COMMENT: A similar interceptor project by Eugen Sänger from the Škoda-Kauba company was the Sk P.14-02. Compared to the Sk P.14-01 the design was smaller, had a shortened fuselage and the wings set in a more forward position. As its predecessor the Škoda-Kauba Sk P.14-02 took-off an a slightly lighter three-wheeled trolley, assisted by four Schmidding 109-533 solid-fuel rockets. Additionally the acceleration was needed to reach the speed where the ram-jet would work. The aircraft was landed on a retractable skid. Performance data were similar to the Sk P.14-01. None of the projected aircraft to fly on ramjet power were completed. (Ref.: 20)
POWER PLANT: One Sänger-Lorin ramjet, rated at 1,350 kp at 33,000 ft
PERFORMANCE: 545 mph at 33,000 ft, (estimated)
COMMENT: Škoda-Kauba Sk P.14-01 was a ramjet-powered fighter project for the Luftwaffe. It was designed by Eugen Sänger and a team of 80 Czech and 40 German engineers of the Škoda-Kauba industries in the occupied Czech Republic towards the end of WWII. The ramjet had a diameter of 1.5 m and a length of 9.5 m, the massive engine and its tubular air-intake duct formed most of the fuselage structure. The aircraft was flown by a pilot in prone position. For take-off the aircraft was hoisted on a three-wheel trolley and in order to bring the ramjet to a speed where it would work, the trolley was accelerated by means of by two Walter HKW 109-500, rated at 500 kp each. Additional four Schmidding 109-533 solid fuel rockets could be attached to the aircraft with 1,000 kp thrust each for 12 seconds. The aircraft was landed on a retractable skid. The ramjet was fed by carbon dust or heavy oil. (Ref.: 20)
POWER PLANT: One Junkers Jumo 004C turbo jet, rated at 1,015 kp
PERFORMANCE: 567 mph at 19,700 ft (estimated)
COMMENT: The Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5 was the final design of all Me P.1092 projects. The layout was similar to the Me P.1092/3 and Me P.1092/4 as far as wings, tail compartment, air intake, undercarriage and turbo engine are concerned. Also the calculated performance remained equivalent. Solely the cockpit was moved back above the wings to give more space for armament in the fuselages nose. All the different Me P.1092 projects remained on drawing board. However, the designs influenced later projects such as Messerschmitt Me P.1106 and Me P.1101, respectively.
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5 and Messerschmitt Me 262C-3 Heimatschuetzer III, JV 44
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5 and Messerschmitt Me 262C-3 Heimatschuetzer III, JV 44
POWER PLANT: Junkers Jumo 004C turbojet, rated at 1,015 kp
PERFORMANCE: 567 mph at 19,700 ft (estimated)
COMMENT: The design of the Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4 was very similar to the Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3 except the cockpit that was placed to the forward fuselage. This layout allowed the pilot a much better field of vision. Air intake, wings and tail unit as well as power unit remained unchanged.
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4 and Messerschmitt Me 262C-1 Heimatschuetzer I, JV 44
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4 and Messerschmitt Me 262C-1 Heimatschuetzer I, JV 44
COMMENT: In May 1943, the Messerschmitt Company began work on a series of fighter/Interceptor aircraft under the designation Me P.1092. The first design, the Messerschmitt Me P.1092A had single Junkers Jumo 004C turbojet and the P.1092B had a rocket engine. The wings were basically the outer wing sections from the Messerschmitt Me 262, a butterfly tail and a tricycle landing gear arrangement were planned. In mid 1943, based on that design, a new series of derivatives were on the drawing boards, the Messerschmitt Me P.1092/2, Me P.1092/3, Me P.1092/4, and Me P.1092/5, respectively. All were of conventional design, as far as power unit, wings and tail arrangement as well as landing gear are concerned.
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me 262A-1b, KG 44 and Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5, Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4 and Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4, Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5 and Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3, clockwise from left
Messerschmitt Me P.1092/3, Messerschmitt Me P.1092/4, Messerschmitt Me P.1092/5, Messerschmitt Me 262C-3 Heimatschuetzer III, JV 44, Messerschmitt Me 262C-1a Heimatschuetzer I, JV 44, and Messerschmitt Me 262A-1b, KG 76, clockwise from left
TYPE: Fighter, Dive bomber, Ground attack, and Reconnaissance aircraft. Project.
ACCOMMODATION: Pilot only
POWER PLANT: One BMW 801D engine, rated at 1,700 hp and one BMW 003 turbojet, rated at 800 kp
PERFORMANCE: 423 mph at 13,600 ft (estimated)
COMMENT: The Blohm & Voss Company had a great experience in designing asymmetrical aircraft as the Blohm & Voss Bv 141, Bv P. 176, Bv P.179, Bv P.204, and Bv P.237. In 1944 Blohm & Voss proposed new asymmetrical design to the RLM, which could be used as fighter, destroyer, dive bomber and reconnaissance, respectively. The design featured a mixed propulsion system with a piston engine in the main fuselage/ tail boom and a turbojet under a separated gondola that housed the cockpit. The main advantage of that arrangement was an excellent and unobstructed view for the pilot and the reduction of torque moments along the vertical axis induced by the propeller of single engine aircraft. Several different designs were proposed, the Bv P.194.01-02, the Bv P.194.03-01, and the Bv P.194.00-101, changes regarding mainly in the layout of the turbojet engine. Due to the threatening defeat of Germany the Bv P.194 development was not pursued (Ref.: 16).
Blohm und Voss Bv. P.194.01-02
Blohm und Voss Bv. P.194.01-02
Blohm und Voss Bv. P.194.01-02
Blohm und Voss Bv. P.194.01-02
Blohm und Voss Bv. P.194.01-02
Blohm und Voss Bv. P.194.01-02
Blohm und Voss Bv. P.194.01-02
Blohm und Voss Bv. P.237 and Blohm und Voss Bv. P.194.01-02
TYPE: Long range Bad-weather/Night Fighter. Project.
ACCOMMODATION: Crew of three
POWER PLANT: Two Junkers Jumo 213J, rated at 1,750 hp each
PERFORMANCE: 577 mph (estimated)
COMMENT: The Dornier Do P.252 project dates back to 1943 as replacement of the Do 335 “Pfeil” (Arrow). In January 1945 the design, that based on the Dornier Do P.247/6 project, was submitted for the optimum Luftwaffe night fighter contract specification. Three studies P.252/1, P.252/2, and P.252/3 were made from this design, all were very similar despite little differences in dimensions and wing plan forms (straight, 35 and 22.5 degree, respectively). Two Junkers Jumo 213J , rated at 1750 hp each were located in tandem within the fuselage and coupled to an extension shaft that drove two contra-rotating three bladed propellers that featured a blade sweep of 50 degrees, a novelty at that time. The P.252/2 had a slightly elongated fuselage and room for a crew of three. The wings were swept back at 35 degrees. Although the Dornier Do P.252 promised an excellent performance, equivalent to upcoming turbojet powered aircraft the design was abandoned reluctantly.
POWER PLANT: One Junkers Jumo 213T, rated at 2,000 hp, driving four bladed pusher propeller
PERFORMANCE: 520 mph (estimated)
COMMENT: The excellent performance of the Dornier Do 335 Pfeil (Arrow) proceeded to several Dornier designs of pusher type fighters and fighter bombers. Among these is this Do P.247/6 project from autumn 1944. The swept back wing together with a powerful engine promised an excellent performance and the pusher type propeller offered an excellent visibility and allowed the installation of radar antennas for the adoption as a bad weather/night fighter. This furher development was the Dornier Do P.252 but the project was never realized.
POWER PLANT: Six BMW 003 turbojet-engines, rated at 850 kp each
PERFORMANCE: 510 m.p.h.
COMMENT: Besides four “Strahljägerprojekte I – IV” (Jet fighter projects I – IV) the BMW company worked on designs of two “Strahlbomberprojekte I and II” (Jet bomber projects I and II). Strahlbomberprojekt I was a tailless design, but in order to achieve sufficient stability a tail boom with fin was installed. Six turbojet-engines were planned, four in the wing roots and two aside the cockpit. Project not realized.
COMMENT: BMW (Bayrische Motoren-Werke, Bavarian Engines Factory) was well known as an engine-building company. In the last stages of WW II BMW took part in aircraft designing via a construction company EZS, a subsidiary of BMW. Four designs of simple and easy to built interceptor projects were submitted to the RLM. The largest and most powerful design was the Strahljägerprojekt P.IV, powered by BMW 018 turbojet. No project was realised.
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV and BMW Strahlbomberprojekt I
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV and BMW Strahlbomberprojekt I
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV
BMW Strahljaeger P. IV and BMW Strahlbomberprojekt I
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.
