POWER PLANT: One Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engine, rated at 1,300 kp
PERFORMANCE: 630 mph
COMMENT: In Autumn 1944, in the context of the “Jägernotprogramm” (“Emergency Fighter Program”) the Oberkommando der Luftwaffe (OKL, Luftwaffe High Command) requested for proposals for a new generation of fighter/interceptor aircraft in order to replace the Heinkel He 162 “Salamander” or “Volksjäger” (“Peoples fighter”).
Besides designs such as Blohm & Voss Bv P.212, Focke-Wulf Ta 183, Heinkel He P. 1078, and Junkers EF 128 Messerschmitt proposed its project Me P. 1110 with three different variants.
First of the designs was the Messerschmitt Me P.1110/I, a turbo-jet powered interceptor with a conventional-looking design with the air intakes located in the middle part of fuselage sides above the wing the inlet not protruding the cross section (“Rampen-Einlauf”, “Ramp-air-intake”). The wing was of wooden construction and was swept back to 60 degree at the wing root and 40 degree at the leading edge. The tail plane was conventional with elevators and a vertical fin and swept back. Power was provided by a Heinkel/Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engine. A pressurized cockpit with streamlined fairing, tricycle landing gear and three MK 108 30mm cannon in the nose with a provision for two more in the wing roots was envisaged.
The second design was the Messerschmitt Me P.1110/II that differed from the Me P.1110/I mainly in a V-tail unit and a divided annular air intake behind the cockpit. The advantage of this unusual arrangement was that it would reduce drag by fifteen percent compared to a single nose air intake at the cost of four percent air flow reduction to the jet engines. To increase the air flow a supercharger was provided that additionally withdraw the boundary layer.
Like the Me P.1110/I, the Me P.1110/II had 40 degree swept-back wings, an HeS 011 jet engine and was armed with three MK 108 30mm cannon in the nose with a provision for two more in the wing roots.
The third design the Messerschmitt Me P.1110 “Ente” was of canard configuration with small wings in the front and larger wings in the rear part of the fuselage.
All projects would be soon dropped in favor of the Junkers EF 128 and none of the Messerschmitt designs made it to the prototype stage. (Ref.: 20, 22).
POWER PLANT: Two Junkers Jumo 222 or Daimler-Benz DB 604 (both liquid-cooled) or BMW 802 (radial) piston engines PERFORMANCE: 360 mph
COMMENT: In 1939, the “Technisches Amt des Reichluftfahrtministeriums” (RLM); (Technical Office of the Reich Air Ministry) issued specification for a “Bomber B” requirement.
The Reich Air Ministry ordered the aircraft to replace the Junkers Ju 88 and Dornier Do 217 bombers by 1943. At first four manufacturers submitted plans to the Air Ministry: Arado project E.340, Dornier Do 317, Focke-Wulf Fw 191, and Junkers Ju 288. Later, Henschel was asked to submit its Henschel Hs 130 design due to the expertise of this company with its experiments with pressurized cockpits. Meanwhile, Project “Bomber B” contest winner was the Arado design, officially named Ar 340.
While the designs of all other contenders were of more conventional layout the Arado Ar 340 was designed with a central fuselage containing all four crew members. The cockpit and rear compartment were glazed and pressurized. The projected Junkers Jumo 222 engines were positioned in a unique twin-boom arrangement connected only through the wing assembly, a configuration which offered the crew better visibility. The landing gear was mounted to the load-bearing wing center-section. The tail of the aircraft was a unique design, where the tail plane did not connect the two booms but was cantilevered outwards instead, each similar to the asymmetric Blohm & Voss Bv 141B booms and tail arrangement. Also similarly, this would have provided the rear gunner with a clear range of fire directly behind. The fuselage extended forwards beyond the engines, with the gunners situated behind the cockpit, ahead of the bomb bay and wing spars. The MG 151 cannon in the tail of the central fuselage would have been controlled with remote aiming through periscopes. There were also two remote-controlled “Fernbedienbare Drehlafette FDL 131” 13mm (remotely-controlled gun turrets) to be placed above and below the fuselage.
The Ar 340 was one of the steadily growing numbers of later-war military airframe designs designed to use the troublesome Junkers Jumo 222 engine. Otherwise an innovative design, these powerful engines were selected because they would have allowed the Arado Ar 340 to carry the required payload of 5,900 kg within a relatively compact airframe, despite their still-strictly developmental nature. As the development of the Junkers Jumo 222 engines were cancelled, plans were discussed to power the Arado Ar 340 with Daimler-Benz DB 605 liquid-cooled engines or BMW 802 radial engines. Meanwhile the RLM favoured the Junkers Ju 288 and the Arado project was not pursued.
Ultimately, the entire “Bomber B project” was cancelled, primarily as a result of the failure to develop the required engines (Ref.: 24).
POWER PLANT: Two Daimler-Benz DB 603A liquid-cooled engines, rated at 1,725 hp each
PERFORMANCE: 475 mph
COMMENT: The Dornier Do 335 “Pfeil” (“Arrow”) was a WW II heavy fighter built by the Dornier Company. It’s performance was much better than any other twin-engine designs due to its unique push-pull configuration and the lower aerodynamic drag of the in-line alignment of the two engines. It was Luftwaffe’s fastest piston-engine aircraft of World War II. The Luftwaffe was desperate to get the design into operational use, but delays in engine deliveries meant that only a handful were delivered before the war ended.
The origins of the Dornier Do 335 trace back to WW I when Claude Dornier designed a number of flying boats featuring remotely driven propellers and later, due to problems with the drive shafts, tandem engines. Tandem engines were used on most of the multi-engine Dornier flying boats that followed, including the highly successful Dornier Do J “Wal” (“Whale”) and the gigantic Donier Do X. The remote propeller drive, intended to eliminate parasitic drag from the engine entirely, was tried in the innovative but unsuccessful Dornier Do 14, and elongated, tubular drive shafts as later used in the Do 335 saw use in the rear engines of the four-engine, twinned tandem-layout Dornier Do 26 flying boat.
There are many advantages to this design over the more traditional system of placing one engine on each wing, the most important being power from two engines with the frontal area (and thus drag) of a single-engine design, allowing for higher performance. It also keeps the weight of the twin power plants near, or on, the aircraft centerline, increasing the roll rate compared to a traditional twin. In addition, a single engine failure does not lead to asymmetric thrust, and in normal flight there is no net torque, so the plane is easy to handle. The choice of a full “four-surface” set of cruciformly tail surfaces in the Do 335’s rear fuselage design, included a ventral vertical fin-rudder assembly to project downwards from the extreme rear of the fuselage, in order to protect the rear propeller from an accidental ground strike on takeoff. The presence of the rear pusher propeller also mandated the provision for an ejection seat for safe escape from a damaged aircraft, and designing the rear propeller and dorsal fin mounts to use explosive bolts to jettison them before an ejection was attempted — as well as twin canopy jettison levers, one per side located to either side of the forward cockpit interior just below the sills of the five-panel windscreen’s sides, to jettison the canopy from atop the cockpit before ejection.
In 1939, Dornier was busy working on the P.59 high-speed bomber project, which featured the tandem engine layout. In 1940, he commissioned a flying test bed, closely modeled on the airframe of the early versions of the twin engine Dornier Do 17 bomber but only 40% of the size of the larger bomber, with no aerodynamic bodies of any sort on the wing panels and fitted with a retractable tricycle landing gear to validate his concept for turning the rear pusher propeller with an engine located far away from it and using a long tubular driveshaft. This aircraft, the Göppingen Gö 9, built by , Schrempp-Hirth, a small sailplane company, showed no unforeseen difficulties with this arrangement, but work on the Dornier P.59 was stopped in early 1940 when the RLM ordered the cancellation of all projects that would not be completed within a year or so.
In May 1942, Dornier submitted an updated version his design as the Dornier P.231, in response to a requirement for a single seat, “Schnellbomber” -like high-speed bomber/intruder. P.231 was selected as the winner after beating rival designs from Arado, Blohm & Voss and Junkers, development contract was awarded as the Dornier Do 335. In autumn 1942, Dornier was told that the Do 335 was no longer required as a “Schnellbomber”, and instead a multi-role fighter based on the same general layout would be accepted. This delayed the prototype delivery as it was modified for the new role.
The Dornier Do 335 V1 first prototype flew in October 1943 and initial trials revealed essentially good handling characteristics. Acceleration was particularly favourable and the turning circle was rather better than had been anticipated. The use of a nose-mount annular radiator for the forward engine (much like a Junkers Jumo 211-powered Junkers Ju 88, or Jumo 213-powered Focke-Wulf Fw 190D-9) and a ventral-fuselage mount air-scooped radiator installation for cooling the rear engine (appearing like that on a North American P-51 “Mustang”) was distinctive.
However, several problems during the initial flight of the Do 335 would continue to plague the aircraft through most of its short history. Issues were found with the weak landing gear and with the main gear’s wheel well doors, resulting in them being removed for the remainder of the V1’s test flights. The Do 335 V1 made 27 flights, flown by three different pilots.
During these test flights the second Do 335 V2 was completed and made its first flight on December 1943, followed by the third Do 335 V3 on January 1944. In mid January 1944, RLM ordered five more prototypes, one to be built as Do 335A-6 night fighter. By this time, more than 60 hours of flight time had been put on the Do 335 and reports showed it to be good handling characteristics, but more importantly, it was a very fast aircraft. Even with one engine out, it reached about 350 mph.
Thus the Do 335 was scheduled to begin mass construction, with the initial order of 120 preproduction aircraft to be manufactured by DWF (Dornier-Werke Friedrichshafen) to be completed no later than March 1946. This number included a number of bombers, destroyers (heavy fighters), and several yet to be developed variants. At the same time, DWM (Dornier-Werke München) was scheduled to build over 2000 Do 335s in various models, due for delivery in March 1946 as well.
On 23 May 1944, as part of the developing “Jägernotprogramm” (“Emergency Fighter Program”) directive, maximum priority was given to Do 335 production. Furthermore, the decision was made, along with the rapid shut-down of many other military aircraft development programs, to cancel the Heinkel He 219 night fighter, which also used the DB 603 engines, and use its production facilities for the Do 335 as well. However, Ernst Heinkel managed to delay, and eventually ignore, its implementation, continuing to produce examples of the He 219A.
At least 16 prototype Do 335s were known to have flown as well as Muster-series prototypes on a number of DB603 engine subtypes. The first preproduction Do 335A-0s were delivered in July 1944 to the “Erprobungskommando 335” (“Proving detachment 335”) formed for service evaluation purposes. Approximately 22 preproduction aircraft were thought to have been completed and flown before the end of WW II including approximately 11 Do 335A-1 single-seat fighters of which two examples had been converted to a trainer version Do 335A-12 for training purposes (Ref.: 7., 24).
POWER PLANT: Two Daimler-Benz DB 603A liquid-cooled piston engines, rated at 1,750 hp each
PERFORMANCE: 348 mph at 19,685 ft
COMMENT: When the “Führungsstab der Luftwaffe” (Operations Staff of the Luftwaffe) drafted its so-called “Bomber B” requirement which was translated into a specification for issue to selected airframe manufactures in July 1939 by the “Technischen Amt des Reichluftfahrtministeriums” (RLM), (Technical Office of the RLM), its intention was nor merely the provision of successors for the Junkers Ju 88 and Heinkel He 111; its aim was also to carry the state of the art in medium bomber design a significant step forward.
The specification was noteworthy in the performance advances that it stipulated, and equally so in design innovations that it called for. The “Bomber B” had to possess a range of 2,237 miles do endow it with a radius of action sufficient to encompass the entire British Isles from bases that it was assumed would be available in France and Norway, a maximum speed of 373 mph at 19,685-22,965 ft., which compared favourably with the speeds of the best contemporary fighters, and a bomb load of 4,410 lb. It had to carry three or four crew members, possess a loaded weight of the order of 44,090 lb., and be of twin-engined configuration, utilizing the extremely advanced 24-cylinder liquid-cooled Daimler-Benz DB 604 or Junkers Jumo 222 engines then at an early stage in development, but the really radical demands of the specification were its insistence on pressurized accommodation for the crew, and the use of remotely-controlled barbettes to house defensive armament.
Initially, the specification was issued to four manufacturers: Arado, Dornier, Focke-Wulf and Junkers, although the scope of the contest was later to be broadened to include Henschel (Henschel Hs 130) when it was realized by the RLM that this company has more pressure cabin experience than any other contestants, with the possible exception of Junkers. The final proposals of the original four competing companies were submitted to the “Technisches Amt” in July 1940, and evaluation eliminated the Arado contender, the Ar 340, prototypes being ordered of each of the other contender, Dornier Do 317, Focke-Wulf Fw 191 and Junkers Ju 288.
Dornier’s proposal was based broadly on the design of the Dornier Do 217, the four crew members being housed ahead of the wing in a pressure cabin which, taking the form of a detachable compartment pressurized by tapping the superchargers of the Daimler-Benz DB 604 engines, was extensively glazed by a series of curved panels.
Two versions of the Do 317 were proposed: the simplified Do 317A, powered by two DB 603A engines (instead of the troublesome Daimler-Benz DB 604) and featuring conventional defensive armament, and the more advanced Do 317B with the heavy 1.5 tonnes apiece, counter-rotating DB 610A/B “power system” engines, remotely aimed “Fernbedienbare Drehlafette” (FDL)-style gun turrets (remotely-controlled turrets), heavier bombload, and an extended wing.
Six prototypes of the Dornier Do 317A were ordered, and the first of these, the Do 317 V1, commenced its flight test program on September 1943. The Do 317 V1 was very similar in appearance to the later Dornier Do 217K and -M subtypes, with a visually reframed slight variation of its multiple glazed-panel “stepless cockpit”, fully glazed nose design that accommodated a pressurized cabin provision, and triangular tailfins. Trials with the Do 317 V1 revealed no real performance advance over the Do 217. However, it was clear even at this point that the call for designs was to some extent a formality, as the Junkers Ju 288 design had already been selected for production. So it was decided to complete the remaining five prototypes without cabin pressurization equipment and fit them out with FuG 230 “Kehl-Straßburg” radio guidance transmitting gear to employ them as Henschel Hs 293 missile launchers. In this form, the prototypes were redesignated Dornier Do 217R. At this time, the Do 317B project was abandoned due to changing wartime conditions (Ref.: 7, 24).
POWER PLANT: Four Heinkel/Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engines, rated at 1,200 kp each
PERFORMANCE: 528 mph
COMMENT: In January/February 1945, only four month before the German “Third Reich” surrendered, Messerschmitt proposed two designs of a “Fernbomber” (Long-distant range/long-range bomber), the Me P.1108/I and –II. Although no post-war information provided by Messerschmitt’s employees could be independently verified, since all data had already been removed by the French it seems that both projects were designed by Dr. Wurster from Messerschmitt to a concept by Dr. Alexander Lippisch.
While the Messerschmitt Me P.1108/I, (design drawing Nr. IX-126 from 28th February, 1945) was a more conventional design with a fuselage, 35 degree back-swept wings and a butterfly-type tailplane, the Me P.1108/II (design drawing Nr.117 from January 12th, 1945) was a flying wing concept with 40 degrees sweep of the leading edge without any tailplane. Common to both projects were the installation of four Heinkel/Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engines, the air intakes were under the wings or in the wings leading edge. Calculated fully loaded weight was to be 30 tons, a range of 4,300 mi at a speed of 500–530 mph and a height of 30,000–39,000 ft. was estimated.
The Messerschmitt Me P.1108/I design had an aerodynamic clear fuselage with circular cross section and low positioned swept back wing with four He S 011 turbojet engines in paired nacelles half-embedded in the wing trailing edge. These were fed by a common intake on each lower wing surface. A two man crew sat in tandem position in a pressurized cockpit in the extreme nose of the aircraft. A tricycle landing gear arrangement was designed, with the main wheels retracting into the fuselage. It was planned that the armament of the production aircraft should consist of three twin 20mm cannon turrets, two located on the back of the fuselage and aft of the cockpit and one under the fuselage. All were remotely controlled from the cockpit.
Understandably, at the end of March 1945, only few weeks before the total collapse of the “Third Reich” Messerschmitt was ordered by the RLM to cease all development on long range bomber designs (Ref.: 15, 20).
POWER PLANT: Six Junkers Jumo 012 turbojet engines, rated at 2,500 kp thrust each
PERFORMANCE: 578 mph
COMMENT: The Junkers EF 132 was one of the last aircraft project developments undertaken by Junkers in WWII, and was the culmination of the Junkers Ju 287 design started in 1942. The shoulder-mounted wings were swept back at a 35 degree angle and featured a small amount of anhedral. Six Junkers Jumo 012 jet engines, each of which developed 2,500 kp of thrust, were buried in the wing roots. Wind tunnel results showed the advantages of having the engines within the wing, rather than causing drag by being mounted below the wing surfaces. Several wooden mockups were built of the wing sections, in order to find the best way to mount the engines without wasting too much space while at the same time providing maintenance accessibility. The landing flaps were designed to be split flaps, and the goal was to make the gearing and operation simple. Because of the high placement of the wings to the fuselage, an unbroken bomb bay of 12 meters could be utilized in the center fuselage. The tail plane was also swept back and the EF 132 had a normal vertical fin and rudder. An interesting landing gear arrangement was planned, that consisted of a nose wheel, two tandem main wheels beneath the center rear fuselage, and outrigger-type wheels under each outer wing. A fully glazed, pressurized cockpit located in the extreme fuselage nose held a crew of five. Armament consisted of two twin 20mm cannon turrets (one located aft of the cockpit, the other beneath the fuselage) and a tail turret containing another twin 20mm cannon. All of the defensive armaments were remotely controlled from the cockpit, and a bomb load of 4000-5000 kg was envisioned to be carried.
A wind tunnel model was tested in early 1945, and a 1:1 scale wooden mockup was also built at the Dessau Junkers facility to test the placement of various components, and also to check different air intake openings in the wing leading edge for the turbojet engines. The development stage had progressed far when the Soviets overran the Dessau complex and took possession of all of the Ju 287 and Junkers EF 131 and Junkers EF132 designs and components. The Soviets gave its approval for the bombed out Junkers Dessau factory to be partially rebuilt, the wind tunnels repaired and the turbojet engine test and manufacturing facilities to be put back into operation. In October 1946, the whole complex and the German engineers were transferred to GOZ No.1 (Gosoodarstvenny Opytnyy Zavod, State Experimental Plant), at Dubna in the Soviet Union, to continue development of the EF 131 and EF 132. Design work on the EF 132 continued under Dr. B. Baade at OKB-1 (the design bureau attached to GOZ No.1), under order of Council of Ministers (COM) directive No.874-266, an unpowered example was constructed to gather additional data, but only slow progress was made before the project was terminated on June 1948, by COM directive 2058-805 (Ref.: 17. 24).
POWER PLANT: Four Junkers Jumo 004C turbojet engines, rated at 1,020 kp each
PERFORMANCE: 510 mph
COMMENT: With its Blohm & Voss Bv P.188 bomber projects the aircraft company proposed several different designs that would have been powered by four powerful turbojet engines. Most unusual was a long, specifically W-shaped wing design. The wings were placed – differing of project – from high to low on the fuselage side. Common to all projects was the layout of wings: their inner halves were swept back 20 degrees while the outer halves were swept 20 degrees forward. It was hoped that this arrangement would provide a better performance, both at high and low speeds.
The Blohm & Voss Bv P.188 bomber project had three different known variants. Blohm & Voss Bv P.188.01 was powered by four turbojets placed in separate nacelles under the wings. The W-shaped wing was placed high on the fuselage, the tail section was of a conventional type.
Very similar in design was the Blohm & Voss Bv P.188 02 except for a smaller, slightly raised cockpit, the wings were placed in mid-fuselage and a tail with a twin rudder arrangement.
The last design was the Blohm und Voss P.188.04 turbojet bomber. The fuselage center section was designed as an armored steel shell which was to hold the fuel supply, with the forward and rear sections being bays for the tandem twin main landing gear wheels. The W-shaped wing was place low on the fuselage and had a constant 3 degree dihedral. A crew of two sat in tandem in an extensively glazed, pressurized cockpit, which was flush with the fuselage. Four Junkers Jumo 004C turbojet engines were mounted in two nacelles, which were located beneath each wing, very similar to the Arado Ar 234C “Blitz” (“Lightning”) turbojet bomber. There were also an auxiliary ‘outrigger’ type landing gear outboard of the engine nacelles, these being more to steady the aircraft, and did not touch the ground when it was on an even keel. The tail was of a twin fin and rudder design, with a dihedral tail plane and the extreme tail had an airbrake. Armament consisted of two remote-controlled FDL 131 Z twin 13mm machine guns, guided by two PVE 11 periscopes aft of the cockpit, and firing to the rear. A bombload of 2000 kg could be carried externally. None of these futuristic projects were realized (Ref: 17, 24).
POWER PLANT: One Daimler-Benz DB 601A liquid-cooled engine, rated at 1,175 hp
PERFORMANCE: 370 mph app.
COMMENT: The designation Messerschmitt Me 209 was used for two separate projects during World War II. The first was a record-setting, single-engine race aircraft, for which little or no consideration was given to adaptation for combat (Messerschmitt Me 209 V1). The second Me 209 was a proposal for a follow-up to the highly successful Messerschmitt Bf 109 which served as the Luftwaffe’s primary fighter throughout World War II.
In late 1939, after three prototypes of the record-breaking aircraft were built the fourth prototype, the Messerschmitt Me 209 V4, was adapted to a fighter aircraft. The fuselage was essentially similar to that of the record-speed aircraft but the vertical tail surfaces were substantially increased in area, the main undercarriage legs were shortened, an entirely new wing was fitted, and the maximum gross weight was reduced.
For initial flight trials, the Me 209 V4 was fitted with a standard Daimler-Benz DB 601A engine and retained the surface evaporation cooling system employed by its high-speed predecessors, but this system was far from perfection and continuously troublesome, and after the eighth test flight was removed and replaced by shallow, low drag radiators beneath the inboard wing panels. The resumption of flying trials immediately revealed inadequacy of the cooling provided by the underwing radiators, and the handling characteristics of both on the ground and in the air proved extremely poor. By 1940, the overall wing span had been increased and both horizontal and vertical tail surfaces had been enlarged, but trial revealed no major improvement of the characteristics of the fighter.
With each successive modification weight escalated and performance diminished, and as the Me 209 V4 was by now decidedly underpowered, the DB 601A was replaced by a DB 601N affording 1,200 hp for take-off. But troubles still continued and further tests proved that speed performance was marginally lower than that of the standard Messerschmitt Me 109E. Finally all further development was abandoned.
However, combat actions with British Supermarine “Spitfires” showed an urgent need for a successor of the Luftwaffe’s Messerschmitt Me 109. So the Messerschmitt design bureau had been engaged in developing a modernized, more powerful derivative of the Me 109 and the RLM transferred the designation Me 209 to the new fighter which should employ a large portion of a standard Me 109 components. In fact, at the outset it was envisaged that there would be approximately 65 per cent airframe communality between the Me 109G and what now referred to as Messerschmitt Me 209-II (Ref.: 7).
POWER PLANT: Three BMW 132T-2 radial engines, rated at 830 hp each
PERFORMANCE: 168 mph at 2,000 ft
COMMENT: The Junkers Ju 52/3m (nicknamed “Tante Ju”, “Aunt Ju”) was German trimotor transport aircraft manufactured in Germany from 1931 until the end of WW II. In total 4.845 aircraft have been built.
Initially designed with a single engine but subsequently produced as a trimotor, Junkers Ju 53 /3m – suffix “3m” means “Drei Motoren” (three engines) it saw both civilian and military service from mid1930 onwards.
The Ju 52 was similar to the company’s previous Junkers W 33, although larger. Designed in 1930 at the Junkers works at Dessau, Germany, the aircraft’s featured an unusual corrugated duraluminium metal skin, pioneered by Junkers during WW I, strengthened the whole structure.
The Ju 52 had a low cantilever wing, the midsection of which was built into the fuselage, forming its underside. It was formed around four pairs of circular cross-section duralumin spars with a corrugated surface that provided torsional stiffening. A narrow control surface, with its outer section functioning as the aileron, and the inner section functioning as a flap, ran along the whole trailing edge of each wing panel, well separated from it. The inner flap section lowered the stalling speed and the arrangement became known as the “Doppelflügel” ( “double wing”).
The outer sections of this operated differentially as ailerons, projecting slightly beyond the wingtips with control horns. The strutted horizontal stabilizer carried horn-balanced elevators which again projected and showed a significant gap between them and the stabilizer, which was adjustable in-flight. All stabilizer surfaces were corrugated.
The fuselage was of rectangular section with a domed decking, all covered with corrugated light alloy. There was a port side passenger door just aft of the wings, with windows stretching forward to the pilots’ cockpit. The main undercarriage was fixed and divided; some aircraft had wheel fairings, others not. There was a fixed tailskid, or a later tailwheel. Some aircraft were fitted with floats (Junkers Ju 52/3mg5e) or skis instead of the main wheels.
Originally powered by three Pratt & Whitney R-1690 “Hornet” radial engines, later production models mainly received 770 hp BW 132 engines, a license-built refinement of the Pratt & Whitney design. The two wing-mounted radial engines of the Ju 52/3m had half-chord cowlings and in planform view (from above/below) appeared to be splayed outwards, being mounted at an almost perpendicular angle to the tapered wing’s sweptback leading edge (in a similar fashion to the Mitsubishi G3M bomber (Allied code “Betty”) and Short “Sunderland” flying boat; the angled engines on the Ju 52 were intended to make it easier to maintain straight flight should an engine fail, while the others had different reasons). The three engines had either “Townend” ring or NACA cowlings to reduce drag from the engine cylinders, although a mixture of the two was most common, with deeper-chord NACA cowlings on the wing engines and a narrow “Townend” ring on the center engine, which was more difficult to fit a deeper NACA cowl onto, due to the widening fuselage behind the engine. Production Ju 52/3m aircraft flown by Luftwaffe usually used an air-start system to turn over their trio of radial engines, using a common compressed air supply that also operated the main wheels’ brakes.
In service with Lufthansa, the Junkers Ju 52/3m had proved to be an extremely reliable passenger airplane. Therefore, it was adopted by the Luftwaffe as a standard aircraft model and flew as a troop and cargo transport.. The Luftwaffe had 552 Ju 52/3ms in service at the beginning of WW II. Even though it was built in great and production continued until approximately the summer of 1944; when the war came to an end, there were still 100 to 200 aircraft available (Ref.: 24).
POWER PLANT: Two Junkers Jumo 004D-1 turbojet engines, rated at 930 kp thrust each
PERFORMANCE: 683 mph at 19.685 ft
COMMENT: The final layout of the Messerschmitt Me 262 “Schwalbe” (“Swallow”) did not come up to all expectations of perfectionist Willy Messerschmitt. He argued that at least the concept of the new revolutionary aircraft is a result of many compromise and need to be improved. One goal is the high speed that can be reached by a turbojet driven aircraft.
Already in 1939 when the first design studies began what later became the Messerschmitt Me 262 Willy Messerschmitt proposed the installation of the turbojet engines into the wing roots in order to reduce drag and save weight. But at that time the plan failed due to the rapid changing dimensions of the first “Sondertriebwerke” (“Exceptional power plants”) as the new turbojet engines are called..
Yet another possibility to reduce drag in high-speed flight was the introduction of swept-back wings. In 1935 Prof. Busemann, an aeronautical research scientist at the aerodynamic institute of the University of Göttingen, discovered the benefits of the swept wing for aircraft at high speeds. He presented a paper on the topic at the Volta Conference at Rome in 1935. The paper concerned supersonic flow only. At the time of his proposal, flight much beyond 300 miles per hour had not been achieved and it was considered an academic curiosity. Nevertheless, he continued working with the concept, and by the end of the year had demonstrated similar benefits in the transonic region as well.
By early 1940 the first precise research findings on swept back wings were available to the German aircraft industry and Messerschmitt proposed in April 1941 to fit up the piston engine driven Messerschmitt Me 262 V1 with a 35 degree swept back wing. Nevertheless, at that time priority was given to the mass-production of the Messerschmitt Me 262 “Schwalbe” (“Swallow”). But with the introduction of this phenomenal aircraft the influence of critical Mach-number (“compressibility”) on subsonic speed became noticeable. In early 1944 research work on development of a high-speed variant of the Messerschmitt Me 262 was done again in three steps as so called “Hoch-Geschwindigkeitsjäger” , suffix “HG” (“High-speed fighter”):
Messerschmitt Me 262 HG I
The leading edge of the inner wing as well as of the vertical tail was increased to 45 degree, the leading edge of the horizontal tail was swept back to 40 degree, a shallow, low-drag cockpit canopy was installed, and the muzzles were faired over.
Messerschmitt Me 262 HG II
A new wing with 35 degree sweep was installed, the engine nacelle was improved, a shallow, low-drag canopy and a butterfly tail-plane was provided.
Messerschmitt Me 262 HG III
Improvements were a new 45 degree swept-back wing, installation of turbojet engines in wing-root, low-drag canopy and swept-back tail-plane.
The last variant was intensively discussed and tested especially the installation of more powerful turbojet engines (Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011). The end of WWII stopped all further work on the Messerschmitt Me 262 HG III (Ref.: 20, 24).
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.