POWER PLANT: One Allison V-1710-35 liquid-cooled engine, rated at 1,150 hp
PERFORMANCE: 350 mph at 10,000 ft
COMMENT: In 1936 the Bell Aircraft Corporation’s design team began work on the Bell XP-39, a radical design of a single-seat fighter with the engine mounted behind the pilot, driving the airscrew by means of an extension shaft. This arrangement appeared to offer superior manoeuvrability, the engine weight being concentrated around the fighter’s center of gravity. But the first flight test proved that this unorthodox fighter had a low ceiling, slow rate of climb and relative lack of manoeuvrability. So alternatively the engine was mounted forward and the cockpit was positioned to the back. This and some more minor changes led to the design of the Model 3. But calculations proved no advantage of this model compared to the P-39 “Aircrobra”, so the project was not further followed (Ref.: 13).
POWER PLANT: One Junkers Jumo 213A inline engine, rated at 1,750 hp
PERFORMANCE: 354 mph, estimated
COMMENT: Independent from each other the design teams of Blohm & Voss, Dornier and Focke-Wulf worked on projects with mid-mounted engines, driving pusher propellers via a long extension shaft. By that the pilot had an excellent view and a wide field of fire. Furthermore it was possible as far as a night- or bad-weather fighter was concerned to install a radar equipment. Dornier worked on the projects Do P.247 and Do 252 and Focke-Wulf on the Fw P.0310251. The Blohm & Voss team designed a ground attack/dive bomber that was similar to the Bv 192.01-01. A Junkers Jumo 213A engine drove a three-bladed pusher propeller via a very long extension shaft and a single fin and rudder was mounted beneath the fuselage to protect the propeller during take-off and landing. The wing had a straight leading edge and tapered trailing edge and a tricycle undercarriage was provided. The armament consisted of two MK 103 30mm cannon in the wings and two MG 151/20 20mm cannon on the nose sides. A bomb load up to 1,000 kg could be carried (Ref.: 17, 18).
POWER PLANT: One Junkers Jumo 213A-1 liquid-cooled engine, rated at 2,240 hp (with MW 50)
PERFORMANCE: 426 mph at 21,653 ft
COMMENT: The Focke-Wulf Fw 190, perhaps the most successful of Germany’s wartime fighters, was subjected to continuous development in order to keep pace with the rapidly changing requirements of the air war. Before the type had entered wide-spread service in its initial form work on adapting the basic frame to take liquid-cooled engines and improving the high-altitude capabilities was being undertaken by the Focke-Wulf design team, led by Prof. K. Tank. Work on three high-altitude interceptor variants powered by liquid-cooled engines was inaugurated almost simultaneously. The first of these was the Fw 190B with the Daimler-Benz DB 603 engine, this being followed by the similarly powered Fw 190C which featured an extended wing spanning, and the Fw 190Dm powered by the Junkers Jumo 213. The last-mentioned type proved easily most effective of the trio, development of the B- and C-series eventually being abandoned in its favour. The first prototypes began flight trial in early 1942 and shows spectacular performance. Small batches of pre-production Fw 190D-0’s and production Fw 190D-1 for service evaluation were delivered and tested during summer 1943. The Fw 190D-1 was not manufactured in large numbers, the first major production model being the Fw 190D-9 (nicknamed “Dora”; or “Langnasen-Dora” (“Long-Nose Dora“). For some unexplained reasons no sub-series suffix numerals between D-1 and D-9 were allocated, and the Fw 190D-9 was the only D-series fighter intended solely for the interception role. While these “long nose” versions gave them parity with Allied opponents, it arrived far too late in the war to have any real effect. The early production Fw 190D-9 shown here is fitted with original style cockpit canopy, most “Dora-9” fighters having a blown hood (Ref.: 11).
POWER PLANT: One Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engine, rated at 1,300 kp
PERFORMANCE: 631 mph
COMMENT: The Messerschmitt Me. P.1110 “Ente” (“Duck”) was the third variant of the Me P. 1110 projects proposed for the “Jägernotprogramm” (Emergency Fighter Program). It was of canard configuration with small wings in the front and larger wings in the rear part of the fuselage. This was felt would allow good pitch and lateral stability at low-speed flight characteristics. The air intakes were located on the fuselage sides like in the Me P.1110/I. The cockpit was located at the nose end of the plane and the wings had a 40° wing sweep back. Projected maximum speed was 631 mph. As with the other two Messerschmitt Me P.1110 designs the project would be soon dropped in favor of the Junkers EF 128 (Ref.: 17)
POWER PLANT: One Daimler Benz DB 603G liquid-cooled engine, rated at 1,750 hp
PERFORMANCE: No data available
COMMENT: This project of a ground attack and dive bomber was one of the most unusual designs of Dr. Vogt and his team. The front part including the cockpit was completely separate from the fuselage and only held by two booms projecting from the wing leading edge. A Daimler Benz DB 603 engine, located mid-fuselage immediately behind the cockpit, drove a four-bladed propeller rotating around the fuselage. The wing had a straight leading edge and was pronounced taper on the trailing edge. The aircraft had a tricycle landing gear and was heavily armed with two MG 151/20 20mm cannon located in the nose and two MG 151/20 20mm cannon located in the twin booms that held the front part. Also up to 500 kg bomb load could be carried. This project was never realized (Ref.: 17, 18).
TYPE: Anti-ship and -fortification destroyer. Project
ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only in the Heinkel He 162
POWER PLANT: Two BMW 003A-1 turbojet engines, rated at 800 kp thrust each in the Ju 268 and one BMW 003A-1 turbojet engine in the He 162A-2
PERFORMANCE: 497 mph
COMMENT: The Junkers Ju 268 was the un-manned bomber component of the “Mistel 5” parasite bomber project designed in Germany during 1944. It was a composite bomber comprising a Heinkel He 162A-2 piloted component and a specially developed Arado Ar E.377 glide bomb. Due to shortages at the Arado design offices, several other composites were studied as replacements for the Arado Ar E.377, and in late 1944 Junkers proposed the Ju268 as an alternate bomber component for the “Mistel 5”, with a Messerschmitt Me 262 studied as an alternative piloted component. The Ju 268 was simply designed with a cylindrical wooden fuselage, a hollow-charge of up to 10 tons of explosive in the nose part, rectangular mid-mounted wings, and a cruciform un-swept tail unit. A jettisonable tricycle landing gear was fixed attached to the fuselage during take-off only and power was provided by two BMW 003 or Junkers Jumo 004 turbojet engines. For suicide- or “Kamikaze”-missions a manned version of the Ju 268 was under study with a glazed cockpit section in the front of the aircraft. No further details are known and the project never left the drawing-board (Ref.: 20, 24).
Junkers Ju 268 with Heinkel He 162A-2 (“Mistel 5”, “Mistletoe 5”)
Junkers Ju 268 with Heinkel He 162A-2 (“Mistel 5”, “Mistletoe 5”)
Junkers Ju 268 with Heinkel He 162A-2 (“Mistel 5”, “Mistletoe 5”)
Junkers Ju 268 with Heinkel He 162A-2 (“Mistel 5”, “Mistletoe 5”)
Junkers Ju 268 with Heinkel He 162A-2 (“Mistel 5”, “Mistletoe 5”)
Junkers Ju 268 with Heinkel He 162A-2 (“Mistel 5”, “Mistletoe 5”)
Junk62A-2 (“Mistel 5”, “Mistletoe 5”)
Junkers Ju 268 with Heinkel He 162A-2 (“Mistel 5”, “Mistletoe 5”)
Junkers Ju 268 with Heinkel He 162A-2 (“Mistel 5”, “Mistletoe 5”)
Junkers Ju 268 with Heinkel He 162A-2 (“Mistel 5”, “Mistletoe 5”)
Junkers Ju 268 with Heinkel He 162A-2 (“Mistel 5”, “Mistletoe 5”)
Junkers Ju 268 with Heinkel He 162A-2 (“Mistel 5”, “Mistletoe 5”)
POWER PLANT: One Argus As 410C inverted V-12 air-cooled inline engine, rated at 450 hp
PERFORMANCE: 162 mph at 9,843 ft
COMMENT: The Arado Ar 199 was a floatplane trainer aircraft built by Arado Flugzeugwerke. It was a low-wing monoplane designed in 1938 to be launched from a catapult and operated over water. The enclosed cockpit had two side-by-side seats for instructor and student, and a third rear seat for a trainee navigator or radio operator. Only a few aircraft were built, because the Luftwaffe found that many elder aircraft are suitable for training duties (Ref.: 24).
POWER PLANT: One Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engine, rated at 1,300 kp
PERFORMANCE: 621 mph
COMMENT: As part of the “Jägernotprogramm” (“Emergency Fighter Program”) at the beginning of 1945 a program was launched by the OKL for a new generation of fighter/interceptor aircraft in order to replace the Heinkel He 162 “Salamander” or “Volksjäger” (“Peoples fighter” as called by the authorities). The new aircraft was intended to have superior performance in order to deal with high-altitude threats such as the Boeing B-29 “Superfortress”. Messerschmitt designed three different single-seated, high-altitude fighter projects which were submitted in February 1945. One of the designs of the Messerschmitt Me P.1110 series was a turbo-jet powered interceptor with a conventional-looking design with the air intakes located on the fuselage sides (“Rampen-Einlauf”, “Ramp-air-intake”). The wings were swept-back at 40 degrees, as well as the tail-plane. Power was provided by a single Heinkel HeS 011 turbojet engine, projected maximum speed was 621 mph. The project would be soon dropped in favor of the Junkers EF 128 and none of the Messerschmitt designs made it to the prototype stage (Ref.: 17).
Messerschmitt Me P.1110/I and Kramer X-4
Messerschmitt Me P.1110/I and Kramer X-4
Messerschmitt Me P.1110/I and Kramer X-4
Messerschmitt Me P.1110/I and Kramer X-4
Messerschmitt Me P.1110/I and Kramer X-4
Messerschmitt Me P.1110/I and Kramer X-4
Messerschmitt Me P.1110/I and Kramer X-4
Messerschmitt Me P.1110/I and Kramer X-4
Messerschmitt Me P.1110/I and Kramer X-4
Messerschmitt Me P.1110/I and Kramer X-4
Messerschmitt Me P.1110/I and Kramer X-4
Messerschmitt Me P.1110/I and Kramer X-4
Scale 1:72 aircraft models of World War II
Mit der weiteren Nutzung unserer Webseite erklären Sie sich damit einverstanden, dass wir Cookies verwenden um Ihnen die Nutzerfreundlichkeit dieser Webseite zu verbessern. Weitere Informationen zum Datenschutz finden Sie in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.
