Messerschmitt Me 264 Variants and Projects

[sgeorges4]

Was it considered to use the me 328 as a parasite fighters on the me 264?

 

[Johnbr]

from the net

 

[sgeorges4]

I've readed that the luftwaffe considered to use the me 264 in the mittelafrikanishesreich (german african colony)

 

[blackkite]

Hi!
https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/182976-me-264/page/7/

 

[blackkite]

Hi! Steam turbine projects.
https://forums.autosport.com/topic/156061-viability-of-the-steam-turbine-as-an-aircraft-power-plant/"As I have previously mentioned in this forum, during WW2 there were a few projects for designing a steam turbine for aviation use.
The first of these was started by Junkers Moteren (Jumo) in 1940. The turbine ran on the test bench in 1941, but the project was shelved in 1942 in favour of gas turbines.
The specs for the Jumo turbine were:
Power - 3000hp
Turbine speed: 8000rpm
Propellor Speed: 950rpm
Weight: 800kg (I presume this only applies to the turbine itself and the reduction gearing, not the boiler and other required equipment).
Intake Pressure: 100atm
Intake Temperature: 550°C
Exhaust Pressure: 0.15atm

A further steam turbine design was also being undertaken by Professor Lösel and Dipl-Ing Pauker at the Technische Hochschule. This was to be rated at 4000hp. Not much in the details for this turbine, except that the turbone would be roughly 1/2 the length and 2/3 the height of the Jumo 213 aero engine (ie about 1225mm long x 565mm high). It was also cancelled in 1942.

Steam turbines re-emerged in 1944 when Messerschmitt were looking for suitable engines for their long range Me264 "Amerika bomber". The first prototype Me264 flew with 4 x 1250hp Jumo 211s, taken straight from the Junkers Ju88, and the second prototype used 4 x 1750hp BMW 801 radials. Both were considered underpowered. The original concept called for 1750hp Daimler-Benz DB603s, but these were in short supply.

Various alternatives, including mixing piston engines and jet engines, turboprops and turboprop and jet combinations were investigated. Steam turbines were also investigated, with Professor Lösel's Osermaschinen company being asked to design and manufacture a suitable steam turbine."

 

[pegasus]

Hi!
View attachment 621722

great picture

 

[blackkite]

Thanks for your appreciation, pegasus-san!!
Perhaps we can see the concept of Me264 America bomber candidate steam turbine engine through this Junkers drawing.

 

[blackkite]

Hi!　Almost same scale.

 

[blackkite]

Hi!　

 

[hesham]

From the Feb '18 issue of Klassiker

A clearer view,from Flugzeug Extra 4-2005.

 

[BookWood96]

Hello

I'm looking for information on the me-264 airfoil (or me-261 as it was in some points similar).

Thanks for your Help in advance.


Best Regards

André

 

[Jemiba]

Does those drawings from Robert Forsysth/Eddie Creek "Messerschmitt Me 264 Amerika Bomber" help ?

 

[BookWood96]

Thats brilliant

The second airfoil ist a NACA 23017 right?

 

[Jemiba]

Well, that's what I read there, too.

 

[BookWood96]

I bought vector drawings of the Me 264 with backswept wings. According to these the wingspan is arround 21m. Is this possible?The length looks good.

thanks in advance

 

[blackkite]

Thats brilliant

The second airfoil ist a NACA 23017 right?

Hi!
http://airfoiltools.com/airfoil/naca5digit?MNaca5DigitForm[cl]=0.3&MNaca5DigitForm[posKey]=15_0&MNaca5DigitForm[thick]=17&MNaca5DigitForm[numPoints]=81&MNaca5DigitForm[cosSpace]=0&MNaca5DigitForm[cosSpace]=1&MNaca5DigitForm[closeTe]=0&yt0=Plot

 

[hesham]

From, Flugzeug Classic - 2013-07.

 

[topspeed3]

What if Superfortress and this 264 went into a dogfight at 50 000 ft ? Which would have come out as a winner ?

 

[Foo Fighter]

Not so much of a dog fight as circling around each other.

 

[hesham]

So weird,

there was a little known Project for Me.264,powered by only single
turbine engine,mounted in the fuselage,and it would have been
driven four propellers ?.

Jet Planes of the Third Reich - The Secret Projects-volume two

 

[Dan Sharp]

So weird,

there was a little known Project for Me.264,powered by only single
turbine engine,mounted in the fuselage,and it would have been
driven four propellers ?.

Jet Planes of the Third Reich - The Secret Projects-volume two

Not that weird. I believe the idea started with this report by Technischen Hochschule Muenchen of July 14, 1942 (see attached - although even this may well have been building on earlier work). The report's distribution list includes the OKL, DVL, DFS, LFA, AVA, E-Stelle Rechlin, Blohm & Voss, BMW, Daimler-Benz, Dornier, Focke-Wulf, Gotha, Heinkel (and Heinkel-Hirth), Henschel, Junkers (and Jumo), Arado and Messerschmitt. In other words, pretty much everyone! BMW produced a report on the idea itself on November 22, 1943. I don't have the Losel study from 1944 but I don't think it would have been anything particularly revolutionary by this point, given that the idea had already been kicking around for a couple of years.

 

[Dan Sharp]

So weird,

there was a little known Project for Me.264,powered by only single
turbine engine,mounted in the fuselage,and it would have been
driven four propellers ?.

Jet Planes of the Third Reich - The Secret Projects-volume two

Not that weird. I believe the idea started with this report by Technischen Hochschule Muenchen of July 14, 1942 (see attached - although even this may well have been building on earlier work). The report's distribution list includes the OKL, DVL, DFS, LFA, AVA, E-Stelle Rechlin, Blohm & Voss, BMW, Daimler-Benz, Dornier, Focke-Wulf, Gotha, Heinkel (and Heinkel-Hirth), Henschel, Junkers (and Jumo), Arado and Messerschmitt. In other words, pretty much everyone! BMW produced a report on the idea itself on November 22, 1943. I don't have the Losel study from 1944 but I don't think it would have been anything particularly revolutionary by this point, given that the idea had already been kicking around for a couple of years.

In fact, thinking about it, I believe that the British actually built a large aircraft with a single centrally mounted steam engine driving props on the wings in 1921 - the Bristol Type 37 Tramp. And perhaps the idea of a steam-powered aircraft goes back even further, since powerful steam engines were readily available in various sizes from the 1800s onwards.

 

[dan_inbox]

And perhaps the idea of a steam-powered aircraft goes back even further, since powerful steam engines were readily available in various sizes from the 1800s onwards.

Indeed. Clément Ader's Avion III Zéphir of 1897 was steam powered.

 

[Justo Miranda]

More info here

 

[FXXII]

What a strange arrangement in the BB turbo-prop. If I understand the schemantics correctly, a compressor driven by an seperate combustion chamber, delivers compressed air to a heat exchanger, that warms it up by means of a hot gas from another turbine exhaust. Then the heated air is fed into a combustion chamber, which produces a super hot gas flow to another combustion chamber (is there enough oxygen in the mixture for a second combustion?) which is finally expanded in a turbine, driving an airscrew and then is es expelled in the engine exhaust. Isn't that a violation of the Carnot diagram, not to mention the Laws of Thermodynamics? Can anybody explain this process please?

 

[Dan Sharp]

I suspect that Griehl didn't have Losel's original report either. The wording of his note on the steam-powered Me 264 seems to come directly from the famous German Aircraft: New and Projected Types British intelligence report of January 1946 (which can be found at the National Archives, Kew, London, at AIR 40/3129). See attached copy of the relevant page.

 

[athpilot]

So weird,

there was a little known Project for Me.264,powered by only single
turbine engine,mounted in the fuselage,and it would have been
driven four propellers ?.

Jet Planes of the Third Reich - The Secret Projects-volume two

In one of Igor Witkowskis Volumes of "The Truth about the Wunderwaffe" (in the awful german translation) he cites some reports of the Polish Armia Krajowa. One of these reports speaks about the developement at BMW. At a certain BMW plant (I can´t remeber which one it was) there were in late 1944 developements going on, on an engine called BMW-806. It should have 30.000 hp. A single engine should propel an Americabomber. I never gave anything about it, but it reminds me on this here...

 

[athpilot]

I suspect that Griehl didn't have Losel's original report either. The wording of his note on the steam-powered Me 264 seems to come directly from the famous German Aircraft: New and Projected Types British intelligence report of January 1946 (which can be found at the National Archives, Kew, London, at AIR 40/3129). See attached copy of the relevant page.

Dan, thanks so much for all the information you presented here. I wish I knew some of it 20 years ago, when I read Herwig/Rohde...

 

[hesham]

From, Target America.

 

[blohmundvoss]

Nice picture thanks!!
And beautiful artwork for Messerschmitt-264 – Me P.1075 / Me P.1085.
http://www.oxygino.com/site/?p=1039
Juft46
"Messerschmitt received an order to build six prototype Projekt 1061 aircraft, which were given the designation of Me 264. If the aircraft proved capable, a further 24 aircraft were to be built for "harassing attacks against the United States". At the same time, Messerschmitt continued to work on a six engined version of the Me 264, Projekt 1075. Since the Messerschmitt design offices were running at full capacity, part of the design work was delegated to the Fokker Works in Amsterdam. "

Interesting Me264 information here.
http://www.zona-militar.com/foros/threads/messerschmitt-me-264-amerika-bomber.15830/http://modelstories.free.fr/analyses/avions/MS2002_1P/SHOB_Me264/
So there are two drawings for pure 4 pusher engine design(P.1085) radiator position.
Bottom drawing shows Me264 with DB603 engine.

I'm planning to build a model of the P1075 in 1/72 scale. I have the 264 kit and have just bought a Trumpeter Tu-16 for the wings. Thinking of an Me 410 kit or 2 for engines and propellers. It will be a hybrid 'what-if' design with weapon stations similar to the 364.

 

[Dan Sharp]

Nice picture thanks!!
And beautiful artwork for Messerschmitt-264 – Me P.1075 / Me P.1085.
http://www.oxygino.com/site/?p=1039
Juft46
"Messerschmitt received an order to build six prototype Projekt 1061 aircraft, which were given the designation of Me 264. If the aircraft proved capable, a further 24 aircraft were to be built for "harassing attacks against the United States". At the same time, Messerschmitt continued to work on a six engined version of the Me 264, Projekt 1075. Since the Messerschmitt design offices were running at full capacity, part of the design work was delegated to the Fokker Works in Amsterdam. "

Interesting Me264 information here.
http://www.zona-militar.com/foros/threads/messerschmitt-me-264-amerika-bomber.15830/http://modelstories.free.fr/analyses/avions/MS2002_1P/SHOB_Me264/
So there are two drawings for pure 4 pusher engine design(P.1085) radiator position.
Bottom drawing shows Me264 with DB603 engine.

I'm planning to build a model of the P1075 in 1/72 scale. I have the 264 kit and have just bought a Trumpeter Tu-16 for the wings. Thinking of an Me 410 kit or 2 for engines and propellers. It will be a hybrid 'what-if' design with weapon stations similar to the 364.

The Messerschmitt P 1075, P 1085 and Me 364 were all basically the same thing - an Me 264 with six tractor props. 'Me 364' seems to have been the company name initially given to the P 1085. The P 1075 had six DB 614s with bigger wings and a longer fuselage than the Me 264. The Me 364/P 1085 was essentially the same but with much greater flexibility to accommodate different engine types - specifically the BMW 801, DB 603, DB 609, DB 614, Jumo 213, Jumo 222 or Jumo 223. The preferred choice from among those was the BMW 801.
The design with swept wings, 2 x turbojets + 4 x pusher props was simply labelled 'Me 264 mit Druckschrauben und Pfeilfluegel'. The design with swept wings, 2 x turbojets + 2 x tractor props + 2 x pusher props is actually just labelled 'Me 264'. There's no accompanying report with the drawings - just those two drawings among a sheaf of drawings showing the standard Me 264 with 4 x tractor prop.

 

[Nicknick]

What a strange arrangement in the BB turbo-prop. If I understand the schemantics correctly, a compressor driven by an seperate combustion chamber, delivers compressed air to a heat exchanger, that warms it up by means of a hot gas from another turbine exhaust. Then the heated air is fed into a combustion chamber, which produces a super hot gas flow to another combustion chamber (is there enough oxygen in the mixture for a second combustion?) which is finally expanded in a turbine, driving an airscrew and then is es expelled in the engine exhaust. Isn't that a violation of the Carnot diagram, not to mention the Laws of Thermodynamics? Can anybody explain this process please?

The process is quite efficient, but so complicate, that you could be sure, the war will be over before you finished developing it...

The air was compressed (in two stages), an than heated by a recuperator before it entered the combustion chamber (that’s nothing unusual and helps to improve the efficiency, especially at part load). In the combustion chamber, the air certainly reached the maximum permittable temperature so that it had to pass a turbine where part of the heat was converted to useful work. After that a second combustion chamber reheated the air again to the maximum temperature before it entered the low-pressure turbines. After expanding, the air is still hotter than the compressed air after the second compressor, so heat can be transferred from the exhaust gases to the compressed fresh gases.
To make it a little bit more complicate, you combine it with counter rotating props and coaxial turbine configuration.

I would say, that’s a bit dreaming the pie in the sky, I know how much effort and time had to be invested to develop gas turbines for cars and trucks (without success), so this deemed to be a little insane.

 

[Basil]

What a strange arrangement in the BB turbo-prop. If I understand the schemantics correctly, a compressor driven by an seperate combustion chamber, delivers compressed air to a heat exchanger, that warms it up by means of a hot gas from another turbine exhaust. Then the heated air is fed into a combustion chamber, which produces a super hot gas flow to another combustion chamber (is there enough oxygen in the mixture for a second combustion?) which is finally expanded in a turbine, driving an airscrew and then is es expelled in the engine exhaust. Isn't that a violation of the Carnot diagram, not to mention the Laws of Thermodynamics? Can anybody explain this process please?

The process is quite efficient, but so complicate, that you could be sure, the war will be over before you finished developing it...

The air was compressed (in two stages), an than heated by a recuperator before it entered the combustion chamber (that’s nothing unusual and helps to improve the efficiency, especially at part load). In the combustion chamber, the air certainly reached the maximum permittable temperature so that it had to pass a turbine where part of the heat was converted to useful work. After that a second combustion chamber reheated the air again to the maximum temperature before it entered the low-pressure turbines. After expanding, the air is still hotter than the compressed air after the second compressor, so heat can be transferred from the exhaust gases to the compressed fresh gases.
To make it a little bit more complicate, you combine it with counter rotating props and coaxial turbine configuration.

I would say, that’s a bit dreaming the pie in the sky, I know how much effort and time had to be invested to develop gas turbines for cars and trucks (without success), so this deemed to be a little insane.

Well, certainly not a suitable project for a short-term deployment requirement, but ultimately a well-considered concept for optimizing the efficiency of aircraft turbines. It is precisely these concepts, such as recuperative heat exchangers and inter turbine burners, that are currently being re-evaluated for future aircraft engines.

 

[Nicknick]

You’re right, thermodynamically the principle is sound, but I don’t know any gas turbine with staged combustion in production and very few have ever been built with a regenerator/recuperator (I think some were built for locomotive and tank propulsion).

 

[HoHun]

Hi,

The first prototype Me264 flew with 4 x 1250hp Jumo 211s, taken straight from the Junkers Ju88, and the second prototype used 4 x 1750hp BMW 801 radials.

On another forum, I found a datasheet ("Zustandsblatt", i. e. "status sheet") showing that the 4-engined Me 264 "W.Nr. 264 00001" was assigned 4 x "BMW 801 MG/2 TC-1" (with individual Werk-Nr. stated).

Depending on where you look, there seem to be conflicting lists of the various BMW 801 designations, but I suspect that the designation provided is in fact for an engine installation based on a BMW 801G-2 engine, which is stated to be the counterpart to the BMW 801D-2, and intended for bombers. In fact, the German Wikipedia article states that the G-2 has a different propeller reduction gear ratio suited for use with larger propellers.

Now that would make perfect sense and be in line with German practice, where the DB 605B for example was a variant of the DB 605A with a slower propeller gear ratio.

However, the abovementioned Me 264 data sheet also states that the propellers to be used on the Me 264 with BMW 801 engines have a 3.4 m diameter, which is very close to the 3.3 m diameter propellers used on the Fw 190 fighters.

If anyone could shed some light on this, that would be very much appreciated!

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

 

[hesham]

From Air Magazine 07

 

[fightingirish]

Interesting.

Me 264 Amerikabomber - Germany's Strategic Bomber Against The USA
The Messerschmitt Me 264 is popularly known as the Amerikabomber. Join me as I explore the history of this machine that was developed to allow Germany to strike the USA. I go into all the details, the history, purpose and the practical hurdles Germany would have had to overcome.

View: https://youtu.be/IfaPp0f2wv8?si=uz2RmI6fRavg4vA3

 

[greenmartian2017]

The Azores weren't the planned base for long-range bombers to attack the USA. It was Norway. Southern Norway. See this: https://secureservercdn.net/198.71....ds/2023/12/ForgottenCreators2023-12-10-E1.pdf.

 

[hesham]

From this book.

 

[hesham]

From this book.