POWER PLANT: One Heinkel/Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engine, rated at 1,300 kp
PERFORMANCE: 609 mph
COMMENT: As part of the “Emergency Fighter Program” (”Jägernotprogramm”), at the beginning of 1945 a program was launched by the OKL (Oberkommando der Luftwaffe, High Command of the Luftwaffe) for a new generation of fighter/interceptor aircraft in order to replace the winner of the “Volksjäger” fighter design competition, the Heinkel He 162A “Spatz” (“Sparrow”) . The new aircraft was intended to have superior performance in order to deal with high altitude threats such as the the Boeing B-29 “Superfortress”, but only had a 30-minute endurance figure.
Heinkel produced three different designs of the project (He P. 1078A, He P. 1078B, and He P. 1078C) which were submitted in February 1945. The high-altitude fighter designs brought forward by other German aircraft makers were the Messerschmitt Me P. 1110, Focke-Wulf Ta 183 “Huckebein”, Blohm & Voss Bv P.212 and Junkers EF 128, the official winner of the competition. After being subject to severe criticism, the project was cancelled by Heinkel at the end of February 1945. Other reports state that these Heinkel projects have never been submitted to the OKL. In fact, members of the Heinkel construction bureau were working on these designs under U.S. supervision after WW II during the summer of 1945 (Ref.: 24).
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).
POWER PLANT: One Daimler-Benz DB 603A-1 liquid-cooled engine, rated at 1,750 mph
PERFORMANCE: 496 mph at 26,200 ft
COMMENT: During 1941 the Messerschmitt design bureau began work on a new fighter intended to succeed the Messerschmitt Me 109. Designated Me 309, the new fighter employed a nose-wheel undercarriage. The first prototype Me 309 V1 began taxi-ing trials on June 1942 and the first test flight was not attempted until July 1942. Subsequent flight tests revealed some instability, and the prototype was grounded for several modifications.
Despite continual modifications, the characteristics of the fighter were still not entirely satisfactory. On November 1942 a flight comparison between the Me 309 V1 and a standard Me 109G revealed the fact that the older fighter could turn-out its potential successor. In the meantime three further prototypes were ready for test flights but the results showed that numerous modifications were necessary. During summer 1943, however, the complete program was abandoned owing to the superior qualities of the Focke-Wulf Fw 190D and Focke-Wulf Ta 152.
Prior to the termination of the program several variants of the basic design were proposed including different engines as Daimler-Benz DB 603H and Junkers Jumo 213. Another development, the Messerschmitt Me 609, with two Me 309 fuselages joined by a constant center wing, was not proceeded with (Ref.: 11).
POWER PLANT: One Daimler-Benz DB 627B liquid-cooled engine, rated at 2,000 hp
PERFORMANCE: 460 mph at full boost altitude
COMMENT: In April 1943 the Messerschmitt design bureau submitted proposals for a high-altitude fighter designated Messerschmitt Me 209H. This project envisaged the insertion of an additional rectangular center section in the wing to increase overall span and gross area, and the use of either Daimler-Benz DB 628A high altitude engine or the DB 603U which was a DB 603E equipped with a TKL 15 turbo-supercharger. Owing to the time element Messerschmitt was instructed to embody some of its proposals for the Me 209H into the Me 109H which, making extensive use of Me 109G components, offered a quicker solution to the requirement for a fighter of superior altitude capability.
Nevertheless, the Messerschmitt bureau persisted with the development of the Me 209H, detail design being completed on October 1943, and work on the prototype, the Me 209H V1, began shortly afterwards, but proceeded slowly, and was delayed as a result of an air attack in February 1944 in which the partly assembled prototype was damaged, and some of its components destroyed. Thus, the Me 209H V1 was not rolled out until June 1944, by which time the entire Me 209 program had been officially abandoned. It had been intended that the Me 209H V1 should receive the Daimler-Benz DB 627 which was basically a DB 603 G with aftercooler and two-stage mechanical supercharger, and afforded 2,000 hp for take-off. The engine drove a four-bladed wooden airscrew and the annular radiator was discarded in favor of radiators in the leading edge of the wing center section. No records exists of the results of flight testing or the ultimate fate of the sole Me 209 high-altitude prototype (Ref.: 7).
POWER PLANT: One Daimler-Benz DB 603G liquid-cooled engine, rated at 1,900 hp
PERFORMANCE: 416 mph at 19,685 ft
COMMENT: Despite the total failure of the Messerschmitt Me 209 V4 and the disappointing performance of the Messerschmitt Me 309, the Messerschmitt design bureau was still determined to provide the successor of the Messerschmitt Me 109 in the Luftwaffe’s fighter arm and a competitor for Focke-Wulf’s Fw 190D and Ta 152 fighters. It was realized that no useful purpose could be served in attempting any further development of the original Messerschmitt Me 209, and it was decided, therefore, to produce an entirely new fighter design which, in order to accelerate development and subsequent production, was to use a large proportion of standard Me 109 components. The new fighter was designated Messerschmitt Me 209-II and was, in fact, a modernized, more powerful Me 109G and employed sixty-five per cent of the earlier fighter’s components. The Me 209-II adopted an exceptionally wide-track, inward retracting undercarriage. Another major change was the installation of a Daimler-Benz DB 603G with an annular radiator. Overall wingspan was substantially increased and the vertical tail surfaces were enlarged. The prototype for the Me 209-II, the Me 209 V5 (A-1), was flown for the first time on November 1943 and tests revealed that the aircraft processed an excellent performance and overcame most of the Me 109’s shortcomings. Shortages of the DB 603G engine resulted in a demand for the installation of the Junkers Jumo 213E liquid-cooled engine. Designated Me 209A-2 flight trials began in December 1943. By this time, however, the Focke-Wulf Fw 190D-9 was entering service and this fighter had a speed advantage of some 30 mph at altitude, and as the introduction of the Me 209-II would disrupt fighter deliveries at a critical phase of the air war, it was decided to discontinue the development of the Messerschmitt design (Ref.: 11).
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).
POWER PLANT: One Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engine, rated at 1,300 kp
PERFORMANCE: 618 mph
COMMENT: In winter 1944/1945, the Messerschmitt Project Bureau was intensively working on several advanced turbojet powered interceptor aircraft superior to the now in service acting Messerschmitt Me 262 “Schwalbe” (Swallow). Besides projects such as Me P.1110/I, Me P.1110/II, Me P. 1110 “Ente”, and Me P. 1112 was the Me P.1111 jet fighter/interceptor. The innovative design was as an improvement to the Messerschmitt Me P.1110 “Ente” (“Duck”). It was a tailless aircraft with the wings swept back at 45 degrees, being of near-delta shape. There was a single sweptback vertical fin and rudder. The cockpit was pressurized, fitted with an ejection seat and had a fairing extending to the base of the fin. The planned power plant was a Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engine, armament consisted of four MK 108 30mm cannon with 100 rounds each, two in the wing roots and two in the nose. The collapse of the “Third Reich” a few months later stopped all further work but data were transferred to the United Kingdom and influenced the post -war development of the de Havilland DH 108 “Swallow” (Ref.: 17).
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 II” 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).
Messerschmitt Zerstörer-Projekt, Ausführung I, (Destroyer-project, Scheme I)
Messerschmitt Zerstörer-Projekt, Ausführung I, (Destroyer-project, Scheme I)
Messerschmitt Zerstörer-Projekt, Ausführung I, (Destroyer-project, Scheme I)
Messerschmitt Zerstörer-Projekt, Ausführung I, (Destroyer-project, Scheme I)
Messerschmitt Zerstörer-Projekt, Ausführung I, (Destroyer-project, Scheme I)
Messerschmitt Zerstörer-Projekt, Ausführung I, (Destroyer-project, Scheme I)
Messerschmitt Zerstörer-Projekt, Ausführung I, (Destroyer-project, Scheme I)
Messerschmitt Zerstörer-Projekt, Ausführung I, (Destroyer-project, Scheme I)
Messerschmitt Zerstörer-Projekt, Ausführung I, (Destroyer-project, Scheme I)
Messerschmitt Zerstörer-Projekt, Ausführung I, (Destroyer-project, Scheme I)
Messerschmitt Zerstörer-Projekt, Ausführung I, (Destroyer-project, Scheme I)
Messerschmitt Zerstörer-Projekt, Ausführung I, (Destroyer-project, Scheme I)
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).
POWER PLANT: One Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engine, rated at 1,200 kp
PERFORMANCE: 621 mph at 23,000 ft, estimated
COMMENT: In mid 1944 the OKL (Oberkommando der Luftwaffe, Luftwaffe High Command) issued to tender a development request calling for a fighter powered by a Heinkel He S 011 turbojet engine. Required were a top speed of 612 mph at 23,000 ft and an armament of four MK 108 cannon. In contrast to the single-seater, proposed by Blohm & Voss, Bv P.212, Focke-Wulf, Ta 183, Heinkel, He P.1078, and Messerschmitt, Me P.1110, Junkers presented the project EF 128 as a two-seater all-weather fighter. In two conferences between the aircraft companies, the OKL and the DVL, held in December 1944 and January 1945, all designs were evaluated. Finally chosen was the design of Junkers EF 128, as well as single-seater, and as two-seater. The production should start in mid 1945. Due to the compact fuselage and the relative high cross section it was possible to seat the crew side-by-side in an pressurized cockpit and to integrate newest radar equipment such as FuG 240 “Berlin” (Ref.: 20).
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
Junkers EF 128 Nachtjäger (Night fighter)
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.
