I have seen one or two Me 163 Rocket motors in museums and this one has to be one of the best preserved that I have seen. It is on display at Gatow together with a restored Me163 which was restored by the RAF and handed over to the museum. File:Walther HWK 109.jpg - Wikimedia Commons Me-163 Riedel Walther Regards Tom
A small but explosive thunderbox. YouTube - First female test pilot - Hanna Reitsch 2 At 3.55 what this unique little lady had to say about it . In terms of a fighter a failure , too fast , too dangerous and in need of more development time than Germany had. Tom the painted backdrop to the fighter - it is ( or was ) available as a limited edition print several years ago , "Oh what a flea" the name coming from the rocket powered flea emblem . Thank you once again for some great photos - I have enjoyed seeing them.
James, There was a squadron defending the Luna oil refineries and this (The jet flea) was their emblem I believe. The emblem figure on the museum Me 163 is from the German childrens fairytale Baron Von Munchausen, who rode on a Cannon ball! Hanna Reitsch is a very animated speaker and was well respected by her male peers. The video is super and always worth watching. I have an old book relating to the Rocket plane development and I am afraid the Me 163 was just too dangerous for the pilots and groundcrew. Regards Tom
Amazing design , many many years ahead of its time, tailless, swept wings, blended fuselage.... Kev I think we have to agree with you. However the fact is it was never a really viable proposition. The fuel was so volatile, S Stoff and T stoff, both of which are colourless liquids like water and totally dangerous when mixed. Refuelling was carried out with trucks that were supposed to never come in close proximity of each other. When landing on its skid as the worlds fastest glider the pilots were lucky if the plane did not explode when a little fuel was left. At least one pilot was dissolved to nothing after landing due to fuel remaining and escaping into the cockpit. If the pilot landed safely, the plane was left helpless until a special truck came along and recovered it back to the standing area. Not particularly good when the Allies have air superiority. It may have been a tremendously and exhilerating plane to fly, but it certainly killed a lot of very experienced Pilots. All in all an experiment that cost a lot of valuable resources, which could have been better used elsewhere I feel. Regards Tom
Tom I "plundered" these from Werner Held's "Battle Over The Third Reich" ( Air Research Pub.) Some views of the 163 on the ground . Airbags under her to keep the plane stable and prevent damage. A specially designed tractor to move the 163. The irony of it all , advanced rocket powered aircraft being towed by an ox. Question , it is possible to bail out of a 163 ? Someone had to give it a go , the man in question was Fritz kelb , he survived.
As you can see recovery was by a special Schlepper truck and must have been very labour intensive. Good pictures of the rubber inflatable "Jacking " system to level the plane before placing on the special truck. What with the trouble fueling them and retrieving them, the maintainance staff must have hated the beast! Regards Tom
I think we have to agree with you. However the fact is it was never a really viable proposition. The fuel was so volatile, S Stoff and T stoff, both of which are colourless liquids like water and totally dangerous when mixed. Refuelling was carried out with trucks that were supposed to never come in close proximity of each other. When landing on its skid as the worlds fastest glider the pilots were lucky if the plane did not explode when a little fuel was left. At least one pilot was dissolved to nothing after landing due to fuel remaining and escaping into the cockpit. If the pilot landed safely, the plane was left helpless until a special truck came along and recovered it back to the standing area. Not particularly good when the Allies have air superiority. It may have been a tremendously and exhilerating plane to fly, but it certainly killed a lot of very experienced Pilots. All in all an experiment that cost a lot of valuable resources, which could have been better used elsewhere I feel. Regards Tom Tom, Disagree, it was quite feasable, but effective I dont think so. As for the wasted effort, you could say that about a hell of a lot of Nazi equipment from the Tiger Tank to the V2. And its easy to say that with hindsight. The crux of the matter was that there was no way the Axis could compete with the quantity of the allies so It *had* to go for qualititive enhancement. Taking chances on new technolagy is bound to lead to some failure, its par for the course. You could also argue that the whole principle of the interceptor (as opposed to the air superoirity fighter) is a flawed concept, rocket engines apart (but one that was still in favor till very recently(and not suprising when you read some posts on here!) If I remember right the rocket interceptor still gained some favor after the war, rocket assistance was kept going for a long time. Kev Kev
Kev, There is a difference between Viable and Feasible. I would never argue against its Feasibility as it flew operationally. It was ahead of its time, but the fuel used was just so volatile and deadly dangerous to the groundcrew and pilots. It was described as the fastest glider of the times by the Test pilots and was a beast to land as the aerodynamic features of the wing provided perfect sailplane charactoristics and it kept on going and going and the pilot had no second chance to make a landing. The approach speeds towards the Bombers meant very little time to aim and shoot before breaking away and has been described minimal in terms of two to three seconds. For these reasons alone, no matter how much I admire the technology of the plane, I feel that it was not as viable a proposition as say producing more Me 109 or 262s. Regards Tom
The aircraft had fuel for eight minutes in operational terms, so that was eight minutes to climb , locate , and set up an attack on the in coming bombers. Take off had to be carefully if not perfectly timed to take advantage of this limited wiondow of opportunity , there would have been little margin for error. Probably very hard to hit , but equally it was very hard to judge an attack and deliver it when the closing speed was so very high - only 9 victories for the entire 163 force. ( Three of them by one pilot). The speed which made it almost invunerable , was also a disadvantage - the accident rate made it more than a potentially dangerous aircraft to fly - odds on if you flew it on a regular basis sooner or later it would kill you.
All in all an experiment that cost a lot of valuable resources, which could have been better used elsewhere I feel. From the Allied point of view, this was excellent use of resources. Have I ever told you der Führer was in fact an infiltrated KGB agent named Adolf Gitler?
Whilst much is said about the advances of science and aircraft design within Hitlers Germany we tend to forget that our own people matched them and out thought them. The idea that Germany was an efficent and well ordered society and that goverment ran well was a propaganda myth and in science and development this was also the case. The waste of time and resources which Germany did not have which was ploughed into developing systems which could not be realised within the limited lifespan of the regieme , well it could only have happened under Hitler. Development on projects was halted then started again , similar projects and designs ran in competition parallel to each other , and priorities changed on a regular basis. It was this envirpoment and melting pot which produced the 163 , the V-1 and V-2 none of which were going to reverse a situation which was already lost. At best the design work started paved the way for others to follow or for German projects to continue under American or Russian leaderships. The German "wonder weapons" have to be looked at in the context of what contribution they made rather than their development potential. Had a reasonable and timely decision been taken on the jet there would have been no need to chase the 163 - which produced more problems than it did solutions.
dont forget the undercarriage of this little beauty! You could take off, detatch the wheels and have them bounce back up and take you out!
Whilst much is said about the advances of science and aircraft design within Hitlers Germany we tend to forget that our own people matched them and out thought them. The idea that Germany was an efficent and well ordered society and that goverment ran well was a propaganda myth and in science and development this was also the case. The waste of time and resources which Germany did not have which was ploughed into developing systems which could not be realised within the limited lifespan of the regieme , well it could only have happened under Hitler. Development on projects was halted then started again , similar projects and designs ran in competition parallel to each other , and priorities changed on a regular basis. It was this envirpoment and melting pot which produced the 163 , the V-1 and V-2 none of which were going to reverse a situation which was already lost. At best the design work started paved the way for others to follow or for German projects to continue under American or Russian leaderships. The German "wonder weapons" have to be looked at in the context of what contribution they made rather than their development potential. Had a reasonable and timely decision been taken on the jet there would have been no need to chase the 163 - which produced more problems than it did solutions. Focke Wulfe was still developing a twin tailboom jet towards the end of the war. De Havilland had their twin tailboom Vampire flying on 29th Sept 1943! Technology was advancing so fast in both Germany and the UK, as well as the USA and Russia. But it was admitted after the war the German aircrfaft technology was several years ahead in terms of designs and development. RodinuQuote: Originally Posted by Smudger Jnr All in all an experiment that cost a lot of valuable resources, which could have been better used elsewhere I feel. From the Allied point of view, this was excellent use of resources. Have I ever told you der Führer was in fact an infiltrated KGB agent named Adolf Gitler? Yes agreed. It was just ideal for the Allies and helped them win the war. Regards Tom
Jame, Absolutely! I could not agree more. We have to admit that Technology really took off in these years. I wonder where technology developments would be now, if there had been no second world war conflict. It makes you wonder. Regards Tom
Open question. I wonder what resources where actually absorbed by this since, its uses little of the traiditonal aircraft industry idea, its cost per unit must be a fraction of the cost of a a normal piston engine faighter or interceptor. Pilots I guess.. But then they where getting shot down (or shooting themselves down) in droves in Me109's so its hardly a clear cut argument. If you compare it against something like a tiger tank. Which basically uses the same materials, manufacturering Skills and tools, shop floor space as say a Panzer 4, you gotta question the point. A Me163 bares little resemblance to a Me109. I tend to be a little less crtiical of Hitler and his mad ideas. its easy to pull apart with hindsight. Most of them seem pretty good really, maybe there was just to many of them??? Kev
Kev, Here is just one of a vast number of sites devoted to the Me 163B Komet. Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet (Comet) - History, Specifications and Pictures - World Military Aircraft I cannot find any references to more than 9 bombers being shot down by the squadrons equipped with the rocket fighter. When more than 300 of the operational model were produced, the kill ratio is low. Whilst not for one minute decrying the technological innovation, I merely pointed out that in my humble opinion the time and effort going into producing the Rocket plane was not productive enough to merit the expense. In the hands of a skilled pilot the Me 109, Me 262 and Fw 190 were extremely formidable weapons with many pilots having high scores. The structure and composition of the Me 163 was no different to any other plane, only its revolutionary shape and powerplant. The Development and Tooling costs for any new plane are very expensive and labour intensive, this I know as I once worked in the aircraft industry. Perhaps others would like to respond. Regards Tom
