• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

The Daftest Aircraft

similar to the usn airships (USS Macron and Arkon(?)). The Germans experimented too. I can't remember if the j52 mistle came from a. Fighter carried by a bomber or vice versa.
USS Akron and USS Macon. Both where used in the original experiments as flying bases for parasitic aircraft back in the 1930's. It didn't go well as both of them crashed and the project was abandoned.

USS Akron (ZRS-4) - Wikipedia

USS Macon (ZRS-5) - Wikipedia

The aircraft that were used with these airships were propeller driven rather than jet engines

Curtiss F9C Sparrowhawk - Wikipedia

In regards to the Goblin, it's amazing the stuff they did in the 50's with the B36 Peacemaker. Parasitic aircraft, experimental nuclear reactors to drive the aircraft. Certainly was a golden age for aircraft development.
 
similar to the usn airships (USS Macron and Arkon(?)). The Germans experimented too. I can't remember if the j52 mistle came from a. Fighter carried by a bomber or vice versa.
The German Mistel combination was a JU88 bomber, unmanned, controlled by a piloted FW190. The cockpit and nose section of the JU88 was packed with explosive and guided to the target by the pilot in the FW190, which was mounted on top of the JU88.

Mistel_Ju88_-_Fw190_Bernburg.jpg
 
The German Mistel combination was a JU88 bomber, unmanned, controlled by a piloted FW190. The cockpit and nose section of the JU88 was packed with explosive and guided to the target by the pilot in the FW190, which was mounted on top of the JU88.

View attachment 332055
it was indeed. The one above shows a ju88 without the 'warhead' nose. So has probably been mated and then flown to the operating air field for arming. Iirc the combo could take off under just thefighters power. I'll go with the other way, but I'm not sure. As a result of this aircraft the Luftwaffe experimented with non weaponised ju88s. The idea being the fighter being carried and released on contact with the raf. The fighter would then fly home. I think it was the mistle mk4.
 
it was indeed. The one above shows a ju88 without the 'warhead' nose. So has probably been mated and then flown to the operating air field for arming. Iirc the combo could take off under just thefighters power. I'll go with the other way, but I'm not sure. As a result of this aircraft the Luftwaffe experimented with non weaponised ju88s. The idea being the fighter being carried and released on contact with the raf. The fighter would then fly home. I think it was the mistle mk4.
I'd be very surprised if Mistel combinations could takeoff under just the fighter's power and the fighters throttles and controls were synchronized with those of the bomber. Quite how the nuances of asymmetry and mixtures were managed I have no idea but suspect it was a simple throttle connection with the bomber running on a simple fixed pitch with no option to feather engines etc.

For those interested, an aeroplane mad young son of a neighbour showed me a really quite impressive WWII flight sim game called Il-2 Sturmovik on his PC some years back where you could fly a Ju-88/FW190 Mistel mission from take-off to attack! I had a go and it was a bitch to aim!!!

Regards,
MM
 
I'd be very surprised if Mistel combinations could takeoff under just the fighter's power and the fighters throttles and controls were synchronized with those of the bomber. Quite how the nuances of asymmetry and mixtures were managed I have no idea but suspect it was a simple throttle connection with the bomber running on a simple fixed pitch with no option to feather engines etc.
I'll dig out the stuff later, but IIRC the combo was first tested as one of the earliest radio-control units, before they encountered too many problems, and went mechanical.
 
The throttle controls for the Ju 88 were mechanically linked to levers in the upper aircraft and limited engine instruments were duplicated. This took the form of two dual function dials indicating manifold pressure and rpm of the Ju 88's engines.Limited other controls were duplicated.The throttle linkage was supplied by the DUZ company.

The other flight controls were electro-mechanically controlled. The Ju 88 was fitted with a modified Patin PDS (Patin-Dreierrudersteuerung) three axis control system.

The PDS system allowed the combination to be controlled in two modes.In "cruise" mode control movements made by the pilot in the upper element were measured by a potentiometre and transmitted electrically to the servos linked to the flying surfaces of the Ju 88. This mode was also used for take off and worked well. One report noted:

"Tests successfully demonstrated that the servo system gave the pilot the impression that his control column and rudder pedal were mechanically linked to the control surfaces of the aircraft beneath him,though this was not the case.These tests also showed how,in the future,large and very fast aircraft could be flown under conditions where control forces are likely to exceed the strength of the pilot."

In "automatic" mode the flight condition of the Ju 88 could be controlled by switches fitted to the upper aircraft's control column and instrument panel.

Once seperated the Ju 88 flew on its auto pilot to the target. It was initially aimed from the upper aircraft using a revi gunsight and that information locked into the auto pilot. It was important therefore that the two elements of the composite were accurately aligned. A Junkers report noted:

"Care must be exercised with the mounting of the upper aircraft to ensure that no deviation to the approach to the target arises after seperation because the lower aircraft will miss the target."

On test or training flights both elements were piloted. This enabled them to land seperately after seperation. The combination,even with strengthened undercarriage,wa just capable of take off,but not a landing.
 
I've always wondered whether a Mistel combination towing a glider would be a Misteltoe...

...my coat? :)

Regards,
MM
 
I'd be very surprised if Mistel combinations could takeoff under just the fighter's power and the fighters throttles and controls were synchronized with those of the bomber. Quite how the nuances of asymmetry and mixtures were managed I have no idea but suspect it was a simple throttle connection with the bomber running on a simple fixed pitch with no option to feather engines etc.

For those interested, an aeroplane mad young son of a neighbour showed me a really quite impressive WWII flight sim game called Il-2 Sturmovik on his PC some years back where you could fly a Ju-88/FW190 Mistel mission from take-off to attack! I had a go and it was a bitch to aim!!!

Regards,
MM
alas I'm on reach back to memories of the rather slendid aircraft periodical 'take off'. I don't know if it was routine for take off under one engine (doubtful as it's the fighter you want back!) but I was quite taken by the concept. Iirc remote control was electrical. Using standard mains plugs and sockets taped into place. On breakaway they just pulled out. I remember trying to work that out because I didn't realise there was an other type of plug than the British three pin.
 
Bit of film here showing Mustangs teararrsing around France shooting the bejasus out of everything in sight. Including a Mistel.


Dunno why the 190 pilot didn’t dump the bomber and scarper.

Includes film of a Luftwaffe airfield getting the very bad news. Either caught on the hop or out of pilots and/or fuel.

(Might have posted this before).
 
I'd hate to think what the misteltoe would drop as a weapon, and would ships be their primary target?
An 8,000 shaped charge. Look at the picture on the front of the book a few posts up.

I watched another video which claimed that the first Mistel attack on shipping around the Normandy beachhead scored four out of five hits on Allied ships. The wiki entry disputes this and says they only hit an old Frog cruiser used as a decoy ship.

They were used for bridge destruction but were pretty useless.

A bit of a desperate measure and as with so many German ideas firmly in the “too little, too late” category. It was bad enough being a 190 pilot up against Mustangs but suicide with an old bomber strapped to your arse,
 
An 8,000 shaped charge. Look at the picture on the front of the book a few posts up.

I watched another video which claimed that the first Mistel attack on shipping around the Normandy beachhead scored four out of five hits on Allied ships. The wiki entry disputes this and says they only hit an old Frog cruiser used as a decoy ship.

They were used for bridge destruction but were pretty useless.

A bit of a desperate measure and as with so many German ideas firmly in the “too little, too late” category. It was bad enough being a 190 pilot up against Mustangs but suicide with an old bomber strapped to your arse,
I mentioned the 'misteltoe' that MM came up with, not the mistel!

My post may have been a bit cryptic but as 'mistletoe' has white blobby berries that are said to represent semen in traditional pagan mythology (hence kissing under mistltoe to aid fertility) I wondered if a 'semen weapon' would be used against ships :)
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Top