It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US interest in Horten229

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2005 @ 12:32 PM
link   
How come the US didnt pursue the Horten 229 as an American aircraft project after WW2? I know they used a couple of the other German plane plans as a springboard for some aircraft made throughout the last 50 years. While some people differ that the Horten 229 was actually a terrible plane to fly and to run, it is see, through many texts, that the Horten 229 was a stable flying plane that could live up to its promises. I understand that we already had the YB all-wing aircraft, but why would the United States not want to pursue an aircraft that could break the sound barrier, and be stealth? Surely they must have looked at this option once the cold war came- or did the Horten 229 get shipped off and was never seen again? It is proven that all the "v's" (versions) of the Horten 229 were taken back to America. It is a rumor that the US had acutally tested the Horten 229 and the Gotha P.60 A ( it was only in design form). They even have a report that states the different flying characteristics between them.

www.luft46.com... (offical report over differences between the Horten 229 and the Gotha P.60 A)




posted on May, 31 2005 @ 12:36 PM
link   
Horten,

you beat me to luft46! Damn! LOL

Enjoy:





posted on May, 31 2005 @ 12:45 PM
link   
I like the plane very much in Il2 Sturmovik.

Nothrop did develop some flying wings after ww2 tho.



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 12:51 PM
link   
Yes Northrop's flying wings were after WW2, not stealth, not cheap, and not supersonic. Alot different than the Horten. Also one other characteristics that many people often look over, is that since the Horten wings were made out of wood and a carbon resin, when it would get hit by say flak or bullets, they would just go right through the wing and not create an "exit wound" like metal aircraft would. This is a great advantage because when the bullet or round creates an "exit wound" the exit wound creates a disturbance of the airflow on the wings and making the aircraft harders to steer.



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 01:55 PM
link   
Well as I have posted in another thread, the all flying wing with no fuselage and no stabilisers is an efficient form of generating lift but has serious lateral stability issues, that is why not just the Horten design but also none of the other flying wing designs in the world ever made it into operational service anywhwere.

You are also mistaken about the aircraft being capable of supersonic flight, it is completely the wrong shape and you will never see a supersonic design that has a wingspan greater than its length. Go on, have a look



posted on May, 31 2005 @ 02:04 PM
link   
The Horten 9 / Gotha Go229 was not supersonic.
Never on those engines (nor even the more powerful Heinkel engines supposedly 'coming soon') and not with that wing section, ever.

It did have a few interesting aspects (the RAM coating for instance).
But even this was hardly unique to this type, there were other examples of RAM to examine.

(The U-Boats were equiped later in the war with RAM 'matting' to hide their schnorkel masts).

My bet is that these things were investigated - very extensively - on the quiet with as little fuss made as possible.

As for the rest of it, why would the US be interested in a 2nd hand flying wing project when they had their own?

Why bother with that generation of German jets when they were clearly inferior to the types about to come on stream in the UK and US?

[edit on 31-5-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 12:40 AM
link   
Inferior???? to what?? a big metal wing that had 6 engines and could fly around vs. a Stealth aircraft, made cheaply, that could travel at 800 kph?? Even if the aircraft itself was not perfected yet and had some flaws it was far better than the American and British all-wing aircraft. If the Germans had as much time as the allies and if the all-wing Horten project had actually been on the payroll of the Luftwaffe for the entire span of the war, then we could have glimpsed the true potential of the Horten 229.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 05:45 AM
link   
But what about its fatal lateral instability? How would that have been overcome?

Also if the Germans were so advanced by comparison with, say, Britain, can you name (or provide a link) to a German supersonic programme, possibly with a top speed of ,1000 mph and featuring an afterburning jet engine?



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 10:29 AM
link   
The Germans were developing MANY incredible aircraft designs and engines. I have to admit their engines were probably less of quality than Englands- luft46.com has alot of the projects initated by the Luftwaffe.

www.luft46.com



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 11:47 AM
link   
IMO Btitain and Gremany DESERVE to be superpowers.

Its a pity that other nations which acquired all their tech are now superpowers .


I intended to post stuff here but i put it in another thread by mistake.

Anyway take a look : www.abovetopsecret.com...


Nazi tech rulz



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by horten229v3
Inferior???? to what?? a big metal wing that had 6 engines and could fly around vs. a Stealth aircraft, made cheaply, that could travel at 800 kph??


- It seems to be the case that some people have a really hard time seeing the difference between a concept and a handfull of prototypes which could never have been mass produced and properly operated and an actual combat system which could.

The British jets had the fuel to fly and their industry had the materials to produce them, the armed forces of the allies had the manpower and ability to train that manpower (and to an extremely high standard).

Germany had neither fuel to fly it's aircraft (of whatever type) nor did she have the materials to produce them in any meaningful quantity and she did not have the manpower to operate these experimental types, nor could she train the pilots nor devise effective tactics etc etc.
The list goes on and on.

The (early) Meteor might not have been quite as advanced as the Me 262 but it was available in growing numbers with plenty of fuel to operate them as well as with growing numbers of well trained jet pilots.

To attempt to compare and contrast this with the murderous fantasy of the Volksjager Heinkel He 162 etc etc as inferior is absurd......and not too dissimilar to the late 1944/spring 1945 German departure from reality.


Even if the aircraft itself was not perfected yet and had some flaws it was far better than the American and British all-wing aircraft.


- A handful of prototypes is pretty meaningless in the overall scheme of things.


If the Germans had as much time as the allies


- Excuse me?
What on earth do you mean by that?

The Germans were the ones who (thankfully) squandered their efforts on all sorts of exotic concepts, it had nothing to do with anyone else.


if the all-wing Horten project had actually been on the payroll of the Luftwaffe for the entire span of the war, then we could have glimpsed the true potential of the Horten 229.


- What?

That's a bit like saying if the Meteor F8 had been on the RAF payroll for the whole of the war we'd have 'glimpsed' it's true potential (as the best plane in the world etc etc).

That's a ridiculous arguement.

Northrop tested flying wings (with the benefit of later manufacturing and aerodynamic tech) for decades.

It is a fact that until fly by wire and computers came along the flying wing (whilst interesting and having obvious potential) could not actually realise its potential.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 02:44 PM
link   

- It seems to be the case that some people have a really hard time seeing the difference between a concept and a handfull of prototypes which could never have been mass produced and properly operated and an actual combat system which could.


You call a plane that could be built by the common unskilled worker a unmass producable aircraft?


The British jets had the fuel to fly and their industry had the materials to produce them, the armed forces of the allies had the manpower and ability to train that manpower (and to an extremely high standard).


Yes exacly, they had much more resources.


The (early) Meteor might not have been quite as advanced as the Me 262 but it was available in growing numbers with plenty of fuel to operate them as well as with growing numbers of well trained jet pilots.


I could have sworn we were talking about the AIRCRAFT itself, not who had more fuel and whos pilots were better trained etc. You yourself say that the 262 was better than the Meteor! that should be the end of discussion.


A handful of prototypes is pretty meaningless in the overall scheme of things.

Meaningless??? it just shows that the Germans COULD build it, but they lacked resources and time to PRODUCE it.


If the Germans had as much time as the allies

I meant that if they had had worked non-stop (without bomb raids etc. - the conditions in US and Britain) then they would have been able to perfect the Horten 229.



That's a bit like saying if the Meteor F8 had been on the RAF payroll for the whole of the war we'd have 'glimpsed' it's true potential (as the best plane in the world etc etc).

No its not considering two brothers with their payroll from the Luftwaffe built and desgined an aircraft. Only until late 44' did the Luftwaffe even start LOOKING at the project.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by horten229v3
You call a plane that could be built by the common unskilled worker a unmass producable aircraft?


- The wooden bits maybe but certainly anything on any scale requiring skilled metal working was by early 1945 impossible.


Yes exacly, they had much more resources.


- They had the resources to actually research and accomplish their projects properly; Germany could put together a few interesting prototypes (and if they were lucky they worked and held together if not they killed the pilots unfortunate enough to be flying them......witness the Bachman Natter, the first He 162 and this Horten Ho9).


I could have sworn we were talking about the AIRCRAFT itself, not who had more fuel and whos pilots were better trained etc.


- Well there is the thing.
Because they could barely get any flying time done one can speculate all one likes without the inconvenience of factual data getting in the way, hmmmm?


You yourself say that the 262 was better than the Meteor! that should be the end of discussion.


- As a design in many ways yes it was. But even then not by vast amounts (especially compared to the later mks, which is how come the Meteor stayed in RAF service until 1961 - No. 60sq) .
But that is hardly the end of the matter as the realities of the production and operation also come into the equation.

Poor production standards (falling markedly after autumn 1944) along with jet engines that were liable to fail at any moment or else barely complete 10hrs operational time and no fuel or trained pilots to fly them are pretty gemane to the issue too, wouldn't you say, hmmm?


Meaningless??? it just shows that the Germans COULD build it, but they lacked resources and time to PRODUCE it.


- It shows they put together and flew an interesting idea for a very short time, nothing more.

There was a world of difference between a handfull of flying hours in the first powered prototype back then to a production 'front line' machine.

Ask any aero engineer.


I meant that if they had had worked non-stop (without bomb raids etc. - the conditions in US and Britain) then they would have been able to perfect the Horten 229.


- Given that Northrop had far longer at this (in much better conditions) and therefore a better general aerodynamic understanding, much later - better - test equipment, much more time on the issues, flew several very large multi-jet and piston engined flying wing bombers and had comparatively lavish funding and still could not quite perfect the flying wing - even with several little vertical tail surfaces - (until FBW and computer control) I think that is a baseless assertion.

As Waynos says, if they were that ground breaking and so much more advanced how come no one (not even Russia) did anything with the idea post war?

In fact that holds true for many of these supposedly incredibly advanced designs.
Elements of design were used, of course, (the Messerchmitt and Focke Wulf wing, famously, for instance) but there is almost nothing one can look at and say that it is almost in its' entirely a German WW2 design.

I mean no-one looked at a Heinkel He343 or a Blohm & Voss P188.01 etc and said 'wow look how advanced they are, we have to have some of those, rush that into mass production immeadiately!' did they, hmmm?


No its not considering two brothers with their payroll from the Luftwaffe built and desgined an aircraft. Only until late 44' did the Luftwaffe even start LOOKING at the project.


- Or alternately it demonstrates just how desparate and willing to clutch at any straw the Luftwaffe had become.......as well as the then typical German tendancy to scatter their resources and efforts at a host of unusual and difficult exotic proposals and prototypes, as opposed to concentrating their resources and efforts on those a little more conventional but with much proven promise (ie the Arado Ar 234 & the Me 262).

Like I said the Horten barely flew. 10hrs powered flight is next to nothing and proves nothing other than it could actually fly.

1 glider prototype and 1 powered prototype.

To claim so much about it (nevermind these absurd 'world-beater claims) given the severe lack of any flying time is IMO simply ridiculous.


[edit on 1-6-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
IMO Btitain and Gremany DESERVE to be superpowers.

Its a pity that other nations which acquired all their tech are now superpowers .


I intended to post stuff here but i put it in another thread by mistake.

Anyway take a look : www.abovetopsecret.com...


Nazi tech rulz

Stealth, the fact of the matter is that the current world powers we have today, got there on their own two feet, no stealing tech from anyone, the Americans got to the Atom bomb first(I know we had German Scientists, don't try to throw that out in the open, I think it's very obvious that they were working for us), that put America right at the top instantly, Russia soon followed, it is that no one else wanted to jump right into the fire as america and Russia did, everyone else was too busy trying to bring up their nation, not see who has the biggest kahonas.

Besides, what's so great about being a super power if there is more than one?

Germany and Britian didn't deserve to be Superpowers, otherwise they would be, and it's not so much as they deserved, as they just didn't try to be a superpower. I hear Germany is a wonderful country to be in, they have very well built up their nation from nothing into one of europe's best economical nations, along side Britain.

What is with this pro-nazi enthusiasm? Why are people so blind as to think that the mass genocide of a people is a good thing?

Look I know you think Nazis technology is awsome, and you know what? It is amazing, some very interesting ideas in there, but they were being used for all the wrong reasons, if only Germany used their ideas and technology for the good, not for the bad, imagine where Germany would be today, at the top.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jun, 2 2005 @ 07:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
Stealth, the fact of the matter is that the current world powers we have today, got there on their own two feet, no stealing tech from anyone


- It seems some see an external shape and suddenly want to deny the impact of computers on the issue of stealth (ie working out compound curves, internal construction angles for 'scatter patterns' etc etc) to worship at the alter of nazi science.



What a pity.


the Americans got to the Atom bomb first(I know we had German Scientists


- Actually it was scientists from all over Europe. Hungary, the UK, Germany, Denmark etc etc.


Besides, what's so great about being a super power if there is more than one?


- Er, actually I think that for all it's faults the post USSR world shows us that it is probably better to have 2 to keep each other's worst instincts in check.


Germany and Britian didn't deserve to be Superpowers, otherwise they would be, and it's not so much as they deserved, as they just didn't try to be a superpower.


- I don't think that is quite fair.
Germany certainly was under the spell of those trying to make Germany a dominant force in the world.
The UK was a superpower pre-WW2, the fact is the UK ruined herself economically to defeat nazism.


I hear Germany is a wonderful country to be in, they have very well built up their nation from nothing into one of europe's best economical nations, along side Britain.


- I know several Germans myself, it is a wonderful country and they have succeeded in extinguishing the crazy belligerent militaristic attitudes that were once so common there, indeed excepting the handful of nutters we all get afflicted with, Germans are noteably peaceable and considerate people.


What is with this pro-nazi enthusiasm? Why are people so blind as to think that the mass genocide of a people is a good thing?


- Sadly that kind of ruthless naked power and 'purity of purpose' are attractive to a certain mindset.


Look I know you think Nazis technology is awsome, and you know what? It is amazing, some very interesting ideas in there, but they were being used for all the wrong reasons, if only Germany used their ideas and technology for the good, not for the bad, imagine where Germany would be today, at the top.


- Quite so.

But we should also have a little proportion about this too.
Their technology may have the interest factor because of it's difference etc but it was hardly the only high-tech around either.
They copied, they went down dead ends and they had some really laughable ideas (just like everyone else).

.......and they lost so utterly, just as they deserved to.




top topics



 
0

log in

join