TYPE: Fighter, project

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

POWER PLANT: One Junkers Jumo 004B turbojet engine, rated at 950 kp thrust or one Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engine, rated at 1,300 kp thrust

PERFORMANCE: 598 mph at 25,800 ft (with HeS 011 turbojet)

COMMENT:  In early 1944, the RLM (Reichsluftfahrtministerium, Reich Air Ministry) became aware of Allied jet developments, and were particularly concerned that they might have to face the Gloster Meteor  over the continent. In response, they instituted the Jägernotprogramm (Fighter emergency program) which took effect on July 3, 1944, ending production of most bomber and multi-role aircraft in favour of fighters, especially jet fighters. Additionally, they accelerated the development of experimental designs that would guarantee a performance edge over the Allied designs, designs that would replace the first German jet fighters, the Messerschmitt Me 262  and Heinkel He 162. Focke-Wulf Company proposed its design Focke-Wulf Ta 183 Huckebein, powered by the advanced Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011 turbojet, although the first prototypes were to be powered by the Junkers Jumo 004B. The wings of the new design were swept back at 40° and were mounted in the mid-fuselage position. The wings appear to be mounted very far forward compared with most designs, a side-effect of attempting to keep the center of pressure (CoP) of the wing as a whole as close to the middle of the fuselage as possible. The original design used a T-tail, with a notably long vertical stabilizer and a seemingly undersized horizontal stabilizer. The vertical tail was swept back at 60°, and the horizontal tail was swept back and slightly dihedralled. Many problems beset the project, work therefore concentrated on the much less problematical Focke-Wulf Projekt VII “Flitzer”. However, when the RLM eventually rejected that design and in late 1944 the Focke Wulf Ta 183 Huckebein was again brought to the fore. Detailed blue-prints were readied in beginning of 1945 and construction of several prototypes began immediately. The first flight of the aircraft was scheduled for May 1945, but none aircraft was completed by 8 April 1945, when British troops captured the Focke-Wulf facilities.
The name “Huckebein” is a reference to a trouble-making raven (Hans Huckebein, der Unglücksrabe) from an illustrated story in 1867 by famous cartoonist Wilhelm Busch. (Ref.:24).

TYPE: High altitude fighter. Project

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

POWER PLANT: One Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engine, rated at 1,300 kp thrust

PERFORMANCE: 615 mph

COMMENT: As part of the “Jägernotprogramm” (Fighter emergency program), at the beginning of 1945 a programme was launched by the Oberkommando der Luftwaffe, (OKL, Luftwaffe High Command) in order to replace the Heinkel He 162 “Salamander”
(“Volkskjäger”, “Peoples fighter” ). The new aircraft was intended to have superior performance in order to deal with high altitude threats such as the Boeing B-29 “Superfortress”, first missions expected in summer 1945. To meet this requirement, power was to be a single Heinkel HeS 011 turbojet. Proposals were brought forward by other German aircraft makers so as the Blohm & Voss Bv P.212, Focke-Wulf Ta 183, Heinkel He P.1078,Junkers EF 128, and Messerschmitt Me P.1110. The designs of the official winner of the competition, the Junkers EF 128, were submitted in February 1945. This more advanced fighter attracted more interest than the austere Miniaturjäger (Midget fighter) among German aircraft manufacturers, but at the time of the end of WWII only models had been built. It had swept wings of 45 degrees which included wood in their construction. The air intake for the turbojet was with boundary layer suction aerodynamically refined, the air left the fuselage behind the cockpit. A model for wind-tunnel experiments and a mock-up of the fuselage are built. Estimated flight characteristics and performance were optimistic and led to an order for mass production starting in mid1945. There was a projected variant of a two-seater all-weather and night fighter with a lengthened fuselage, pressure-cabin and FuG 240 “Berlin” radar. (Ref.: 22, 24).

TYPE: Interceptor fighter. Project

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

POWER PLANT: One Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engine, rated at 1,300 kp thrust

PERFORMANCE: 621 mph

COMMENT: Initial troubles with the Walter HWK 509 rocket engine caused a delay in production of the Messerschmitt Me 163 “Komet”. To bring an effective interceptor into service as soon as possible chief designer Lippisch designed a turbojet engine equipped variant of the Me 163 that used, in order to speed up production and reduce costs, as many parts from other aircraft as possible. The nose of the aircraft was taken from the Heinkel He 162, the wing came from the Messerschmitt Me 163B and C, the tail plane from the Junkers Ju 248 (Messerschmitt Me 263), and the landing was taken from the Messerschmitt Me 109.  A single Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011A turbojet or, as temporary solution, a BMW 003 turbojet was provided. A mock-up was finished when WW II ended (Ref. 17, 22).

TYPE: Fighter. Project

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

POWER PLANT: One Junkers Jumo 004C turbojet engine, rated at 1.000 kp thrust

PERFORMANCE: 568 mph

COMMENT: The Lippisch P.20 jet fighter project dated from April 1943 and was a further development of the Messerschmitt Me 163 “Komet”. It was the final design of Dr. Alexander Lippisch for the Messerschmitt Company before his design department became an independent engineering office in Vienna. The P.20 was similar in appearance to the Me 163, with an air intake mounted low in the nose which fed a single Jumo 004 turbojet. Armament consisted of two MK 108 30mm cannon mounted in the forward fuselage sides and two MK 103 30mm cannon mounted in the wing roots. As the end of WWII became apparent this project was not pursued (Ref.: 17, 22).

TYPE: Interceptor, fighter. Project

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

POWER PLANT: One Daimler-Benz DB 605C liquid-cooled engine, rated at 1.475 hp

PERFORMANCE: Data not available

COMMENT: In spring 1943 Dr. Lippisch’s design team, part of the Messerschmitt Aircraft Company, was working on the fighter project Me 334 that originally was to be powered by new developed turbojet engine. But due to shortcoming of turbojet engines the design was modified to incorporate a Daimler-Benz DB 605 12 cylinder piston engine. A three-bladed pusher type propeller was driven via an extension shaft. The wings were mounted mid-fuselage and were swept back at a 23.4 degree angle. The main landing gear retracted inwards and the front gear retracted to the rear.  In summer 1943 when deliveries of turbojet engines began slowly, all work on the Me 334 was abandoned in favor of the turbojet engine driven Lippisch Li P.20 (Ref. 17, 22).

TYPE: Fighter, project

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

POWER PLANT: Junkers Jumo 004B turbojet engine, rated at 900 kp thrust

PERFORMANCE: 543 mph at 19.685 ft

COMMENT: In spring 1943, the Messerschmitt design bureau was working on several designs of different single engine, lightweight turbojet fighters. These were the P.1092A-E, and further variants P.1092/2, P.1092/3, P.1092/4, and P.1092/5. At the same time, the Argus pulse jet powered Messerschmitt Me 328 was also under development. Of all these projects only seven prototypes of the Me 328 were built and flight tested. But the results of these tests as well as calculations of all the P.1092 variants were incorporated into a new design, internal designation Me P.1095. In order to cut down the development and retooling time the design team decided to use as many existing components from other aircraft as possible.  The first P.1095 design of October 1943 was proposed in two versions. All used the same fuselage and the power was provided by a single Junkers Jumo 004B jet engine, located below the fuselage. This had the advantage of being easily serviced, but the drawback of the possibility of the ingestion of foreign matter into the intake on take-off. The two variants differed only in wings and tail-plane configuration. One was to use the entire Messerschmitt Me 262 tail unit  with horizontal tail and fin/rudder along with a wooden wing, the other used the entire Me 328 tail unit with horizontal tail and fin/rudder along with a slightly smaller all metal wing. The undercarriage was of a tricycle design, and the main wheels retracted, and were also taken from the Messerschmitt Me 309. A forward retracting nose gear was located in front of the engine intake.  The P.1095 project was discontinued in early 1944, due to the fact that the engine location was felt to be disadvantageous, and the performance was less than the Me 262 twin jet fighter, which was about to come into service (Ref.: 17, 22).

TYPE: Interceptor, fighter. Project

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

POWER PLANT: Two Lorin-Pabst ramjet engines, rated at 4375 kp thrust each

PERFORMANCE: 621 mph

COMMENT: Heinkel designed this ramjet-powered fighter after receiving ramjet data from DFS near the end of WWII. Two 900 mm (2′ 11.5″) diameter Lorin-Rohr ramjets were mounted on each side of the fuselage with their outer surfaces faired into the wing, so that the large surface area of the ramjets were exposed to the airstream for cooling purposes. To save design time, the swept-back wing with the elevon controls were based on those of the He P.1078, but a single orthodox fin and rudder was used instead of wingtip anhedral. The cockpit was located in the forward section of the fuselage, along with a radar unit and two MK 108 30mm cannon. The fuel tanks were located in the rear of the fuselage. Take-off power was accomplished with the aid of four solid-fuel Schmidding rockets of 1000 kp of thrust each. An undercarriage trolley that could be jettisoned was used for take-off. The aircraft landed on an extendable skid. Like the other Heinkel projects He P. 1078 and He P.1079, the Heinkel He P.1080 was never submitted to the RLM. It is known that members of Heinkel construction bureau were working on these designs under U.S. supervision after WW II during the summer of 1945 (Ref.: 17, 19).

TYPE: Interceptor, fighter

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

POWER PLANT: One Daimler-Benz DB 603L liquid-cooled engine, rated at 2,100 hp

PERFORMANCE: 491 mph

COMMENT: In autumn 1944 the Blohm & Voss team worked on a high performance, piston engine powered fighter aircraft under the internal designation P.208. From the onset the design was a tailless aircraft, the engine imbedded in the aft fuselage behind the cockpit. The advantage of the design was seen in a reduction of the fuselages surface to reduce drag, the abstinence of an extension shaft to drive the pusher propeller, and lower costs and production time. The engine was fed by an air intake located on the starboard side of the fuselage, with the radiator mounted beneath the fuselage.  The cantilevered wings were swept back at 30 degrees and were of a constant cross section. Downturned wingtips were connected aft of the main wing trailing edge by small booms, which served the purposes of elevators and rudders. A tricycle undercarriage was used, with the wide-track main wheels retracting inwards into the center section and the nose wheel retracting forwards. All armament was in the aircraft’s nose, and consisted of three MK 108 30mm cannon. Three different designs were finalized differing solely in the engine used. Design Bv P.208.01 should be powered by a Junkers Jumo 222E piston engine, Bv P. 208.02 utilized an Argus As 413 engine, and Bv P.208.03, which was the favored design, was to be powered by a Daimler-Benz DB 603L engine. Wind tunnel experiments showed excellent performance but the RLM was convinced of the future of the oncoming turbojet engines (Ref.: 16, 21).

TYPE: Interceptor, fighter. Project

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

POWER PLANT: One Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engine, rated at 1.300 kp thrust

PERFORMANCE: 612 mph

COMMENT: Henschel submitted this design Hs P.135 in autumn 1944 to the OKL (Oberkommando der Luftwaffe, Luftwaffe high-command) based on specification for a single-seat fighter to be powered by a HeS 011 turbojet. This aircraft design was intended to achieve better high speed performance through the reduction of air resistance. The aircraft was tailless and featured an innovative wing design, a compound swept back wing with different angle of sweep: inner wing 42, mid-wing 38, and again positive about 15 degree for the outer wing. This had the effect of reducing turbulent flow by spreading out the compression effect along the length of the wing as Mach speed was approached, enabling the aircraft to carry more weight at higher speed. The wing was thus thicker in both height and width, as well as heavier, which made the aircraft more structurally strong without adversely affecting performance. The cockpit was relative high positioned, the pilot sat on an ejection seat which was in normal position during cruise flight and could be tilted back during aerial combat. The design was considered as “Zweitlösung” (second solution), while an “Optimallösung” (optimal solution) was expected from Messerschmitt( Me P.1101) (Ref.: 16, 21).

TYPE: Interceptor, fighter. Project

ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only

POWER PLANT: One Heinkel-Hirth HeS 011 turbojet engine, rated at 1300 kp thrust

PERFORMANCE: 614 mph

COMMENT: In context with the “Volksjäger Projekt” (Peoples fighter project) designers of the Blohm & Voss Company projected a turbojet engine powered fighter under internal designation Bv P.209. The design was a cantilever shoulder wing airplane with strong forward-swept wing. This was an effort to alleviate compressibility problems of straight wings at high speed, while helping to avoid the instability at low speeds suffered by swept-back wings. The wing was made from steel and the main spar formed the fuel tank. A steel tube formed the fuselage and was used as air intake for the turbojet engine. A second steel tube formed the tail boom with normal and positive swept back tail-plane. Expert’s report from the DVL (Deutsche Versuchsanstalt für Luftfahrt, German Aviation Experimental Establishment) was negative concerning forward-swept wing concept and Blohm und Voss cancelled further work on that project in favour of the Blohm und Voss Bv P.212 (Ref.: 16, 17).