"Hitler's Stealth Fighter" Reborn - The Horten 2-29

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


SKL,

A couple of things. Jack Northrop was flying all wing designs. THe N-1M had its first flight in 1941. The N-9M was flown in 1942. WHile the Hortons had an all wing glider in the early 30's Thier first powerd wing took flight much later with the Ho-229 (First flight 1944)

The B-2 had its basis in Jack Northrop's YB-49 (Yes they did look at the Ho 229).

The F-117 is a whole differnt animal based on faceting and has nothing to do with the flying wing shape or Curved stealth. Tacit Blue may share some credit to the all wing design as its the first airframe to explore 'Curver shapes" in stealth airframes.

reply to post by FredT


What I don't understand though is if the German design was discovered after the war along with many more Top Secret German designs then how did Northrop get inspired by them before the 1940s
Yeah Yeah I know Wicki.....

The B-35 was the brainchild of Jack Northrop, who made the flying wing the focus of his work during the 1930s. During World War II, Northrop had been commissioned to develop a large wing-only, long range bomber designated XB-35. Northrop advocated the "flying wing" as a means of reducing parasitic drag and eliminating structural weight not directly responsible for producing lift.

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge

Seem You know some of WWII history...But concerning Yugoslavy being benevolent ally of Germans- its not true there was invasion by German army with bulgarian help in 1941 and afterwards they ve created "free" croatian state in reality vasal of Germany(which not changed much till now-Germans mixing in yugoslavian politics was one of reason or if you prefere cataliser of recent yugoslavian wars )
And besides: also Slovakia, after fall of Poland, having no choice jojned the Axis...

Originally posted by SpartanKingLeonidas
reply to post by waynos

 

Wow, I do believe you took everything out of context, in reverse of what I had to say.

Are you trying to reverse engineer my words into lies?

You are not very successful, if that was your intent.

No, it wasn't. I was just pointing out that you wrote a falsehood, for that is what you did

As I previously stated, it was :

Back on topic, history being one of my favorite topics, the Horten "flying wing" was the original concept behind what is now the stealth bomber, as well as the the awesome and awe-inspiring F-117 Nighthawk.

Original concept, meaning Horten designed it, then, the Allies took it, and changed the concept, in order for it to work.

And that is wrong. The Allies did not take Hortens design, that was actually what made him so bitter as he spent years TRYING to get someone to take it on. The basic principle of Bell-shaped spanwise lift distribution, which is what gave the Horten a stability that other all-wing designs from Northrop, Armstrong Whitworth, Avro and others lacked, was never made use of by any other designers. Horten gliders that did use this principle were still flying successfully in the 1960's. US and UK flying wing design evolved entirely separately from Horten's work. In fact, if they had not done so they may have been more successful in the late 40's and 50's when the majority of this effort was underway.

You must not know how to read English very well, or at least ask an enlightened question, to clarify your thoughts, and here I thought you were rather intelligent.

And after getting the aeronautics wrong you go and make another blunder, a personal attasck from the likes of you is utterly meaningless and bothers me not a jot.

I guess I am wrong about some things.

Oh the irony!

Just because I did not specify that Northrop Grumman is who took the "flying wing" and developed it, does not know I do not know I speak about.

That has no bearing on it whatsoever, you were just plain wrong, as I have explained.

[edit on 27-6-2009 by waynos]

reply to post by SLAYER69


But that's just it, Slayerr 69, he wasn't. Such as Northrop, The Hortens and Lippisch all, in their turn, took inspiration from professor G T R Hill and his 'Pterodactyl' series of all wing designs that originated, and were built and flown, in the 1920's and ended, in practical terms, with the Prototype Westland Pterodactyl V turret fighter of the mid 1930's, though there were also two other Pterodactyl's proposed which remained unbuilt, the VI was a flying boat similar to the Do 24 in some respects, while the VII was to be a large airliner for post war use. All this series featured a large swept flying wing and no tail.





[edit on 27-6-2009 by waynos]

Originally posted by waynos
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

But that's just it, Slayerr 69, he wasn't. Such as Northrop, The Hortens and Lippisch all, in their turn, took inspiration from professor G T R Hill and his 'Pterodactyl'

I'm not doubting you but... Do we have proof of this connection?
A link to any information would be appreciated thanks

The influence was mutual amogst all flying wing designers at that time and theuy frequently met and discussed ideas, its just that Hill was the first to get a powered flying wing airborne, at least from this little group.

The Archive section at flightglobal is an excellent source, containing , as it does, every issue of the magazine since it was launched in 1909. There are various articles about 'all-wing' designs as Flight called them which frequently cross reference each others work. They are spread throughout the 1930's and '40's and I have a few saved on my pc so I just need to figure out how to copy them now.

As an example I have pasted some text below lifted from a news article of a meeting attended by Hill and Lippisch. I wouldn't know how to link to a pdf I'm afraid as my attempts to do just that have resulted only in me linking to the search page, not the actual results.

FLIGHT, FEBRUARY 20, 1931
GLIDING
"WESTLAND AIRCRAFT SOCIETY.—Over a hundred
comprised the audience at a lecture on the subject
of the " Design, Development and Construction of Sailplanes
and Gliders," which was delivered under the aegis of
the Westland Aircraft Society at The Three Choughs Hotel,
Yeovil, on Monday, February 2.
The lecturer was Herr Lippisch, who is responsible for the
design of many of the most successful German gliders, and
has built remarkable tailless types. More familiar to most
is his sailplane vthe Wien, the type demonstrated by Herr
Kronfeld at Eggardon, Dorset, last year, at an exhibition
arranged by the Dorset Gliding Club.
The lecturer was introduced by Mr. R. A. Bruce, and
by means of slides the various air currents and the
development of design of gliders was illustrated. To
enable pilots to take fullest advantage of these, varying
designs were explained in detail by drawings accompanied
by photographs.
Passing to actual construction, slides showing various
methods were projected and explained.
Reference was then made to the construction of tailless
types of aircraft, the lecturer paying tribute to the work
carried out in England by Capt. G. T. R. Hill.
Views of the Wasserkuppe, the centre of gliding activities
in Germany, situated in the Rhon mountains, were shown.
In one view, as many as eight different types of gliders and
sailplanes were in the air at one time.
Herr Lippisch caused much laughter by referring to the
seasons of the year as " three-quarters winter, the other
quarter being bad weather."
Mr. Bruce said the lecture had been very interesting,
and that gratitude should be expressed to Herr Lippisch
for coming to Yeovil to give to members of the Westland
Aircraft Society first-hand information on this subject—and
invited members to put any questions they desired.
Questions by Capt. A. S. Keep, Mr. A. Davenport, and
others, were answered at length by the lecturer, and further
explained by blackboard illustrations.
Invited by Mr. Bruce to propose a vote of thanks, Capt.
Hill said he would first like to express his appreciation of
the extreme kindness shown to Mrs. Hill and himself during
a recent visit to the Wasserkuppe. Everywhere he found
courtesy and the construction work he saw was beautiful.
Referring to the withdrawal of nails from the work, Capt.
Hill emphasised the fact that the nails used were of steel,
and were picked up and hammered in by magnetised hammers,
thus saving time in the operation and lessening risk of injury
to the hands. He wished, he said in conclusion, to thank
Herr Lippisch for so kindly coming to lecture.
Replying, Herr Lippisch said that gliding was an art, and
emphasised that by studying and using air currents it was
possible to make a long flight without the necessity of
constant refuelling, as in the case of light, power-driven
aircraft.
Among others present were Capt. R. C. Petter and Mr.
R. J. Norton and members visited from Bristol and Gloucester
Branches of the Royal Aeronautical Society. Many members
of the Dorset Gliding Club were present, and afterwards
availed themselves of the opportunity to obtain the advice
of Herr Lippisch on many technical matters.

www.flightglobal.com... %3AtoYear=&x=25&y=6

[edit on 27-6-2009 by waynos]

Impressive as the Horten 229 was, if they had gotten that plane into service earlier it would have terrorized American bomber fleets because thanks to its flying wing design, the Ho 229 probably had better maneuverability than the Me 262 and would have given P-51B/C/D/K and Spitfire XIV pilots fits along with making the bombers sitting ducks.

(By the way, we should count ourselves lucky Focke-Wulf didn't get the Fw 190D series into service in late 1943, especially since Focke-Wulf noted the problems with the BMW 801 engines losing power at higher altitudes. If the Fw 190D had entered service in late 1943--very likely since the Junkers Jumo 213 engine used on the Ju 188 reconnaissance bomber had just started to ramp up production at the time--it would have effectively erased the tremendous advantage of the P-51B/C Mustang over Fw 190A-8 and Bf 109G-6 models the Luftwaffe used as their air defense fighters in late 1943/early 1944.)

[edit on 27-6-2009 by SactoGuy001]

man this is crazy look a that thing man... it just looks bad ass and scary and just think of what would have heppened if they bombed us. i mean we still had plains with propellers and here Hitlers has a modern 2009 plain. crazy how smart he was and what he halped to make. he was 100% bat # crazy but he did he did help science alot. if u look at what he did he did help us if. if u ignore what he did to the jews tho.if u JUST ONLY look at the science he gave us he was koo. but if u look at everything tho..... ya he needed mental help.

i know that people r gonna post # saying im a nazi I'm not in soman Italian. and soman was taken by Hitler and Samoa controlled over 30 other islands and because of him we only have Samoa. so u no he #ed my ppl over too. i posted that so ppl don't talk #

Mod Note: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.

[edit on Sun Jun 28 2009 by Jbird]

Originally posted by Vinveezy
man this is crazy look a that thing man... it just looks bad ass and scary and just think of what would have heppened if they bombed us. i mean we still had plains with propellers and here Hitlers has a modern 2009 plain.

The Nazi war machine was predominantly propeller driven and the allies had jets in the field too, so it was not a monopoly. In fact, I would suggest that allied (especially British) jet engine technology was more advanced than the Nazis and the engines were certainly more reliable. I use the word "advanced" with caveats.

The British Gloster Meteor entered service in 1944, for example.

I am sure that if allied dominance of the skies over Europe had for one moment been threatened the allies had the industrial and technological capability to develop anything appropriate. The objective was to win the war, not fanny about. The need to develop aircraft against a threat that did not exist never arose.

This Horten "flying wing" design must be seen in the context of dozens of Nazi experimental design projects, some of which were quite wacky, like the Henchel PS 132, He Lerche II, Lippich P.13a etc., etc... The range and number of designs is indicative of desperation, fantasy and no coherent leadership.

Let's not forget that some people think the Nazi's developed flying saucers and they migrated to Antarctica where they await the rise of the Fourth Reich!!!! Dear me, they were not defeated after all - well that's going to be an inconvenience.

Regards

Thats right. All this worshipping of 'Nazi' technology is far too overblown.

In some areas the Germans were ahead. You could repeat that sentence and replace the word 'Germans' with British or Americans and it would still be correct.

Radar for instance, The best German NF's had radar with 4 mile range by the end of the war. The DH Mosquito NF.30 was equipped with a radar with a 10 mile range. Nor did allied NF's look like they had TV aerials sprouting from the nose as we had proper scanners in streamlined radomes.

Jet engines; British jets were both more powerful and much more reliable than German engines in 1945. Power Jets was also bench running an afterburning version of the W2, the W2/700 for an attempt at the sound barrier.

A counter to this argument from the pro-Germans is that the Jumo and BMW engines were the first axial flow jets and were the model for all modern engines.

This argument is only spoiled by the photo's of the Gloster Meteor I prototype fitted with with Metrovick Beryl axial engines. The same Beryl engines that were the basis for the postwar and very successful AS Sapphire/Wright J-65 axials.

The Germans were ahead in terms of Rocketry, ie the V-2, and invented the cruise missile (the V-1). Important, yes. But not everything.

And as for the notion that any of this stuff was an indication of Hitler being smart, or thinking that he played a part? Please do some research and find out why that view is 100 per cent wrong. The Scientists were working on this stuff for years, the Generals knew what was in the pipeline. As early as 1937 Hitler promised his Generals that he would make no military moves before 1944 for this, they had told him, would be when Germany would be strong enough to fight a war and win it. So, who looks smart now? Not old Adolf.

[edit on 28-6-2009 by waynos]

reply to post by Haunebu


Wow Haunebu, finally somebody who knows what they’re talking about when it comes to the history of the Second World War! I often come on here and look in threads regarding history and am astonished at the naivety of the discussion. It truly vexes now to a point I don’t enjoy discussing the War anymore.

Anyway, I’m glad not alone in recognising there was a whole different World War II beneath the fiction we’re told.

Mod Note: Excessive Quoting – Please Review This Link

Mod Note: Please stay on Topic – Review This Link.



[edit on Sun Jun 28 2009 by Jbird]

The prototype of the Horton IX / Gotha GO 229 - Was flowm and did remarkably well, on the second flight the plane crashed due to flameout in one of the engines (Something that did hapend now and then), never the less, the RLM, approved production.


The plane itself could not reach US, but the design is intreaging.

the "stealth" came from production as most here has stated, due to low amount of steel and aluminium, the wing frame, is made of wood, and though it's not as sturdy as steel or aluminium, wood can take a lot more punishment before breaking apart.


Weapons, there are different configurations swabbling the net, some states a 30mm in each wing, others, like Lukasgames (Secret weapons of the luftwaffe - PC game) has a 2 * 30mm canon in each wing, a deadly combination, no mather what.



For those whom like strange german planes of WW2, check out the ME262 with a 50mm auto AT gun mounted to hunt bombers.

on it's virgin test flight, this plane actually shot down 5 US B-17 bombers on it's own.
a powerfull statement of german ingenuity.

and the german type 21, diesel electric sub, is the grandfather of all modern submarines :-)


On the bizare end, we have the german tank, Pzkpfw 8 - Mouse
188 ton, 128mm main gun (kapable of killing all allied tanks at a range of 4.5 KM), secondary - 75mm AT gun (Same gun you find in the Hetzer), a nice little roling bunker.

The Panther, could together with the T34, be seen as the father of all modern tanks.

[edit on 29-6-2009 by Phoebus]

reply to post by Skelkie3


The B2 as it is now was originally signed off on and approved by Jimmy Carter. As a design well..just look at the thread

reply to post by Vinveezy


Actually Mr Hitler was absolutely detrimental to real war-scientific progress. His main failure in that regard never managed to install a capable development leadership. Instead, the german warmachine was to a large part developer-driven which resulted in a myriad of fantastic, theoretically possible but practically unuseable concepts that sucked the precious funds dry to the detriment of promising progress like the E tanks or jet engine technology.

Together with Göring and others, he stood in awe before all these flashy concepts and humonguos machines the engineers could think of while the more mundane needs of the troops were not paid enough attention to.

[edit on 30/6/2009 by Lonestar24]

reply to post by gimme_some_truth


I have been wanting to post a comment for several years about this amazing aircraft. First I have a hard time believing we didn't retro engineer it back in the late 40's and early 1950's. I think this because just look at the "first" example of the use of the term "flying saucer." Kenneth Arnold discribed this air craft to a "T" flying over Mount Ranier in 1947. The conseptual drawing I saw on the history channel is almost like looking at the plane itself. Has anyone else noticed that?

And again, the Germans had some innovative engineering, but they tended to blow all their resources on "magic weapons" while the US and the Russians crushed them under an avalanche of P-51's, LA-5s, T-34's, Shermans etc...

Thanks for reminding me who won the war..And there was me thinking the allies consisted of US, Russian, UK & Commonwealth countries too numerous to mention, Free French, Polish Norwegian, etc, etc.

Not entirely sure how that applies to the discussion at all given that all you did was post an image..

And I'm very curious when the U.S. allowed a Eurofighter to be within range of a B-2.

But I digress, back to topic.

I have always had this hunch that the Nazis were either developing or were planning to develop weapons that could have turned the tides for the Nazis in Europe. However, with the attitude that Hitler had with his field marshalls like Rommel and Paulus was what lost the war for the Nazis. If Hitler would have listened to his advisors about the development of these Wunderwaffe. The Nazis might have had a better chance when it came to winning the war.

Then again, the Germans did have technology for then was years before its own time.