Category Archives: Fighterbomber

Fighterbomber

Henschel Hs P.87 (Planet, Resin)

TYPE: Light bomber, ground attack aircraft. Project.

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot and observer

POWER PLANT: One Daimler-Benz DB 610 liquid-cooled engine, rated at 2,900 hp, driving two four-bladed pusher propellers

PERFORMANCE: 466 mph

COMMENT: In 194/42 the design team of Henschel Aircraft Company proposed an advanced project of a fast light bomber and ground attack aircraft. Power was provided by a single Daimler-Benz DB 610 engine that in fact consisted of two Daimler-Benz DB 605 liquid-cooled engines, joined side-by side. The engine drove two four-bladed pusher type propellers via an extension shaft. A similar design but powered by a Daimler-Benz DB 613 was the Henschel Hs P. 75 fighter and interceptor project. Both designs were radical in so far as a canard arrangement was proposed with elevators in front and the wing positioned to the rear. By that enough space was available to integrate the wide and bulky power unit. Furthermore, a large weapon bay in the in the forward fuselage was available. The disadvantage of this arrangement is the permanent shifting of the center of gravity. Vertical fins were located at the wingtips. Intensive work was done concerning the lay-out of the cockpit in order to give the two crew members an excellent view forward. In case of emergency the cabin could be blown up in order to prevent a collision with the eight-bladed propellers. Detailed construction was in an advanced stage when the RLM refused this project with the flimsy comment “… the pilots couldn’t acclimatize with a propeller in the back and the elevators in front”. So further work on this project was stopped (Ref.: 16, 17).

Henschel Hs P.75 (CMK, Resin)

TYPE: Fighter, fighter bomber, Project

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

POWER PLANT: One Daimler Benz DB 613 liquid-cooled engine, rated at 3,500 hp

PERFORMANCE: 491 mph

COMMENT: In early 1941 the OKL asked for a possible successor for the Messerschmitt Me 110 heavy fighter. Among others the Henschel Aircraft Company proposed a design of a futuristic and unusual configuration. This design, the Hs P.75, featured a tapered fuselage with slightly swept-back wings set back to the rear fuselage of the aircraft and a pair of slightly swept-back canards located on the nose. The widened fuselage housed a powerful engine that drove three-bladed contra-rotating pusher propellers at the rear via an extension shaft. As power unit a Daimler Benz DB 610 engine, which were two DB 605 liquid-cooled engines joined side-by-side, was proposed. These were the same engines that the Heinkel He 177 bomber used and became known for overheating and catching fire.  So it was decided to install the Daimler Benz DB 613, in fact two coupled DB 603 liquid-cooled engines, rated at 3,500 hp. A vertical tail unit was mounted beneath the fuselage additionally functioning as a tail bumper and protected the propellers from stroking the ground during take-off. A tricycle landing gear arrangement was chosen and a single pilot sat in the cockpit located about midway along the fuselage. All weapons were mounted in the nose. The advantage of the pusher propeller and the forward canard design was the excellent view of the pilot and concentration of weapons in the nose. The disadvantage would be the engine cooling and the pilot’s safely exit in case of emergency. Although good results were obtained in wind tunnel testing this design was not followed up further.
Notable is the fact that this basic design was realized in several WW II aircraft design such as Curtiss XP-55 “Ascender” and Kyushu J7W1 “Shinden” (Ref.: 17).

 

Henschel Hs 132A V1 (A+V Models, Resin)

TYPE: Dive-bomber and interceptor

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot in prone position

POWER PLANT:  One BMW 003A turbojet engine, rated at 800 kp

PERFORMANCE: 485 mph at 19,685 ft

COMMENT: Early in 1943, the RLM issued a specification for a single-seat attack aircraft to combat the anticipated Allied invasion in Europe. Although the specification called for a piston-engine powered dive bomber it was soon realized that only a turbojet-driven aircraft could hope to match the proposed performance requirements. The Henschel Company submitted a design which was approved as Henschel Hs 132 and placed accent of simplicity and ease to manufacture. The wing was a wooden structure with plywood skinning, and the fuselage was a circular metal monocoque. The single turbojet was mounted above the fuselage, exhausting over the rear fuselage and between the twin vertical surfaces of the tail assembly. A tricycle landing gear was to be used and the extensively glazed cockpit was completely faired with the fuselage. The pilot was in prone position better to withstand the high G-forces of the fast and steep dive during the bomb run. It was estimated that during the dive a speed of more than 570 mph could be reached and after the bomb was released the aircraft was pulled up thus inducing acceleration forces of up to 10 G. A contract for six prototypes was placed in May 1944, and construction began in March 1945. When the war in Europe ended the Henschel Hs 132 V1 was nearly complete and captured by Soviet forces

NOTICE: To ascertain the practicability of the prone position for dive bomber pilots, the DLV ordered in early 1943 a small prone-pilot research aircraft that was designed and built by the FFG Berlin (Flugtechnische Fachgruppe/Aerotechnical Group, University Berlin) and designated Berlin B9. The design was a low winged, twin-engine aircraft of standard layout. It was built of mixed construction and could accept up to 22 G. It was flown by many experienced pilots and showed the advantages of a prone position for pilots to tolerate high g-forces.  (Ref.: 17).

Messerschmitt Me 329 (Airmodel, Resin)

TYPE: Heavy fighter, fighter-bomber. Project.

ACCOMMODATION: Crew of two

POWER PLANT: Two Daimler-Benz DB 603 B liquid-cooled engine

PERFORMANCE: 426 mph

COMMENT: In February 1942 severe problems became obvious with the new twin-engine Messerschmitt Me 210, successor of the aging Messerschmitt Me 110. Due to longitudinal instability and lack of performance the series production was stopped and switched back to the inadequately Me 110. So Messerschmitt was forced to redesign the aircraft by lengthening the fuselage and adding more powerful engines what finally became the Messerschmitt Me 410. In the meantime a search was begun on a new design for a twin-engine heavy fighter.
Since beginning of 1939 Prof. A. Lippisch and his design staff was part of the Messerschmitt Company and was well known for many advanced and unorthodox projects. Among these was a design study, the Lippisch LiP.10, a fast, tailless, twin-engine bomber that incorporated many parts of the unsatisfactory Me 210. Independent to this Dr. Wurster from Messerschmitt’s design team was working on a similar project that officially was designated Messerschmitt Me 329. This aircraft was of tailless design and was to be constructed mainly from wood. This would save on strategic materials and keep the weight lower. The large area wing was swept back at approximately 26 degrees, and two Daimler-Benz DB 603 engines were buried in the wings, each driving a 3.4 m four-bladed pusher propeller. A large fin and rudder was mounted at the rear and a tricycle landing gear was provided. Other advanced touches included the pilot and navigator sitting tandem in a broad bubble canopy and a remote-controlled rear gun in the tail aimed via a periscope system from the cockpit. Performance comparison between the Lippisch Li P.10, the Me 329 and the Me 410 showed that the improvement of the Me 329 over the Me 410 was marginal. So development received a low priority, and while a full-scale glider  mock-up was tested in the winter of 1944/5, work on the project was cancelled shortly after (Ref.:  16, 17).

Messerschmitt “Zerstörer-Projekt II” (Planet, Resin)

TYPE: Heavy fighter, fighter bomber. Project

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

POWER PLANT: Two Junkers Jumo 004 turbojet engines, rated at 900 kp each or one Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engine, rated at 1,300 kp

PERFORMANCE: No data available

COMMENT: This project became known through a sketch which was published in France after WW II. Probably it dates back to 1942 and suggests a possibility of the”… installation of a radial turbojet engine”. A later well-known drawing suggests that there were two configurations of the same design, the “Zerstörer-Projekt I and II”. In both the air intakes as well as the tail assembly was different. Apparently, it was planned to utilize two Junkers Jumo 004 turbojets or one Heinkel HeS 011 engine.  In “Zerstörer-Projekt I” the air intake for the turbojet engines were positioned in the wing roots and the tail plane was swept sharp forward and in “Zerstörer-Projekt II” it was swept back so as the wings. Also the turbojet engine was fed by an air intake located on each side of the fuselage under the wings. To extend range, plans were made to mount two 300 liter auxiliary wingtip fuel tanks. Two Mk 108 30mm cannon were installed in the nose part. The design was not pursued (Ref.: 16, 17).

Focke-Wulf Ta 152C-0 (Academy)

TYPE: Medium-altitude fighter and fighter-bomber

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

POWER PLANT: One Daimler-Benz DB 603LA liquid-cooled engine, rated at 2,300 hp (with MW 50)

PERFORMANCE: 460 mph at 32,810 ft

COMMENT: By autumn 1942, it was obvious that despite earlier opinions, the USAAF had every intension of building up an immense bomber force in Britain for use against Germany, mainly Boeing B-17 “Flying Fortress” and Consolidated B-24 “Liberator”. Furthermore, intelligence reports revealed that tremendous impetus was being placed behind the mass production of a larger, pressurized successor, the Boeing B-29 “Superfortress”, capable of operations at still greater speeds and altitudes. Thus, the development of fighters possessing higher combat ceilings had assumed greater urgency. Both Focke-Wulf and Messerschmitt were, therefore, asked to submit their proposals for a “Hochhleistungsjäger” (High-performance fighter), offering a substantially improved combat ceiling and amenable to adaption for a medium-to-high altitude reconnaissance-fighter role. To meet the requirements Focke-Wulf proposed the Fw 190Ra-2 and Ra-3, a variant based on the Fw 190D, and Messerschmitt offered a long-span derivative of the Me 109, the Me 155B. These submissions were accepted by the “Technische Amt” (Technical Office of the RLM) but in August 1943 it became clear that Messerschmitt was too committed with other development programmes to devote sufficient attention to the Me 155B, this being duly passed to Blohm & Voss.
Prof. Tank, director of Focke-Wulf’s design team, worked on his proposals Fw 190Ra-2 and Ra-3 that soon would receive the RLM type designations Ta 152H and Ta 152K, respectively. Tank envisaged the short-span variant as primarily a “Begleitjäger” (Escort fighter), and the long-span version as a “Höhenjäger” (High-altitude fighter). Furthermore, Tank pressed for permission to install the turbo-charged Daimler-Benz DB 603 engine in the Ta 152 fighter owing to its indisputable superiority to the Junkers Jumo 213E engine, installed in the Focke-Wulf Fw 190D, at high altitudes. The short-span Fw Ta 152C, as it was designated now, was broadly of similar aerodynamic concept to that of the Fw 190D, but was structurally an entirely new airframe. Although test flights showed excellent handling characteristics and performance and although a production order was placed in autumn 1944 the General-Luftzeugmeister Amt (Department of the Chief of Aircraft Procurement and Supply) decided on November 1944 that the highest priority had been given to four key warplanes, the Heinkel He 162, the Messerschmitt Me 262, the Arado Ar 234, and the Dornier Do 335. So all work on the Ta 152 was stopped (Ref.: 7).

Blohm & Voss Bv P.193.01-01 (Planet, Resin)

TYPE: Ground attack fighter, dive bomber. Project

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

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).

Focke-Wulf Fw 190D-9, “Dora 9” (Dragon)

TYPE: Interceptor and fighter-bomber

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

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).

Blohm & Voss Bv P.192.01-01 (Planet, Resin)

TYPE: Ground attack and dive bomber. Project

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

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).

Messerschmitt Me 262A-2a Sturmvogel (Stormbird) (Matchbox) with SC 1000 high explosive bomb (Hermann) on Deichselschlepp (tow-bar) (Airmodel)

TYPE: Fighter bomber

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

POWER PLANT: Two Junkers Jumo 004B-1 turbojet engines, rated at 900 kp thrust each

PERFORMANCE: 530 mph at 9,800 ft

COMMENT: The fighter-bomber version of the Messerschmitt Me 262 Schwalbe (Swallow) received the appellation Stormbird (Sturmvogel) to distinguish it from those aircraft completed purely as interceptors. It was Hitler’s explicit desire to use this aircraft as a fighter-bomber incomprehensible to the manufacturer. Deliveries of that subtype, now called Messerschmitt Me 262A-2a, began in July 1944. It differed from the Me 262A-1a interceptor fighter solely in having bomb fusing equipment and a pair of pylons side-by-side beneath the fuselage nose, forward of the undercarriage wells. These could be either of the ETC 504 type or of so-called Wikingerschiff type, and proposed loads included a single SB 1000 bomb, or two SC 500 bombs, and derivate types, respectively. An unconventional approach was provided by a towed bomb, SC 1000 or SC 500 fitted with a wooden wing and towed by means of a 20-ft tube rigidly attached to the bomb. The tow-bar was attached beneath the tail by means of a swivel joint permitting horizontal and vertical motion, and the wires to detonate the explosive bolts, by which the bomb and its wing were separately jettisoned, passed through the tube. For take-off a two-wheel dolly was fitted to the bomb, this being jettisoned by means of an explosive bolt once aircraft and bomb were airborne. Additionally two Rheinmetall Borsig R 109-502 solid-fuel rockets were attached to the aircraft for assisted take-off. In early 1945 trials were done with the Me 262 V10. With the bomb on tow the speed of the Me 262 was reduced to some 320-330 mph. Furthermore, due to the high lift coefficient of the auxiliary wing the bomb began to porpoise, the motion was transmitted to the aircraft causing uncontrollable flight and the pilot was forced to bail out. Eventually it was concluded that the towed bomb concept was too hazardous and further tests were cancelled (Ref.: 7).