Did the Luftwaffe ever experiment with JATO?

[Jaap Woortman]

Originally Posted by RodM

Among the claimed sightings in November 1944, for example, were:

1-2 Nov, Amsterdam/Schipol, Single jet a/c taking off. Climbed to 5000'.
Appeared to do climbs & dives over airfield (reported by a Mosquito night fighter crew).
4-5 Nov, 52 08 N, 06 29 E, A/F lit up and 3 jet a/c seen taking off, short bursts of whitish
yellow flame rising at an angle of 60-70°
Rod

Strange, Schiphol/Amsterdam was completely demolished in September/Oktober 1944 by the Germans.
After finishing the destruction it was not possible to use it for operational aircraft and certainly not by jet-aircraft.

52 08 N, 06 29 E is a location close to Fliegerhorst Twente.

Jaap

[RodM]

Hi Jap,

thanks for the comments, and the confirmation that Schiphol was not in use.

Are the very high numbers of reported sightings on 2-3 and 4-5 November linked to some kind of large scale event or series of events that were witnessed for the first time? I mean this in the sense that BC crews occasionally reported "jet and rocket" phenomena during the period, but then on these two nights the number of sightings reported "went through the roof." The questions become why was there a dramatic increase in sightings and was there any event or events that occurred to account for these sightings?

On 1-2 November, there were some eight reported sightings, resulting in claims of 1 'Me262', 1 'Me163' and 1 'jet a/c' destroyed. Besides the reported sighting at Schiphol, another sighting was reported in the area of Almere-Lelystad (said to be moving NW); two sightings (and claims for a 'jet a/c' and a 'Me163' destroyed) were reported slightly north and east of Weert, apparently on the Allied side of the front lines; two sightings at Koeln/just east of Koeln; one sighting near Simmern, and; an isolated sighting just south of Luebeck.

On 2-3 November, there were at least twenty reported sightings, resulting in claims of 5 'Me262s or Me163s' destroyed. The locations of these prescribed an arc that began over Allied-controlled territory between Antwerpen-Turnhout-Eindhoven-Helmond, continued into German-controlled territory between Venlo-Krefeld-Duesseldorf-Leverkusen-Dueren, and finally continued back into Allied-controlled territory between Aachen-S. of Verviers-Durbuy.

On 4-5 November, there were at least forty-eight reported sightings, resulting, according to a BCHQ minute of 5/11/44, in 34 'combats', and claims of 18 'jet a/c' & 3 'Me163s' destroyed, and 3 'jet a/c' damaged. The locations for the majority of these sightings prescribed an arc between Lelystad-Zwolle-NE. of Almelo-area between Hopsten and Achmer airfields (6 sightings)-area between Ladbergen and the canal (5 tightly grouped sightings)-Muenster. The sightings then branched off over the Ruhr according to the course of the particular bomber stream. One group was between Wesel-Dinslaken-Recklinghausen, and the other between Hagen-Wuppertal-Dueren and into Allied controlled territory between Aachen-S. of Verviers-Durbuy.

As can be seen, the sightings also occurred over Allied-controlled territory.

Thre were a further two reported sightings of jet/rocket phenomena on 5-6 November, twelve on 6-7 November, one on 8-9 November, three on 10-11 November (including two that involved phenomena that could change course in relation to the reporting aircraft), and six on 11-12 November. To the best of my knowledge, the number of sightings on one night never again reached the levels of 2-3 and 4-5 November.

Regards

Rod

[edwest]

An Me-262 variant given the designation Interzeptor I was built "with two Jumo 004 turbojets and a Walter R-II/211 rocket engine with 1,700 kp takeoff thrust. An altitude of 12,000 meters could be reached in 4.5 minutes. (On one flight, the prototype was able to reach 8,000 m in three minutes)."

Source: The History of German Aviation, Willy Messerschmitt: Pioneer of Aviation Design, by Hans J. Ebert/Johann B. Kaiser/Klaus Peters. Published by Schiffer Publishing.

I think, at this point, it would be reasonable to prepare a list of all possibilities based on the reports. The Germans were very good at disguising damage and the idea of an airfield in such an area is not out of the question. I propose the following:

1) An unmanned Me-262 fitted with a guidance system and rocket propulsion under test in actual combat conditions.
2) An unmanned Me-163 operating in the same role.
3) A missile designed to resemble, or using actual Me-262 or Me-163 airframes, filled with explosives, rocket propelled and with a guidance system.

As to the type of guidance, I suggest the Freya-Langlatte/Erstling. This was developed for use with the A-4/V-2.





Ed

[RodM]

Hi Ed,

thanks for the very interesting information.

How easy would such remotely piloted aircraft be to control at night and would the Germans be likely to test them close to the front lines?

I've attached images of the plots of sightings and claims from the nights of 2-3 and 4-5 November 1944. The time of the sighting/claim is given and sightings are marked with a triangle, claimed with a star. The blue areas are Allied controlled territory.

Cheers

Rod

[edwest]

In order to find a reasonable explanation, a few thoughts. Prior to the development of a guided missile, for example, regular aircraft are sometimes used to test components, guidance and so on. The Enzian was based on the Me-163 design. It was controlled by a joystick from the ground. This does not rule out additional help from ground radar as well.

Along with radar guidance, the fiery exhaust would be visible at night. After reaching a certain altitude, control could be passed off to an onboard guidance system. I have the names "Madrid" and "Elsass." The first relied on scanning infrared and the latter was a proximity fuse.

Sometimes the term "magnetic" appears when mentioning fuse types. The Fw-190 F-8 had a weapon called a Foerstersonde (SG 113 A) installed that fired rockets vertically, triggered by the magnetic field generated by a large metallic object, in this case, a tank. It worked on a similar principle to the handheld mine detector. A bomber is also a large metallic object.

Back to rockets. The Americans were seeing them as well. On 5 December 1944, the New York Times published an article titled "Rockets In Reich Defense." Here is the link to the NYT paid article site:

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstra...89D95F408485F9

An excerpt:

LONDON, Dec. 4 (AP) -- The Nazis shot "baby V-2's" or anti-aircraft rockets at formations of American Flying Fortresses that attacked Mainz, one of the German rail cities pounded by the Allied air fleets today.

"We got a lot more rockets than we usually do," said Lieut. Robert Dams of Milwaukee, a bombardier.

"The flak was light, but the Nazis mingled it with rockets which left heavy trails of bluish white smoke," related Lieut. David Barnett of Bromley, Ky., a navigator.



Ed

[RodM]

Hi Ed,

thanks for the detailed reply. Do you have any idea what system could have been employed against the Americans?

I conceed that between October 1944 and the end of the war, there were most likely multiple causes of the phenomena reported as jets/rockets in the night skies over Europe. Half the issue is understanding which platforms may have been tried operationally away from the usual proving grounds, where and when.

I have just read about another possibility to be added to the list, and it could explain in part a number of the sightings from early November 1944. According to a Wikipedia article (I know, not necessarily the best source of info) the Rheinbote surface-to-surface rocket was first fired at Antwerpen in November 1944. Besides the obvious questions of on what date were they first fired, where from, and were they fired at night, this at least merits further investigation to establish the validity of the wp article.

Cheers

Rod

[edwest]

Hi Rod,


After reading T-Force by Sean Longden, published in 2009, I realized, and he noted, much remains classified to this day. He did, however, provide a peek behind the curtain.

I have no further information about the rockets employed against the Americans except to say that whatever German rocket supposedly still in development that most closely resembled the V-2 in smaller form was apparently used operationally on more than one occasion. The Wasserfall appears to qualify.


Ed

[RodM]

Hi Ed,

thanks for the additional comments.

From the limited reading I've done, conventional literature all seems to suggest that most of the missiles developed by the Germans were never deployed operationally, but then, as you say, a lot still remains to be uncovered.

At night, from the descriptions of various phenomena, there would appear to have been a range of ground- and air-fired projectiles fired in the vincinity of bomber streams.

There were some recorded descriptions of small, winged projectiles, and on a reasonable number of occasions many projectiles exploded on their own accord. There is also the instance from the night of 20-21 March, when a Mosquito chased an aircraft, thought to be a jet (but later classified as a "He219 with a single jet") that fired projectiles in the direction of the bomber stream. the mystery aircraft was shot down; the combat was captured on cine film.

Besides the instances of lights seen climbing rapidly from 'lit-up airfields', and lights that were able to chase aircraft, another commonly reported occurrance were lights seen climbing rapidly from the ground that would either explode at height or curve back down to earth. I do think that some of these were probably signals munitions; the Germans tested a system of visual signals to indicate the position and course of a bomber stream for night fighters, to be used to negate the radio jamming. It had been hoped that the system would be fully operational by May 1945.

Cheers

Rod

[edwest]

Hi Rod,


There was also the Henschel Hs 297 Föhn. This was a surface to air missile launcher.


http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...Ger%C3%A4t.jpg




Ed