Nazi Germany (1944)
Parasite Interceptor – None Built
Artist’s depiction of the Sombold So 344 firing off its nose rocket. [Heinz Rodes]The Sombold So 344 was a highly specialized interceptor designed by Heinz G. Sombold to attack Allied bomber formations over Germany in 1944. The way the aircraft would attack, however, would be extremely unconventional. Being deployed from a bomber mothership, the So 344 would fly towards an approaching bomber formation and launch its entire nose cone, which was a 400 kg (882 Ib) rocket, at the enemy bombers in an attempt to destroy as many as possible. From there, the So 344 could either attack the remaining bombers or return to base and land on a skid. Work went as far as wind tunnel models for the aircraft but none would be built.
History
Towards the end of the Second World War, Germany found itself at odds on an almost daily basis against the threat of Allied bombers. While pre-existing aircraft were used to defend Germany from this threat, more and more proposals for aircraft designed to deal with enemy bombers began to emerge. A number of these projects would use extremely unorthodox or downright strange methods to attempt to destroy enemy bombers. These ranged from carrying specialized weapons to even ramming the bomber. These projects were often small in design and were made of widely available materials, like wood, to save on production costs, reserving the more important material for mainline aircraft. An aircraft produced in small numbers that followed this formula was the Bachem Ba 349 “Natter”. Although not used operationally, the Ba 349 was a small bomber interceptor that would not require an airstrip to take off. Instead, it would be launched vertically from a launch rail. After taking off, the Ba 349 would approach the Allied bombers and attack them with a salvo of rockets in the nose. With its ammo depleted, the pilot would then eject from the aircraft, with the aircraft’s engine section parachuting down and being recovered for reuse. The nose would break off for the pilot to deploy the rockets under the cone. The Ba 349 is the most well known of these projects, but many would never leave the drawing board. Many of these aircraft designs were created by large companies but a handful came from individual engineers. One such design, the Sombold So 344, would approach the destruction of enemy bombers in an entirely different, almost ludicrous way.
3-way view of the So 344 [Luft46.com]The Sombold So 344 was the idea of Heinz G. Sombold of the Bley Ingenieurbüro (Engineering Office). Bley Segelflugzeug was a sailplane manufacturer located in Naumburg, Germany. During the 1930s, they became popular for their various sailplane designs, like the Kormoran and Motor-Kondor designs. Heinz G. Sombold was an engineer at Bley. He began working on the So 344 in late 1943 and his aircraft incorporated many features of the sailplanes built by the company. At the time, the craft was only designed as a parasite escort fighter and armed with two machine guns. On January 22nd of 1944 however, Sombold would drastically change the design and purpose of the aircraft. From here, the aircraft would be designed for the destruction of enemy bombers. To fit this new role, it would use a very unorthodox weapon. The nosecone of the So 344 was a rocket filled with 400 kg (880 Ib) of explosives that could be launched by the pilot at enemy aircraft. Sombold envisioned his aircraft using its nosecone rocket against close formations of bombers, where multiple aircraft could be destroyed with one well placed explosive. American bombers would often fly in combat box formations, where the bombers would fly close together to maximize the defensive capabilities of their guns. This allowed the bombers to have ample protection from enemy interceptors, as the approaching craft would come under fire from most of the aircraft in said formation. There were earlier weapons deployed by the Germans to try and damage the closely packed formations, like the BR 21, but none would be as huge a payload as the Sombold’s nose rocket.
Rear view of the wind tunnel model
Design work on the So 344 continued through 1944, even going as far as having a ⅕ scale wind tunnel model being made and tested at the Bley facility. By 1945, work on the project was cut off, as the Bley facility had to be abandoned due to the encroaching warfront. No further work was done on the Sombold So 344 and Sombold’s fate is unknown. No other designs by Sombold are known to have existed. The 344 designation was later used for the Ruhrstahl X-4, or RK 344, air-to-air missile system.
At the top of this image is the photo of the claimed nosecone of a Sombold So 344. In actuality it is a nose section of a Wasserfall SAM. [Lower: Wiki][Upper: Luftwaffe Secret Projects 17]A photo has circulated in several books, as well online, that claims a nosecone of the So 344 was built and discovered by the Allies at the end of the war. However, this photo actually depicts the nose section of a Wasserfall surface-to-air missile. The nose of the Wasserfall easily could be confused for that of the Sombold’s, as its shape is semi-similar and both have four stabilizing fins. No So 344 was built.
Design
Photo of the 1/5 wind tunnel model of the Sombold So 344
The Sombold So 344 was a single man special attack aircraft. It was to have a short, tubular body of wooden construction. For ease of transport, the aircraft could be split into two sections. The cockpit would be located at the rear of the body, directly in front of the vertical stabilizer. The aircraft would have conventional control surfaces on its wings and stabilizers. At the ends of the horizontal stabilizers were two angled vertical stabilizers. The wings would be mid-set. For its powerplant, the So 344 would use a Walter 509 bi-fuel rocket engine. To conserve fuel, the aircraft would be deployed via bomber mothership. Once deployed, it would have around 25 minutes of fuel. To land, the So 344 would have a rounded ski built into the body, similar to how the sailplanes Bley created would land.
For its main armament, the So 344 had a massive unguided rocket as its nose cone. The nose would contain 880 Ibs (400 kg) of explosive Acetol. The rocket was triggered via a proximity fuse. For stabilization, four fins would be placed on the nose. Additionally, the So 344 would have two forward machineguns to either defend itself or attack other bombers once its payload was released.
Operations
The So 344 would be carried to an approaching bomber formation via a modified bomber mothership. Once deployed, the aircraft would move in an arc towards the bombers, coming in downwards at them from at least 3,300 ft (1,000 m) above. This height would protect the So 344 from defensive fire during its dive. When the aircraft was lined up with a group of bombers, the pilot would launch the nosecone into the middle of the formation. Given the close proximity of the bombers in formation and the explosive threshold of the nosecone, it was predicted the resulting explosion would be able to take down several bombers in one attack. After launching its nosecone, the So 344 would have some fuel left and could continue to attack the remaining bombers with two machine guns on the aircraft. When fuel was low, the aircraft would return to base via gliding, like the Messerschmitt Me 163B rocket interceptor. Once near an airfield, it used a large ski to land.
Conclusion
The So 344 was a very strange way of approaching the bomber problem over Germany late in the war. The logic behind it was not too far fetched. The aforementioned Ba 349 Natter followed a similar attack plan, approaching the bombers and firing off a salvo of rockets before the pilot bailed from the craft. A project like the So 344 was not new to Germany by that point in the war and, like most of its contemporary designs, was not produced.
Had it been produced, the So 344 would have been a very niche aircraft. The fact that the aircraft had a single shot from its rocket payload made accuracy extremely important. The aircraft also would have been a prime target for Allied escort fighters once it ran out of fuel. A bomber would also need to be modified to carry the So 344 and would be a prime target for the escort fighters once the attacker was launched. The nature of the aircraft has led it to wrongly be named a “suicide attacker” by many postwar books on the subject. In some instances, the craft is also incorrectly listed as being a ramming aircraft. It is likely the aircraft would not have impacted the war very much.
Variants
Sombold So 344 (1943)– Original planned fighter version. Armed with two machine guns or heavier armament. None were built
Sombold So 344 (1944)– The Sombold So 344 attack aircraft. Armed with a nosecone rocket which would be fired at enemy bomber formations. None were built.
Operators
Nazi Germany – The Sombold So 344 was designed for the Luftwaffe to use against Allied bombers over Germany. None of the type would be built.
Sombold So 344 Specifications
Wingspan
18 ft 8 in / 5.7 m
Length
22 ft 11 in / 7 m
Height
7 ft 1 in / 2.2 m
Wing Area
64.58 ft² / 6 m²
Engine
Walter 509 Bifuel rocket engine
Weight
2,976 Ib / 1,350 kg
Flight Time
25 minutes
Crew
1 pilot
Armament
2x machine guns
1x 880 Ib (400 kg) Nose Rocket
Gallery
Artist’s Concept of a completed So 344 with striped nosecone – By Ed Jackson
Video
Credits
Article by Marko P.
Edited by Henry H. and Stan L.
Illustration by Ed Jackson
Herwig, D. & Rode, H. (2003). Luftwaffe Secret Projects: Ground Attack & Special Purpose Aircraft. Hinckley, England: Midland Pub.
France (1936-1940)
Fighter – 25 Built & ~200 Incomplete [Destroyed]
The VG.33 on an airfield. Colorized by Amazing Ace
Arsenal de l’Aéronautique was one of the more peculiar plane manufacturers of interwar France, though it is also one of the somewhat more obscure ones. Arsenal was a state company which was created towards the end of 1934. Its goal at the time was to provide a way to train aviation engineers employed by the French state, and to help them evaluate design proposals. It would also be tasked with studying aircraft designs without the profitability constraints of a private company, meaning Arsenal de l’Aéronautique would typically be used to study experimental projects not necessarily meant to see mass-production. Following the mass nationalization of France’s aircraft industry ,which began in August 1936 under the Popular Front’s government, Arsenal was given eight hangars built by Bréguet in Villacoublay, near Paris, to install its design bureau and production facilities.
Roots in Tandem-Engine Fighter Designs
The timeline of the VG 33’s predecessors tends to be somewhat unclear. It is generally considered that the fighters hold their roots in tandem-engine designs, which were being studied at the request of the French state in the mid to late 1930s. The VB10, which would be manufactured postwar, was one result of these studies. However, orders to design such tandem designs appear to date from 1937 according to some sources, while a mockup of the VG 33’s direct predecessor, the VG 30, appeared in November of 1936.
The Arsenal VG.30 mockup, the beginning of the VG.3X series of fighters, at the Paris air show of November 1936. [arsenalvg33.free.fr ]In any case, the engineers of Arsenal, led by lead engineer Michel Vernisse, presented their new plane at the 15th Paris Air Show in November 1936. The design they had worked on appears to date from early 1936, and was an attempt to compete with contemporary fighter designs, such as the MS.405 or LN 161 . This aircraft would be designated the Arsenal de L’aéronautique VG.30.
The VG.30: An Impressive First Draft
The VG.30 mockup which was first presented at the Paris air show was a low cantilever-wing monoplane powered ,originally, by the Potez 12dc 610 hp in-line engine. The plane was to use an almost exclusively wooden construction, which would save on cost and strategic resources (though this would prove less so the case than expected when it was found France lacked the spruce wood reserves to build the aircraft and had to purchase large quantities abroad to compensate for this issue). It had a capable armament of one 20 mm HS-404 firing through the propelled hub, and four wing-mounted 7.5 mm MAC 34 machine-guns. The wings had a surface of 14 m². When first unveiled, the VG.30 had a very modern appearance and drew considerable interest from France’s air ministry. So much so that, in early 1937, the Air Ministry set requirements for a competition, the “A.23”, for French aircraft designers to offer light fighter aircraft designs. This opened up some competition to the VG.30, which would materialize in several prototypes, such as the (Bloch MB.700, SNCAO CAO.200, Roussel R.30).one design, Caudron’s C.714, would enter production (Caudron’s very light C.714)
Arsenal worked on adapting their VG.30 to these requirements and then manufactured a prototype. Manufacturing of the prototype started during the summer of 1937, and faced some considerable delays. Notably, the Potez engine could not be delivered, which pushed the Arsenal designers to switch to another engine, Hispano-Suiza’s 12Xcrs, which would provide a considerable power increase up to 690 hp. This change would start the association between Arsenal’s VG.3X series fighters and Hispano-Suiza in-line engines.
A small but nonetheless rare view of the VG.30 prototype during flight. [Internet Movie Plane Database]The first prototype of the VG.30 had its first flight on the 15th of October 1938. It would still have to wait several months for official state trials, in which some subsequent modifications were made to the aircraft. in July of 1939 were the state trials undertaken. The VG.30 proved to have decent performance for a light fighter with a Hispano-Suiza powerplant that was not the most powerful of these available; up to 485 km/h in level flight. In a dive, the VG.30 was found to reach 805 km/h.
The VG.30 prototype on the ground during trials. [arsenalvg33.free.fr ]
Improving Upon the VG.30
The VG.30 had been found to be a rather capable design, but it had room for improvement. This was done by designing the VG.31. An issue with the VG.30 was that the radiator was fairly far forward. Being further in front than the cockpit, it was found not to be ideal for the plane’s aerodynamic profile. The VG.31 had its radiator moved back by two meters, and also had the wing surface reduced by two square meters. A more powerful engine was fitted in the form of the Hispano-Suiza 12Y-31 860 hp, which did not however feature a 20 mm gun firing through the propeller hub. Two of the wing machine-guns were also removed, with only two 7.5 mm MAC 34s remaining as armament.
The VG.31 was never flown. It appears a fuselage was built, but was then converted to a VG.33 which was also never flown, but used as a model to base production upon.
The VG.33: First Production Model
Wind tunnel trials of the VG.31 showed that its reduced wingspan resulted in aerodynamic instability. Its reduced armament was also a major issue. However, its radiator, pushed back to the rear, appeared to be a good design choice in order to reduce drag and improve the aerodynamic profile of the series.
In designing a more advanced version, the best parts of the VG.30 and VG.31 were combined. The new fighter, the VG.33, would combine the wingspan and armament of the VG.30, with the fuselage and engine of the VG.31 – modified to mount a 20 mm HS-404 firing through the propeller hub.
Production of the VG.33 prototype started in 1938, and the prototype took flight for the first time on the 25th of April 1939. The official trials would last from July of 1939 to March of 1940, and were generally very positive.
Design: The Structure of the VG.33
A photo of the first VG.33 prototype during production in late 1938, showing the wooden structure of the aircraft before the plywood cover was applied. [Le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]Schematics of the wing structure of the VG.33, which was mostly made using spruce. [Le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]The VG.33 was designed using a largely wooden construction, made mostly of spruce. Almost all of the plane’s internal structure was wooden, and then given a plywood skin. The VG.33 used a semi-monocoque fuselage and a one-piece wing structure. The plane had a wingspan of 10.80 m, with each wing having a surface of 14 m². The plane was 8.55 m long, and 3.35 m high. Empty, it would weigh around 2,050 kg. When loaded, it would be between 2,450 and 2,896 kg (the second prototype would be weighed at 2,680 kg in seemingly standard configuration, with guns, fuel and pilot). The VG.33’s landing gear deployed outward.
The mounting of the Hispano-Suiza 12Y-31 engine onto a VG.33. [Le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]The VG.33 used a Hispano-Suiza 12Y-31. This was a V12 engine producing 860 hp maximum at a critical altitude of 3,320 m, and at 2,400 rpm. This engine was fitted with a three-bladed Chauvière variable pitch propeller with a diameter of 2.95 m. This propeller would rotate at up 1,600 rpm. The water radiator was located below the cockpit,and was recessed into the fuselage as a way to reduce drag as much as possible. Upon take-off, a VG.33 would weigh 2,680 kg.
Firing through the propeller hub was the plane’s heaviest armament: a 20 mm HS-404 autocannon. Found on most French fighters of the era, this cannon fired 250 grams projectiles at a muzzle velocity of 880 m/s. It was fed by a 60-round drum magazine, which would typically be expended quite quickly considering the weapon typically fired at 570 to 700 rpm. Additionally, two MAC34M39 machine-guns were located in each wing. The M39 was the belt-fed version of the original MAC34 aircraft machine-gun, which initially used drum magazines. The 9 gram 7.5 mm projectiles were fired at 830 m/s, and 1,200 to 1,450 rpm. With a larger ammunition provision of 850 rounds per gun, the machine-guns could be kept firing much longer than the cannon.
The VG.33 featured the standard radio of the French air force at the time, the RI 537.
Performance
The VG.33 on an airfield, giving a good angle on the plane’s sleek profile and radiator. [Pinterest]The trials undertaken from July of 1939 to March of 1940 gave a very good impression of the Arsenal VG.33, which could reasonably be considered the best French single-engine fighter of the era.
At its optimal altitude of 5,200 m, the VG.33 could reach a maximum speed of 558 km/h. This was faster than the newest French fighter of the time, the D.520, by about 20 km/h. The take-off speed would be of about 135 km/h, with a take-off distance of about 550 m. The landing speed was 125 km/h. The plane’s climb-rate was also a strength of the design. It would reach 1,000 m in 1.17 minutes, 2,000 in 2.34, 5,000 in 6.26 and 8,000 in 13.26. The plane had an operational ceiling of roughly 9,500 m.
The VG.33 had a maximum range of 1,060 km with its full fuel load of 400 litres. At an altitude of 5,000 m, it had an endurance of two hours and forty minutes There were trials for additional fuel tanks on the VG.30, which could perhaps have been applied to the VG.33 as well. The plane would then have a fuel load of 600 litres, and it was expected a VG.33 could cross up to 1,560 km, or fly for four hours and twenty minutes.
A view of the instrument board in the VG.33’s cockpit. [Pinterest]Posessing superb performance, forgiving flight characteristics, and good maneuverability, the VG.33 was a great fighter for its day . The first report made by the CEMA, the French Air Force’s evaluation service, in September in 1939, found the plane had excellent and well-balanced control surfaces which were effective at all speeds. Even at low speed, the plane remained very controllable all the way down to the stall speed, which made it easy to perform landings with. Furthermore, there was no particular imbalance and no risk of the plane losing control and nosing over. Taking-off was also not hard on the VG.33. The plane had no issues keeping a straight trajectory on the runway,and was considered very controllable even on the ground. The landing gear was found to be reliable and safe. The only somewhat lacking element was found to be the plane’s brakes, which were perhaps not as powerful as would be appreciated.
In comparison to the D.520 – which was already a decent fighter – the VG.33 compared favorably in pretty much all areas. This was even more of an achievement when taking into account the weights and powerplants of the two planes. The D.520’s weight was about equal to the VG.33 (2,050 kg empty, 2,740 kg fully loaded), however, it used a more powerful version of the same series of Hispano-Suiza 12Y engine, the 12Y-49. In comparison to the VG.33’s 12Y-31, the 12Y-49 producded 90 hp more, with a maximum output of 950 hp. This did not prevent the VG.33 from being faster than the D.520, climbing at a higher rate, and being more manoeuvrable, while featuring the exact same armament. In other words, the VG.33 would be, by the standards of 1939 and1940, a stellar fighter, very much able to compete with the newest designs from Germany or Great-Britain, the likes of the Bf109E and Spitfire. The plane would also have enough evolutionary potential to birth a series of fighters lasting potentially well into the war
A view of the uncovered 12Y-31 engine of a likely unfinished VG.33, the photo likely being of German origin. The 12Y-31 was not the most powerful version of the 12Y engine available by 1940, yet it was sufficient for the VG.33 to outclass fighters such as the D.520 powered by more powerful models of the same engine family. [hisaviation.com]
Production Orders and Setting Up the VG.33’s production
The outbreak of the Second World War in September of 1939 led to Arsenal’s fighter,which had been undertaking trials for several months at this point, being ordered into production. A first order was placed on the 12th of September, for 220 VG.33s.
Arsenal de L’Aéronautique lacked any facilities suited for mass-production. As such, production of the VG.33 would be undertaken by the SNCAN factory of Sartrouville, South-West of Paris. Five days after the first order, an additional 200 VG.33s were ordered, with the fighter being thought of as a good potential replacement for the aging Morane-Saulnier MS.406.
In the following months, orders and scheduled production of the VG.33 would evolve considerably, with the type quickly being seen as a future mainstay fighter for the French air force. By late September 1939, it was planned that the first 10 serial-production VG.33s were to be delivered in April of 1940, with production gradually rising to 150 planes a month by the autumn. The schedule was revised in November, with the 10 examples then being scheduled for February, and production to be set at 50 planes a month from April onward at the SCAN factory. It was already understood that a second assembly line would be required at this point. It was planned to open an assembly line in Michelin’s factories of Clermont-Ferrand, in the region of Auvergne in Southern France. This facility would not produce the VG.33, but one of its derivatives, the VG.32, of which the first were to be completed in December of 1940. There were also plans to set up a VG.33 production chain in Vendée, Western France.
VG.33 fuselages (top) and wing structures (bottom) during production. [Le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]The flap of a VG.33 during production in a workshop. [arsenalvg33.free.fr ]Production of the VG.33 required a large number of small producers. The aircraft’s largely wooden construction meant that a lot of parts could be supplied by cottage industry sources. Nonetheless, the production of the plane was quite consuming in terms of resources. To produce a single VG.33, 1,166 kg of spruce, 110 kg of plywood, 880 kg of steel, 436 kg of aluminum and duralumin and 125 kg of magnesium was required. Even if mostly wooden, a large quantity of steel was still consumed in the aircraft’s production. The most significant efforts in providing the materials needed to produce the VG.33 were not spent in acquiring any of the steel though, but rather the spruce wood. The French Air Force only had a reserve of 750 tonnes, and the wood was also used to manufacture some reconnaissance or training aircraft, meaning this available reserve would only be sufficient to provide for about 500 VG.33s. France had to start a scramble to acquire spruce from foreign sources. In November, the acquisition of 500 m3 of spruce from Great-Britain was negotiated. In the meantime, France also bought spruce not only from its traditional suppliers, the USA and Canada, but also from an additional source, Romania. Romanian spruce was soon found to be lacking in comparison to the North American-sourced material. However, it would still be sufficient for less strategically important reconnaissance or training aircraft, freeing up better quality spruce for the VG.33, which had become an absolute priority of the French air ministry by the spring of 1940. In terms of cost, the airframe of the VG.33, without engine or armament, cost 630,000 French francs to produce. This was less than the D.520 (700,000) or MB.152 (800,000), and the VG.33 could be considered to be a fairly economical fighter – though not as much as the much lighter, and less capable, Caudron C.714, born from the same specifications .
Too Little, Too Late
The first production schedule for the VG.33 evolved considerably over the months.At the outbreak of the war, it was expected that the first VG.33s would be delivered in April 1940. In November 1939, the date for the first expected deliveries was changed to February 1940. In January of 1940, it appeared obvious this schedule would not be met and the new set date for the first VG.33 deliveries was March. Finally, in March, the first VG.33 were not yet completed, and the schedule was moved again to April of 1940, where it originally was at the start of the war. Finally, the first production aircraft would take flight on the 21st of April 1940. The next two production aircraft followed in early May. Eventually, 7 production aircraft would be taken into the French Air Force’s registry. The aircraft’s production and service was cut short by the German invasion of the Low Countries and France, with the production facilities at Sartrouville being occupied by German troops around the 14-15th of June 1940.
Side view of a VG.33. Taken in Toulouse, Southern France, in 1942, this photo shows one of the few production aircraft which could be evacuated to Southern France in time. [Le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]The first squadron the VG.33 was supposed to enter service with was the GC ½, which previously operated the MS.406, far outclassed by the D.520 or Bf.109E. This squadron was allocated its two first aircraft, the 2nd and 4th production VG.33s, on the 10th of June 1940. The squadron, already engaged in the campaign, could not allocate any pilots to recover the aircraft. In the end, pilots of a reconnaissance group, GR 1/55, took them and relocated them from the under threat airport of Villacoublay, near Paris, to the far-away Toulouse-Francazal, deep in Southern France. Production planes n°1 and n°7 were moved to Clermont-Ferrant, where they were supposed to serve as models for the future VG.32 assembly chain. A fifth aircraft was moved to Southern France, n°7, in uncertain conditions.
Two VG.33s were reportedly part of an ad-hoc defensive squadron created in Bordeaux in June, GC I/55 active from the 17th to the 24th. According to some scaint claims, they may have been engaged in a few combat missions in the last days of the campaign of France. Two VG.33s are known to have been captured by German forces on Mérignac airfield, in Gironde, the same region as Bordeaux. These may have been the same aircraft.
Two production VG.33s captured intact by the Germans in Mérignac, Gironde. [Le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]Outside of these 7 aircraft taken in by the French air force, production at SCAN’s facilities in Sartrouville had been starting to pick up steam, and a number of aircraft were at various stages of production. It appears a total of 19 fighters had been completed. 20 more lacked only their landing gear and were near completion. Seemingly, at least 120 more fuselages were at various stages of production. The vast majority of these were sabotaged in extremis to prevent advancing German troops from capturing them. Notably, the completed fighters, that had yet to be taken in by the French air force were destroyed by the crew of a Potez 540 reconnaissance bomber on the 14th of June using sledgehammers, mere hours before German troops would seize the facilities. This did not prevent the Germans from getting their hands on a few VG.33s. Two VG.33s were seemingly captured in Mérignac airfield. Located near Bordeaux, these two planes may have been those part of an ad-hoc defensive squadron. At least one aircraft would be repainted in German colors and tested extensively, likely at Rechlin airfield, Germany, and given the registration number “3+5”. According to some sources, the Germans would capture a total of five serial production VG 33s as well as the original prototype.
An uncompleted VG.33, likely photographed by the picture services of Germany’s armed forces in Sartrouville. [Le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]The VG.33 which would be tested by German pilots at the Rechlin airfield. [Armedconflicts.com]Another photograph of the VG.33 which was captured by the Germans [Armedconflicts.com]
A Series of Derivatives, France’s Potentially Mainstay World War Two fighter
Though the VG.33 was already a very potent fighter by 1940, there were already plans to improve upon it, generally by improving its powerplant. A variety of prototypes, mostly based on VG.33 airframes and given alternative designations as VG.33 prototypes, were flown in the Spring of 1940 and would have given Arsenal’s new series of fighters a more promising fate, were it not for the German occupation of France.
The VG.32, developed before the VG 33, but never flown, replaced the 12Y-31 engine with an American-sourced Allison V-1710-C15 1,150 hp engine. A model from the same series of engines would be fitted into the American P-40 Warhawk fighter. While also being more powerful than the Hispano-Suiza 12Y, the most significant advantage of the Allison engine was that it would relieve France’s strained engine industry. By producing the relatively easy to build VG.33 airframe and giving it an engine which would not strain the local industry, France would have a fighter that would require comparatively few work hours. The fifth VG.33 prototype airframe, VG.33-05, was supposed to receive the Allison engine and be the VG.32 prototype. However, the engine was not delivered before the armistice and, as such, the prototype was never flown. Nonetheless, the VG.32 had been ordered for serial production. Production was to be set-up in Michelin’s facilities of Clermont-Ferrant. It was hoped the first dozen would be delivered in December of 1940, with 25 to be manufactured in January of 1941, 40 in February, 70 in March, 100 in April, and 150 monthly from May 1941 onward. This obviously never materialized. As it was never flown, there is no good way to estimate the VG.32’s performance. The Allison engine reportedly required lengthening the engine cover by 42 cm and may have made the plane somewhat heavier, but its significantly higher power output may still have resulted in the VG.32 being at least comparable, if not somewhat superior to the VG.33.
A rear view of the first VG.33 derivative to take flight, the VG.34, parked aside a LeO 451 bomber on a French airfield. [Aviafrance]The first VG.33 derivative to take flight would be the VG.34. Built using the second VG.33 prototype airframe (VG.33-02), the VG.34 mounted a more powerful version of the Hispano-Suiza 12Y engine, the 12Y-45. Producing 960 hp, this was enough to give the VG.34 a maximum speed of 576 km/h at 6,000 m, and likely improve upon its climb rate as well. The VG.34 had its first flight on the 20th of January 1940. It appears to have been at an airfield near Toulouse by the armistice, with its further fate unknown.
The VG.35, made from VG.33-04, received a Hispano-Suiza 12Y-51 engine producing 1,000 hp. Sadly, it is a lot more elusive than the VG.34. Its recorded performances do not appear to be known, nor do any photo survive, despite the VG.35 having its first flight on the 25th of February 1940. The plane was known to be in Orléans by the point German forces captured the city. Its further fate is unknown.
A front view of the fairly impressive-looking VG.36 prototype. [Old Machine Press]The VG.36 could be said to be a more mature version of the VG.35. Using the same 12Y-51 engine, the VG.36 was not built from a converted VG.33 airframe, but instead had a new one, incorporating a number of changes. Its radiator was wider but presented a smaller profile, and was more integrated into the fuselage in an effort to reduce drag. Taking its first flight on the 14th of May 1940, the VG.39 could reach 590 km/h at 7,000 m. Very satisfying in terms of its performance, it appears to have been scheduled to replace the VG.33 on the production lines at some point. As for the prototype, it was reportedly withdrawn to an airfield in La-Roche-Sur-Yon during the campaign, before being destroyed to avoid capture.
The VG.37 was never built; a further development of the VG.36, it was to feature a supercharger and be modified for long-range operations. The VG.38 was never built either, and was to feature an improved version of the 12Y engine – the exact model being unknown.
The sleek and impressive looking VG.39, often considered to be the most brilliant example of the future of French fighter design to have reached prototype stage by 1940, parked in front of a LeO 451 bomber. [ww2.sas1946.com]The VG.39 was the most advanced model which took flight. Its main improvement was in terms of its powerplant. It received the advanced Hispano-Suiza 12Y-89 ter, with an output of 1,200 hp. It appears this engine did not allow for a cannon firing through the propeller hub in this version. To somewhat compensate for this, the wings were redesigned, keeping the same surface area but having a vastly modified structure which enabled for the mounting of one additional MAC34 machine-gun in each wing. Taking its first flight on the 3rd of May 1940, it could reach an impressive 625 km/h at 5,750 m. A very well performing plane for the time, the VG.39 was, as the VG.36, intended to enter production. This would, however, likely have been in the form of an improved version still on the drawing board by 1940. Designated as the VG.39bis, this improved VG.39 would feature an even more powerful Hispano-Suiza 12Z-17 engine producing 1,600 hp and allow for a 20 mm HS-404 to fire through the propeller hub, with the 6 wing machine-guns being retained. The VG.39bis would also incorporate a lower and widened radiator design similar to the one found in the VG.36. It would likely have been a very high performing aircraft, but it stayed on the drawing board due to the German occupation of France. As for the VG.39 prototype, its eventual fate is unknown.
The Undying Shadow of a Promising Fighter: Vichy Regime Studies
As can be seen, the VG.33 was an aircraft with promising performance, and an already well-developed series of variants which would have guaranteed the aircraft good evolutionary potential. Had France not been knocked out of the war by 1940, it is likely the Arsenal VG.3X series would have become for France what the Spitfire was to Britain or the Bf.109 to Germany: a mainstay able to continue to evolve and remain relevant for pretty much the entirety of the conflict.
This promising future was cut short by German wings, tracks and feet occupying France in 1940. Nonetheless, the armistice regime known as Vichy continued some studies upon the base of the VG.33. A few of the fighters, seemingly five production models as well as the original prototype, were indeed re-located in the unoccupied part of France at the end of the 1940 campaign. Though they were not put into service, they appear to have been taken as a basis to continue working on future fighters.
A series of profile views of Arsenal’s series of fighters. There is little in common to be found between the original VG.30 or VG.33 and the later VG.50 or VG.70 projects undertaken by the Vichy regime. [le Fana de l’Aviation n°199]Under the Vichy regime, studies would continue, leading to the VG.40, 50 and then VG.60. The definitive aircraft designed by 1942 would have featured larger 16.25 m² wings, and a completely redesigned fuselage which had little to do with the old VG.33. It would feature a new version of the Hispano-Suiza 12Z engine. Studies stopped after the occupation of the unoccupied part of France in November of 1942, but would resume after the liberation of France, with a VG.60 fitted with a German Jumo 213E 1,750 hp engine being considered. This would have been a fighter vastly different from the original VG.33. Armed with eight wing-mounted M2 Browning 12.7 mm machine-guns and a cannon of unknown model firing through the propeller hub, it would have weighed up to around five tons and was expected to reach over 700 km/h. This would never materialize, as Arsenal would end up manufacturing a version of a pre-war project in the form of the tandem engine VB.10. The design bureau would also design some jet fighters in the form of the VG.70 and VG.90, though these would not result in any Arsenal aircraft being adopted by France before the bureau was absorbed into the larger SNCAN in December of 1954.
A Fighter Mystified and Fantasized-About, Cut Short by France’s Defeat
The Arsenal VG.33 was a particularly interesting French piece of equipment. Having its roots in a venture by Arsenal de L’Aéronautique to design the VG. 30 light fighter, the type would evolve into a solid fighter by 1939-1940. Having both promising performance and evolutionary potential, the VG.33’s future was cut short by the German invasion which happened right as the very first production aircraft were taking their first flights. Even more so than the D.520, often described by this sentence, the VG.33 arrived too few and too late, and couldn’t provide the French air force an aircraft able to compete with Germany’s Bf.109 . It has since become a fairly mystified piece of French engineering. An elegant fighter with a sleek design, it has become a sort of ambassador for the large variety of advanced military equipment which France was to field by 1940, but never got the chance. In this fashion, it is not too different from the Somua S40 and B1 Ter tanks or MAS 40 rifle in the psyche of French military enthusiasts.
Two production VG.33s on a French airfield. The majestic and sleek fighter design that is the VG.33 has attracted the eyes of many French military enthusiasts for decades. Though the reality is somewhat more complex, it is certain the VG.33 would have provided the French air force with a better performing asset than the MS.406, MB.152, and even D.520 and H.75. [Old Machine Press]
Replica Construction
This heavily mystified status of the VG.33 likely played a role in the creation of a project to produce a replica of the French fighter aircraft. An association, Arsenal Sud Restoration, was created with the goal of building a replica. With the original plans unavailable, the team had to recreate them using new tools. As of November 2020, while far from complete, the shape of the replica’s fuselage is starting to take shape, while the rudder has been painted and given its markings.
A view of the state of the project in October of 2020 [Facebook]
Variants
VG.30: Original light fighter prototype
VG.31: Planned modified variant of the VG.30, with Hispano-Suiza 12Y-31 860 hp engine, radiator moved to the back, and only two 7.5mm machine-guns. Never flown, a fuselage built and converted to a VG.33 prototype
VG.32: Planned variant fitted with Allison V-1710-C15 1,150 hp engine. A VG.33 prototype fuselage was set aside to receive the engine and serve as the VG.32 prototype, but it had not yet been mounted in June of 1940. Production was scheduled to begin in December 1940.
VG.33: Main production variant, using the Hispano-Suiza 12Y-31 860 hp engine and armed with one 20mm HS-404 autocannon and four 7.5mm MAC 34 machine-guns.
VG.34: Prototype converted from the second VG.33 prototype airframe, using the Hispano-Suiza 12Y-45 engine producing 960hp.
VG.35: Prototype converted from the fourth VG.33 prototype airframe, fitted with the Hispano-Suiza 12Y-51 1,000hp engine.
VG.36: Prototype, an improved iteration of the VG.30 series with the 12Y-51 engine in a modified airframe, with a radiator designed to reduce drag and significant other changes. Was to replace the VG.33 on the production lines at some point
VG.37:Planned variant of the VG.36 fitted with a supercharger and optimized for longer-range operations, never built
VG.38: Fighter design with an unknown iteration of the 12Y family of engines, never built.
VG.39: Prototype using the Hispano-Suiza 12Y-89 ter, producing 1,200hp but not fitted with an engine cannon, and instead using six 7.5mm machine-guns instead of four.
VG.39bis: Further evolution of the VG.39, powered by the Hispano-Suiza 12Z-17 1,600hp engine which would allow for a 20mm firing through the engine, while retaining six 7.5mm machine-guns. Never built
VG.40: First variant studied under the Vichy regime, using a Roll-Royces Merlin III 1,030hp engine on an airframe based on the VG.39bis. Never built
VG.50: Variant studied under the Vichy regime, using the Allison V-1710-39 engine. Never built
VG.60: Variant studied under the Vichy regime, with a new version of the Hispano-Suiza 12Z series of engines. Never built.
Arsenal VG.33 Specifications
Wingspan
10.8 m / 35 ft 6 in
Length
8.55 m / 28 ft 1 in
Height
3.55 m / 11 ft 8 in
Wing Area
14 m² / 46 ft² (One Wing) 28 m² / 92 ft² (Total)
Engine
Hispano-Suiza 12Y-31
Engine Output
Take Off – 760 hp Optimal Altitude – 860 hp at 5,200 m / 17,000 ftMax RPM – ~1,850 Standard
Propeller
Three-bladed Chauvière Variable Pitch Propeller (2.95 m diameter)
Empty Weight
2,050 kg / 4,519 lb
Takeoff Weight
2,450 to 2,896 kg (2,680 kg standard) 5,400 to 6,385 lb (5,908 lb standard)
Wing Loading
95.7 kg/m² / 19.6 lb/ft² (at standard 2,680 kg weight)
Fuel Capacity
400 liters / 105 US gallons 600 liters / 158 US gallons with proposed additional non-droppable fuel tanks
Maximum Speed
558 km/h / 347 mph
Cruising Speed
385 km/h / 239 mph
Cruising Range
1,060 km / 620 mi with Standard 400 liter fuel load
1,560 km / 970 mi with Extended 600 liter fuel load
Endurance
2h40 at 5,000m with 400 liter fuel load
4h20 at 5,000m with 600 liter fuel load
Maximum Service Ceiling
9,500 m / 31,000 ft
Time to Altitude
1.17 minutes to 1,000 m
2.34 minutes to 2,000 m
3.51 minutes to 3,000 m
5.07 minutes to 4,000 m
6.26 minutes to 5,000 m
8.02 minutes to 6,000 m
10.11 minutes to 7,000 m
13.26 minutes to 8,000 m
Crew
One Pilot
Armament
20 mm HS-404 firing through the propeller hub center with 60 rounds
4x MAC34M39 machine-guns with 850 rounds per gun in the wings
Production
1 prototype + 4 completed derivative prototype
Around 20 production aircraft fully completed of which 7 were taken in by the French Air Force
40 airframes very close to completion
About 200 aircraft in various stages of production in total by June of 1940
Gallery
Arsenal VG.30 PrototypeArsenal VG.33 PrototypeArsenal VG.33 in Standard Camouflage for 1940German Captured VG.33 – Depicted as seen in testing at Rechlin
Germany (1944)
Experimental VTOL Fighter – Paper Project
The bizarre looking Focke-Wulf Triebflügel fighter design. [luft46.com]During the war, German aviation engineers proposed a large number of different aircraft designs. These ranged from more or less orthodox designs to hopelessly overcomplicated, radical, or even impractical designs. One such project was a private venture of Focke-Wulf, generally known as the Triebflügel. The aircraft was to use a Rotary Wing design in order to give it the necessary lift. Given the late start of the project, in 1944, and the worsening war situation for Germany, the aircraft would never leave the drawing board and would remain only a proposal.
History
During the war, the Luftwaffe possessed some of the best aircraft designs and technology of the time. While huge investments and major advancements were made in piston engine aircraft development, there was also interest in newer and more exotic technologies that were also being developed at the time, such as rocket and jet propulsion. As an alternative to standard piston engine aircraft, the Germans began developing jet and rocket engines, which enabled them to build and put to use more advanced aircraft powered by these. These were used in small numbers and far too late to have any real impact on the war. It is generally less known that they also showed interest in the development of ramjet engines.
Ramjets were basically modified jet engines which had a specially designed front nozzle. Their role was to help compress air which would be mixed with fuel to create thrust but without an axial or centrifugal compressor. While this is, at least in theory, much simpler to build than a standard jet engine, it can not function during take-off. Thus, an auxiliary power plant was needed. It should, however, be noted that this was not new technology and, in fact, had existed since 1913, when a French engineer by the name of Rene Lorin patented such an engine. Due to a lack of necessary materials, it was not possible to build a fully operational prototype at that time, and it would take decades before a properly built ramjet could be completed. In Germany, work on such engines was mostly carried out by Hellmuth Walter during the 1930s. While his initial work was promising, he eventually gave up on its development and switched to a rocket engine insead. The first working prototype was built and tested by the German Research Center for Gliding (Deutsche Forschungsinstitut für Segelflug– DFS) during 1942. The first working prototype was tested by mounting the engine on a Dornier Do 17 and, later, a Dornier Do 217.
The Dornier Do 217 was equipped with experimental ramjets during trials. [tanks45.tripod.com]The Focke-Wulf company, ever keen on new technology, showed interest in ramjet development during 1941. Two years later, Focke-Wulf set up a new research station at Bad Eilsen with the aim of improving already existing ramjet engines. The project was undertaken under the supervision of Otto Ernst Pabst. The initial work looked promising, as the ramjets could be made much cheaper than jet engines, and could offer excellent overall flying performance. For this reason, Focke-Wulf initiated the development of fighter aircraft designs to be equipped with this engine. Two of these designs were the Strahlrohr Jäger and the Triebflügel. The Strahlrohr had a more conventional design (although using the word conventional in this project has a loose meaning at best). However, in the case of the Triebflügel, all known and traditional aircraft design theory was in essence thrown out the window. It was intended to take off vertically and initially be powered by an auxiliary engine. Upon reaching sufficient height, the three ramjets on the tips of the three wings would power up and rotate the entire wing assembly. It was hoped that, by using cheaper materials and low grade fuel, the Triebflügel could be easily mass-produced.
A model of the Triebflügel. This is how it may have looked if completed. [Wiki]
The Name
Given that these ramjet powered fighter projects were more a private venture than a specially requested military design, they were not given any standard Luftwaffe designation. The Triebflügel Flugzeug name, depending on the sources, can be translated as power-wing, gliding, or even as thrust wing aircraft. This article will refer to it as the Triebflügel for the sake of simplicity.
Technical Characteristics
Given that the Triebflügel never left the drawing board, not much is known about its overall characteristics. It was designed as an all-metal, vertical take-off, rotary wing fighter aircraft. In regard to the fuselage, there is little to almost no information about its overall construction. Based on the available drawings of it, it would have been divided into several different sections. The front nose section consisted of the pilot, cockpit, and an armament section for cannons and ammunition, which were placed behind him. Approximately at the centre of the aircraft, a rotary collar was placed around that section of the fuselage. Behind it, the main storage for fuel would be located. And at the end of the fuselage, four tail fins were placed.
A drawing of the Triebflügel’s interior. [luft46.com]This aircraft was to have an unusual and radical three wing design. The wings were connected to the fuselage while small ramjets was placed on their tips. Thanks to the rotary collar, the wings were able to rotate a full 360o around the fuselage. Their pitch could be adjusted depending on the flight situation. For additional stability during flight, the tail fins had trailing edges installed. The pilot would control the flying speed of the aircraft by changing the pitch. Once sufficient speed was achieved (some 240 to 320 km/h (150 to 200 mph)), the three ramjets were to be activated. The total diameter of the rotating wings was 11.5 m (37 ft 8 in) and had an area of 16.5 m² (176.5 ft²).
This unusual aircraft was to be powered by three ramjets which were able to deliver some 840 kg (1,1850 lb) of thrust each. Thanks to ramjet development achieved by Otto Pabst, these had a diameter of 68 cm (2.7 ft), with a length of less than 30 cm (0.98 ft). The fuel for this aircraft was to be hydrogen gas or some other low grade fuel. The estimated maximum speed that could be achieved with these engines was 1,000 km/h (621 mph). The main disadvantage of the ramjets, however, was that they could not be used during take-off, so an auxiliary engine had to be used instead. While not specifying the precise type, at least three different engines (including jet, rocket, or ordinary piston driven engines) were proposed.
In the fuselage nose, the pilot cockpit was placed. From there the pilot was provided with an overall good view of the surroundings. The main issue with this cockpit design wass the insufficient rear view during vertical landing.
Close up view of the Triebflügel landing gear assembly. [Secret Jets of the Third Reich]The landing gear consisted of four smaller and one larger wheels. Smaller wheels were placed on the four fin stabilizers, while the large one was placed in the middle of the rear part of the fuselage. The larger center positioned wheel was meant to hold the whole weight of the aircraft, while the smaller ones were meant to provide additional stability. Each wheel was enclosed in a protective ball shaped cover that would be closed during flight, possibly to provide better aerodynamic properties. It may also have served to protect the wheels from any potential damage, as landing with one of these would have been highly problematic. Interestingly enough, all five landing wheels were retractable, despite their odd positioning.
The armament would have consisted of two 3 cm (1.18 in) MK 103s with 100 rounds of ammunition and two 2 cm (0.78 in) MG 151s with 250 rounds. The cannons were placed on the side of the aircraft’s nose. The spare ammunition containers were positioned behind the pilot’s seat.
Final Fate
Despite its futuristic appearance and the alleged cheap building materials that would have been used in its construction, no Triebflügel was ever built. A small wooden wind tunnel model was built and tested by the end of the war. During this testing, it was noted that the aircraft could potentially reach speeds up to 0.9 Mach, slightly less than 1,000 km/h. The documents for this aircraft were captured by the Americans at the end of the war. The Americans initially showed interest in the concept and continued experimenting and developing it for sometime after.
In Modern Culture
The Triebflügel taking off in the movie. [marvelcinematicuniverse.fandom.com]Interestingly, the Triebflügel was used as an escape aircraft for the villain Red Skull in the 2011 Captain America: The First Avenger movie.
Conclusion
The Triebflügel’s overall design was unusual to say the least. It was a completely new concept of how to bring an aircraft to the sky. On paper and according to Focke-Wulf’s engineers that were interrogated by Allied Intelligence after the war, the Triebflügel offered a number of advantages over the more orthodox designs. The whole aircraft was to be built using cheap materials, could achieve great speeds, and did not need a large airfield to take-off, etc. In reality, this aircraft would have been simply too complicated to build and use at that time. For example, the pilot could only effectively control the aircraft if the whole rotary wing system worked perfectly. If one (or more) of the ramjets failed to work properly, the pilot would most likely have to bail out, as he would not have had any sort of control over the aircraft. The landing process was also most likely very dangerous for the pilot, especially given the lack of rear view and the uncomfortable and difficult position that the pilot needed to be in order to be able to see the rear part of the aircraft.
The main question regarding the overall Triebflügel design is if it would have been capable of successfully performing any kind of flight. Especially given its radical, untested and overcomplicated design, this was a big question mark. While there exist some rough estimation of its alleged flight performances, it is also quite dubious if these could be achieved in reality. The whole Triebflügel project never really gained any real interest from the Luftwaffe, and it is highly likely that it was even presented to them. It was, most probably, only a Focke-Wulf private venture.
Triebflügel Estimated Specifications
Rotating Wing diameter
37 ft 8 in / 11.5 m
Length
30 ft / 9.15 m
Wing Area
176.5 ft² / 16.5 m²
Engine
Three Ramjets with 840 kg (1,1850 lb) of thrust each
Empty Weight
7,056 lbs / 3,200 kg
Maximum Takeoff Weight
11,410 lbs / 5,175 kg
Climb Rate to 8 km
In 1 minute 8 seconds
Maximum Speed
621 mph / 1,000 km/h
Cruising speed
522 mph / 840 km/h
Range
1,490 miles / 2,400 km
Maximum Service Ceiling
45,920 ft / 14,000 m
Crew
1 pilot
Armament
Two 3 cm MK 103 (1.18 in) and two 2 cm (0.78 in) MG 151 cannons
Gallery
A rendition of how the Triebflugel may have looked had it been built. Illustration by Pavel ‘Carpaticus’ Alexe.
Credits
Article by Marko P.
Duško N. (2008) Naoružanje Drugog Svetsko Rata-Nemačka. Beograd.
D. Sharp (2015) Luftwaffe Secret Jets of the Third Reich, Dan Savage
Jean-Denis G.G. Lepage (2009) Aircraft of the Luftwaffe 1935-1945, McFarland and Company
J.R. Smith and A. L. Kay (1972) German Aircraft of the Second World War, Putham
Nazi Germany (1943)
Night fighter – Approximately 2,520 Built
A Ju 88G-1 in transit. [Boiten]Developed from converted fighter versions of the Ju 88A-4 medium bomber, the Ju 88G would take up a growing role in the German night fighter force, as it saw its greatest successes in the Spring of 1944, and its decline in the Autumn of that same year. While built mostly as a result of the German aviation industry’s failure to produce a new specialized night fighter design, the Ju 88G would nonetheless prove to be a valuable asset, one that far exceeded the capabilities of its predecessors and was well suited for mass production.
Hunting in the Dark: 1943
1943 was a year of highs and lows for the Luftwaffe’s night fighter force, one that saw their tactics change considerably to match those of RAF’s Bomber Command. The year started with the Luftwaffe continuing the heavy use of its long standing fixed network of defensive ‘Himmelbett’ cells. These contained searchlights, radar, and night fighters that coordinated to bring down raiders. This chain of defenses stretched across the low countries through northern Germany in a network known more broadly as the ‘Kammhuber line’, named after its architect and initial commander of the German night fighter force, Josef Kammhuber. However the British would develop tactics to shatter this line and employ countermeasures to blind the radars used both by flak and fighter directors, and night fighters.
They employed what became known as the ‘bomber stream’, deploying their aircraft in a long and narrow formation in order to penetrate as few of the Luftwaffe’s defensive boxes as possible. It was a simple but effective tactic, a night fighter could only intercept so many planes, and the cells were quickly overwhelmed. When they coupled this tactic with radar reflecting chaff, which they called ‘window’, the result was the near total collapse of the German air defenses during the July raid against the city of Hamburg. With German radar scopes clouded by the resulting interference, they were unable to direct gun laying radar for their anti-aircraft guns, and night fighters could not be vectored onto their targets, much less find anything using their on-board radar systems. Virtually defenseless and in the grips of a hot, dry summer, Hamburg suffered a level of destruction eclipsed only by the raid on Dresden when the war was coming to a close.
The Himmelbett system provided expansive coverage but could easily be overwhelmed by a concentrated stream of enemy aircraft. [Price]The Luftwaffe’s disaster over Hamburg forced them to reform their strategy and develop new detection systems that would be unaffected by the newest RAF countermeasures. Kammhuber was sacked, though not exclusively as a result of the raid, and a new system of night fighter control was to be the primary means of nightly strategic air defense. Instead of the heavy focus on the fixed Himmelbett boxes, night fighters would be assembled over beacons before being directed towards bomber streams. This would ensure there would be no bottlenecks and would allow the full strength of the night fighter force to, as it was hoped, be brought against the enemy in mass. They would also employ new equipment, modifying their Wurzburg radars, used for fire and aircraft direction, with a chaff discriminating device, and replacing the older Lichtenstein (B/C) aerial search radars with the new SN-2.
In the winter of 1943, Bomber Command set out to try and knock Germany out of the war. They launched a series of large-scale raids against major industrial cities and the capital, with Sir Arthur Harris, its C-in-C, believing he could end the war without the need for a costly invasion of the continent (Overy 339). The Luftwaffe’s new weapons and tactics would quickly prove their worth during what later became known as the ‘first Battle of Berlin’. Bomber Command held that a loss rate of 5% represented “acceptable losses” and significantly higher values could spell trouble for continuous operations (Brown 309). Between August and November of 1943, the casualty rates during the “1st Battle of Berlin” sat at 7.6-7.9%, figures which would climb slowly over the following months (Overy 342). However, while most Luftwaffe planners were enthusiastic about the new air defense methods, they would have to confront a growing concern in the service: they were reliant on considerably dated night fighter designs.
The Search for a New Design
Left to right: Ta 154, He 219, Ju 188. [avionslegendaires.net & Wikipedia]Throughout much of 1943, the night fighting mission was taken up mostly by variants of the Bf 110, followed by the Ju 88, and in much smaller numbers the Do 217 and He 219. In order to address the lack of a mass produced, specialized night fighter design, three new proposals were introduced. The first being the Ta 154 “Moskito,” a wooden, dedicated night fighter design which hoped to capture the same success as the British aircraft which bore the same name. The second, the He 219, was a specialized night fighter design championed by the very man who had devised the Himmelbett system, Josef Kammhuber. Lastly the Ju 188, a bomber that at the time still lacked a night fighter version, was proposed for conversion (Aders 72).
The Ta 154, despite high hopes for the project, never came to fruition as a result of its troubled development. The He 219 was sidelined by Generalflugzeugmeister (Chief of Procurement and Supply) Erhard Milch, who opposed increasing the number of specialized airframes in favor of mass production of multipurpose designs (Cooper 265). To make matters worse for the project a number of technical issues prolonged development, the aircraft took around 90,000 hours to produce, and with comparatively little support from the Luftwaffe, few were built (Cooper 325). The aircraft would, however, still be employed with the Luftwaffe, but in limited service. The Ju 188 design that likely would have received Milch’s support simply never materialized.
With the failure to find a new design, it was clear that the brunt of future night fighting would fall on existing designs, in particular the Ju 88. In early 1943, it was on this design that hopes were placed for a high performance, specialized night fighter that would become available to the Luftwaffe the following year (Cooper 266).
The Old 88
Left to right: Ju 88A-4, Ju 88C-6, Ju 88R, Ju 88G-1. [Asisbiz]Originally entering service as a medium/dive bomber in 1939, the Ju 88A was a state of the art, if somewhat conservative, design that was exceedingly versatile and easily modifiable. The airframe was sturdy, aerodynamically clean, and modular, with many components capable of being modified without necessitating major revisions to its overall design. This is perhaps nowhere more evident than the self-enclosed combined engine-radiator assemblies that allowed the powerplant and its associated cooling systems to be easily removed or replaced via connecting plates and brackets (Medcalf 106, 107, 191).
Not long after its teething period subsided, the Ju 88 proved itself in a number of roles and was employed as a night fighter early in the war, as some bombers were converted to Zerstorer (long range fighter/ground attack aircraft) at Luftwaffe workshops. Several of these aircraft were subsequently handed off to night fighter squadrons by the end of 1941, the first set with their dive brakes still equipped (Aders 31). However, by the end of 1941, small quantities of serial-built Ju 88C fighters were being delivered, with a larger production run following in the subsequent years. The type would eventually take up a growing position in the night fighter force (Medcalf 166, 178). Owing to their origins as converted aircraft, the Ju 88C-6 series retained virtually the same airframe as their bomber counterparts, with some minor alterations. The bombardier and their equipment were removed and an armament of three 7.92 mm MG17’s, a 20mm MG 151/20, and a pair of 20mm MG FF cannons were installed in the nose of the aircraft and in the “gondola” beneath the nose that would have otherwise carried the bombsight and ventral gunner (Medalf 319).
The night fighting capabilities of the C-6 were good but its shortcomings were becoming more apparent as the war progressed. By early 1943, it was considered relatively slow and this was particularly worrying in the face of the RAF’s growing use of the Mosquito as a bomber and pathfinder, an aircraft which no German night fighter in service was able to effectively intercept. When flying at high speeds and altitudes, catching these aircraft was often more a matter of good fortune than anything else. In mid 1943, an interim design known as the Ju 88R was introduced in the hopes of alleviating some of the deficiencies of the preceding series. Despite remaining very capable in the anti-heavy bomber role, it had no hope of intercepting the Mosquito. While the Ju 88R proved to be significantly faster thanks to the use of the much more powerful BMW 801 engines over the older Jumo 211Js, it still failed to fulfill the anti-Mosquito role that its planners hoped to achieve.
While the aircraft offered greater performance and was favored by pilots, it was still very much a simple conversion, much like the C series it was supplementing, and it was clear additional modifications were necessary to better realize the airframe’s potential. In particular, its greater engine power meant the aircraft could reach higher speeds, but that power also enabled the aircraft to exceed the limits to which the rudder was effective (Aders 73). However, despite the disappointments of the year and the failure to secure a brand-new night fighter design, the hope that a new model of specialized Ju 88 would be entering service was soon realized.
Gustav
The Ju 88G would provide the Luftwaffe with a high performance night fighter that also allowed them to consolidate existing production lines. [Asisbiz]By the end of 1943, work on the new night fighter was complete and the Luftwaffe was preparing to receive the first planes by the end of the year. The new Ju 88G-1 was developed as the successor to the previous C and R series night fighters, both consolidating production and vastly improving performance.
The Ju 88V-58 was the primary prototype for the Ju 88G-1 and first flew in June of 1943 (Aders 258). It sat between the older Ju 88R series aircraft and the later Ju 88G in design and appearance, using the same basic airframe as the Ju 88R and its BMW 801 power plants. However, it also incorporated the vertical stabilizer designed for the Ju 188, used a new narrower, low drag canopy from previous fighter models, and removed the “gondola” which carried a portion of the aircraft’s armament in previous models (Aders 132; Medcalf 191, 192). The armament was significantly improved with the addition of a mid-fuselage gun pod which mounted four MG 151/20 20 mm cannons, making use of the space otherwise taken up by bombing gear, with another pair of cannons installed in the nose of the aircraft. However, the nose mounted pair were removed later on due to issues regarding the muzzle flash of the guns affecting the pilot’s vision, a resulting shift in the aircraft’s center of gravity, and interference with nose mounted radar aerials (Medcalf 191).
After this series of changes to the aircraft’s fuselage, armament, and the subsequent addition of an SN-2c radar, the Ju 88G went into production. 6 pre-production Ju 88G-0 aircraft and 13 Ju 88G-1s were completed by the end of 1943 (Medcalf 178). The production switch between the previous Ju 88R and 88C models to the G was relatively smooth, with the first three aircraft delivered to the Luftwaffe in January of 1944. Production and deliveries of the new model increased sharply over the following weeks thanks to the aircraft sharing most of its components with older models (Aders 129). Mass production was carried out rapidly, with 12 planes completed a month later in January, roughly doubling the next month, and rising to 247 aircraft in June, before gradually falling as the production of its successor, the G-6, began to supersede it (Medcalf 240).
The Ju 88G-1 went into production with an offensive armament of four forward facing 20 mm MG 151/20 cannons in a pod mounted ventrally near the center of the aircraft. Upward facing cannons in the fuselage, in a configuration referred to as ‘Schräge Musik’, were often installed later at field workshops. These upward facing weapons were of particular use against British bombers, which had forgone ventral defensive guns. This armament was a marked improvement over the three 20 mm cannons and three MG 17 7.92 mm machine guns carried by the preceding C6 and R series (Medcalf 319).
The aircraft was powered by the much more powerful BMW 801 G-2 engines producing 1740 PS, a huge boost up from the Jumo 211J, 1410 PS, on the Ju 88C-6. This allowed the aircraft to reach 537 km/h at an altitude of 6.2 km, quite a considerable improvement over the Ju 88C-6’s 470 km/h at 4.8 km (Junkers Flugzeug und Motorenwerke 7, 12, Medcalf 319). The engines were unchanged from that of the previous Ju 88R model, though it was able to make better use of them thanks to the enlarged vertical stabilizer which granted better control and stability at high speed.
G-6
The G-6 would incorporate more powerful engines and standardize several common modifications made to the previous model. [albumwar2]To build on the success and production base of the first design, work began on a successor. Retaining the same airframe, the G-6 would be powered by the Junkers Jumo 213 A-1 and would standardize the use of equipment commonly added to the G-1 at Luftwaffe workshops. To this end several new prototypes were produced, these being Ju 88V-108, V-109 which included the MW50 boost system, and Ju 88V-111 which served as a production prototype (Medcalf 192).
The aircraft carried with it several key improvements over the initial model. It was faster, better armed, and possessed a more advanced set of electronic warfare equipment. However, it’s top speed is difficult to ascertain given the limited number of sources on the aircraft. It was able to achieve 554 km/h (344 mph) at 6km (19685 ft) without the use of the MW50 boost system, and after the war Royal Navy test pilot Eric Brown was able to reach a top speed of 644km/h (400mph) at an altitude of 9,145 meters in tests (30,000ft) (Medcalf 319, Eric Brown 195). In all likelihood, this was a testing aircraft that was using either Jumo 213E or 213F engines, as 9km was well above the full throttle height of the Jumo 213A. Alternatively, some of these engines may have made their way into very late production G-6 aircraft.
The new standardized equipment included an upward firing pair of 20 mm cannons, the FuG 350 Naxos Z radar detector, and they would later be the first night fighters to be equipped with the new SN-2R and Naxos ZR tail warning equipment. They also carried the new Neptun radars for twin engine fighter use and were the only aircraft that made use of the SN-3 and Berlin search radars (Medcalf 319, 324; Aders 181).
The SN-2R was a rearward facing radar aerial added to the SN-2d search radar sets that would warn the crew of pursuers. It helped to significantly improve survivability along with the new Naxos ZR, which could now warn the crew of enemy night fighter radar emissions. These systems quickly showed their worth. Ju 88G-6’s fared better in the presence of enemy night fighters than the He 219’s and Bf 110’s, which lacked standardized tail warning equipment (Aders 181).
Late G-6’s were also equipped with the FuG 120A Bernhardine. This device was intended to make use of a nationwide network of high powered transmitters that would have been unjammable by the RAF’s electronic warfare equipment. The system would provide the altitude of a bomber stream, its location on a grid map, its course, strength, and the recipient night fighter’s bearing from the ground station. All of this information was relayed in coded messages by means of a teleprinter in the cockpit of the night fighter. It was mostly foolproof, but the system was not fully operational by the war’s end (Medcalf 325; Price 237, 238).
Pilot’s Remarks and General Flight Characteristics
As with the rest of the Ju 88’s in the night fighter service, the plane had the ergonomics and handling characteristics that were so sought after by pilots. The sorties they faced by this point of the war were as long as two hours and as such undemanding flight characteristics were a crucial feature of any night fighter (Aders 23). Stability, well balanced controls and the ability to fly well on one engine were crucial factors, and having them made the Ju 88G a highly rated aircraft among the force (Aders 31, 132). Its reinforced airframe also came in useful, as its earlier use as a dive-bomber required a high tolerance for g-forces that made it capable of pulling off hard maneuvers without risk of damaging the airframe in the process. The addition of the Ju 188’s vertical stabilizer also improved handling markedly, as the newer design provided much smooth rudder controls over the previous version, which had ones unchanged from older bomber models and were quite stiff once the aircraft was brought up to speed (Medcalf 304).
Ju 88G-1 flown by Roland Beamont. [asisbiz.com]The G-1 handled exceedingly well, with controls that were well balanced and responsive. Praise for the Gustav’s handling could even be found outside the ranks of the Luftwaffe, as Roland Beamont, an RAF fighter pilot and post war test pilot, had a chance to take one up and evaluate how it performed at RAF Tangmere in the summer of 1945. Beamont found the aircraft undemanding, with gentle controls and that, on landing, the aircraft “could be steered on the approach as gently and responsively as any fighter”. Equally as important, he found the aircraft needed very little adjustment in the air, with only very minor trimming of control surfaces needed for smooth operation in regular flight. In a rare chance, he even found an opportunity to have a mock battle with another RAF pilot, Bob Braham, flying a DeHavilland Mosquito. Beamont found the 88 was able to hold its ground for some time, but eventually letting up when he began to reach the limits of the unfamiliar plane so low to the ground and in the wake of Bob’s plane, which promptly outmaneuvered him.
Despite his praise for the aircraft’s flight characteristics, he felt the structural cockpit framework was very restrictive of the pilot’s vision. In a summary of his first flight and a second on July 16th, he claimed “It has remained in my rating as one of the best heavy piston-engined twins of all time and a very pleasant flying experience.” (Medcalf 294, 295). Much like Beamont, most Luftwaffe pilots were very satisfied with the aircraft (Aders 132).
Famed Royal Navy pilot Capt. Erik ‘Winkle’ Brown would also be among the few allied pilots to have the opportunity to fly both the G-1, and subsequent G-6 model. Capt. Brown felt the aircraft possessed largely the same excellent handling characteristics as the Ju 88A-5 he’d flown prior. He praised the aircraft for its easy ground handling, thanks to its excellent brakes, it’s good handling during climbs, and light controls at cruising speed (Brown 190).
Capt. Brown would spend more time with the G-6 and was able to put one through more demanding tests. Having previously flown several versions of the Ju 88, Brown was particularly impressed by the aforementioned high speeds achieved by a Ju 88G-6 (Werk-nr 621965) he’d flown in tests. The aircraft remained in line with his general, glowing remarks over the Ju 88. “It was a pilot’s airplane, first and last, it demanded a reasonable degree of skill in handling and it responded splendidly when such skill was applied. There was a number of very good German aircraft but, with the exception of the Fw 190, none aroused my profound admiration as did the Junkers ‘eighty-eight’ (Brown 195).”
Perhaps the simplest but greatest advantage the aircraft had in night fighting was in the close proximity of the crewmembers, which allowed them easy communication in the event of intercom failure or emergency. It also allowed the pilot to be seated beside their radar operator, with the flight engineer seated directly behind him, an ideal arrangement providing both easy communication and good situational awareness, which became a necessity as bomber streams became the hunting grounds for RAF night fighters (Aders 132).
While it inherited the benefits of the original design, it also had its flaws, the most obvious of which was the poor visibility due to the bars of the reinforced cockpit frame, and the troublesome landing gear which had a tendency to buckle if the aircraft was brought down too hard (Medcalf 75). The landing gear was a hydraulically actuated set that rotated 90 degrees so that the wheels would lie flat within their nacelles. This greatly reduced drag, as the shallower landing gear bays contributed far less to the frontal area of the plane, but they could be broken in forced landings or careless flying. These types of accidents were typically handled by the airfield ground staff, though handing off the plane to a recovery and salvage battalion could prove necessary in the event of a forced landing or a particularly bad accident (Medcalf 62).
Lichtenstein SN-2
Early combined SN-2 with the wide-angle attachment; compared to a later model on Ju 88G. These large aerials came to be known as the ‘Hirschgeweih’(stag antlers). [Bauer, Rod’s Warbirds]Perhaps the most important feature of the Ju 88G, its radar, was easily the weakest point of the aircraft in comparison to its contemporaries in foreign service. Unlike the British or Americans, the Germans lacked any major production of centimeter band search radars, forcing them to rely on meter band types. In practical terms, the meter band radar carried with it several major disadvantages, the most evident and visible of which were the large aerial antennas which protruded from the aircraft’s fuselage and created significant drag. In tests by the Luftwaffe’s Rechlin test pilots, it was found that the Lichtenstein (B/C) decreased the maximum speed of a Bf-110 by 39.9 km/h (Aders 44). Another major disadvantage was its inferior ability to cut through ground clutter, leading to very poor performance at lower altitudes and making it useless near ground level (Aders 163, 200).
The standard Ju 88G-1 was equipped with the Lichtenstein SN-2c, also designated as FuG 220. This airborne radar set was designed by Telefunken for naval service and originally rejected by the Luftwaffe earlier in the war. Its initial rejection was based on its extreme minimum range of 750 meters, which meant that any target would disappear off the scopes long before the pilot would be able to see it (Aders 79, 80). Its later adoption was a matter of the previous air search radar having a relatively short maximum range, and that the SN-2 would be unaffected by the chaff that made the previous sets useless (Brown 309). However, due to the shortcomings of the original SN-2, the device was coupled with a simplified version of the older Lichtenstein FuG-212 radar to track targets within the large minimum range of the new system. The resulting set up required the use of 5 radar scopes and was an exceedingly cumbersome display, with three scopes devoted to the older Lichtenstein set and two for the SN-2 (Price 196).
The two scope SN-2c display, the “peaks” represent radar contacts. Left is azimuth and range, right is elevation. The range demarcations are 2 km for both sides, the radar will not display contacts beyond the 5th demarcation.[Bauer]The SN-2 carried by the 88G was an improved model which had its minimum range decreased to an acceptable distance, allowing it to drop the excess equipment for the far simpler SN-2c, which required only two scopes (Aders 122). The system had a frequency range of 73/82/91 MHz, a power output of 2.5 kW, an instrumented range of 8km, a minimum range of 300 m, a search angle with an azimuth of 120 degrees, an elevation of 100 degrees, and a total weight of 70 kg. While the system had a maximum instrumented range of 8km, its practical detection range was tied to the altitude at which it was operating and the size of the target. For example, if searching for a heavy bomber traveling at the same altitude, and with the maximum antenna aperture towards the Earth being roughly 30 degrees, and at an operating altitude of 5km, the slant range of the radar can be placed roughly at the system’s maximum range of 8km (Bauer 12, 13). This range increases or decreases correspondingly with the altitude of the aircraft or its target, with the device being virtually useless near ground level.
One SN-2c was eventually recovered by the RAF when an inexperienced crew landed their plane at RAF Woodbridge as a result of a navigation failure, which allowed the British to develop both effective chaff and electronic jamming countermeasures for it (Price 221). This same aircraft would be the one given such a good review by Roland Beamont, its registration code being 4R+UR.
The SN-2 would see further development even as its usefulness declined in the face of widespread jamming and chaff which targeted its operating bands. The SN-2d was the most immediate development which helped to some degree. Its operating frequencies were shifted to the 37.5-118 MHz dispersal band to make use of its still usable frequencies that were not fully targeted by RAF jamming efforts. It would later be combined with the SN-2R tail warning radar and, very late in the war, made use of low drag ‘morgenstern’ aerials and an aerodynamic nose cone which fit over it (Aders 244).
Late War and Experimental Radars
Left to right: Fug 218 Neptun, Lichtenstein FuG 220 SN-2 with a low drag array, FuG 240 Berlin with its parabolic antenna set behind a removable nose cone. [Rod’s Warbirds, Asisbiz,ww2aircraft.net] The FuG 217/218 Neptun radar setswere developed and built by FFO. These had been initially developed for use in single engine night fighters, but were later adapted for use aboard twin engine aircraft. They were largely a stop gap following the RAF jamming efforts against the SN-2, as any new aerial search radar was months away. These series of radars came in a variety of configurations as they were further developed and pressed into wider service.
The Neptun 217 V/R was a search radar that could switch between two frequencies between 158 and 187 MHz, had a search angle of 120 degrees, a maximum range of 4 km with a minimum of 400 meters, and a total weight of 35 kg. The subsequent Neptun 218 V/R search radar included four new frequency settings along the same range, had a maximum range of 5km with a minimum of 120 meters, a power output of 30kW, weighed 50kg, and possessed the same search angle as the previous model. Both radars could be mounted in a “stag antler” array with the preceding Neptun 217 V/R also having a “rod” type mounting arrangement, which consisted of individual antennas attached to the airframe. As with the SN-2, tail warning sets were produced which were found in the form of the standalone Neptune 217 R and Neptun 218 R sets, or as a component of the Neptune 217 V/R and Neptun 218 V/R combined search and tail warning radars. (Aders 245, 246).
The FuG 228 SN-3 was developed by Telefunken and was visually similar to the SN-2 but with thicker dipoles. The device operated on a frequency range of 115-148 MHz, had a power output of 20kW, a maximum range of 8km with a minimum of 250m, a search angle with an azimuth of of 120 degrees, an elevation of 100, and a total weight of 95kg. Some sets also made use of a low drag “morningstar ” array that used ¼ and ½-wavelength aerials. 10 sets were delivered for trials and may have been used in combat (Aders 245).
The FuG 240 Berlin was another radar developed by Telefunken and their last to see operational use during the war, it also being the first and only centimetric aerial search radar to see service with the Luftwaffe. It operated on a wavelength of 9 to 9.3 cm, an output of 15kW, had a maximum range of roughly 9 km, a minimum of 300 m, a search angle of 55 degrees, weighed 180 kg, and had no serious altitude limitations (Aders 246, Holp 10). While only twenty five Berlin sets were delivered to the Luftwaffe they made successful use of them in March of 1945 (Aders 246; Brown 317). While these new devices were free of the heavy jamming the SN-2 faced, they lacked the larger production base of the SN-2 which continued to be fitted to new night fighters until the end of the war.
Passive Sensors
While the SN-2 radar was somewhat mediocre, this deficiency was offset by other devices that were often installed aboard which could supplement it, these being the FuG 227Flensburg and FuG 350 Naxos Z. Developed by Telefunken, Naxos was able to detect the emissions of British H2S ground mapping radar and other devices with frequencies in the centimeter band. This would enable a night fighter equipped with the system to home in on RAF aircraft that were using ground mapping radar to direct bomber streams to their targets. The Naxos Z set was capable of detecting emissions at up to 50 km, enabling them to find pathfinders or simply other bombers in the stream as the ground mapping radar became more commonplace among the aircraft of Bomber Command (Price 176, Medcalf 325). Subsequent models would expand the reception band to allow the device to detect British centimetric aerial intercept radar and combine the system with tail warning equipment to alert aircrews to the presence of British, and later American, night fighters, with the series working within the 2500 mHz to 3750 mHz band (Medcalf 325). These included the Naxos-ZR, used exclusively in Ju 88s, with the aerial contained within the fuselage, the Naxos ZX, which further increased the detectable frequency ranges, and the Naxos RX, which was a version of the previous type which coupled it with tail warning equipment (Aders 248, 249). This was solely a directional sensor and would give the operator the azimuth of the target, but not its altitude or range.
Naxos indicator, each notch represents a detected emission [Bauer]Flensburg was another passive device, this one made by Siemens. While Naxos detected the emissions from RAF ground mapping radar, Flensburg picked up the tail warning radar of RAF bombers, a device codenamed Monica. With later versions operating on a tunable frequency band of 80 mHz to 230 mHz, it allowed aircraft equipped with it to detect virtually all bombers traveling within a stream should their rear warning radar be active (Medcalf 325). Among the captured pieces of equipment in Ju 88G [4R+UR], this was evaluated by the RAF and found to be an exceedingly useful tool for detecting and closing in on their bombers. The aircraft with the device was evaluated by Wing Commander Derek Jackson in a series of tests with both a single RAF Lancaster bomber and a small group of five planes flying over a considerable distance. He found that, in both cases, he was able to home in on the bombers with the Flensburg device alone from as far as 130 miles away without any issues even when the aircraft were in close formation, where there was hope that several of the tail warning radars operating closely together might have confused the device (Price 222).
In all, 250 Flensburg sets were produced, alongside roughly 1,500 Naxos-Z sets, and though only the latter became standard equipment, both saw extensive use among Ju 88 night fighters (Aders 124). These devices proved incredibly successful in combination with SN-2 and, for several months, allowed the German night fighter forces to achieve great operational success. However, they eventually fell behind again one final time after the successful British efforts to counter the Luftwaffe’s sensors and tactics in the months following the landings in France (Brown 319). In the end only Naxos remained the only reliable means of detecting raiders as, unlike Monica, they could not do without their H2S ground mapping radar.
Initial Deployments
Field use of the aircraft began shortly after the delivery of the first pre production aircraft, which were quickly sent out to units equipped with older models of Ju-88s, often being placed into the hands of formation leaders. In this way, its introduction into service was gradual, with the first aircraft already being in the hands of more experienced pilots before more deliveries allowed for the entire unit to transition away from older models. Prior to July of 1944, Gruppe IV of NJG3, II and III of NJG6, and I of NJG7 were supplied with large numbers of G-1s, followed by a gradual supply to NJG2, Gruppe IV of NJG 5, III of NJG3, and NJG100. It should also be noted that these aircraft could be found in the inventories of most units, even those that did not fully transition over fully to their use (Aders 131).
For the first three months of 1944, the Luftwaffe inventory had only a single digit number of operational G-1s but, by April and May, mass deliveries of the aircraft began, with 179 planes available in May and 419 by July (Aders 272). A total 1,209 Ju 88G-0s and G-1s were delivered to the Luftwaffe between December of 1943 and October of 1944, with the aircraft and its successor, the Ju 88G-6, becoming the mainstay of the German night fighter force for the remainder of the war (Medcalf 178, 240).
Zahme Sau: Winter through Spring
As a heavy radar equipped night fighter, the Ju 88G would serve the Luftwaffe as “Zahme Sau” (Tame Boar) interceptors. They differed from “Wilde Sau” (Wild Boar), in that they were to receive guidance toward enemy bombers from a series of ground based stations in a system known as Y-Control. With information collected from various search radars and passive radio and radar detectors scattered throughout much of Western Europe, ground control operators would direct interceptors toward bomber streams (Price 175, 178).
For much of 1944, a typical mission for a Zahme Sau pilot would go as follows. First, they would take off and head for an assembly point marked by a radio/searchlight beacon. Then, they would wait their turn before receiving radio commands directing them towards a bomber stream. The fighters were led away from the beacons by their formation leaders, but rarely did all a gruppe’s fighters actually reach the target in close order. Lastly, upon reaching the stream, they would attempt to merge with it and then begin to search out targets with on board sensors. In addition to direct guidance, Y-control gave a running commentary on a bomber stream, describing its course and the altitude range the staggered bombers flew at (Aders 102, 103,195). This running commentary was particularly useful later on when night fighters more commonly flew alone and the use of the signal beacons was restricted.
This system would see the effectiveness of the Luftwaffe’s night fighters reach its zenith in the spring. Building upon their successes of the previous winter they would inflict heavy losses on Bomber Command. Between November of 1943 and March of 1944, Bomber Command would lose 1,128 aircraft prior to the temporary withdrawal from large scale operations over Germany. During the raid on Nuremberg in April of 1944, 11.9% of raiders failed to return home in what became the costliest raid of the entire war (Overy 368). Thankfully for the Allies, the Luftwaffe would never see this level of success again, as Bomber Command shifted to support Operation Overlord at the end of May. While Arthur Harris wished to continue his large-scale area bombing campaign over Germany, he would relent to pressures from higher offices and place his forces in support of the coming operation to liberate France. The subsequent raids against various rail yards across coastal France would prove a well needed respite for Bomber Command. The short distance the raiders flew over hostile territory meant that Luftwaffe night fighters had fewer opportunities for interception, and thus Bomber Command’s losses were comparatively light.
RAF Tactics and Changing Fortunes
Avro Lancaster and DeHavilland Mosquito NF MK XVII. [Flickr]Following Overlord, Bomber Command returned to Germany better equipped and prepared for the challenges ahead. A typical late war Bomber Command heavy raiding force was composed mostly of Lancaster and Halifax heavy bombers which were supported by airborne radar and radio jammers, night fighters, decoy formations composed of trainee squadrons, and chaff dispersing aircraft. In addition to the aforementioned Lancaster and Halifax, the B-17 and B-24 were also used by both the USAAF and RAF as electronic warfare platforms during these raids, though in much smaller numbers. Several variants of the DeHavilland Mosquito would be used as pathfinders, bombers, and nightfighers. The pathfinders were particularly troublesome as they could outpace any interceptor, save for a night fighter variant of the Me 262 that was introduced near the end of the war. While goals of the heavy bombers were straightforward, the supporting forces’ goal was to disorient Luftwaffe ground controllers and engage their night fighters to reduce operational losses and tie up enemy aircraft (Aders 194, 195).
Locating the stream proved difficult, but if a fighter was to infiltrate it, they were mostly free of electronic interference and would encounter little resistance. While successful infiltration often meant good chances for kills, most night fighters would end up returning to base having expended most of their fuel in the search.
Various derivatives of the FuMG 402 Wasserman radar, a long range early warning and fighter control radar built by Siemens. Later versions were capable of frequency changes within the 1.9-2.5 m, 1.2-1.9 m, and 2.4-4.0 m ranges (Aders 251). [cdvandt]While the Luftwaffe’s system was still holding steady it soon faced a new challenge, as from December 1943 onward, German night fighter pilots would also have to contend with the long-range Mosquito night fighters of the RAF’s 100 Group. Tasked with supporting bombing raids through offensive action, they operated by seeking out German night fighters over raid targets, at night fighter assembly points, and lastly to seek out enemy aircraft near the stream itself (Sharp & Bowyer 289).
By the beginning of May 1944, 100 Group possessed only about a hundred Mosquitos, though the number would grow larger and they would begin to replace their older and less capable aircraft (Sharp & Bowyer 290, 291). In the Autumn of 1944, the Mosquitos began to carry equipment to track German night fighters by activating their Erstling IFF (Identify Friend or Foe System) by mimicking the signals of German search radars. With this new gear and their bolstered numbers, they had tied down much of the Luftwaffe night fighter force by the winter of 1944. Eventually, the Germans left their IFFs off, which made tracking their own planes extremely difficult, and forced them to abandon the use of the assembly beacons which were frequented by the Mosquitos (Aders 196). Understandably, the Mosquito became the source of constant anxiety for Luftwaffe night fighter crews. The Mosquito typically made its appearance during takeoffs, landings, and when the often unsuspecting German night fighters were transiting to and from their targets. Under such circumstances, the use of tail warning and radar detecting equipment aboard the Ju 88G was both an important defensive tool, and a serious morale booster.
Despite its earlier successes, the Luftwaffe’s night fighter force’s effectiveness began its decline in August of 1944 in the face of general disruptions to their detection and communication capabilities as the Allies deployed radar and radio jammers to the continent (Aders 194, 195, 197). This loss of early warning radar coverage would prove a decisive blow to the Luftwaffe, one that they never recovered from.
Blind and Deaf: Autumn into Winter
As summer turned to autumn, night fighter bases were increasingly harassed by Allied daylight fighter bombers, which forced the Luftwaffe to disperse their forces to secondary airfields. While these “blindworm” locations were free of prowling Mosquitos and fighter bombers, they were not without their disadvantages. While these fields were well camouflaged, their rough landing fields could be hazardous and they were not cleared for night landings. This forced many night fighters to land at their more well-constructed bases after their nightly sorties and return to the camouflaged fields in the evenings. The result was a rise in losses as the aircraft were occasionally caught by Allied fighters on their flight back. Through late 1944 and into 1945, German night fighter losses were most commonly the result of interception in transit or being hit on the ground. While at first only bases in Belgium and the Netherlands were threatened, Allied fighters would appear in growing numbers over the skies of Western and Southern Germany, as would the recon aircraft that periodically uncovered the “blindworm” bases (Aders 197).
A Ju 88G caught in transit. [asisbiz.org]In September of 1944 the night fighter force flew a total of 1,301 sorties against approximately 6,400 enemy aircraft, of which they brought down approximately 76, representing a loss rate of 1.1%. Bomber Command losses had fallen significantly from the 7.5% of the previous year, and from last April’s catastrophic high of 11.9%. As such, Bomber Command losses were once again well below the 5% attrition threshold for continuous operations (Aders 197).
By the start of winter, the RAF and USAAF had largely succeeded in jamming most of the Luftwaffe’s early warning radars, y-control radio services, and through the use of chaff and jammers, made the standard SN-2 search radar useful only in the hands of experts. This had the overall effects of ensuring the night fighter force was slower to respond in-bound raiders, more likely to be sent against diversionary formations, and that night fighters were far less likely to make contact with the bomber stream after being vectored toward it. By winter, it had become clear for the Luftwaffe that the after hours war over Western Europe had been irrevocably lost.
While the night fighter force had some success in finding alternatives to their models of the SN-2 air search radars there was no hope of recouping their past successes. Between the chronic fuel shortages, marauding RAF Mosquitos, mounting ground and transit losses, and the compromised performance of most of the Luftwaffe’s ground based radars, the situation had become unsalvageable. Its decline was final, and in February of 1945, the force disintegrated as the Allies took the war into Germany (Aders 201). After almost a year following its greatest successes, the Luftwaffe’s night fighter force finished the war mostly grounded for lack of fuel and as night harassment forces in support of Germany’s depleted and hard pressed army (Aders 206).
Large numbers of German night fighters were captured as the Allies overran their airfields, many left intact. Lacking flame dampeners or exhaust stains, these planes have likely never been flown. [flickr]
On the Offense
In conjunction with their interception duties, many units equipped with Ju 88Gs would conduct night ground attack operations against Allied forces in France against the Normandy beachhead, and later across the Western front in support of Operation Wacht am Rhein at the end of 1944.
On the night of August the 2nd, 1944, the first of these operations were carried out against various targets, including the disembarkation area at Avranches and the Normandy bridgehead. The operation code-named ‘Heidelburg’ was conducted by elements of NJG’s 2, 4, and 5.These attacks were conducted without the use of bombs and were regarded by some as absurd due to the extreme danger in conducting low level strafing runs at night, and with only limited preparations being made before the operation (Boiten P4 25). The attacks would be carried out until the night of the tenth with the night fighters taking considerable, but inconsistent, losses.
On the night of the sixth, one Ju 88G would claim an unusual victory in this period as during their return flight, Lt. Jung of 6./NJG2. Jung and his R/O Fw. Heidenrech detected and closed in on P-38 of the 370th fighter squadron at around 2:30 near Falaise, which they subsequently downed. Not all the aircraft had the same luck as Jung, as during the same night another Ju 88G of his Gruppe would be brought down by an Allied night fighter. The aircraft proceeded to crash into a Panther tank belonging to the 1st SS Panzer Division, resulting in a two hour traffic jam during that unit’s counter attack on Mortain (Boiten P4, 28). The overall impact these missions had were largely undefinable due to the inability to accurately survey the damage inflicted.
While infrequent attacks were carried out during the Autumn of 1944, the Luftwaffe’s night fighters would not be committed to any major ground attack operations until the end of the year. On the night of December 17th, several night fighter squadrons would be called upon for night ground attack operations in support of Operation Wacht Am Rhein. This action saw roughly 140 Ju 88’s and Bf 110’s of at least seven Gruppen being committed to what was to become the Battle of the Bulge (Boiten P3, 65).
This abandoned Ju 88G-6 was modified for ground attack missions, its radar had been removed and racks for bombs had been added. An AB 500 cluster bomb unit lies in the foreground. [Rod’s Warbirds]These night raids did considerable damage and sowed confusion amongst rear-echelon services, as vehicles initially traveled with undimmed lights and many facilities failed to observe black out conditions. This was especially true against rail and road traffic which, until then, felt safe traveling at night. These mistakes placed otherwise safe trucks, trains, depots, and barracks in the sights of night fighters sent on massed area raids, and armed reconnaissance patrols. These attacks were typically carried out by strafing, and bombing in the case of modified aircraft, which were equipped with ETC 500 bomb racks. During the nightly ground attack operations during the Battle of the Bulge, these modified aircraft typically carried a pair of AB 250 or AB500 cluster bombs which themselves contained either SD-1 and SD-10 anti-personnel submunitions.
These attacks were particularly effective on the odd night with higher visibility. On the night of the 22nd of December, 23 Bf 110G’s and Ju 88G’s belonging to the I. and IV./NJG 6 flew interdiction missions around Metz-Diedenhofen. Owing to the good weather that night they were able to successfully attack several targets, which included some 30 motor vehicles credited as destroyed, and several trains which they attacked north of Metz. They were joined that night by seven aircraft from I.NJG4 which undertook low level strafing attacks, for which they were credited for the destruction of one locomotive, four motor vehicles, and a supply dump. Additionally, they were credited for damaging another locomotive, six motor transport columns, and five single motor vehicles. Losses amongst the night fighters were uncharacteristically light that night, with only Bf 110 G-4 2Z+VK having been lost during the raids (Boiten 73).
Ground crew with an engine heater prepare a Ju 88G-1. [Asisbiz]The operational conditions during these raids were generally very poor, both a result of the weather, which had infamously grounded most aircraft during the initial stages of the battle, and Allied electronic interference. While the navigational aids and avionics of their aircraft made them effectively all weather capable, the harsh weather and Allied jamming of navigation beacons and radio communications proved serious challenges to Luftwaffe night fighter crews. The difficult nature of the missions themselves made for little improvement, as they typically flew at low altitudes under weather conditions which reduced visibility. The sum of all of these factors made for missions which brought on significantly more fatigue than the typical bomber interception mission.
Throughout the battle, the Ju 88G would prove an exceptional night ground attack aircraft or ‘Nachtschlachter’. With its powerful engines, cannons, large payload, and exceptional de-icing systems, the aircraft could carry out attacks under very harsh winter conditions. Several of these aircraft would have their radar removed and were used exclusively for this mission until the end of the war. A number of former night fighters would even serve with the bomber squadron KG2, with their cannon armament removed, as night attack aircraft (Medcalf Vol.2 618).
The raiders encountered few night fighters as several RAF Mosquito night fighter units had been withdrawn to requip with the new Mosquito NF Mk. XXX. Between the two USAAF squadrons with their P-61’s and the remaining RAF units, there were few Allied night fighters in the area (Aders 200). However, Luftwaffe losses to AAA were high thanks to the advanced centimetric gun-laying radars in use with the US and British armies. In the end the night fighters were able to cause disruptions behind allied lines, but the price paid was steep, with 75 aircraft being lost over 12 nights (Boiten P5 3).
Operation Gisela:
The Ju 88G would play an exclusive role in the last major Luftwaffe night action of the entire war, in a large-scale intruder mission dubbed Operation Gisela. This operation was likely formulated after Maj. Heinz-Wolfgang Schnaufer discovered that night fighting conditions on the other side of the ‘front’ were far more favorable. He later submitted a proposal to his fighter division to attack Allied bombers over the North sea, where there would be relatively little electronic and chaff interference, and where the bombers would least suspect an attack. However, the CO of the 3rd fighter division would instead propose to attack the bombers at their airfields when they were landing.
In any case the British intelligence services got wind of the plan as was made clear by the broadcasting of the song ‘I dance with Gisela tonight’ over a propaganda station. The attack would be postponed several times until early March, 1945 (Aders 205).
About 100 Ju 88G’s were dispatched in three waves to follow a bomber stream as it departed for home. Upon reaching their destination the first wave would down twenty two bombers, however the fires from the wrecks would ruin the chances of the subsequent waves. While many bombers were saved by flying to different airfields after being alerted by the flames, eight more were wrecked attempting to land at darkened airstrips. However, the night fighters would face a dangerous return trip as they had to chart a course using dead reckoning and astral navigation due to their signal beacons being jammed (Aders 205). In the end, the night fighters would suffer a similar level of losses to the bombers they were hunting as a result of ground fire, crashes resulting from low level flight, and navigation failures. Operation Gisela would end in failure with no subsequent missions being attempted.
Construction
Fuselage
Wing connecting system [Ju 88A-4 Bedieungsvorscrift. [1941], 46]The Ju 88A-4 was the most widely produced bomber variant and provided the foundations for the C, R, and G types. It was a fairly conventional all metal aircraft in its construction, and, while it pushed few technical boundaries, it was state of the art and versatile. It was primarily made of sheet aluminum fastened by rivets, with cast parts used for load bearing elements. Some use of Elektron magnesium alloy was made to further reduce weight, with sparing use of steel where strength was required, particularly in the landing gear assemblies and fuselage connecting elements. The fuselage cross section was rectangular with rounded corners and clad in large sheet aluminum stampings. It used a semi-monocoque structure made up of formers and bulkheads joined by connectors that ran front to aft, with the outer aluminum skin riveted to both elements, which allowed it to bear some of the structural load. Its structural load factor was 4.5 with a 1.1 multiplier for the first wrinkle, 1.3 for yield, and 1.8 for failure. In service, it proved very sturdy, with Junkers engineers claiming after the war that there had been no reported major structural failures over the service life of the airframe (Medcalf 41,43,73).
Eventually, the construction process had been improved to the point where the fuselage could be built from sub-assemblies that would become the upper and bottom halves of the fuselage. These would then be joined together after the internal components were fitted. Wing construction followed a similar process, making heavy use of sub assemblies, followed by equipment installation, skinning, and painting. An early model Ju 88 took roughly 30,000-man hours to complete. By the end of 1943, this number remained about the same for the Ju 88G-1. While this may seem unimpressive at face value, the night fighter carried an airborne radar system and a much more sophisticated set of avionics (Medcalf 41-43; Adders 183).
Wings and Stabilizers
The Ju 88’s wings were the heaviest part of the aircraft, comprising much of its total structural weight at over 1200 kg. A pair of massive main spars ran from the root to the wing tip, a rear spar ran across the entire span of the wing to support the flaps and ailerons, and two forward spars ran from the engine nacelles to the fuselage to transfer thrust from the engines and support loads from the landing gear. These spars were joined by relatively few airfoil shaped ribs and stiffened with corrugated aluminum (Medcalf 41-43). The wings were joined to the fuselage by means of four large ball connectors, which made for easy assembly and alignment. (Medcalf 73).
The vertical stabilizer was fixed to the fuselage by means of the same ball-screw connectors as the wings. Installing it was simple, with the rudderless stabilizer being fitted to the fuselage, and the rudder fin being affixed afterwards. The horizontal stabilizers did not use the same fitting system. Instead, they were each inserted into the fuselage by two spars which were then bolted together. This process was virtually the same on both the Ju 88A and the Ju 188, save for the latter having a fin which was 42% larger by area and a rudder which was 68% larger than the previous model (Ju 88A-4 Bedienungsvorschrift-FL Bedienung und Wartung des Flugzeuges; Ju 188E-1(Stand Juni 1943); Medcalf 123). The Ju 88G would incorporate the larger vertical stabilizer from the Ju 188 to improve stability and control at high speed.
Ju 188 vertical stabilizer assembly. [Ju 188E-1(Stand Juni 1943)]As previously stated, the landing gear could prove troublesome due compromises in its design. During early prototyping, JFM (Junkers Flugzeug- und Motorenwerke) redesigned the landing gear into a single strut that would rotate so that it would lie flat beneath the wing when retracted. While this did remove the frontal area that would have seriously impacted the aircraft’s high speed performance, it came at the cost of added complexity and made for a far less robust landing gear arrangement (Medcalf 74, 75). Differing from earlier series, the Ju 88G’s landing gear frames made use of welded cast steel instead of light weight alloys.
The G-1 carried a maximum of 2835 liters (620 gallons) of fuel, with the subsequent G-6 likely having a reduced fuel capacity considering its shorter endurance (Report No. 8 / 151).
Engines and De-icing Systems
The Ju 88R’s BMW 801 engines and engine mounting plate. [Wikimedia]Among the most notable features of the Ju 88 were its use of unitized engine power units and its novel de-icing system. The unitized engine installation incorporated both the engine and associated cooling system into a single module that could be installed or removed from the aircraft relatively quickly, and made storage of components easier. These “kraftei” arrangements existed for the BMW 801 G-2, and, later, Jumo 213 A-1 engines. These engines were fitted with VDM and VS-111 propellers respectively.
Engine Type
Arrangement
Bore
Stroke
Displacement
Weight
Maximum Output
Maximum RPM
Fuel type
BMW 801 G-2
Radial 14
156 mm
156 mm
41.8 liters
1210 kg
1740 PS
2700
C3, 95 octane
Junkers Jumo 213 A-1
Inverted V-12
150 mm
165 mm
35 liters
820 kg
1775 PS [2100 PS MW50]
3250
B4, 87 octane
(Medcalf 323; Ju 88S-1 Flugzeug Handbuch 3, Smith & Creek 687; Jumo 213 13)
The aircraft was also equipped with a de-icing mechanism which took in air, ran it through a heat exchanger around the exhaust ejector stacks, drove it through channels in the wings, and then out over the ailerons (Rodert & Jackson). As the BMW 801 had no exhaust stacks compatible with this system, they made use of a petrol-fired heater to supply air to the de-icing system on the Ju 88G-1 (Report No. 8 / 151).
On left: Exhaust stack heat exchanger. On Right: the wing channel flow area. [Rodert & Jackson]
Cockpit
The crew arrangement on all Ju 88 models would set the entire crew within the canopy and in close contact with one another. The bombardier ,or radar operator, sat to the pilot’s right, a flight engineer/gunner at the pilot’s back, and a ventral gunner sat beside the flight engineer or in a prone position inside the “gondola”, where his weapon was located. Aboard the Ju 88G, the ventral gunner’s position had been omitted with the removal of the gondola, however the positions of the other crew members remained largely unchanged. While these close quarters arrangements were somewhat claustrophobic, they ensured easy communication between the pilot and the rest of the crew at all times. It also made for a much simpler bail out procedure, as half the canopy would detach and allow for a quick escape for all aboard. In the Ju 88G, the crew entered the aircraft through a hatch below the cockpit.
Ju 88G-1 instrument panel. The cables for the radar display are on the right. [albumwar2]The Ju 88G’s cockpit differed heavily from previous fighter versions as a result of added instrumentation and alterations to some of the aircraft’s existing controls. Among the new additions were ammunition counters with space for representing up to six guns, and a Zeiss Revi C.12/D gunsight. This sight differed from previous sets by its new elevation controls and its lack of an anti-glare shield. The front of the canopy was protected by a 10mm armor plate, with the windscreen itself being comprised of four panes of armored glass. The three in front of the pilot were electrically heated to prevent frost formation (Report No. 8 / 151). Work was also done to revise the controls to bring them more in line with other Luftwaffe fighters, perhaps most usefully by the addition of an automatic engine control system and manual propeller pitch control switches being added to the throttles (Brown 194).
Armament
The gunpod of the Ju 88G. [Asisbiz, Ju 88 G-1 Schusswaffenlage Bedienungsvorschrift-Wa]The aircraft’s initial armament consisted of four Mg 151/20 cannons and a defensive MG 131. The cannons were mounted in a ventral pod between the aircraft’s wings and supplied by ammunition belts that occupied the space used as a bomb bay on bomber variants of the airframe. The ammunition belts were loaded with an equal proportion of high explosive ‘mine-shot’, armor piercing, and general purpose high explosive shells. The single 13 mm MG 131 was placed at the rear of the canopy within an armored glass mount and supplied with 500 rounds of armor piercing and high explosive shells in equal proportion (Ju 88G-1 Schusswaffenlage Bedienungsvorschrift-Wa). An armament of upward firing 20mm cannons, being either the MG FF or MG 151/20, were often installed at Luftwaffe field workshops prior to their inclusion to the design in the production run of the G-6 model.
In addition to its cannons, the aircraft could mount ETC 500 underwing racks for bombs and fuel tanks. These racks could each support bombs weighing over 1000kg, though bomb loads in service were light compared to those carried by bomber variants of the Ju 88. These were universal pylons that were added to existing aircraft, an alteration that was fairly simple given the design commonalities with the older Ju 88A-4, and newer Ju 88S medium bombers.
Avionics
In addition to its complement of detection devices, the aircraft carried a variety of tools to aid in navigation and ground direction. Ju 88G’s were typically equipped with the following devices: FuB1 2 (Blind approach receiver), Fug 10P (radio set), FuG 25 (IFF), FuG 101 (Radio altimeter), and the FuG 16zy (radio set).
The FuB1 2 was a blind landing system that guided the aircraft onto a runway by way of two radio beacons placed at 300 m and 3000 m away from one end of the airstrip. It was a tunable device so that airfields could possess separate frequencies between 30 and 33.3 mHz. The aircraft itself carried the Eb1 2 beacon receiver, the Eb1 3F beam receiver, the FBG 2 remote tuner, the AFN 2 approach indicator, the U8 power supply unit, and either a mast or flush antenna (Medcalf 324).
The FuG 10P was a radio developed by Telefunken and was coupled with the Pielgeräte 6 radio direction finder. The device consisted of numerous transmitters and receivers capable of operating at various ranges. One pair, E10 L and EZ 6, operated at between 150-1200kHz, and another, S10 K and E10 K, between 3-6mHz. Other components included the U10/S and U10/E power supply units, and the fixed antenna loading unit AAC 2. Numerous versions existed and made use of various other components. Much of this system was later removed during the production run of the Ju 88G-6 (Medcalf 324).
The FuG 25 “Erstling” was an IFF system manufactured by GEMA that would respond with coded impulses to the ground-based Wurzburg, Freya, and Gemse radar systems up to a range of 100 km. The receiver operated on a frequency of 125 mHz and the transmitter at 160 mHz. The entire unit was contained within the SE 25A unit, with the BG 25A control box in the radio operator’s station (Medcalf 324).
FuG 101 was a radio altimeter designed by Siemens/LGW with a maximum range of 150-170 m and operated on a frequency of 375 mHz at 1.5 kW. Accuracy was within 2 m and the entire system weighed 16 kg. It consisted of the S 101A transmitter, E 101A receiver, U 101 power supply unit, and the pilot’s panel indicator (Medcalf 325).
The FuG 16zy “Ludwig” was a radio manufactured by Lorenz and used for fighter control and directional homing, operating on a frequency range of 38.5 to 42.3 MHz. In Ju 88 night fighters it usually accompanied the Fug 10P radio gear which sat just below the defensive machine gun at the rear of the canopy. It could be set to different frequencies for the Y-control communication system: Gruppenbefehlswelle [between aircraft in formation], Nachischerung und Flugsicherung [between the pilot and the ground control unit], and Reichsjagerwelle [running battle commentary] (Aders 242). It was composed of the S16 Z Tx transceiver, E16 Z and U17 power supply systems, and the loop phasing unit ZWG 16 along with the antenna (Medcalf 324).
The FuG 120A ‘Bernhardine’ was a radio positioning device designed by Siemens to provide navigational assistance and bomber stream intercept information to night fighters by means of a teleprinter in the aircraft’s cockpit. It was intended to overhaul the night fighter force’s air to ground communication infrastructure which faced significant signals interference from the RAF, but the war ended before it entered large scale service. Aircraft could be directed over a range of 400km with position bearings accurate within .5 degrees from ground stations (Medcalf 325, Price 238, 239).
Emergency Equipment
The emergency equipment carried by the Ju 88G. [Ju 88S-1 Flugzeug Handbuch]The Ju 88G would share the same emergency gear as the Ju 88S, this being stowed in a compartment at rear of the fuselage. The largest items of the set were an inflatable raft and an emergency radio beacon, with the contents of the entire compartment being sealed in a waterproof cloak (Ju 88S-1 Flugzeug Handbuch 64).
Production
Junkers Flugzeug und Motorenwerke AG was the sole manufacturer of the Ju 88G and, as was the case with most late war German aircraft, production was conducted at major plants in conjunction with dispersal facilities. The primary production facility for the Gustav was at Bernburg, with two dispersal plants at Fritzlar and Langensalza, each of which would eventually be able to assemble 75 aircraft every month, these being half the capacity of the main Bernburg plant (Medcalf 241, 247).
As with all major fighter projects at the time, large-scale mobilization of labor and material resources was managed by the Jagerstab, an office which built direct links with the RLM (Reichsluftfahrtministerium, the German Air Ministry), regional government officials, and industrialists in order to marshal resources for expanding fighter production. The office was created in response to increasing Allied raids against Germany’s aviation industries and the growing disparity in numbers, which began to strongly favor the Allies as they built up their forces in anticipation for the landings in France. The office was headed by Albert Speer, Minister of Armaments and War production, and aided by Erhard Milch, Generalluftzeugmeister (Air Master General). In spite of the rapidly deteriorating wartime conditions facing all German industries, the office was successful in boosting production, but relied on desperate and illegal measures (Medcalf 229,232). In the fall of 1944, a minimum 72-hour work week was standard, as was the use of forced labor under conditions that were especially poor at the dispersal sites. The acceptance of rebuilt and used parts became ever more commonplace. This, however, did little to offset the clear superiority of the Allies in the air after the Summer of 1944 (Medcalf 247).
Up until April of 1944, the aircraft was built in parallel with decreasing numbers of Ju 88C-6 and Ju 88R, as production at Bernburg transitioned over to the Gustav. Production of the Ju 88G-1 ceased in October as the factories shifted over to the Ju 88G-6 (Medcalf 240). The Bernburg plant was hit twice by the USAAF’s Eight Air Force in February of 1944, which resulted in total stoppages for only a few days, after which production quickly resumed. However, there was a projected loss of over a hundred aircraft per month compared to the averages of the previous year, with a full recovery requiring several months (Medcalf 229).
Ju 88 Production
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
1943
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
13 (+6 pre-production)
1944
12
26
47
169
209
247
239
143
88
10
–
–
5*
14*
138*
189*
222*
308*
178*
1945
168*
35*
19*
Ju 88G-6 production*
Ju 88G-0 Werk Nummern: 710401 through 710406
Ju 88G-1 Werk Nummern: 710407 through 714911
Ju 88G-6 Werk Nummern: 620018 through 623998
Ju 88G-7 Werk Nummern: 240123 through 240125 (~3 built)
Ju 88G-10 Werk Nummern: 460053 through 460162 (~30 built, converted to mistel air to ground weapons)
Variants:
G-0: Preproduction aircraft, the same as G-1
G-1: Production night fighter, powered by BMW 801 G-2 engines
G-2: Proposed zerstorer, powered by the Jumo 213A, was to carry a single MG 131, four MG 15’s, and two MK 103’s. No radar.
G-3: Proposed night fighter, powered by DB 603, same armament as the G-1
G-4: Proposed night fighter, powered by Jumo 213A, with GM-1 boost system
G-5: Proposed night fighter, powered by Jumo 213A
G-6: Production night fighter, powered by Jumo 213A
G-7: The same as G-6 except with Jumo 213E engines with three speed, two stage intercooled superchargers. Output: 1726 HP (1750 PS) unboosted, 2022 HP (2050 PS) with boost at 3250 RPM. Weight: 28,946 lbs (13,130 kg). Speed: 650 km/h at 7.9 km. Experimental.
G-10: Same as G-6 but with an extended fuselage.
(Medcalf 319, 178, 240; Green 448-482; Smith & Creek 687)
Conclusion:
Only a handful of Berlin centimeter band radars would enter service with the Luftwaffe near the end of the war. The system improved the aircraft’s performance across the board, lacking the drag inducing aerials of the SN-2, and it was untroubled by allied jamming or the altitude limitations of older systems. [wikimedia]The Ju 88G would prove a valuable asset to the Luftwaffe’s night fighter forces through its zenith, in the spring of 1944, until its collapse nearly a year later. From a production standpoint the aircraft was phenomenal. It made use of existing supply chains and components from Ju 88 variants that had long been in service prior to its introduction, allowing for a near seamless transition into mass production. In terms of its performance, the initial model would prove exceptional, being far faster and easier to fly than the existing night fighter workhorses, the aging Bf 110G and Ju 88C. The subsequent G-6 model would prove to be even more impressive with the addition of more powerful engines and standardized tail warning equipment.
While the aircraft did have its downsides and couldn’t solve every problem the night fighter service faced, it effectively fulfilled its purpose, and became the most numerous night fighter model in German service by the war’s end.
Specification Charts:
Classification
Aircraft type
Engine
Engine output
Loaded weight
Range
Maximum Speed
Bomber
Ju 88A-4
Jumo 211J
2×1400 PS (2x 1380 hp)
14000 kg, 30864lbs
2430 km, 1510 mi
440 km/h (5.5 km), 273mph (18044ft)
Zerstorer/Night fighter
Ju 88C-6
Jumo 211J
2×1400 PS (2x 1380 hp)
–
–
470 km/h (4.8 km), 292mph (15748ft)
Zerstorer/Night fighter
Ju 88R-2
BMW 801D
2×1740 PS (2×1716 hp)
–
3450 km, 2144 mi
550 km/h (6.2km), 341 mph (20341ft)
Night fighter
Ju 88G-1
BMW 801G
2×1740 PS (2×1716 hp)
12005 kg, 26466lbs
2870 km, 1783 mi
537 km/h (6.2km), 333mph (20341ft)
Night fighter
Ju 88G-6
Jumo 213A
2x 1775 PS [2100 PS], (2×1750 hp [2071 hp])
12300 kg, 27116lbs
~2400km, 1491 mi
554 km/h (6.0km), 344mph (19685ft)
(Medcalf 323, 319, 320; Smith & Creek 687)
*only the G series was tested with radar and exhaust flash hiders fitted, when equipped with these devices the C and R series flew at values lower than the ones presented on this chart
[] denotes performance with the MW50 boost system
Ju 88G-1 (Ju 88G-6)
Specification
Engine
BMW 801 G-2 (Jumo 213 A-1)
Engine Output
2×1740 PS (2x 1774PS [MW50: 2100PS]) : 2×1706 hp (2×1750 hp [2071 hp])
(Ju 88 G-2, G-6, S-3, T-3 Bedienungsvorschrift-Fl 66, 69 Part II; Ju 88G-1,R-2, S-1,T-1 Bedienungsvorschrift-Fl 49, 53 part II; Report No. 8 / 151: Junkers Ju 88 G-1 Night Fighter 2; Medcalf 323, 319, 320)
*Top speeds reflect only the initial production models and do not take into account any boost systems.
BMW 801 G-2 Low supercharger gear (January 1944)
At Height
Output
RPM
Manifold Pressure
Maximum power (3 minutes)
0.9 km
1740 PS
2700
1.42 ata
Combat power (30 minutes)
1.1 km
1540 PS
2400
1.32 ata
Maximum continuous
1.6 km
1385 PS
2300
1.20 ata
Low power, greatest efficiency
2.2 km
1070 PS
2100
1.10 ata
Low power
2.3 km
980 PS
2000
1.05 ata
BMW 801 G-2 High supercharger gear (January 1944)
At Height
Output
RPM
Manifold Pressure
Maximum power (3 minutes)
6.0 km
1440 PS
2700
1.30 ata
Combat power (30 minutes)
5.6 km
1320 PS
2400
1.32 ara
Maximum continuous
5.8 km
1180 PS
2300
1.20 ata
Low power, greatest efficiency
5.7 km
990 PS
2100
1.10 ata
Low power
5.7 km
905 PS
2000
1.05 ata
Engine rated for C3 ~95 octane fuels
(Ju 88S-1 Flugzeug Handbuch 3)
Radar System
Practical Maximum range
Minimum range
Search angle-azimuth
Search angle-elevation
Frequency
Output
Array
Other notes
FuG 220 Lichtenstein SN-2c & SN-2d
8km (instrumented)
Altitude dependent
300m
120 degrees
100 degrees
73/82/91 MHz later changed to 37.5-118 MHz dispersal band
2.5kW
Stag antler (Hirschgeweih), few examples of low drag morningstar array (Morgenstern)
SN-2d had a narrower beam width, was combined with tail warning radar, and performed better against jamming. Standard production radar for the Ju 88G.
FuG 217 Neptun V/R
Altitude dependent
400m
120 degrees
–
Two click stop frequencies of 158 amd 187 MHz
–
Rod or stag antler
FuG 217R was the tail warning radar component
FuG 218 Neptun V/R
Altitude dependent
120m
120 degrees
–
Six click stop frequencies between 158-187 MHz
–
stag antler
FuG 218R was the tail warning component
FuG 228 Lichtenstein SN-3
Altitude dependent
250m
120 degrees
100 degrees
115-148 MHz
20kW
Stag antler, morningstar
ten sets built
FuG 240/1 Berlin N-1a
~9km
300m
55 degrees
–
9-9.3cm (3,250-3,330 MHz)
15kW
Parabolic antenna
25 sets built, 10 delivered for service, 1945
This chart is only for operational and experimental radar usage aboard the Ju 88G, it does not include earlier radars or specialized sets designed for other aircraft.
*The morgenstern (eng. morningstar) aerial is often misidentified as a separate search radar or exclusive to either the SN-2d or SN-3, it is a low drag aerial arrangement compatible with either device.
Ju 88G-1 [4R+UR], 7. Staffel/NJG2 flown by Hans Mackle, WNr. 712273. This is a relatively early production Ju 88G equipped with an FuG 220 SN-2c search radar and a FuG 227 Flensburg radar detector.Ju 88G-6 [C9+AC], Stab II./NJG5 Hans Leickhardt, 1944. This late production G6 used a rare “morningstar” low drag array for its SN-2d combined search and tail warning radar set. While the SN-2’s faced considerable jamming and chaff interference, the series still was still improved upon, focusing on its still usable bands and developing more aerodynamically efficient antennas. This plane was also equipped with a Naxos radar detected which was installed within the fairing over the cockpit.Ju 88G-1 [2Z+HM], 4. Staffel/NJG6 Aschaffenburg, Germany 1945. While this is a relatively early production Ju 88G it was later refitted with the SN-2d as can be seen from the angle on the nose mounted dipoles and the tail warning array. This aircraft also received a pair of upward firing cannons and a Naxos radar detector.Junkers Ju 88G-6 [C9+AR], 6. Staffel/NJG5 Dubendorf, Switzerland, 1945. A late war Ju 88G-6 equipped with a FuG 218 G/R Neptun combined search and tail warning radar set, and while it lacks the fairing typically used for installing the Naxos radar detector there was by this point a fuselage mounted model designed for the Ju 88G. Unlike the SN-2R, the FuG 218R tail warning radar sits at the top of the vertical stabilizer rather than below it.Junkers Ju 88G-6 [4R+EP], 6. Staffel/NJG2 Fritzlar 1945. This aircraft is a good example of the lax camouflage regulations for the Luftwaffe’s night fighters. While aircraft were delivered in white-grey liveries the air and ground crews were free to devise their own patterns.Ju 88G-6 [C9+HB], 1. Staffel/NJG5, 1945. This aircraft was equipped with an extremely rare FuG 240 Berlin centimeter band search radar. While it presented many major improvements over previous Luftwaffe aerial search radars, only a few were delivered near the end of the war. The radar’s parabolic antenna sits behind the wooden nose cone which created far less drag compared to the ‘antlers’ that were used by the older meter band radars. This aircraft and others that carry late war radar sets are typically misidentified as Ju 88G-7’s. Due to the overlap between that type and very late production G-6’s, identifying them can only be done through their Werk-Nummer.With its nose mounted Mg 151/20, Hptm. Johannes Strassner’s Ju 88G had perhaps the most peculiar Schräge Musik arrangement of any night fighter. (Boiten P4 30) [Asisbiz]One of the most obvious differences between the Gustav and other Ju 88 fighters was the removal of the nose mounted weapons to a ventral pod, where muzzle flashes would not disturb the pilot, and the empty area that once served as a bomb bay would offer a much larger capacity for ammunition. Also visible here is the larger vertical stabilizer. [warbirdphotographs.com]A Flensburg aerial, one of several mounted to a Ju 88G [asisbiz.com]The capture of a Ju 88G-1 proved to be one the most valuable Allied intelligence coups of the war and, for the Germans, a source of endless trouble. [i.pinimg.com]Many of the Luftwaffe’s ‘blindworm’ makeshift airfields were later overrun by allied forces, here American personnel inspect Ju 88G-6’s and Bf 110G-4’s hidden in a forest clearing. [SmallScaleArt]Despite its growing obsolescence and degraded performance in the face of RAF jamming efforts, the SN-2 saw continued development. Its last versions used morningstar aerials encased within wooden nosecones to reduce drag.[Asisbiz]
A restored Ju 88G-1 fuselage in the Berlin Technikmuseum. (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eWzHzdTpJNo/TVqQOv6IFHI/AAAAAAAACVI/gvX4yAaLL_0/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/ju88berlin0.jpg )
Primary Sources
Air Intelligence 2 (g) Inspection of Crashed or Captured Enemy Aircraft Report Serial No. 242 dated 16th July 1944 Report No. 8 / 151: Junkers Ju 88 G-1 Night Fighter. 1944.
Fw-190 A-5/A-6 Flugzeug-Handbuch (Stand August 1943). Der Reichsminister der Luftfahrt und Oberbefehlshaber der Luftwaffe, Berlin. December 8, 1943.
Handbuch fur die Flugmotoren BMW 801 MA-BMW 801 ML-BMW 801C und BMW 801D Baureihen 1 und 2. BMW Flugmotorenbau-Gessellschaft m.b.H. Munich. May, 1942.
Junkers Flugmotor Jumo 213 A-1 u. C-0. Junkers Flugzeug und Motorenwerke Aktiengesellschaft, Dessau. December, 1943.
Ju 88S-1 Flugzeug Handbuch. Junkers Flugzeug und Motorenwerke A.G., Dessau. 1944.
Ju 88A-4 Bedienungsvorschrift-FL Bedienung und Wartung des Flugzeuges. Der Reichsminister der Luftfahrt und Oberbefehlshaber der Luftwaffe, Berlin. July 19, 1941.
Ju 188E-1 (Stand Juni 1943). Junkers Flugzeug und Motorenwerke Aktiengesellschaft, Dessau. June 1, 1943.
Ju 88G-1 Schusswaffenlage Bedienungsvorschrift-Wa (Stand Oktober 1943). Der Reichsminister der Luftfahrt und Oberbefehlshaber der Luftwaffe, Berlin. November, 1943.
Ju 88 G-1,R-2, S-1,T-1 Bedienungsvorschrift-Fl (Stand November 1943). Der Reichsminister der Luftfahrt und Oberbefehlshaber der Luftwaffe, Berlin. December 1, 1943.
Ju 88 G-2, G-6, S-3, T-3 Bedienungsvorschrift-Fl (Stand September 1944). 1944.
Rodert, L. A., & Jackson, R. (1942). A DESCRIPTION OF THE Ju 88 AIRPLANE ANTI-ICING EQUIPMENT (Tech.). Moffett Field, CA: NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS. 1942.
Secondary Sources
Aders, Gebhard. German Night Fighter Force, 1917-1945. Stroud: Fonthill, 2016.
Bauer, A. O. (2006, December 2). Some Aspects of German Airborne Radar Technology, 1942 to 1945 [Scholarly project]. In Foundation for German Communication and Related Technologies. Retrieved from https://www.cdvandt.org/
Bauer, Arthur O. “Stichting Centrum Voor Duitse Verbindings- En Aanverwante Technologieën 1920-1945.” Foundation for German communication and related technologies (History of Technology), December 2, 2006. https://www.cdvandt.org/.
Boitens, Theo. Nachtjagd Combat Archive 24 July – 15 October 1944 Part 4. Red Kite . 2021.
Boitens, Theo. Nachtjagd Combat Archive 16 October – 31 December Part 5 1944. Red Kite . 2021.
Boitens, Theo. Nachtjagd Combat Archive, 1 January – 3 May 1945. Red Kite . 2022.
Brown, L. A radar history of World War II: Technical and military imperatives. Bristol: Institute of Physics Pub. 1999
Brown, Eric Melrose. Wings of the Luftwaffe. Hikoki, 2010.
Cooper, M. The German Air Force, 1933-1945: An Anatomy of Failure. Jane’s Pub, 1981.
Green, William. The warplanes of the Third Reich (1st ed.). London: Doubleday. pp. 448–482, 1972.
Manfred Griehl, Nachtjäger über Deutschland, 1940-1945: Bf 110, Ju 88, He 219 (Wölfersheim-Berstadt: Podzun-Pallas-Verlag, 1999).
Medcalf, William A. Junkers Ju 88 Volume One From Schnellbomber to Multi-Mission War Plane. Manchester, UK: Chevron Publishing Limited , 2013.
Medcalf, William A. Junkers Ju 88 Volume Two The Bomber at War Day and Night Operational and service history. Manchester, UK: Chevron Publishing Limited , 2014.
Holpp, Wolfgang. “The Century of Radar.” EADS Deutschland GmbH
Holm, M. (1997). The Luftwaffe, 1933-45. Retrieved February, 2021, from https://www.ww2.dk/
Overy, Richard James. The Bombing War: Europe 1939-1945. London: Penguin Books, 2014.
Price, Alfred. Instruments of Darkness: the History of Electronic Warfare, 1939-1945. Barnsley, S. Yorkshire: Frontline Books, 2017.
Sharp, C. Martin, and Bowyer Michael J F. Mosquito. Bristol: Crecy Books, 1997.
Smith, J. R., & Creek, E. J. (2014). Focke-Wulf Fw 190, Volume 3: 1944-1945. Manchester: Crecy Publishing.
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 (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.
Nazi Germany (1942)
Jet Fighter Concept – None Built
An official blueprint showing the Fw 190 Strahljäger’s design and estimated performance. (Die Deutsche Luftrüstung 1933-1945: Vol. 2)
The Fw 190 Strahljäger (Jet Fighter) was a conceptual turbojet fighter and the Focke-Wulf Flugzeugbau firm’s first attempt to design a jet-powered fighter. First mentioned in a report dated November 5, 1942, the Fw 190 Strahljager would have seen the BMW 801 radial engine replaced by a Focke-Wulf T.1 turbojet engine capable of producing 1,300 lb / 600 kg of thrust at most. Short-lived and canceled mere months after its conceptualization, the Fw 190 Strahljäger is quite mysterious in many aspects, such as how the engine would have performed while mounted. Unfortunately, due to the unique nature of the design, the Fw 190 Strahljäger has been the victim of falsification and malicious misinformation. One of the most popular claims on this aircraft was that it was built. This is almost assuredly false, as no primary sources support this claim. A photo does exist which purports to show a Fw 190 with the jet engine, but this photo is definitely a fake as there are too many discrepancies and questionable content, such as the plastic model looking landing gear. Nonetheless, the Fw 190 Strahljäger is quite an interesting design from 1942 that shows Focke-Wulf’s attempts to remedy the powerplant issues of their Fw 190.
History
When first fielded in August of 1941, the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 Würger (Shrike) made a positive impression with Luftwaffe pilots. Seemingly equal or superior to most contemporary Allied fighters, the Fw 190 gained a fearsome reputation among the Allied pilots, who at first did not even realize the Fw 190 was a new aircraft model. Despite the success of the Fw 190, there were several problems with the aircraft’s design. For one, the air-cooled 14-cylinder BMW 801 radial engine which powered the aircraft was prone to overheating due to inadequate cooling systems and, as a result, would produce fumes which would seep into the cockpit and suffocate the pilot. This issue was somewhat addressed in subsequent production variants, but the problem was never snuffed out. In an attempt to address this issue, the Bremen-based Focke-Wulf firm began to look into the possibility of changing the powerplant. However, it was not until late 1942 that the firm launched several design ventures for a new design. In the spring of 1942, the Focke-Wulf firm received a considerable amount of funds from production orders for the Fw 190 by the Reichsluftfahrtministerium (RLM / Ministry of Aviation). The goal of the design venture was to provide a successor to the Fw 190 by replacing the BMW 801 with more promising engines being developed at the time.
A colored official blueprint showing the Fw 190 Strahljäger’s design and estimated performance. Note the large “Ungültig” on the document, which means “Invalid”. (Doktor_Junkers)
One of the designs which resulted from this venture was the Fw 190 Strahljäger (jet fighter), a curious design that first appeared in documents on November 5, 1942. This design explored the feasibility of replacing the BMW 801 with a Focke-Wulf designed turbojet engine. Even before 1942, the Focke-Wulf firm looked into the possibility of replacing the BWM 801 with a turbojet. Dr. Otto Pabst, a Focke-Wulf engineer, told British officials after the war that he attempted to design a jet engine which would be used for the Fw 200 Condor bomber before the Second World War started. The report which entails his interview states: “Dr. Pabst had also worked on a gas turbine engine to be constructed by Focke-Wulf, which consisted of a double entry radial compressor and a single stage axial flow turbine with a single annular burner chamber which was expected to produce 600 kg (1,300 lb) thrust at 11 km (7 mi) or 2 kg (4 lb) thrust at sea level.“ The 4 lb / 2kg thrust at sea level is likely an error by the document author, and the more realistic thrust would be 440 lb / 200 kg. The engine in question was the Focke-Wulf T.1, and this same engine was envisioned to power the Fw 190 Strahljäger.
Much of the Fw 190 Strahljäger’s developmental history is unknown due to poor documentation and the project’s short lifespan. It would appear that the Fw 190 Strahljäger was designed with the intent of making the turbojet nose easily adaptable to standard Fw 190 airframes. Surprisingly, estimated performance graphs on the Fw 190 Strahljäger exist and demonstrate improvement over the standard Fw 190 A variant. Despite this, however, the Fw 190 Strahljäger’s top speed was lower than the Heinkel firm’s He 280 jet fighter and the Messerschmitt firm’s Me 262 fighter. As such, the Reichsluftfahrtministerium decided that the project was not worth pursuing and priority was given to the other firm’s jet fighter programmes. As such, the Fw 190 Strahljäger project would come to an end either in very late 1942 or early 1943, after only two or three months of development time. The original intent to replace the BMW 801 with a turbojet failed, and the Fw 190 program would evolve to utilize improved and reliable conventional reciprocating engines and propellers.
Fact or Fiction? – Author’s Analysis
With the mysterious and unique nature of the Fw 190 Strahljäger design, several online publications from recent times have made several claims about the project, with the most important being that a Fw 190 was actually converted to test the turbojet. This claim is certainly false, as primary documentation and credible historians show that the project did not even make it past the drawing stage. Although the Focke-Wulf firm could have easily taken a factory fresh Fw 190 off of the production lines to test this, just because they could does not mean they did.
A fake photo of the Fw 190 Strahljäger. Several discrepancies in this photo gives away it’s doctored nature. (greyfalcon.us)
There does exist a photo which claims to be evidence that a Fw 190 Strahljäger was built, but there are several discrepancies which suggest that it is fake. For one, the landing gear seems rather plastic, and the shadows are questionable. The shadow of the main wing suggests it is evening or morning and the sun is off to the left, while the shadow from the tailplane is projected as if the sun is behind the plane. Furthermore, it appears that two Werfer-Granate 21 rocket launchers are hung beneath the wing. If a hypothetical aircraft was converted to test the engine, it would make no sense for it to retain the launchers especially when it takes little time to remove them. Lastly, it seems that the nose exhaust is at the wrong angle relative to the fuselage. In conclusion, this appears to be a photo of a model which has been bleached to give the black and white effect. FotoForensics (used to detect photoshopped images) does not appear to suggest that the photo was modified, but this could possibly be due to the image not being the original one.
Other than that, a curious nomenclature which has surfaced in recent times suggests the turbojet-powered Fw 190 would be called the Fw 190 TL (TurboLader Strahltriebwerk – Turbocharger Jet Engine). However, this claim is questionable as official documents only state the name was “Fw 190 Strahljäger”. This can possibly be chalked up to misinformation.
Design
A diagram showing the turbojet engine in detail, along with some of the statistics of the aircraft. (Projekt ’46)
The Fw 190 Strahljäger was a 1942 project to mate a Focke-Wulf designed turbojet engine with a standard Fw 190 A airframe. According to credible secondary sources and an interview with former Focke-Wulf engineer Otto Pabst, the engine which would power the Fw 190 Strahljäger “consisted of a double entry radial compressor and a single stage axial flow turbine with a single annular burner chamber which was expected to produce 600 kg (1,322 lb) thrust at 11 km (6.8 mi) or 2 kg (4 lb) thrust at sea level”. As mentioned earlier, the 4 lb / 2 kg thrust was likely an error and the actual engine would produce 440 lb / 200 kg of thrust at sea level. The engine was the Focke-Wulf T.1 turbojet. The exhaust of the turbojet would be passed through a ring-shaped outlet between the engine and the fuselage. The exhaust passed through the side and bottom, but not the cockpit on the top. The engine would be accompanied by 370 gal / 1,400 l fuel, which the engine uses at 309 gal / 1,170 l per hour. This would give the Fw 190 Strahljäger a total flight time of 1.2 hours or 72 minutes.
A postwar Allied report which shows the Fw 190 Strahljäger’s blueprint. (Author’s Collection)
The Fw 190 Strahljäger’s armaments consisted of two 7.92x57mm Rheinmetall-Borsig MG 17 machine guns mounted on the engine cowl and two 20x82mm Mauser MG 151/20 cannons, one in each wing. It is unknown whether or not the aircraft would have been able to carry ordinance.
Official graphs of the Fw 190 Strahljäger’s estimated performance exist. Some fundamental specifications are listed in the Specifications Table below.
Operators
Nazi Germany – The Fw 190 Strahljäger was intended to replace the Fw 190’s troublesome BMW 801 engine, but the design did not go into production due to several factors.
Focke-Wulf Fw 190 Strahljäger*
* – Information taken from “Das Focke-Wulf Strahltriebwerk wird an die vorhandene Zelle Fw 190 angebout” published in 1942 by the Focke-Wulf Flugzeugbau AG and “Luftwaffe: Secret Jets of the Third Reich” published in 2015 by Dan Sharp
Wingspan
34 ft 5.78 in / 10.51 m
Wing Area
197 ft² / 18.3 m²
Engine
1x single stage axial flow turbine Focke-Wulf T.1 turbojet
Engine Ratings
4 lb / 2 kg at Sea Level*
1,300 lb / 600 kg at 7 mi / 11 km
* – Likely an error in the document, the more realistic thrust would be 440 lb / 200 kg
Nazi Germany (1944)
France (1936-1940)
