Me 163B-1 production model. Due to the scarcity of information regarding the Me 163S, it is unknown exactly when the Habicht was produced and what sort of testing it may have undergone during German possession. However, it is known that the Soviet Union was able to capture the only example during the final stages of the World War II’s Eastern Front. The sole Habicht was sent to the Soviet Union along with three Me 163B Komets during the Summer of 1945 for thorough inspection and testing. In historian Yefim Gordon’s book “Soviet Rocket Fighters – Red Star Volume 30”, he claims that in addition to the three Komets, seven Habicht trainer models were also captured. This, however, remains quite dubious as there is no evidence that more than one Habicht existed, and all current photographic material, research materials, and books all suggest that only a single example was produced.
The Me 163S in simulated flight configuration aided by struts. [Yefim Gordon]As the Soviets were particularly interested in rocket propulsion aircraft, the State Defence Committee issued a resolution which called for the thorough examination of the Walter 109-509 jet engine and the Me 163 Komet along with captured German documents on rocket propulsion. The three Me 163B Komets, of which only one was airworthy, and the Me 163S Habicht were sent to the Flight Research Institute (LII), the Valeriy P. Chkalov Soviet Air Force State Research Institute (GK NII VSS), and the Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute (TsAGI). The Habicht and Komets saw extensive testing in Soviet hands, undergoing several structural, static and wind tunnel tests. During the initial flight testing period, the Komet only flew as a glider as Soviet pilots and engineers were unsure of whether or not the Walter rocket engine was ready for use since bench tests were not completed. Securing the T-Stoff and C-Stoff propellants for the rocket engine was also a problem. In order to understand the handling characteristics of the Komet, the Habicht was flown numerous times at different altitudes, as was the unpowered Komet. A Tupolev Tu-2 bomber was responsible for towing the Habicht to these altitudes. Under Soviet ownership, the Habicht was given the nickname of “Карась” (Karas / Crucian Carp) due to the glider’s distinct silhouette. The test pilot responsible for flying the Habicht was Mark Lazarevich Gallaj. In general, the Habicht was considered relatively easy to handle by the Soviet test pilots. It is unknown how many test flights the Habicht underwent, but the aircraft certainly aided Soviet pilots in understanding the handling characteristics of the Komet. The Habicht’s service came to an end once the Soviet state trials of the Komet concluded. The sole example was scrapped sometime in 1946, along with seemingly all the other Komets.
If the Me 163S was able to be mass produced and flown with the Luftwaffe, the aircraft would have been a valuable tool to train German pilots. Landing the Komet was a problem for some pilots and in some cases resulted in fatalities but, with the use of the Habicht, the number of accidents would have certainly decreased.
Design
The Me 163S hung upside down in an unspecified TsAGI workshop for static testing. [Yefim Gordon]The Messerschmitt Me 163S Habicht was a semi-monocoque aluminum based two-seat training glider developed off the standard tailless Messerschmitt Me 163B-1 Komet. The sole example was converted from a production Komet, which meant dramatic modifications had to be made to the aircraft. The Walther HWK 109-509 rocket engine was removed and in its place was a cockpit for an instructor. The fuel tanks in the airframe were all filled with water to simulate fuel weight while another water tank was added behind the instructor’s cockpit for ballast purposes. There was no armament fitted to the glider. There was a small transparent section between the student pilot’s cockpit and the instructor pilot’s cockpit, presumably for the purpose of communication. As there are no known German documents on the Habicht and Russian documents are scarce, not much is known on the other differences the Habicht may have had. Detailed specifications of the Habicht are unknown, but theoretically it should have been identical to the standard Me 163B-1 Komet except for possibly weight, air drag and center of gravity.
Operators
Nazi Germany – The intended operator and producer of the Me 163S Habicht.
Soviet Union – The main operator of the Me 163S Habicht. A single Habicht was captured and tested by the Soviets after the war. The Habicht was scrapped in 1946.
*Editor’s note: As noted above, the exact specifications of the Me 163S Habicht are unknown. However they are presumed to be similar to that of the Me 163B-1 Komet.
Me 163S Habicht “White 94” in Russian Service [Haryo Panji]Me 163S Habicht in German Service [Haryo Panji]
Now known as the “White 94”, the Me 163S sits idly by. [Yefim Gordon]A closeup view of the Me 163S showing the transparent section between the two cockpits. [Yefim Gordon]The Me 163S in simulated flight configuration aided by struts. [Yefim Gordon]A top down view of the “White 94” Me 163S. [Yefim Gordon]A photo of the “White 94” Me 163S in flight being towed by a presumed Tupolev Tu-2. The pilot in the photo is likely Mark L. Gallaj. [Yefim Gordon]The Me 163S inside TsAGI’s T-101 wind tunnel for testing. The struts support the Habicht and simulate its flight configuration. [Yefim Gordon]An alternate closeup view of the Me 163S during static tests. [Yefim Gordon]
Yet another inverted static test, but this time the tail wheel strut and tire were removed from the Me 163S. [Yefim Gordon]
Nazi Germany (1942)
Experimental Aircraft – 1 Prototype Built
Three-quarters view of the B9, note the large glazed cockpit. Colorized by Michael Jucan [airwar.ru]The Akaflieg Berlin B9 was a German experimental twin engine aircraft designed with the pilot placed in the prone position. It was designed to withstand extremely high g-forces. One prototype was built and tested by a glider production workshop in 1943 but it would not be adopted for mass production. The author would like to especially thank Carsten Karge from the Archiv Akaflieg Berlin for providing information on this generally unknown aircraft.
Why prone position?
During sharp up and down turns while flying an aircraft, strong g-forces appear that act on the pilot, potentially leading to loss of consciousness. Under normal flying conditions, the g-forces that appear are relatively harmless. The first effect of the g-force which the pilot notices is the difficulty of moving his body normally, as normal movements feel much heavier. Another effect of strong g-forces, which is much more dangerous, is the loss of oxygen flow to the brain. In some cases, the flow of oxygen and blood to the human brain can be greatly diminished, which can lead to the pilot losing consciousness momentarily. This effect lasts a short time, but it is enough for the pilot to lose control of the plane with a potentially fatal outcome.
While today, devices such as advanced anti-g suits help the pilot withstand strong g-forces, during the World War Two, other solutions had to be found. The Germans had noticed that, especially during sharp dive bombing actions, the pilots often lost consciousness. One way to tackle this was to put the pilot into a prone position, which in essence means to fly the plane while lying on the belly. In this position, the pilot has both his heart and his brain at the same level, which means that blood is no longer stopped from travelling to the brain during high-g maneuvers. Thus, this flying position allows the pilot to endure much greater g-forces than he would normally be able to if he would be in an ordinary sitting position. Other advantages of the prone position are the reduced aircraft size, smaller fuselage, less drag due to the smaller cockpit, and it would be easier for the pilot to operate the plane when conducting bomb sighting and ground attack, among other advantages.
During the war, the Germans would test several such aircraft designs, sush as the Henschel Hs 132 or B9, mostly for the ground attack role. Beside a few prototypes built, none were ever used operationally.
History
The SF 17 prone glider was the forerunner of the B9 powered aircraft [Akaflieg Stuttgart]In order to test the idea of an aircraft with the pilot in the prone-position, the Aero-Technical Group (Flugtechnische Fachgruppe/FFG) of Stuttgart designed and later built the FS 17 all-wood test glider. It was especially designed to withstand forces up to 14 G. It made its first test flight on 21st March, 1938. In the spring of 1939, FFG Stuttgart made the first design drawings and calculations for a prone-piloted aircraft. This aircraft was to be powered by two Hirth HM 50 engines with an estimated speed of 250 mph (400 km/h).
FFG Stuttgart never completed this project as it was forced, for unknown but likely politicaly reasons, to hand over the project to Akaflieg (Akademische Fliegergruppe/Academic Aviator Group) Berlin. It is possible the order came from the German Experimental Department for Aerospace (Deutsche Versuchanstalt für Luftfahrt e.V. Berlin-Aldershof) DVL or even from the Ministry of Aviation (RLM – Reichsluftfahrtministerium), but precise information is lacking. Akaflieg Berlin, founded in 1920, was one of the oldest gliding clubs in Germany and it still exists today.
The RLM designation for this aircraft was “8-341” but Akaflieg used the simpler B9 designation. The technical characteristics that the new plane was supposed to have were a good field-of-view for the pilot in the prone position, a high degree of safety for the pilot, a high speed during diving, good general flying characteristics and being able to withstand forces of up to 25 G, or 22 G depending on the sources.
Akaflieg Berlin had a small number of engineers and workers and an adequately equipped workshop to complete the task given. For this purpose, a design team was formed with Theodor Goedicke, Leo Schmidt and Martin G. Winter, which was responsible for the creation of this new aircraft design. The first prototype was to be ready by August 1942 but this was never achieved, and the prototype was only completed in early 1943. It made its first test flight on the 10th April, 1943 at the Schönefeld airfield, near Berlin.
The Design
Front view of the B9 [airwar]The B9 was a single-seat, low wing, mixed construction aircraft with the pilot in prone position. It consisted of a metal airframe, made of steel ribs, covered with wood and canvas. The main fuselage’s cross-section was trapezoidal shaped. As the B9 was specifically designed to withstand forces of up to 25 G, it had to have a strong fuselage.
The wings were made of wood covered with duralumin sheets. In order for the wooden wings to withstand the strong torsional forces which occur during high acceleration maneuvers, the spaces between the spars were heavily reinforced. The middle part of the wings viewed from above have a square shape and then narrow towards the wing tips. The wings were held in place by four bolts on each side. The rear tail design was a simple one, with standard rudder and elevators.
The B9 had a standard retractable landing gear copied from the Me-108, which consisted of two larger wheels and one smaller non-retractable wheel at the back. The landing gear was lowered and raised manually. The front wheels retracted into the engine nacelles, but they were not fully enclosed.
The B9 had a large 4.9 ft (1.5 m) long glazed cockpit with good all-around view. But, as the pilot was in a prone position, the above and the rear views were limited by the human body’s inability to turn the head in these directions. The glazed cockpit was made of two parts, the front windshield and the rear larger canopy that opened to the right side. The cockpit interior had to be especially designed for a pilot lying in the prone position. The usual flight controls were almost useless in this situation and, thus, certain changes were necessary. It was important to divide the controls on both sides of the cockpit, in order to avoid the pilot crossing hands, which could lead to complications in flight. On the right side were the controls for ailerons and elevation. The pilot would use his right hand to gain access to the harness and the canopy release mechanism. For controlling the rudders and brakes, the pilot would use his feet. Using his left hand, he would operate the remaining instruments, the throttles, flaps, ignition switches, emergency pump, fire warning, undercarriage control and others. Additional engine and flight instruments were located behind the pilot. These included, among others, the distance indicator, climb indicator, compass, oil and fuel pressure gauges and airspeed indicator. For the pilot to be able to see them, a small mirror was provided. There were also inclined and horizontal line markers on the inner windshield to help the pilot with orientation. For flying at high altitude, an oxygen supply system with a mask was provided to the pilot.
The aircraft was powered by two Hirt HM 500 air-cooled engines, with 105 hp each. The maximum speed was around 140 mph (225 km/h) but, according to some sources, it was as high as 155 mph (250 km/h). The four fuel tanks, with a total capacity of 25 gallons (95 l), were located between the spars on both engine sides. The B9’s effective operational range was 250 mi (400 km). Originally, the B9 was meant to be equipped with two variable-pitch propellers, but it was instead fitted with ordinary wooden fixed pitch propellers made by the Schäfer company.
As the B9 could be used as a ground attack aircraft, a bomb rack was meant to be installed, but it is not clear if this was ever implemented.
Operational Testing
The B9 in flight [airwar]The operational prototype was ready by the summer of 1943. The first test flights were carried out by Ing. L. Schmidt and Dipl.-lng. E. G. Friedrichs. On one flight, L. Schmidt had an accident, the details of which are not known, but the plane probably suffered only minor damage.
The B9 was meant to make a series of test flights in order to ascertain if the prone position design had any merit and to test the general flying and overall structural performance. If these proved to be successful, the B9 would serve as base for future development and be put into active service. The B9 aircraft received the ”D-ECAY” marking, which was painted on both sides of the fuselage.
The tests were carried out from July to October 1943, during which time around thirty pilots had the opportunity to fly it. The test flights were conducted without any major problems and only one accident was recorded. This accident was caused not by any mechanical problems, but by a pilot mistake during takeoff. The B9 was damaged, but it was repaired and put back into service in only a few weeks.
The pilots did not have many objections to flying in the new prone position. They described it as comfortable and that it was relatively easy to adapt to the new commands. There were some issues, like fatigue and tiredness of the neck and shoulder muscles because of the constant moving of the upper arms. There were also some complaints about the chin supporter, which was deemed as unpleasant during flight but it was essential during high g-force maneuvers. During these test flights, the control panel and the controls did receive some changes in design. The large and fully glazed cockpit provided the pilot with good front and below fields of view, while the rear and upward view was somewhat problematic due to the prone position.
These tests showed that this type of aircraft was well suited for bomber, ground attack, high speed reconnaissance and possibly even in a high-speed fighter role. But it was also noticed that, due to the somewhat restricted view, the use of low speed prone pilot aircraft without air support was not recommended. Despite being designed to withstand forces of up to 25 G, the maximum achieved was only 8.5 G. One of the reasons for this was the use of low rotational speed propellers.
For 1944 and 1945 unfortunately, there is no information about the B9’s operational use. The B9 was found abandoned at the Johannisthal airfield near Berlin after the war. In what condition it was by the time of capture is not known. What is unusual is that the B9 was captured by the Americans and not the Soviets (according to author Hans J.W.). What the Americans did with the plane is unknown to this day, but it was most likely scrapped.
Only one B9 plane prototype was ever built. By 1943 and 44, a large amount of resources were invested in the production of fighters for the defense of the Reich and there were neither the time nor the resources needed to develop and test such an aircraft.
Nazi Germany (1936)
