Bachem Ba 349 Natter
 

Hi, I have posted this on a couple of sites, and was wondering if anyone here had a view on it. Was the Natter (Viper) really such a bad concept? As a point defence fighter, like the Me 163 Komet, I think the concept was sound. Sure it was a desperate measure, but the Luftwaffe was faced with desperate times. With huge armadas of B-17s and B-24s roaming the skies escorted by a veritable plethora of P-51s and P-47s (the mighty 8th Air Force could routinely put up for one mission, 800 four engined bombers with an escort of 1,200 fighters), apart from surrender, what else could they do? With a vertical launch as the endless bomber stream passed overhead, it could soar at tremendous speed, over 620 mph, making it virtually impervious to Allied fighter attack, launch its 24 73mm Hs 217 or 33 55mm R4M rockets. The R4Ms, on the few times they were used operationally, exceeded all expectations of their potential, and the bigger Hs 217 Föhns could possibly do even more damage. Leaving aside the proposed ramming finale, the pilot could probably make it back to the ground safely, barring being shot in his parachute, and could maybe do another mission. The construction of the Natters was designed to be cheap and quick, why couldn't it have been an effective point defence system? Thanks for reading this!

Troy

Re: Bacham Ba 349 Natter
 

The Natter bridges a gap, that between a manned and unmanned SAM (albeit with an indirect means of attack)..

As so many compromises, the Natter wasn't sufficiently a combat a/c and also inefficient (as in requiring a trained pilot who risks his life even flying the thing) as a SAM.

Since the Wasserfall was also being developed, amongst other projects, it already points towards the future, as in UNmanned SAM.

Of course with the potential overcrowding of our planet we may one day return to a manned projectile* as a cheap alternative! The USAF even tested pigeons to steer their guided weapons!

(*not an original thought of mine, remember it from a SciFi short story, no idea about the title and who wrote it).

Re: Bacham Ba 349 Natter
 

It was a sound concept. The program was under the control of the SS. The first vertical take-off failed for unknown reasons, killing the pilot (M23). The M25 completed a succesful manned flight, and the M34 completed a successful manned take-off (both during March-April 1945). In one minute, the aircraft could climb to 10,000 meters automatically, at this point the pilot took control. Between the next minute plus about ten seconds, the pilot fires his weapons. Less than a minute later, the pilot disconnects his oxygen supply, controls and all mechanical and electrical linkages at 4,000 meters. "He then activates the braking parachute. Explosive charges blow off the nose section with the windscreen, the forward armor plate, and the rudder pedals." He then lands by parachute and the rear section is recovered for reuse.

Source: Vertical Takeoff Fighter Aircraft of the Third Reich by J. Miranda & P. Mercado. Published by Schiffer.



Ed

Re: Bacham Ba 349 Natter
 

Nice post Ed! :)

Troy

Re: Bacham Ba 349 Natter
 

I guess the jet fighters and the Me 163 found that a major problem in attacking Allied bombers was the extremely high closing speed during the approach. The pilot would be trying to line up with the intended target while trying at the same time to avoid hitting any of the other a/c in the air. It would be easier for this type of attack because the pilot would just have to approximate the lead on the target since the rocket patterns were normally setup to form an oval pattern with the long axis horizontal. But, he would still have to level his wings for an effective attack, and not scatter the rockets. And, at the same time he would be approaching the target at 300+ mph. while attempting to ensure that the rockets were fired between ca. 250 yds. and ca. 800 yds. To counter this, some jets would slow down and so become vulnerable to escorting fighters as well as the bombers' guns. For the Ba 349 this would not be an option unless the rocket was burned out and he was gliding into the attack. So, experienced pilots would need to be used.

Re: Bacham Ba 349 Natter
 

The company was actually called Bachem.

Re: Bachem Ba 349 Natter
 

If I recall correctly, due to the short range of the Me 163B the Allied bombers simply could avoid the areas, where those planes were stationed, which they did later on.
The Ba 349 with a similar range would have had the same problem.
Fritz