Various projects from pre-war and wartime Germany

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear richard,

I am graceful to you dear richard,and do you know Dornier Model-M ?,
I heard that it was a bomber,is that right?.

Dornier project of 1931 :it was designation for 1931 Schneider
Trophy,it was shoulder wing unconventional flying boat,powered
by two 2000 hp enginesmounted in the hull drove pusher propeller
via a gearbox and drive shafts.the shoulder wing was strut braced
and small retractable floats were fitted to the fuselage sides.
 
Hallo,

if anyone knows informations about Weser P.2130 and P.2131,please
tell us.
 
Hi,

Flettner Gigant:was Giant helicopter with two huge rotors of 1933.
Laufer VE-OR: was jet helicopter project.
Muck, Otto 1938 Patent:was unmanned circular winged VTOL tail-sitter project.
 
The internet is a very valuable source for informations, BUT ...
before this invention, anybody, who wanted to give informations,
had at least to write an article for a magazine or a newspaper, or,
if there wase more to tell to the public, he had to write a book, find
a publisher and then enough readers ... a hard way for new informations
and probably a lot of interesting material was lost that way. But on the
other side, it was a kind of "natural filter", preventing obscure
authors to find audiences. Today many internet accounts include some
webspace, which can be filled with everything and sometimes with complete
nonsense ! And modern searchengines give us the possibility to find these
"information" ...
During the war, and especially at the end of the war, there were a lot of
projects from german manufacturers, I know, but please, please be aware,
that there might be some other reasons for the vast amount of "german secret
projects" ! It's always good and interesting to listen to veterans and their
memories, but even veterans may have fallen victim to propaganda and false
anouncements of "wonderweapons".
During the war, my mother was in Schlesien, now poland, for quite a time.
She told me several times, that some farmers there told stories of rocket
fighters, taking off vertically from beneath the earth ! Of course, she told
me, too, that some some farmers there, including her grandpa, were drunken
at least every Friday ...
And today, I really think, that there still are people, especially here in
Germany, who are trying to convince the world, that, although germany lost
the war, "we at least won the war technologically" .
There were quite fierce discussions in other fora about "sensational pictures
of german prototypes", although, in my opinion even at the closing stages of
WW II, when the fuel was in very short supply and a great part of the infra
structure was already destroyed, there still was enough paper left for the
german bureaucracy and if there even was a prototype, then it surely would
have been accompanied by a vast amount of documents.And that's probably true
for most projects, besides, what would be called today "design studies" which,
more often than not, were just weird ideas, drawn on the back of an envelope.
Interesting ideas, of course, but probably very often made to save the designers
job in the office, because the alternative could have be sitting in a trench at
the eastern front.
It's ok, of course, to look for such "projects", but I think, too often in the
past, sketches made from misinterpreted memories long after the war were the
basis for "revolutionary german aircraft, that could have won the war" !
In this way, the history of the german wartime aviation is a kind of a mine field,
and, I'm afraid, there still are a lot of mine-layers around !
 
Hi,

Messerschmitt Me 271bz (Blitz Zerstorer) :prototype for ramjet fighter.
DFS 464 (I spoke about it before) :proposed rocket carrier aircraft for DFS 360,
project (rocket powered).
 
Excellent Jemiba,

I was bussy to write about the same problem but you beat
me a the time ;)
A lot is indeed published in several web'clopedias' but it is
the art to weed out the false information fromthe fiction.
As most of us know-I think-the search for the good info is not easy...
 
Jemiba said:
The internet is a very valuable source for informations, BUT ...
a kind of a mine field,
and, I'm afraid, there still are a lot of mine-layers around !
Well, I respect your opinion, Jemiba and Lark, my friends, but please accept there is another possibility: considering it more as a smile-field than as a mine-field. Dreams are welcome from my point of view, are pleasant, and if I do not stay among what-ifers but come here too, I consider there is not a good side and a bad side (in neither direction), it is possible to pick things here and there. I just understand your wish to have what-if dreams well classified as "fantasy", all right.
 
Tophe said:
Well, I respect your opinion, Jemiba and Lark, my friends, but please accept there is another possibility: considering it more as a smile-field than as a mine-field. Dreams are welcome from my point of view....


Not from mine, unles Explicitly And Clearly Labelled As Such. It is far too easy for nonsense to become accepted. Hell, that's what I devoted my last big article for APR on: space weapons developed in wartime Germany... and the nonsense that has grown up around it. There was the realitly (V-2, A-9/A-10, Sanger, etc), but then there's also the *other* stuff, like "Projekt Saucer;" the "Sun Gun;" the A-60; Henschall's radiological V-2; Myrha's, Mirandas and Mercados "Manned A-9/A-10" and "A-6" recon vehicle, Zundels flying saucers... and all the rest. It was the *only* time I used profanity in an article for APR.
 
Tophe, the problem comes when people start accepting them as reality, to the extent of posting them as genuine projects here. Even when a picture is clearly fake (e.g. the three seat F-14 picture) and may even be labelled as such when originally posted, the picture takes on a life of its own, and can then reappear elsewhere on the internet as "genuine".

People need to understand the value of sources, of checking facts, and of scepticism.
 
overscan said:
People need to understand the value of sources, of checking facts, and of scepticism.
It seems, dear, you do not know what scepticism is... Full scepticism is destroying the Reality label, I have demonstrated it, but it is not published, refused as "dangerous". You have just chosen to believe in the Realist religion (monotheist or/and scientist). Be free and do it, simply prefer what you prefer, but true sceptic minds do not deserve the psychiatric asylum where Western "doctors" put them, referring to the holy Reality, they do not deserve jail where French "Justice" put them, referring to the holy History.
I do not mean you History-fans are wrong - dreamers could be told: "simply confess always your dreams are dreams, leave the Reality label to the ones following severe Realist criterions". All right. But don't claim you embody scepticism.
 
Jemiba said:
And that's probably true
for most projects, besides, what would be called today "design studies" which,
more often than not, were just weird ideas, drawn on the back of an envelope.
...or a napkin and thus my preferred term: Napkinwaffe.

Cheers, Jon
 
Perhaps the thing to consider is the intention of the designer. Even back of envelope projects can have the serious intent of hardware eventually if suitably developed. Kelly Johnson's total collection of envelopes and napkins would be quite interesting. What I and I guess other "realists" are not interested in are people's flights of fancy for their own and others' amusement only, perhaps getting their amusement from the deception. Clear labelling is fine, but as Orionblam said, they take on a life of their own, and produce confusion and long unnecessary discussions.
It seems, dear, you do not know what scepticism is... Full scepticism is destroying the Reality label,
Dear Tophe, are you sure you know what reality is? Or do you not believe in an external world independent of human experience? But this is not in reality the right forum for this kind of thing, is it?
 
"Dreams are welcome from my point of view, are pleasant... "
Yes, Tophe , they are ! And if I look into a what-if forum, I clearly know, that it is
a dream. But I think, in the field of the WW II german aviation, there are "dreams",
that aren't based on interest in aviation ! To see the dreams and ideas of Willy
Messerschmitt or Ernst Heinkel, would be most welcome. But many "dreams", which
were published, are just based on the idea, that in 1945 the victory of the german
army was just around the corner, I think. Unfortunately there's still a lot of fascination
in the regime, which ruled germany form 1933 to 1945 and many crude ideas have
survived. And there are people, who don't matter the way, to prove them right and
I think, we shall be aware,not to fall victim to those demagogues, which haven't
much aviation in mind. Sorry, but dividing aviation themes from political ones is difficult.
You can't tell the story of the Panavia Tornado or Eurofighter Typhoon without mentioning
the gobal political circumstances, and the Lockheed U-2 will always be a part of the cold
war. No, if I'm looking at a military aircraft, I generally do not think first of it's purpose.
I even see gun or missile installation just as technical details and in my opinion, it's not the
weapon itself which is dangerous, but the man who use it, or better orders its use.
But I don't like at all to be fooled by "projects", which were just "invented" to prove, that
certain designers/manufacturers/nations atre better/wiser/more valuable than others !
Or, as smurf pointed out, are just happy to cause confusion.

P.S.: I'm afraid this discussion tends to go off topic completely ! Starting from german
designs, we are beginning to talk about "aviation philosophies" now.
Perhaps we should just remind again everybody of us to name sources, so giving all others
the possibility to judge their value on its own. And then some "facts" will be self explaining,
if, for example, the holocaust is denied on the same site.
 
With all respect for Tophe and his group.
'What if ' is just as it sounds. A speculation of what could have been....
In a certain way,they are artists only limmited by their phantasy.

The purpose of this forum is different I think.
When designers dreamed up their concepts , they had the reality in mind.
Only circumstances prevented their designs to become hardware.

The search and the facination for 'the unknown' with the reallity in mind
leaves few room for phantasy in this forum I 'm afraid.....
 
My dears,

Philipp,Franz Griffon :solar-powered disc aircraft project.
,, ,, Sun Flyer :solar-powered disc aircraft project of 1938.
 
Perhaps some conciliatory words : The frontiers between "real projects" and "what-if"
are fleeting, I think. I like these artworks, showing, for example, the TSR.2 in
desert storm camouflage, although that's pure "what if" ! But the TSR.2 flew and had it
been commissioned ...
And looking through scans and pictures, especially of the "golden era", the late '50s
and '60s, cannot help but think, that a lot of the projects made then, hadn't had
the slightest chance of realisation and probably were just regarded as "a look into
he future" by the ones,who made it. But, as they came from a renowned manufacturer,
they are regarded as projects...
For myself, I'm often trying to depict certain details of a project, e.g. the landing gear.
If this project was cancelled during an early stage, it could be quite plausible, that
such things were never designed in detail at all . Am I dealing with a project or a what-if ?
Ok, enough of aviation-philosophy, maybe it's just the result of having eaten too much
and too much christmas punch ! :D
 
I agree with Jemiba and Lark

What if it's also interesting for me, as you already know my dear Tophe. Bu I don't want to mix concepts. I would like to do serious research here at "secretprojects" and switch to "whatifmodelers" to the fantasy world.
What I don't like is to be "intoxicated" with someone's fantasies shown as it would be real history. Internet is full of this stuff but also some authors are publishing books with fake information (Myrha's, Mirandas and Mercados)

Perhaps we should just remind again everybody of us to name sources
...please "credible" sources. Anyway we also have areas in the forum to talk about "whatifs" and "not fully contrasted" info. The rest of the forum should be for "credited" info.

so...
let us go back to Luftwaffe serious projects
in this area of the forum.

Cheers :)
 
dear hesham,
please read the 'talk page' of wikipedia...
 
Yes my dear lark,

and some from those projects from it,such as Sanger-Bredt
Antipodal hypersonic bomber,Stokel Ram Shot Hunter and
Von Braun Werner VTO rocket interceptor project of 1939.

but there was also anther mystery project from Henschel
P ?,twin boom transport project with two piston engines,
the project is from my dear richard.
 
Hi,

there is a number of really projects to Luftwaffe;
Ju-299,Ju-356,He-128,DFS-468 and DFS-1068,
and there is Ju-290Z;
 

Attachments

  • ju290z.jpg
    ju290z.jpg
    22.7 KB · Views: 636
Hi,

Casper CV was a project for airliner powered by two 300 hp
Fiat engines,and BV P.216 was tailless jet fighter project.
 
I would like to go into this philosophical theme and say how much I approve of Jeminba position! I have been interested in Luftwaffe projects before they became fashionable and I see now how difficult it is to extricate the truth from the sillyness without going to the base (original) documents. Today I have reached the point when I distrust any publication with re-drawn sketches....
I like what-if but as I said (in the British whatif newsletter or in French here http://modelscale.free.fr/trucs/Uchronie_P/index.html
when studying sufficiently a project (for example for scratch building a model out of it) you often reach the conclusion that it wisely remained a project because it has some inherent flaw.
However I would like to point out that things which appear silly to us now may have been perfectly valid science/technology when it was designed. So it is difficult to now distinguish between "Napkin-waffe" and real projects. Beside I understand that most companies (aircraft , automobile etc...) during the 40-50s had "advanced" study groups whose very job were to guess what the future was ... and now without the context it is often difficult for us to know what we are looking at when we find a lone sketch .... Look for example at Sänger much vaunted antipodal bomber. It was not really an aircraft design. It was a look at the future of aircraft design as seen by an aerodynamicist who had worked hard to design a good engine. Eugen designed a rocket engine , Irene did the computation but neither of them actually designed an aircraft... but if they wanted to "sell" their work they had to prove it refered to the war effort ...hence the antipodal bomber. But then is this more "napkin waffe" (we are speaking of a book of 200-pages of computations here) than say the BV P215 for which we have detailed specs down to the cockpit????
I cannot say.
The "sun gun" , the Sänger silbervogel , the Triebflugel, the Wallauscheck sound weapon all made headlines in the immediate post-war and are all rather implausible machines considering the state-of-1945-art but the sound weapon was built , the Triebflugel advanced toward some design stage with a major manufacturer involved (compare with the earlier Muck VTOL patents), the Sibervogel was computed and deamed aerodynamically feasible so it pushed aircraft builders to study wether it was buildable , and the sun-gun was just a loose idea ...by Oberth however.
I really cannot say that either was more interesting than the other .
But now I can also see that the whole business of Schriever , Miethe and co saucer was a complete fabrication by German 50's newspapers (see Joseph Altairac's paper in Scientifiction vol 1/2) , that the so-called Lippisch gleitbomb appeared for the first time in british tabloid in the late 70's etc... In my opinion the great divide is there : do we have substantial wartime proof of existence of a design or do we stop at some newspaper or artist impression appearing ten , twenty or fifty years after the alleged fact ....

JCC
 
Hi All,

The Arado Ar.240TL was a single seat fighter with single turbojet,the DFS
Rammer rocket aircraft and Dornier P.238 twin engined (push-pull) single
seat fighter or Do-435 projects.
 

Attachments

  • ar-240tl.jpg
    ar-240tl.jpg
    7.2 KB · Views: 569
  • DFS-rammer.jpg
    DFS-rammer.jpg
    7.7 KB · Views: 567
  • DO P-238.jpg
    DO P-238.jpg
    6.6 KB · Views: 632
".. hat nothing short of revolutionised the industry.."

Please, just one german invention in aviation, which was made during war time,
that later came to fruition !

- Jet engines ? - Invented and built long before the war (Ohain, Whittle)!
- Swept wings ? - Introduced on an international (!) conference in 1935 by
Adolf Busemann.
- Variable geometry wings ? Several flying experiments in the '30s (Makhonine, Gerin,
Nikitin).

- And as far as I know, the german production techniques were quite well suited
to the production of large numbers of aircraft, but not really up to date and not
comparable to the US production.

What else, please ?
 
hesham said:
Hi All,

The Arado Ar.240TL was a single seat fighter with single turbojet,the DFS
Rammer rocket aircraft and Dornier P.238 twin engined (push-pull) single
seat fighter or Do-435 projects.

Are you sure of the designation on that first one? The Ar.240 was a twin piston-engined competitor of the Me-210/410. I have seen a description of an Ar-240TL that added a turbojet under the fuselage in addition to the piston engines.
 
Jemiba said:
".. hat nothing short of revolutionised the industry.."

Please, just one german invention in aviation, which was made during war time,
that later came to fruition !

- Jet engines ? - Invented and built long before the war (Ohain, Whittle)!
- Swept wings ? - Introduced on an international (!) conference in 1935 by
Adolf Busemann.
- Variable geometry wings ? Several flying experiments in the '30s (Makhonine, Gerin,
Nikitin).

- And as far as I know, the german production techniques were quite well suited
to the production of large numbers of aircraft, but not really up to date and not
comparable to the US production.

What else, please ?

The Walther engine maybe?

Other than that it was the Germans who demonstrated during the war that these designs and technologies actually have practical VALOR, something other countries did not before the war. So maybe the ideas weren't genuinly German, their elaboration was and it was influencial in post war aircraft design.
So... nothing short of revolutionaly ;D
 
The Walther engine, ok. Perhaps I stuck too much to aviation. But when it really
was used ? Successfuly used,I mean ...
What really was revolutionary, were production technics and management methods, that were
able to turn out thousands of fighters and bombers, although of "conventional" construction.
And not to forget, to train thousands of skilled pilots ...
Ok, that was on the allied side, but this was the way to win the war and to position especially
the US aviation industry in the forefront of the business after the war. At lot of scientific work
had still to be done after the war on things like swept wings, variable geometry and so on.
It's quite often overlooked, I'm afraid, that all those fancy "revolutionary" german designs never
left the drawing board, not to mention the ground ! I'm pretty sure, that the first flight of, say
the Blohm & Voss P.202 with it's oblique wing, would have lead to disaster, because understanding
the aerodynamic problems was one thing, solving the problems of flight control quite another.Maybe
some ideas could have been revolutionary indeed, if the had been developed up to the end, but, again,
which development was really finished ?
Beam me up, Scotty ! That would be revolutionary today. And, yes, we are already able to disintegrate
a human being completely ! But how we would put together the pieces again at the end ? Revolutionary ?
 
Hello
I agree with you, Jemiba
Think about all those planes built after the war by German teams : It seems that none was a success ,did they ?
- Ta 183 gave the Pulqui II with high wing ,a failure
- Horten built the I.A 37,flown only motorless,and the I.A 38 only a prototype
- Junkers EF 126 , EF 131 , 140 , 150 , 152 were no success too

I think ,the german scientists were among the best ones in the XXth century but they were not alone and there is a lot of very interesting projects during the same period in UK ,USA etc
In France, during the war there was many projects:
in France the designer tried to avoid the STO , in Germany the Ost front ...
 
Pulqui II was a failure because Tank redesigned it with a high-mounted instead of mid-mounted wing and that generated far more drag.
 
Perhaps I should explain the reasons for my scepticism against a lot of german projects from
the late war years, much more scepticism, than I have against, say british or US projects :

Before and during the early years of war, procurement and development of aircraft followed
similar lines to that, in other countries. Projects or proposals from these times, can be taken as
serious as in GB or the USA, I think. For every type ordered into production, there were several
contenders and the one, which seemed to be the best, was selected. And, as in other
countries, too, the losers, especially those, who were cancelled at an early stage are most often
quite unknown and sometimes not much more than a designation has survived. With the
closing stages of war, there may have been some types, which were ordered into development
without a given specification, sometimes manufacturers proposals, which may have been
shown to “the right one, with the right connections” in the airforce staff, if the type seemed to
offer “revolutionary” capabilities. To my opinion, at least at this moment, a type would have had
official recognition and would have appeared in official documents ! If not, it never was a
serious proposal !
But the number of projects, many of them very weird is filling an enormous number of books
in the meantime. One reason, I think, is the one Richard already mentioned : The aircraft
companies probably tried to keep their design staff intact, by making a lot of unsolicited
proposals . From late 1943 onwards, to everyone with a little bit of hindsight, it must have
been clear, that work on a design, which required some effort for development must have
been in vain. But the alternative would have been, to set designers, engineers, draftsman and
others “free”, something, that for many of them would have led to being send to the front !
Nevertheless, those projects could still be regarded as “authentic”, I think, although they in
many cases were founded on principles, not yet fully understood at this time, so that the
results probably would have been less than successful and in fact they weren’t truly intended
to be build by the ones, who made them .
But I think, there’s another source for many of the fancy “secret projects” . The german
aviation industry was the first to use jet and rocket engines, swept and even forward swept
wings in combat aircraft (Ok, the term “revolutionary”can be used here, if we compare this to
the modern public relations industry, which calls every new dishwasher “revolutionary” :D ) and
so it was regarded as very sophisticated even by its enemies. After the war investigation teams
were send to germany from all allied countries, to try to capture as much of this knowledge,
as possible. So hundreds of people, who had worked for an aircraft manufacturer were
interviewed and probably most of them tried to be as helpful and co-operative as possible.
Never say “no” to someone, who can influence your future !
And as all this was about technical matters, probably more than once, those interviewed were
ask to make a sketch of what they had seen, when they were accidentally peaking through the
door of the design office. So a lot of rumours may have got a face and by mixing with design
lists later even a type designation.
The situation, that a search for “secret technology” was carried out throughout a whole
country was unique then, and the men searching probably were very keen to find something !
The only comparable case may be the search for ABC weapons in Iraq.
And the result is a hard to analyse mixture of some real and realistic projects, a lot of designs,
which would be called concepts or design studies today, many of them probably never with a
serious background and an even greater number of “designs”, that were based on rumours,
misinterpreted interviews and documents, or, as I tried to point out, even pure speculation.
In the case of the Iraq it seems to be clear now to most people, that there never wasn’t a real
ABC arsenal, at least in the expected form. Even in this forum, we had a thread about
“misidentified soviet aircraft”, listing several types, that never were. But there still seems to
be a special fascination with those “german projects”, that is able to fill even more books and
threads ! ???
 
Jemiba, while I respect your points as having certain weight, they also make my point for a large part. Exactly because this search for designs ... this was the reason they became widely spread and eventually used over the course of some years.
I do see your point about these not being original, and even that most "secret" designs where nothing more than fantasies, but I also still think that if the 2nd world war hadn't happened these ideas would have been regarded as too futuristic for quite some time.
 
Firefly said:
Jemiba, while I respect your points as having certain weight, they also make my point for a large part. Exactly because this search for designs ... this was the reason they became widely spread and eventually used over the course of some years.
I do see your point about these not being original, and even that most "secret" designs where nothing more than fantasies, but I also still think that if the 2nd world war hadn't happened these ideas would have been regarded as too futuristic for quite some time.

The majority of the WWII German 'design studies' in question did not lead to anything, however, the 'concepts', 'theories' and 'principles' explored by some did have an impact. Most of these concepts/theories/principles were not uniquely German developments but the evidence of their explorations served to confirm that Allied scientists and designers were on the right track vis. NACA aerodynamicist R.T. Jones and the swept wing. Jones later designed and had built a successful oblique wing design.

Any notion that the world of post-war aircraft and aerodynamics was created purely from German work is not borne out by historical research. Like Jemiba, I am skeptical of many of the ever grander claims being made in Luft'46 books and on websites. A trawl through the surviving archives of any major aircraft manufacturer will produce loads of seemingly visionary design studies.

The thing to keep in mind is that 'design' and 'concept' are not the same thing.

Jon
 
Ah, "war is the father of inventions" !

There are tons of essays, articles and books about the pros and cons of
this thesis. One says, that only very, very really new ideas were ever tried
during a war and even fewer inventions made, because during wartime, the
aim is to defeat the enemy as fast as possible. So usually the scientific potentials
are busy to counter enemy actions by improving the existing equipment.If you have
a look at the development of radar for example (we forgot this invention, I think,
it had some effects on aviation, that even me would call "revolutionary" !), the
equipment at the end of the war, was still based on the vaccuum tube, more
powerful and with higher frequencies, but basically the same, as before the war !
The development of semicondutors didn't start in earnest before the end of the
war, although the principles were known since 1926. But the vaccuum tube was
still working well and a new method always has its risks and would have used up
muc needed capacities. Maybe, without the war and the urgent need to bring ever
improved radars to the front quickly, the first transistor would have been developed
before 1945 ?
But, apart from being miles and miles OT, there probably isn't a black-and-white answer,
life is grey ! Transcontinental flights, an adventure before the war, were standard after
it and by building an airfield nearly around every corner, the seeds for aviation as means
of public transport were laid. But ... in the first jets, that were flying after the war, the
axial compressor jet engines, much favoured by the germans, were replaced by engines
with centrifugal compressors This idea needed a second start, independent from german
developments. And if there was an influence by german developments onto aviation, then
it probably was by types really flown and tested, like the Me 262, Me 163 or Flettner 285,
so with a lot of data readily available, not by sketchy projects. Maybe the success of the
ejector seat was at least partially founded on german developments, as there were real
experiences with it ?
Still much room for discussion, but my main point is the warning against the uncritical believe
in everything, that is shown in nice renderings with RLM 51/65 camouflage and "Reichsver-
teidigungsband" and, not the last, in photos of "sensational unknown fighter types".
 
Again, nice points and hypotheses... It seems to me though, as I'm still not truly convinced, that we will have to agree to disagree.
 
"... that we will have to agree to disagree." ???

I think, it's a statistical problem. You are saying "53% white, 47 % black"
and I'm saying "No, at least 54 % black and only 46% white"
And you know : Never believe in statistics, you didn't manipulate yourself ! ;D
Only small facets of this theme may be provable, not one of ours opinions
as a whole and so, it remains, what it is : An opinion, a point of view, debatable,
but neither right or wrong .

And as long, as I don't get mails with angry comments, that I'm obviously too
stupid to understand that the german scientists were by far the best, better
by a whopping margin, than their allied counterparts, just because of their racial
origin, etc., etc .... everything's ok.
( Following a similar discussion in another forum, I got such mails ... ::) )
 
One reason it seems also for the plethora of German projects that was mentioned only obliquely was that when Germany was overrun, their manufacturers were captured intact, with projects at stages from full production to bar-napkin sketches. This, coupled with cult of Nazi super-science created a lot of interest and a lot of publication. Look at the tons of stuff out there on the Me-163 and the He-162 for example. This intrigued aircraft buffs since May 8, 1945. Now, just TRY to find some material on the Vickers Windsor, the Blackburn Firecrest, or the Boeing F8B.

Kim M
 
Well, there is the Ginter book on the F8B...
 
you won't get much more than this:
Zichek, Jared A. Boeing XF8B-1 fighter Schiffer, 2007 ISBN 0 7643 2587 6
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom