• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Secret Wings of WWII: Nazi Technology and the Allied Arms Race - by Lance Cole

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
12,247
Reaction score
3,127
I have read a friend's ebook copy. I thought it was terrible tin-foil hat conspiracy writing with drawings that looked like they were done by the author's eight year old child. Basically German designers invented everything up to and including the MiG-29, F-117 and B-2. By the same train of logic Leonardo da Vinci designed the UH-1 Huey.
 

Madoc

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Dec 14, 2006
Messages
115
Reaction score
5
Paul.

Well then...

That was the sort of clear and succinct review I was hoping for - positive or negative. I'll be to passing on it from Amazon then!

Thanks!
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
12,247
Reaction score
3,127
To be a little more precise:

Lance Cole loves flying wings. Any plane ever built that wasn't a flying wing is clearly substandard. All planes need to be judged on how closely they approach the ideal, "all-wing" design. The Germans invented this perfect shape, specifically the Horten Brothers, but unaccountably people still keep building non-flying wings, until recently, when the flying wing seems to be enjoying a renaissance. The only possible explanations are (1) everyone else (especially if British) was ignorant or racist and ignored the obvious superiority of the German flying wing design until recently or (2) conspiracy. Any post-war plane that wasn't a flying wing was still based on WW2 or earlier German designs, just not the best one. You can tell this because often the shape of a modern plane vaguely recalls a napkin sketch done by some hugely talented German person in 1945.

Lance Cole hates biplanes, and cannot understand why, after various early pioneer designs which were monoplanes, everyone settled on biplanes until speeds got higher, when monoplanes became standard.

Lance Cole loves Beverley Shenstone, because although he's Canadian, he studied in Germany with some famous German people and clearly absorbed some of their awesome 'Germanity' which allowed him to help design cool planes like the Spitfire which was only awesome due to its elliptical wing (designed by Shenstone).

If you repeat these three for a long time in different ways, you get this book.
 

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
7,321
Reaction score
2,454
Thanks a lot. I ordered my copy.
 

Flying Sorcerer

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jun 19, 2008
Messages
94
Reaction score
22
I think anything published by Pen & Sword should be regarded with the greatest caution - some of their books have pretty crummy.
 

Artie Bob

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
166
Reaction score
21
IMHO possibly the greatest travesty in recent aviation history is attributing the Horten brothers as the great pioneers of flying wings and ignoring the real hardware oriented advances made by Northrop. As early as the 1920s, Northrop was investigating the flying wing configuration and his WWII era prototypes covered a wide range of configurations. The Horten brothers were indeed pioneers in Germany, but Northrop's pioneering work owes nothing to the Germans. His flying wing efforts stands on their own merit and were only one area of achievement by this giant of aviation technological development.

Artie Bob
 

Orionblamblam

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,852
Reaction score
1,058
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Artie Bob said:
IMHO possibly the greatest travesty in recent aviation history...

It's of course subjective, but to my mind any accurate version of the sentence fragment above would include some reference to Die Glocke or flying saucers.
 

XP67_Moonbat

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
2,160
Reaction score
55
The best sci-fi in the world talks about Die Glöcke and saucers! Eat your heart out, JJ Abrams!
 

Wurger

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2007
Messages
934
Reaction score
81
Can someone please ID the 3-view project depicted in the top cover? British or german?
 

sienar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
636
Reaction score
251
I wish I had seen this thread before ordering this.

Lots of common myths repeated like the Tunnan and Mig-15 being Ta-183 knock offs and a large section about saucers/nazifos. The assertion that CIOS reports on the Hortens were biased against them and intentionally overly critical of their work. Oh and that the 262 must have been swept wing from the get go, because Willy wouldn't have started off with a straight wing design that was changed to swept.

But the most humorous line from what I've skimmed has to be this; "Of Alexander Lippisch we cannot deny that his 1930s delta and swept-wing experiments informed the Messerschmitt Me 163, and the Me 262." Yeah, I'd say his work 'informed' the 163 a bit....

Wurger said:
Can someone please ID the 3-view project depicted in the top cover? British or german?

1938 B.S. Shenstone design
 

Attachments

  • bs shenstone 1938.png
    bs shenstone 1938.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 262

Retrofit

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
586
Reaction score
85
sienar said:
Wurger said:
Can someone please ID the 3-view project depicted in the top cover? British or german?

1938 B.S. Shenstone design

Interesting tailless project! Thank you for sharing Sienar!
Is there more information available about this particular project, or other BS Shenstone tailless aircraft projects?
Slightly out off the "Bookshelf & marketplace" thread, Sorry
 

steelpillow

So many projects, so little time...
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
921
Reaction score
374
Website
www.steelpillow.com
Cole's text no more than mentions Shenstone's design. Cole was in touch with the Shenstone family and drew on his personal archive, which seems to be where this blueprint came from.
To be fair to Cole, he has friends-and-relations ties in various high places and his gushing "I'm a popular journalist now" writing style masks a fair amount of original research and useful insights. Reimar Horten's work on yaw stability via control of sideways flow is one example where his discoveries are still coming to light and at last being integrated with Prandtl's work to create wholly clean and stable tailless designs such as NASA's Prandtl-D series of RPVs.
Due respect to Northrop, but he never got it wholly right and even with vestigial fins the big postwar bombers suffered handling problems, especially with pitch; it took computers to brute-force the B-2 into stable flight. Lippisch suffered the same struggle; his tailless Me 163 was an even worse handful. Others of Cole's darts aimed at established lore also sink home - if only he didn't exaggerate them worse than his targets have and then repeat endlessly.
What I do find interesting is how de Havilland interviewed Reimar before embarking on the DH 108 Swallow, and were also informed by Dunne's original certified stable tailless swept designs. Although Cole is unaware of the story, the old man used to tease his employees that Dunne had got it right all those years ago, so they better had too. The DH 108 flew well, only losing the plot when huge transonic forces of unanticipated amplitude appeared at the very top of its speed range, triggering violent flutter - a fault echoed by most tailed jets capable of such speeds. As DH wrote to Dunne, "The sensitivity in pitch is there, but not unduly so".
The thesis that Shenstone was a crucial player in shaping not only the Spitfire wing (the subtleties of which are also being rediscovered) but also British aircraft research in the mid-Twentieth century, indulging in influential industrial espionage when working abroad, also has more than a grain of truth to it. Note too just how many historic photographs, some published for the first time, come from the Shenstone family archive.
There is enough in this book to support a very nice historical paper on Cole's main theses, but I entirely agree that three-quarters of it and more would vanish under the red pen during the rewrite. Nor can the publisher's lack of editorial TLC such as simple peer proofreading be sufficiently excoriated.
 
Last edited:

Richard N

Lost in the Sky
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2009
Messages
478
Reaction score
262
"
Due respect to Northrop, but he never got it wholly right and even with vestigial fins the big postwar bombers suffered handling problems, especially with pitch; it took computers to brute-force the B-2 into stable flight. Lippisch suffered the same struggle; his tailless Me 163 was an even worse handful. Others of Cole's darts aimed at established lore also sink home - if only he didn't exaggerate them worse than his targets have and then repeat endlessly.


Where does your view on the Me-163 being a handful come from?

I've read about problems with it's unstable rocket fuel and landing accidents, but never a whisper about handling problems. The Me-163 was the fastest aircraft of WW2 and and even as a glider was dived to 400mph without problems. None of Lippisch's flying wing aircraft had or needed a computer FCS to fly. Lippisch designed and got flying more flying wing and conventional aircraft than any other designer in Germany and had a great influence on US delta wing aircraft.
 

steelpillow

So many projects, so little time...
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
921
Reaction score
374
Website
www.steelpillow.com
William Green's "Rocket Fighter" records verbatim a contemporary account of an incident during early operational testing when experienced Komet test pilot Olejnik had to abort a flight shortly after takeoff, dumped fuel, and in the ensuing landing run the Komet dropped a wing and he crashed badly.

Eric "Winkle" Brown was a Royal Navy test pilot who flew more aircraft types than anybody else, ever. In his autobiography "Wings on my Sleeve", he discusses the Komet pilots' operational experience as reported to him during personal interviews. Losses in action were very high. Some 15% of them were due to "fire in the air or loss of control in high Mach number dives".

When Brown flew one himself, he notes that below 135 mph, "lateral control was sloppy". He goes on, "At the 163's optimum gliding speed of 155mph the rudder was very light and effective, the elevators very sensitive and the aierons light but not very effective. The plane was generally very unstable and had to be controlled all the time." It behaved better at higher speeds and he was "thrilled with the way she handled and manoeuvred", noting however that "she was known to drop her nose violently in a 'graveyard dive' at Mach 0.84."

I cannot remember which account/s of its development the following comes from, but as Lippisch worked through his decade-long refinement of tailless gliders, prop craft and rockets, he had constant troubles with directional stability, over-sensitivity in pitch, and stall characteristics. The last-minute introduction of fixed leading-edge slots to the Komet tamed the stall at all but low speeds, while the directional and pitching problems were never satisfactorily resolved - as evidenced by Winkle's experiences.

Such a relative handful by today's standards was quite common during the war period, as the designers usually had other priorities on their minds. Squadron pilots' accounts of operations tended to focus on the positive qualities, feeding popular sentiment and rose-tinting the spectacles of the unwary writer. You have to dig a little deeper to find more objective assessments. Brown's experiences with the DH.108 Swallow, recounted in part in his autobiography and in part in Air Enthusiast 10, 1997, provide an interesting comparison. The fact that back in 1905 Dunne's quest, to conquer those very characteristics which so plagued Lippisch, led him to the tailless swept wing, certificated as the world's first stable aircraft in 1910 (as witnessed by Orville Wright in person), lends a further perspective to the partially-tamed and unstable designs of Lippisch. Without the desperate pressures and compromises of war, the Komet would never have made it to the production line.
 
Last edited:

Calum Douglas

Piston engine designer
Joined
Jan 17, 2019
Messages
69
Reaction score
209
Website
www.calum-douglas.com
Ref Me262 with initially straight wings, I think this is now accepted, but for general interest here is a photo from 1940 of "P1065" wind-tunnel model.

Source: Imperial War Museum: File # GDC-15/615 - Messerschmitt AG file, by Dr Winter. (no idea myself who he was... but anyway....).

Image quality is c**p beacuse I took it myself. ;)

GDC-15-615_003.JPG
 

edwest

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
1,071
Reaction score
247
Thank you Calum. Two photos exist of the straight wing F-86 which was modified after German technical information was received. The Americans captured a Mach 4.4 wind tunnel at Kochel. The British interrogated the Horten brothers twice. Alexander Lippisch worked for the Collins Radio Company in the US post-war. Significant portions of what was found by the British T-Force (T for Target) still remains classified. T-Force, for those unfamiliar, operated in any area it chose under the cover name 30 Assault Unit, or No. 30 Commando. It would go into areas where the shooting was still going on in order to recover documents and equipment before they could be destroyed.
 

Dagger

CLEARANCE: Restricted
Joined
Dec 24, 2019
Messages
25
Reaction score
8
Ref Me262 with initially straight wings

In Flugzeug Classic Extra september 2019 there is a photo of a P 1065 windtunnel model with straight wings:

Messerschmitt P 1065 with straight wings.jpg
 

Pasoleati

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
217
Reaction score
18
Regarding Mr 163 handling: An American report on www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org is very much in complete disagreement with Eric Brown's claims. In fact, Brown has made many comments in his books and articles that are in substantial disagreement from wartime original British, German and American test reports. So perhaps it would be wise not to completely rely on his published texts.
 

steelpillow

So many projects, so little time...
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
921
Reaction score
374
Website
www.steelpillow.com
Regarding Mr 163 handling: An American report on www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org is very much in complete disagreement with Eric Brown's claims. In fact, Brown has made many comments in his books and articles that are in substantial disagreement from wartime original British, German and American test reports. So perhaps it would be wise not to completely rely on his published texts.
Really? I just read it and I find the two accounts pretty complementary (for example testing at different gliding speeds) but in broad agreement; much the same can be said with respect to the German accounts reported by Green.
Where are these controversies over other aircraft types?
 

Apophenia

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
2,557
Reaction score
858
I came across an Edgar Schmeud quote saying of Mustang design: “The British Air Ministry was extremely helpful. Among others they sent us Dr. B.S. Shenstone, to assist us with some of the airflow problems into the radiator”. Does anyone know what else Shenstone did as a wartime member of the British Air Commission?

I'm also curious about what Beverley Shenstone did postwar on the CF-100 and C102 Jetliner. According to an article in New Scientist (09 Apr 1959, pg 798), Shenstone joined BEA because "the Avro job ... disappointed him". But does this refer to the parent company (where he was involved with the Tutor) or to the work at Malton?

... by Dr Winter. (no idea myself who he was... but anyway....).

Perhaps this guy?:confused:

Winter, H.: Strömungevorgänge an Platten und profilierten Körpern bei kleinen Spannweiten. Forschung auf dem Gebiete des Ingenieurwesens, Bd. 6(1935)
 

Calum Douglas

Piston engine designer
Joined
Jan 17, 2019
Messages
69
Reaction score
209
Website
www.calum-douglas.com
I came across an Edgar Schmeud quote saying of Mustang design: “The British Air Ministry was extremely helpful. Among others they sent us Dr. B.S. Shenstone, to assist us with some of the airflow problems into the radiator”. Does anyone know what else Shenstone did as a wartime member of the British Air Commission?

I'm also curious about what Beverley Shenstone did postwar on the CF-100 and C102 Jetliner. According to an article in New Scientist (09 Apr 1959, pg 798), Shenstone joined BEA because "the Avro job ... disappointed him". But does this refer to the parent company (where he was involved with the Tutor) or to the work at Malton?

... by Dr Winter. (no idea myself who he was... but anyway....).

Perhaps this guy?:confused:

Winter, H.: Strömungevorgänge an Platten und profilierten Körpern bei kleinen Spannweiten. Forschung auf dem Gebiete des Ingenieurwesens, Bd. 6(1935)

Thats all really interesting stuff thank you. I would think that hiding in the National Archives at Kew there might be some answers to that, however I`m supposed to be finishing my book off so need to avoid inadvertantly starting another one....

Some promising materials:

 

Zoo Tycoon

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
372
Reaction score
382
Regarding Mr 163 handling: An American report on www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org is very much in complete disagreement with Eric Brown's claims. In fact, Brown has made many comments in his books and articles that are in substantial disagreement from wartime original British, German and American test reports. So perhaps it would be wise not to completely rely on his published texts.

Here is the published text concerning the Me163 from Eric Brown

Eric Brown book “Wings of the Luftwaffe” Page 172 The overall paragraph describing his fights is titled “Delightful Handling Characteristics”.
A quote from the second paragraph;-
“ Once in free flight“off tow”the komet handled beautifully with delightful harmony of control and thoroughly satisfactory stability characteristics. Indeed it was difficult to detect any facet of handling that characterised this aircraft as being tailless”

About the 0.84 Mach he writes;-
“ During the subsequent dive I attained 440mph (708kph) at 17000ft (5180m) which was equivalent to Mach 0.8. At this Mach number the elevon control forces were still moderate and there were none of the signs of compressibility I had anticipated. Luftwaffe pilots having all told me that the komet buffeted badly and then dropped its nose violently in a graveyard dive at Mach 0.84”

About low speed handling he writes;-
“ At slow glide speed the stability had deteriorated and all controls remained very light but this was compensated to some extent by the effectiveness of the rudder”
And
“In spite of the apparent deterioration in stick fee stability at low speeds, the landing process on the komet was very much easier than on other tailless aircraft that had been flown in the U.K.”
And
“Our test showed that there was an increase in the stick fixed stability as the stall was approached and the superior behaviour of the aircraft during landing was probably due to this factor which in large measure, resulted from the leading edge slots delaying the onset of tip stall”

From US Report TSFTE/GEL rah/2-3195
“C conclusion The Me163B is a highly manoeuvrable airplane possessing unusually good stability and control characteristics especially for a tailless design”

I don’t see any notable or significant difference between the two accounts.
 
Last edited:

steelpillow

So many projects, so little time...
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
921
Reaction score
374
Website
www.steelpillow.com
(grumbling) That's books like this, that turned the trainwreck of backward Nazi engineering into a bloated "wunderwaffe" myth.
Nonsense. The engineering was typically first-class and highly innovative; you don't pull world firsts like Schwalbes, Komets, ballistic missiles and transonic windtunnels out of a trainwreck. The trainwreck was confined to Nazi interference. Cole is fully aligned with mainstream history on this.
 

steelpillow

So many projects, so little time...
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
921
Reaction score
374
Website
www.steelpillow.com
Dr Winter. (no idea myself who he was...

Possibly H. T. Winter, author of "Flight To-day and To-morrow", Blackie, ca. 1950. and evidently a few other books in aeronautical vein.

The title page claims he was a founder-member of the RAeS, which I find hard to believe, as it was founded in 1866. Perhaps he joined the year it was granted Royal patronage around 1918.
 

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
807
Reaction score
366
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
Nonsense. The engineering was typically first-class and highly innovative; you don't pull world firsts like Schwalbes, Komets, ballistic missiles and transonic windtunnels out of a trainwreck. The trainwreck was confined to Nazi interference. Cole is fully aligned with mainstream history on this.

Yeah, yeah. Schwalbe: overweight, underpowered, with terribly unreliable engines and swept wing that didn't even worked (it was made swept to one reason only - engines were heavier than planned, and center of gravity needed to be shifted).

Komet: utterly senseless design under slogan "we could NOT made surface-to-air missile"

Ballistic missiles: of zero military value, but costly.

Seriously, German engineering wasn't first-class, and wasn't innovative. It was either absurd, or overcomplicated.
 

edwest

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
1,071
Reaction score
247
Nonsense. The engineering was typically first-class and highly innovative; you don't pull world firsts like Schwalbes, Komets, ballistic missiles and transonic windtunnels out of a trainwreck. The trainwreck was confined to Nazi interference. Cole is fully aligned with mainstream history on this.

Yeah, yeah. Schwalbe: overweight, underpowered, with terribly unreliable engines and swept wing that didn't even worked (it was made swept to one reason only - engines were heavier than planned, and center of gravity needed to be shifted).

Komet: utterly senseless design under slogan "we could NOT made surface-to-air missile"

Ballistic missiles: of zero military value, but costly.

Seriously, German engineering wasn't first-class, and wasn't innovative. It was either absurd, or overcomplicated.


Your inability to separate your feelings from good research should not be overlooked. The engine in the Me 163 had few moving parts, an engineering feature counted in its favor.
 

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
807
Reaction score
366
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
Your inability to separate your feelings from good research should not be overlooked.

Or maybe I just knew more than usual myth? :)

The engine in the Me 163 had few moving parts, an engineering feature counted in its favor.

Yeah, and why Germans were unable to build a workable surface-to-air missile with that engine? :) The answer is simple: their only radio-control system, which they stole from France, was designed for a glide bomb, and simply unable to cope with high-speed missile control.
 

edwest

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
1,071
Reaction score
247
Your inability to separate your feelings from good research should not be overlooked.

Or maybe I just knew more than usual myth? :)

The engine in the Me 163 had few moving parts, an engineering feature counted in its favor.

Yeah, and why Germans were unable to build a workable surface-to-air missile with that engine? :) The answer is simple: their only radio-control system, which they stole from France, was designed for a glide bomb, and simply unable to cope with high-speed missile control.


From what do you draw that conclusion? For a short period of time, the Allies would say a few words about that, followed by nothing. The Americans had captured a Mach 10 wind tunnel which they claimed was 'under construction.' In the July 1946 issue of Army Air Force Review, writer Charlotte Knight wrote an article titled "German Rocketeers. German rockets and guided missiles almost won the war for the Nazis." The article quotes Donald L. Putt, Commanding General at T-2 (Intelligence) at Wright Field. Here is the first sentence:

"That the allies won the war in Europe by a terrifyingly narrow margin is a fact now accepted by almost all military leaders who have seen at first hand Germany's progress in the guided missiles field."

Before that, Convair took out a few pages in the 27 August 1945 issue of Life magazine with an article titled "... by the Skin of our Teeth." Here is the first sentence:

"Several times during the European phase of this war, victory was almost within Germany's grasp ... on land, on the sea, or in the air." Included on that page is an illustration with dotted lines, with arrows, that end up on the east coast of the United States.



Best,
Ed
 

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
807
Reaction score
366
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
From what do you draw that conclusion? For a short period of time, the Allies would say a few words about that, followed by nothing. The Americans had captured a Mach 10 wind tunnel which they claimed was 'under construction.' In the July 1946 issue of Army Air Force Review, writer Charlotte Knight wrote an article titled "German Rocketeers. German rockets and guided missiles almost won the war for the Nazis." The article quotes Donald L. Putt, Commanding General at T-2 (Intelligence) at Wright Field. Here is the first sentence:

From comparison of Allied tech development during the war, with Nazi's. Also, from learning how much Nazi actually just blatantly stole from others (mostly from French and Italians), and declared "their own designs". At least, from simple logic: Nazi regime was dysfunctional, chaotic, plagued with constant internal rivalry and in-fighting, utter lack of cooperation and general anti-intellectual politics. What reasons are to assume that in engineering they magically were able to do anything right (especially considering the well-known fact of dismal failure of their atomic project, for example)?

Seriously, it's time to stop believe in fairy tales, and start to look at facts. Germans never ever have anything comparable with American guided missiles - like "Bat", "Felix", GB-4, TDR-1 assault drone, and many, many others. Their guided bombs were primitive and crude, far below American level of engineering. And this is simple facts; when the best Nazi could suggest was "der operator watch der missile and push-push wunderknuppel", Americans already tested semi-active radar homing guided bomb, and decided that they wanted fully autonomous radar homer.
 

steelpillow

So many projects, so little time...
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
921
Reaction score
374
Website
www.steelpillow.com
Your inability to separate your feelings from good research should not be overlooked.
Or maybe I just knew more than usual myth? :)

No, you just stumbled on a ridiculous Internet meme and liked it.

If edwest is wise, they will find better things to do than argue against opinionated and unsupportable rubbish.
 

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
807
Reaction score
366
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
No, you just stumbled on a ridiculous Internet meme and liked it.

Sigh. Do you ever read "Near Miss: The Army Air Forces' Guided Bomb Program in World War II - Donald J. Hanle (2007)", and "OP 1664 U.S. Explosive Ordnance " and "Unmanned Systems of World War I and II - Everett H.R., MIT press (2015) " ? Or "Guided missiles and techniques" from NDRC (1946)?

I have all reason to suspect, that you didn't. Otherwise you would not threw your opinionated and usupportable, let's call it "opinion", around so easily.
 

Apophenia

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
2,557
Reaction score
858
Regarding B.S. Shenstone, not the best source but a start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverley_Shenstone

Thanks Ed :).

I visited that page after posting my query. Wiki includes a reference to that same New Scientist article - full title Profile B.S. Shenstone - Missionary of muscle-power flight. But (with your proviso noted) the Wikipedia entry is somewhat misleading.

Wiki states "He then moved to Avro Canada in Toronto, where he was involved in technical management aspects of the new Avro Jetliner and CF-100 jet fighter,[16]..." with the footnote referencing Lance Cole. The rest of that sentence - reading "... was disappointed by the lack of development work that would fully utilise his experience.[27]" - seems to indicate a source in that New Scientist article (footnote [27]).

The problem is, the New Scientist piece doesn't actually say all of that. It simply says that "the Avro job ... disappointed him." Intentionally, or otherwise, Wiki has bloated their reference. Maybe they simply inferred that "the lack of development work" was at issue. Or else they took the whole statement from Cole?

Perhaps, if and when Flight Archive comes back on line, some answers will fall into place?
 

edwest

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
1,071
Reaction score
247
From what do you draw that conclusion? For a short period of time, the Allies would say a few words about that, followed by nothing. The Americans had captured a Mach 10 wind tunnel which they claimed was 'under construction.' In the July 1946 issue of Army Air Force Review, writer Charlotte Knight wrote an article titled "German Rocketeers. German rockets and guided missiles almost won the war for the Nazis." The article quotes Donald L. Putt, Commanding General at T-2 (Intelligence) at Wright Field. Here is the first sentence:

From comparison of Allied tech development during the war, with Nazi's. Also, from learning how much Nazi actually just blatantly stole from others (mostly from French and Italians), and declared "their own designs". At least, from simple logic: Nazi regime was dysfunctional, chaotic, plagued with constant internal rivalry and in-fighting, utter lack of cooperation and general anti-intellectual politics. What reasons are to assume that in engineering they magically were able to do anything right (especially considering the well-known fact of dismal failure of their atomic project, for example)?

Seriously, it's time to stop believe in fairy tales, and start to look at facts. Germans never ever have anything comparable with American guided missiles - like "Bat", "Felix", GB-4, TDR-1 assault drone, and many, many others. Their guided bombs were primitive and crude, far below American level of engineering. And this is simple facts; when the best Nazi could suggest was "der operator watch der missile and push-push wunderknuppel", Americans already tested semi-active radar homing guided bomb, and decided that they wanted fully autonomous radar homer.


I see you are a true disbeliever. I know about all of the American developments.

I suggest you get a copy of CIOS Report XXXII-125 German Guided Missile Research. "A-11, A-12, A-13, A-14 further development models of the A9/10 with 3500 miles range. Long-range rockets for attacks on the United States. A-15: This project probably never left the drawing board."

"... dismal failure of their atomic project..." I hope you are not relying on a few retouched photos from Haigerloch. And when did it fail exactly?

Headquarters
European Theater of Operations
United States Army
Alsos Mission
APO 887

2 May 1945


SUBJECT: Gerlach Summary of Nuclear Reports


1. A new edition of "Forschungsberichte" was planned containing articles on successful pile experiments. Five articles in all were contemplated, and Gerlach wrote an introductory summary. We found this introductory summary in rough pencilled form, which gives the status of the project as of January 1945.

3. Abbreviations in the above have the following significance.

L II Leipzig II
CTR Chem. technische Reichsanstalt
G II Gottow II
G III Gottow III
BV Berlin Versuch


From Atomversuche in Deutschland by Günter Nagel

---------------------------------------------------------------

From The Paperclip Conspiracy by Tom Bower


The JIC's summary was ominious and its recommendations decisive:

Unless the migration of important German scientists and technicians into the Soviet zone is immediately stopped, we believe that the Soviet Union within a relatively short time may equal United States developments in the fields of atomic research and guided missiles and may be ahead of U.S. development in other fields of great military importance, including infra red, television and jet propulsion. In the field of atomic research for example, we estimate that German assistance already has cut substantially, probably by several years, the time needed for the USSR to achieve practical results.
 
Last edited:

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
807
Reaction score
366
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
The JIC's summary was ominious and its recommendations decisive:

Unless the migration of important German scientists and technicians into the Soviet zone is immediately stopped, we believe that the Soviet Union within a relatively short time may equal United States developments in the fields of atomic research and guided missiles and may be ahead of U.S. development in other fields of great military importance, including infra red, television and jet propulsion. In the field of atomic research for example, we estimate that German assistance already has cut substantially, probably by several years, the time needed for the USSR to achieve practical results.

It is excusable mistake for American official in 1940s, who did not knew about the extent of our spy ring in Manhattan project. :)
 

steelpillow

So many projects, so little time...
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
921
Reaction score
374
Website
www.steelpillow.com
Regarding B.S. Shenstone, not the best source but a start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverley_Shenstone
the Wikipedia entry is somewhat misleading.
That is always a risk with an encyclopedia that "anyone can edit". Wikipedia emphatically does NOT regard itself as a reliable source.

Citations are often a hit-and-miss affair; the text may be written first and then citations sought to make it look more convincing. Some factoids may be cited, others not, it is not always easy to tell without reading the cited source (which is what it is there for).

I am not sure how reliable Cole is on Shenstone; he knew the family and had access to private documents, on the other hand he has an extreme thesis to pursue and is not always critical of memes which support it.
 
Top