Weserflug P.1003/1-the most detrimental luft46 project for the allies....

from luft46.

This VTOL (Vertical TakeOff and Landing) aircraft project’s design, by Weserflug, dates from 1938. The fuselage was fairly conventional, with a standard tail unit. The real difference in this design were the wings, which were hinged and tiltable about halfway along the length of the wings. Mounted on each end of the wing was a nacelle featuring a large diameter propeller. The wing was mounted high on the fuselage, so that the propeller would have the necessary ground clearance when the wing was tilted in flight position. A single Daimler-Benz DB 600 series engine was located in the fuselage behind the cockpit, and drove both propellers. The engine was fed by an air intake located in the nose. The main gear retracted into the fuselage, and the rear tail wheel retracted beneath the tail. A crew of two sat in a cockpit located in the top forward section of the aircraft.
Although this was a very novel idea for an aircraft at this time, the concept never left the drawing board. A very similar design was later built by the United States as the Boeing V-22 Osprey, and began testing in 1989. Even today, the tilt-rotor concept is proving troublesome, and the fact that there would have had to be a very complex gearing arrangement for the Weserflug P.1103 (to tilt the wings and keep constant power to the large diameter propellers) would have proven a very difficult design hurdle.

The v-22 and prototypes have already killed a quite few USAAF test pilots. For that reason, I belive this is the luft46 project that was the most effective against the allies when a lot of rescorces were wasted on useless prototypes.I guess that this is the only weapon that was effective because of its crappyness.:mrgreen:

To manufacture a reliable Wesserflug was beyond the ww2 tech that is for sure however I firmly believe that the most crazy and unlikely to be ever completed as feasible design was the Triebflugel…that is for sure.

Wesserflug:

FW Triebflugel.

To manufacture a reliable Wesserflug was beyond the ww2 tech that is for sure however I firmly believe that the most crazy and unlikely to be ever completed as feasible design was the Triebflugel…that is for sure.

I disagree; the sanger bomber or the von braun space station/A12-A11-A10-A9 rockets were crazier.

Hmmm, The Sanger and the A-9 evolved after the war in working designs ( not made by Germany of course) but the Triebflugel did not… have you seen something like the Triebflugel that actually fly?

How did the Sänger evolve into a working design? Wasn´t it to take off at M1,8 at ground level. That alone is probably still a (metallurgic, for heat reasons) challenge.

Guess the Triebflügel is very difficult to make work in practice.
The Lippish P.13, which was supposed to fly up M1,6 on granulated coal is also a bit special.

Lippish P.13a, model.jpg

A Luft46 project that could have hurt the allies was the Lippish P.15. Based on the Me 163 (which was said to be the best handling of all German WWII aircraft), without the 163´s vices (rocket engine and related fuel / landing skid), it could in theory have been ready as soon as the Germans had working jet engines coming off the production lines. It couldn´t have worked within the WWII with the intended 011 engine though.

Wasnt there a french thing called the cleopatra that was like the trieb?

This:

SNECMA C450 Coleoptere
VTOL Experimental Aircraft
It actualy flew but was uneconomical.

How did the Sänger evolve into a working design? Wasn´t it to take off at M1,8 at ground level. That alone is probably still a (metallurgic, for heat reasons) challenge.

I am not based in any brainy technological analisis, just I think there was osmething related with the Space Shuttle (sanger) and the Bell X-15 ( A-9) :slight_smile:

Well, my scorces say that the A9 and the Sanger Amerikabomber were real Nazi designs.

(I am not based in any brainy technological analisis, just I think there was osmething related with the Space Shuttle (sanger) and the Bell X-15 ( A-9) -answer -not knowing how to put in a qoute :confused:) :

To my knowledge, nobody has ever comtemplated anything like the Sänger. It might work, but it´s vastly more complicated than an ICBM and therefore there´s been little interest and the space shuttle is something different still. (The US even gave up on relatively simple intercontinental cruise missiles, because ICBM´s were better, and probably less complicated)

Another answer:
(They were german wartime designs, the discussion moved on to whether anybody built something similar postwar. In case of the A9/A10, you can say that any long range rocket with two or more stages is based on the same idea.)
The Germans built the Rheinbote 4 stage solid fueled ballistic missile. This was really the way of the future, though 4 (engine) stages are extremely rare. Long range and anything but the Reinbote´s relatively puny warhead was also some time into the future.

Rheinbote.jpg

Actualy, the DYNASOAR was pretty much a sanger, only launched verticaly.

The space shuttle was greatly influenced by the Sanger, him bieng brought to america to work for NASA.

You´re right about the similar Sänger/X-20 post launch modus operandi. And the very long digestion time of the eventual X-20 programme suggests that the Germans would have had to win the war before being able to complete the Sänger programme;)

Another thing a very little bit Sänger-like is rumoured Soviet experiments with low flying ICBM´s. I haven´t been able to find any firm data on such a project, only read somewhere that at least one test flight was made. The idea should have been to avoid US ABM´s by flying comparatively low. It might pose some of the same problems that the Sänger would have faced in its launch phase.

Youre talking about the supposed “keldysh Antipodal Bomber”- Sanger with Ramjets on wings. Is there any truth in this?