He 162A-2 FE-0504 W Nr 120230 Stock No. 3609-01-1415-HE162 ![]() Powered by FreeWebsiteTranslation |
|
|
|
|
Above photos at Freeman Field |
Source | Disposition |
NASM | Manufactured by Heinkel at Rostock-Marienehe and captured by the British at Leck on May 8, 1945 |
War Prizes 217 |
At Freeman Field on 1 August 1946 |
NASM | FE/T2-504 was apparently never flown. |
NASM | Its flying days ended permanently when someone at Freeman Field neatly sawed through the outer wing panels sometime before September 1946. The wings were reattached with door hinges and the jet was shipped to air shows and military displays around the country. |
NASM | The U. S. Air Force transferred the aircraft to the Smithsonian Institution in 1949 |
NASM | Remained in stored at Park Ridge, Illinois, until transfer to the Garber Facility in January 1955. |
War Prizes 217 |
This aircraft is at present with the National Air and Space Museum, Silver Hill, Maryland. |
Wingspan | 7.2 m (23 ft. 7.75 in.) |
Length | 9 m (29 ft. 8.5 in. |
Height | 2.55 m (8 ft. 4.375 in.) |
Weight | 1,750 kg (3,859 lb.) empty |
![]()
|
|
SECRET.
A.D.I.(K)
Report No. 340 / 1945
THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION HAS BEEN OBTAINED FROM P/W. AS THE
STATEMENTS MADE HAVE NOT BEEN
VERIFIED, NO MENTION OF THEM
SHOULD BE MADE IN INTELLIGENCE
SUMMARIES OF COMMANDS OR
LOWER FORMATIONS, NOR SHOULD THEY
BE ACCEPTED AS FACTS UNTIL
COMMENTED ON IN AIR MINISTRY
INTELLIGENCE SUMMARIES OR SPECIAL
COMMUNICATIONS.
ARGUMENTS
FOR AND AGAINST THE VOLKSJÄGER. 1.
The following information on the
Volksjäger project was obtained from captured documents and from
interrogation of Generalleutnant Galland, General der
Jagdflieger (A.O.C. fighters),
and General
Feldmarschall Milch who was Generalluftzeugmeister until June
1944 and was thereafter transferred to the Speer Ministry. 2.
The captured documents which were
found in the possession of Herr Seiler, the Chairman of the
Messerschmitt concern, apparently form part of a dossier
prepared by Messerschmitt in order to demonstrate the all around
superiority of the Me.262 over the Volksjäger and to defend
themselves against possible future charges of inefficiency in
the production of the Me. 262. 3.
The attached Appendix contains a
full translation of one of the documents which includes an
interesting memorandum drawn up by Professor Messerschmitt on
the inferiority of the Volksjäger as compared with the Me. 262.
The originals both of this document and the others which are
mentioned later in this report are being listed and circulated
by A.D.I. (K). Documents Section. The Parentage of the
Volksjäger. 4.
The actual conception of the
Volksjäger project appears to be a subject for considerable
controversy and the attribution of paternity is rendered
difficult by the mutual denial of responsibility by all
concerned, when the project was ultimately realized to have been
a failure. 5.
According to Galland’s account, the
person responsible for the formulation of the idea of a cheap
single jet fighter capable of mass production was
Hauptdienstleiter Saur, head of the Jägerstab and later of the
Rüstungsstab, aided and abetted, if officials of the
Messerschmitt concern are to be believed, by a number of R.L.M.
personalities including General Ing. Lucht, Oberst Diesing and
Oberstleutnant Kneemeyer. 6.
In a document drawn up by the
Messerschmitt concern, however, attacking the Volksjäger
project, the responsibility is shifted by Saur himself to the
shoulders of Generaldirektor Frydag, the head of the main
commission for airframes as well as a Heinkel official. This
document, which was drawn up in April 1944 and therefore gave
all those concerned ample opportunity for being wise after the
event, shows that Saur when challenged with his responsibility
for the misguided project with a suggestion that its originator
was a criminal, declared that Frydag was the person who was
really to blame. 7.
The same document shows that in
April 1945 Frydag was interviewed at Murnau by Professor
Messerschmitt and two other leading members of the Messerschmitt
firm and was taxed to his face with his share in the development
of the Volksjäger plan. Frydag is said to have maintained an
imperturbable demeanor throughout the attack made on him and to
have declared that he never supported the scheme, but on the
contrary had always been definitely opposed to it. 8.
He in his turn attributed the
conception of the idea to Saur and the R.L.M. and stated that
the plan was submitted to Göring and later to Hitler without his
advice being asked. Later, when the decision that such an
aircraft was to go into production, had been made, he submitted
and lent his cooperation. 9.
It is evident from this interview
and from other documents that the Messerschmitt company strove
from the first to oppose the Volksjäger, and in the Murnau
interview Frydag rather ingenuously remarked that he had to
consider the interests of Heinkel who were responsible for
designing the aircraft. 10.
In this
connection Milch, although he had no personal connection with
the whole project, was of the opinion that such a type
had first been conceived by Heinkel in an attempt to retrieve
their reputation and their financial position, both of which had
been compromised by the outstanding failure of the He.177. 11.
According to Milch, Heinkel and
Frydag may then have injected into Saur’s mind the idea of
building masses of such an aircraft. Saur being an energetic and
forceful individual and an extremely capable salesman is then
credited with having sold the idea to Göring and later to Hitler
with the assistance of various R.L.M. officials. 12.
Final judgment must be left pending
until further evidence becomes available, but it is at least
interesting to see how, under the shadow of impending defeat,
none of the leading figures concerned was willing to accept the
responsibility for the conception of the Volksjäger project and
with what eagerness they sought to pass the baby to another of
their number. The Development of
the Volksjäger. 13.
Galland states that once the
decision had been taken to create a cheap single-jet 14.
P/W states that he opposed cogent
arguments against the adoption of such a type, but that he was
overruled and that the project was adopted and forthwith
recommended to Hitler by Göring and Saur. A curious light is
thrown on these events by a document which purports to record
the interrogation of Flugbaumeister Malz, of the S.E. and T.E.
fighter section of Fl.-E-2, the R.L.M. department dealing with
the development of aircraft types. 15.
Malz is recorded as having made the
astounding statement that when Lucht, Diesing and Kneemeyer made
their decisive report on the 162 to Göring certain technical
documents required to support their case lacking and that in
consequence Malz was ordered to have faked pictures of the 162
prepared by a cinema expert on such subjects. The faked pictures
included views purporting to show the 162 above the clouds and
executing a roll. 16.
These fakes must have served their
purpose, for the Heinkel design was accepted in September 1944
and thereafter went ahead with extreme rapidity. The blueprints
are said to have been ready in November and the first two
machines of this type took to the air in the following month. It
is interesting to note that the aircraft was said to have been
put into production straight from the drawing board and that no
prototype in the accepted sense was built. Opposition to the
Project. 17.
Galland states that he was not
alone in his opposition to the Volksjäger but that he was
seconded by such eminent designers as Professor Messerschmitt
and Dr. Kurt Tank of Focke Wulf. In view of his position his own
objections were naturally based mostly on technical grounds; he
considered the aircraft to represent a retrograde step as
compared to the Me. 262, on account of the Volksjäger’s short
range, light armament and restricted field of view and the small
quantity of ammunition which it could carry. 18.
From the point of view of
production, P/W considered that in view of the superior
performance of the Me.262 as compared to the 162, any surplus
manufacturing capacity which had become available by cessation
of bomber production should be made available for building the
former aircraft. 19.
As will soon be seen from the
attached Appendix, Professor Messerschmitt put forward a very
closely reasoned and plausible case against the 162, based
partly on the same tactical arguments as those of Galland and
partly on the impossibility of bringing the aircraft into
production in sufficient numbers in time for the decisive spring
battles of 1945. The conclusion of Messerschmitt’s argument was
that the 162 should therefore be dropped and that the production
capacity set free should be used to bolster up the
unsatisfactory Me.262 output, a view in which he may not have
been entirely objective. 20.
According to Galland, all these
arguments were defeated at the decisive meeting presided over by
Göring by the opposition of the production planners who argued
that for technical reasons it would be impossible for factories
scheduled to manufacture the Volksjäger to switch over to the
Me.262. A.D.I.(K) and DISTRIBUTION. Air Ministry: A.C.A.S.
(I); A.C.A.S. (Ops); A.C.A.S. (T.R.); A.D.I.(Sc) (2) A.I.1(c)
A.I.2(a) (2);
A.I.2(g) (4); A.I.3(
D.Arm.R.; D.B. Ops.;
D.D.I.2; D.D.I.3; D.of I(0); Commands:
Fighter (2); Bomber (3); Eighth Air
Force (8); A-2 SHAEF Forward (3); SHAEF
Rear (Stanmore); S.I.A.S., G-2
SHAEF
(7); USSTAF Rear
(Major Sheldon) (3); A.P./ W.I.U. (8). War Office:
M.I. 19 (For W.O. distribution)
(14); C.S.D.I.C. (U.K.) (5). M.A.P.
C.E. ; C.R.D. ; D.S.R. ; D.T.D. ;
R.A.E. (6); R.D.T. 1 (b); T.R.P. 2 (2); P.S. 18 (20). Miscellaneous: A.D.I. ;
A.C.I.U. (4); A.D. , C.C.G. (5); A.F.Div.A.C.A. ; C.I.C.S. (6);
Deuxiè e Bureau; ETOUSA (P/W & X Det. MIS) (27); I.&R.C.C.G.
(2); J.H.R.S.; Ministère de l’Air; U.S.G.C.C., Austria; H.A.W.
American Embassy. APPENDIX
SECRET
PROFESSOR MESSERSCHMITT ‘S
OPINION OF THE VOLKSJÄGER PROJECT.
(From a document drawn up by Prof.
Messerschmitt and dated October 1944).
My opinion can be resumed as
follows:-
I regard the project for producing
a cheap jet fighter with a B.M.W. 003A propulsion unit for
operational use in large numbers in the spring of 1945 as having
failed, at any rate in its present-day form.
1. The technical requirements
postulated are erroneous as the functions of the Volksjäger can
be better carried out by existing and proved aircraft. A
development which does not conform in performance to existing
technical possibilities is always behind the times.
2. It is improbable that a newly
developed aircraft, with all its attendant risks, will permit us
to throw any notable number of aircraft into battle in the
spring of 1945. On the other hand, if we use the additional
capacity projected for this plan to increase the output of our
present types, we can produce at least the same number of proven
aircraft types in the same period without having to take into
consideration the risk attaching to a new development, and the
consequences arising there-from. On top of that we would have a
superior and proven aircraft. It must not be forgotten that in
order to manufacture several thousands of the new type of
fighter it will be necessary to carry out very considerable work
in the way of preparations, procurement of equipment, etc.,
which until next spring will have to be undertaken in addition
to the actual manufacture of
the aircraft.
3. In my opinion there is not the
slightest possibility that the Volksjäger programme can become
sufficiently advanced by spring 1945 to warrant our counting on
the aircraft becoming operational in large numbers.
4.It is a delusion to think that
the 162 can be developed and produced by “surplus manufacturing
capacity” without disturbing production of current types, and in
particular of the Me.262.
Me.262 production is not yet well
established. Jigs, skilled labor and control personnel are still
lacking.
Moreover, the manufacturing
capacity now earmarked for the special 162 programme is urgently
required for the further development of our existing jet
fighters, or the creation of a new type offering a guarantee
that we shall not again immediately lose to the enemy the
technical superiority which we derive at the moment from the
Me.262. Conclusion:
At the moment the Me.262 is a
really superior weapon, and according to all competent
authorities must form the backbone of aerial defense in the
decisive battles of the spring of 1945. Moreover, the Me.262 is
a tangible reality whilst the 162 is only a hope, which also
promises no improvement in performance.
I am unable to understand
the whole plan to develop and put into mass production, at the
costs of enormous efforts, a new aircraft with such an
unpredictable production schedule, and this just at the present
moment, when we have at last, in the Me.262, a superior fighter
at our disposal.
In my opinion the entire surplus capacity,
both industrial and military, which is earmarked for the
development and introduction of the new type, must be employed
to ensure that the non-recurring chance given us by our present
superiority in performance may be exploited to the utmost. With
this capacity aircraft of existing high performance types must
be produced in the largest numbers imaginable. The whole of the
G.A.F. must be trained and organized in the best way for these
new types by next spring. In this particular case I see no
reason to stake all on one card, nor do I see any prospects of
profit in this game.
As in 1941 the English, under our
attacks, built up their defense with Spitfires and attained
complete success, so we to-day possess in every way better and
surer means to attain this end.
I ask that this intervention for
the Me.262 as against the 162 may not be charged against me as
propaganda for my own firm; in such a matter we are to-day
surely far beyond such considerations.
Instead of developing and bringing
into production an aircraft type which is in no way superior to
existing types, I regard it as urgently necessary to create a
jet aircraft of increased performance and the most modern design
– this might well be a single jet fighter – incorporating the
knowledge of the year 1944 and to be brought into mass
production as soon as possible. For this task in my opinion the
requisite development capacity should be employed immediately
and capacity for series production in the form of special
programmes should only be made available when the material for
the spring battles of 1945 has been assured and when the
prospects of the type under development can be judged.
(Messerschmitt) October 1944. SECRET
Additional Notes on “MY ATTITUDE
TO THE VOLKSJÄGER PROJECT”. To Point 1.
At the present time we possess in
our jet aircraft a real and in fact a great superiority of
performance over the enemy; we cannot assume that this
superiority will remain with us for long. The enemy has shown
that, with the immense productive capacity and the most modern
research facilities at his disposal he has hitherto been able to
catch up with our lead in technical matters. We know that he has
been flying jet aircraft for a considerable time and that he had
every intention of using them operationally this autumn. We must
seriously consider the possibility, or rather the probability,
that this winter or next spring we will find ourselves faced
with jet aircraft which may be equal, or perhaps even superior,
to the Me.262. In the past years we have continually made the mistake of under-estimating the enemy and to-day we can see the results of this. We have every reason to strain ourselves to the utmost to ensure that our development proceeds faster than that of the enemy, or at least as fast. We well know that more aircraft of superior performance to the Me.262 can be built, and we have to-day some knowledge of the physical laws governing developments in this sphere. We also know that the enemy has at his disposal an immense productive capacity and a very modern research organization which is at least as well acquainted with the laws of high speed flight as we are.
No effort would be too great to
realize the most rapid development possible of an aircraft with
a superior performance to the Me.262; we do not however need a
machine with an inferior performance, which is what is
contemplated in the case of the 162. This type should therefore
be rejected.
I remember how we struggled to
improve the performance of the aircraft we have built to date
and how the slightest superiority in the performance of enemy
aircraft has immediately become evident in aerial combat.
Exactly the same struggle to increase speed by a single
kilometre per hour and to improve range, armour and armament
naturally now lies before us in the case of jet aircraft. In my
opinion it is incomprehensibly short-sighted to begin this
struggle by taking a retrograde step of our own volition at a
moment when we have attained a measure of superiority. To Point 2.
The demand for the Volksjäger is
founded on the assumption that as the enemy’s superiority is
based on numbers we, in order to equalize the position, must
take the field with a cheap mass-produced article which is
within our own productive capacity. It is true enough that we
need very large numbers of fighters and for this reason I have
maintained for years that our fighter production should be
raised to the utmost with all our means even at the cost of
bomber production and thus reach those figures which we are
actually producing today under the most difficult conditions of
the sixth year of the war.
It is however wrong to assume that
we can achieve by spring or summer 1945 a greater number of
aircraft with a newly-developed type than with already existing
types.
I assume that it is intended to
produce some 4,000 162s for the operations of the summer of
1945, i.e. by a)
During this period, the Volksjäger
will go through the initial stages leading up to full series
production (Serienanlauf) and this process will be hastened to
the utmost and consequently uneconomical of man-hours. At
present no definitive experience is available, and the series
will therefore have to suffer from constant modifications.
Our own experience has shown that
during the initial stages of series production an expenditure of
some seven times the normal number of working hours must be
reckoned with at the beginning. In the case of a forced
development the initial stages are even more expensive. b)
In the period to the middle of 1945
not only will man-hours have to be expended on the manufacture
of the aircraft (including power units etc.) but in addition
provision will have to be made for the production of the whole
of the necessary jigs and of other manufacturing necessities.
We reckon that this latter task
will take some two and a half million man-hours largely made up
of the time of specialist workers.
On adding up these various items of
outlay, it can clearly be seen that the immense outlay required
for equipment and the initial stages of production which will be
necessary for the introduction of the new type can never be made
good in the few months remaining at our disposal for production, In a word, having regard to the short period
at our disposal, the existing Me.262 is the cheaper aircraft and
it can be also be produced in greater numbers. c)
One serious fallacy in the
presentation of the Volksjäger scheme renders efforts to obtain
large numbers nothing but an illusion. We do not need large
numbers of aircraft standing on airfields but in operation
against the enemy. If we use a third of the fuel to produce half
of the engine performance as compared with the Me.262 this means
that with power units of equal performance we would be
decreasing the range by a third and therefore the effective
operational area of the aircraft in square kilometres by more
than half.
Bluntly, owning to the too small
design of the “mass-produced fighter” we are depriving the
machine of the possibility of coming into action in large
numbers thanks to concentration at the decisive place where it
is needed, i.e. where the enemy penetrates our territory!
Again I see no grounds for
believing that the new type will prove economical in its use of
fuel, because the Volksjäger is designed for too short a range
to make it an economical proposition.
When you take into account the time
that remains for actual combat after deducting the fuel used in
taxying, taking off, climbing, outward flight, return flight,
landing etc. then it becomes quite clear and undeniable that the
Volksjäger, because of its too small dimensions, uses more fuel
for every minute of aerial combat (and these are the only ones
that are really productive) than a larger but more correctly
designed machine. In this connection I would like to draw
attention to the fact that for years past we have continuously
had to take steps to increase the range of all our types. Even
the Me.262, after be chosen in preference to the He.280, mainly
on the ground of its larger fuel capacity, has been fitted with
additional tanks.
Why is it thought that the 162
requires a smaller range than other aircraft? The entire
conception of the extraordinary economical performance of the
162 appears to me to be fallacious.
The Me.262 consumes, it is true,
100% more fuel per hour than the Volksjäger; the Me.262
however
carries 100% heavier armament and 350% more ammunition.
Moreover, if required, the armament can be raised to 200% more
than in the 162.
The Me.262 requires 100% more fuel
but it possesses a 100% superior armour protection for the pilot
(superior because heavier) and carries fuel tank armour weighing
220 kg.
Everyone knows the value of fuel
tank armour in reducing losses. Is not a reduction in losses in
materials and lives also economical? To Point 3. The desire to throw very large numbers of the Volksjäger, which is still to be developed, into operations so early as the spring battles of 1945, with the hope that it will prove a decisive factor, appears to me to be a misleading conception. It is expected that within six months an aircraft can be designed, built, tested and manufactured in a large series which must embrace the results of testing and the elimination of defects! It is expected in addition that within this period of six months the whole necessary organization within the G.A.F. can be built up, including the training of air crews and ground staff, the setting up of pools for the front, repair factories, supply organizations, etc. To Point 4.
The Me.262 has been in production
for about a year and is still in serious difficulty. The desired
output is not being attained, workmanship in the shops is bad
and endangers both the performance and characteristics of the
aircraft, and even to some extent its safety in flight. Even
to-day we still do not possess half the jigs necessary for mass
production. We have to beg and struggle to procure bottle-neck
components and even raw material quotas and it is in such a
situation that it is proposed to develop and manufacture a
completely new aircraft type, to utilize two large aircraft
factories for the purpose, to develop and build jigs – even in
duplicate – for this new type, whilst explaining to us that all
this will be achieved by the use of production capacity which is
not required by the Me.262!
The 162 programme will not be
executed with free surplus manufacturing capacity as it is
stated, but will be built up with resources which even today are
not available for the Me.262. -o-o-o-o-o-o-o- SECRET
|
|
|
|
![]() jimdwest@centurylink.net www.IndianaMilitary.org |