Bachem Ba 349

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachem_Ba_349

The Bachem Ba 349 Natter (English: Colubrid, grass-snake) was a World War II
German point-defence rocket-powered interceptor, which was to be used in a very
similar way to a manned surface-to-air missile. After a vertical take-off, which
eliminated the need for airfields, most of the flight to the Allied bombers was
to be controlled by an autopilot. The primary role of the relatively untrained
pilot was to aim the aircraft at its target bomber and fire its armament of
rockets. The pilot and the fuselage containing the rocket-motor would then land
using separate parachutes, while the nose section was disposable. The only
manned vertical take-off flight on 1 March 1945 ended in the death of the test
pilot, Lothar Sieber.

In 1943 Luftwaffe air superiority was being challenged by the Allies over the
Reich and radical innovations were required to overcome the crisis.
Surface-to-air missiles appeared to be a promising approach to counter the
Allied strategic bombing offensive; a variety of projects were started, but
invariably problems with the guidance and homing systems prevented any of these
from attaining operational status. Providing the missile with a pilot, who could
operate a weapon during the brief terminal approach phase, offered a solution.
Submissions for a simple target defence interceptor were requested by the
Luftwaffe in early 1944 under the umbrella of the "Emergency Fighter Program". A
number of simple designs were proposed, including the Heinkel P.1077 Julia, in
which the pilot lay prone (on his stomach), to reduce the frontal area. The
Julia was the front-runner for the contract. The initial plan was to launch the
aircraft vertically, but this concept was later changed to a conventional
horizontal take-off from a tricycle-wheeled trolley, similar to that used by the
first eight prototypes of the Arado Ar 234 jet reconnaissance bomber.

The Natter was designed to be built by unskilled labor with poor-quality tools
and inexpensive material. Various stringent economies were imposed on an already
frugal design. The Natter had no landing gear, which saved weight, expense, and
construction time. Consequently, one of the most unusual features of the machine
was the escape of the pilot and recovery of the machine. The proposed sequence
of these events was as follows: After the attack, the Natter might dive to a
lower altitude and flatten out into level flight. The pilot would then proceed
with a well-practised escape sequence. He would open the cockpit canopy latch;
the canopy flicking backwards on its hinge in the airstream; he would undo his
seat belt and remove his feet from the rudder pedal stirrups. By squeezing a
lever mounted on the control column, he would release a lock at the base of the
column, which would allow him to tilt the column forwards where it could engage
in and undo a safety latch for the nose release mechanism. He would then lean a
little further forward and pull a lever hinged near the floor at the front of
the cockpit. This action frees the nose section, which self-jettisoned as a
result of the reduced aerodynamic pressure at the front of the fuselage. As the
nose section separates, it was intended to briefly pull on two cables that
release a small ribbon parachute stored on the starboard side of the rear
fuselage. The parachute subsequently opens and decelerates the Natter. The pilot
would be ejected from the cockpit by his own inertia and as soon as he was clear
of the fuselage, he would open his personal parachute and descend to the ground.

A parachute was to eject the valuable Walter rocket motor from the rear, which
would decelerate the aircraft and eject the pilot with inertia, but associated
problems were still not fully resolved prior to the war's end.

Role
Rocket-powered interceptor

Manufacturer
Bachem Werke GmbH

Designer
Erich Bachem

First flight
1 March 1945

Primary users
Luftwaffe
Schutzstaffel

Number built
36

By January 1945 Bachem was under pressure from the authorities in Berlin to
carry out a manned flight by the end of February. On 25 February, M22 was in the
experimental launch tower. It was as complete an operational machine as possible
with the Walter HWK 109-509 A1 motor installed for the first time. A dummy pilot
was in the cockpit. Lift-off from the tower was perfect. The engineers and
ground crew watched as the M22 ascended under the combined power of the four
Schmidding boosters and the Walter motor, an estimated total thrust of 6,500 kg
(14,300 lb). The nose separated as programmed and the dummy pilot descended
"safely" under its personal parachute. The remainder of the fuselage came down
under its two large salvage parachutes, but when it hit the ground the Walter
liquid-propellant rocket motor's residual hypergolic propellants (T-Stoff
oxidizer and C-Stoff fuel) exploded and the machine was destroyed.

Despite Bachem's concerns that the test programme had been significantly cut
short, a young volunteer Luftwaffe test pilot, Lothar Sieber, climbed into the
cockpit of the fully fuelled M23 on 1 March. The aircraft was equipped with an
FM transmitter for the purpose of transmitting flight data from various
monitoring sensors in the machine.

A hard wire intercom appears to have been provided between Sieber and the
engineers in the launch bunker using a system similar to that used in the manned
glider flights. Around 1100 am, the M23 was ready for take-off. Low stratus
clouds lay over the Ocksenkopf. The Walter liquid-fueled rocket motor built up
to full thrust and Sieber pushed the button to ignite the four solid boosters.
With a roar, the M23 rose out of a cloud of steam and rocket smoke straight up,
displaying its camouflage paintwork. At an altitude of about 100 to 150 m (330
to 490 ft), the Natter suddenly pitched up into an inverted curve. Initially it
climbed at about 30° to the vertical. At about 500 m (1,600 ft) the cockpit
canopy was seen to fly off. The Natter continued to climb at high speed at an
angle of 15° from the horizontal and disappeared into the clouds. The Walter
motor stalled about 15 seconds after take-off. It is estimated the Natter
reached 1,500 m (4,900 ft), at which point it nose-dived and hit the ground with
great force about 32 seconds later, some kilometres from the launch site.
Unknown at the time, one of the Schmidding boosters failed to jettison and its
remains were dug up at the crash site in 1998.

The pilot was likely unconscious long before the crash. Bachem surmised Sieber
had involuntarily pulled back on the control column under the effect of the 3 G
acceleration. Examination of the canopy, which fell near the launch site, showed
the tip of the latch was bent, suggesting it may not have been in the fully
closed position at launch. The pilot's headrest had been attached to the
underside of the canopy and as the canopy flew off the pilot's head would have
snapped back suddenly about 25 cm (9.8 in), hitting the solid wooden rear upper
cockpit bulkhead, and either knocking Sieber unconscious or breaking his neck.

French forces had captured Waldsee by 25 April 1945 and presumably took control
of the Bachem-Werk. Shortly before the French troops arrived, a group of
Bachem-Werk personnel set out for Austria with five A1 Natters on trailers.
At Bad Wörishofen, the group waited for another squad retreating from Nabern
unter Teck with one completed Natter. Both groups then set out for the Austrian
Alps. One group with two Natters ended up at the junction of the river Inn and
one of its tributaries, the Ötztaler Ache, at Camp Schlatt. The other group went
to St. Leonhard im Pitztal with four aircraft. US troops captured the first
group at Camp Schlatt around 4 May and the second group on the following day.

Specifications (Ba 349B-1)

General characteristics
Crew: 1
Length: 6 m (19 ft 8 in)
Wingspan: 4 m (13 ft 1 in)
Height: 2.25 m (7 ft 5 in) (without fins)
Wing area: 4.7 m2 (51 sq ft)
Empty weight: 880 kg (1,940 lb) fuel expended
Gross weight: 2,232 kg (4,921 lb)

Gross weight boosters jettisoned: 1,769 kg (3,900 lb)
Fuel capacity: 650 kg
Powerplant: 1 × Walter HWK 109-509C-1 bi-fuel rocket motor, 11.2 kN (2,500 lbf)
thrust Hauptofen main chamber

2.9 kN (652 lbf) Marschofen auxiliary chamberPowerplant: 4 × Schmidding SG 34
solid fuel booster rockets, 4.9 kN (1,100 lbf) thrust each

or 2 x 9.8 kN (2,203 lbf) solid fuel booster rockets
Performance
Maximum speed: 1,000 km/h (621 mph; 540 kn) at 5,000 m (16,404 ft)
Cruise speed: 800 km/h (497 mph; 432 kn)
Range: 60 km (37 mi; 32 nmi) after climb at 3,000 m (9,843 ft)

55 km (34 mi)after climb at 6,000 m (19,685 ft)42 km (26 mi)after climb at 9,000
m (29,528 ft)40 km (25 mi)after climb at 10,000 m (32,808 ft)Endurance: 4.36
minutes at 6,000 m (19,685 ft)

3.15 minutes at 9,000 m (29,528 ft)Service ceiling: 12,000 m (39,000 ft)
Rate of climb: 190 m/s (37,000 ft/min)
Time to altitude: 62 seconds to 12 km (7.5 mi)

Armament

24 × 73 mm (2.874 in) Henschel Hs 297 Föhn rocket shells
or 33 × 55 mm (2.165 in) R4M rocket shells
or 2 × 30 mm (1.181 in) MK 108 cannon with 30 rpg (proposed)




*

On 2018-10-31 13:23:15 +0000, Miloch said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachem_Ba_349

This is so like a Wile E. Coyote cunning plan.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

Miloch wrote in
news
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bachem_Ba_349

The Bachem Ba 349 Natter (English: Colubrid, grass-snake) was a World
War II German point-defence rocket-powered interceptor, which was to
be used in a very similar way to a manned surface-to-air missile.
After a vertical take-off, which eliminated the need for airfields,
most of the flight to the Allied bombers was to be controlled by an
autopilot. The primary role of the relatively untrained pilot was to
aim the aircraft at its target bomber and fire its armament of
rockets. The pilot and the fuselage containing the rocket-motor would
then land using separate parachutes, while the nose section was
disposable. The only manned vertical take-off flight on 1 March 1945
ended in the death of the test pilot, Lothar Sieber.

In 1943 Luftwaffe air superiority was being challenged by the Allies
over the Reich and radical innovations were required to overcome the
crisis. Surface-to-air missiles appeared to be a promising approach to
counter the Allied strategic bombing offensive; a variety of projects
were started, but invariably problems with the guidance and homing
systems prevented any of these from attaining operational status.
Providing the missile with a pilot, who could operate a weapon during
the brief terminal approach phase, offered a solution. Submissions for
a simple target defence interceptor were requested by the Luftwaffe in
early 1944 under the umbrella of the "Emergency Fighter Program". A
number of simple designs were proposed, including the Heinkel P.1077
Julia, in which the pilot lay prone (on his stomach), to reduce the
frontal area. The Julia was the front-runner for the contract. The
initial plan was to launch the aircraft vertically, but this concept
was later changed to a conventional horizontal take-off from a
tricycle-wheeled trolley, similar to that used by the first eight
prototypes of the Arado Ar 234 jet reconnaissance bomber.

The Natter was designed to be built by unskilled labor with
poor-quality tools and inexpensive material. Various stringent
economies were imposed on an already frugal design. The Natter had no
landing gear, which saved weight, expense, and construction time.
Consequently, one of the most unusual features of the machine was the
escape of the pilot and recovery of the machine. The proposed sequence
of these events was as follows: After the attack, the Natter might
dive to a lower altitude and flatten out into level flight. The pilot
would then proceed with a well-practised escape sequence. He would
open the cockpit canopy latch; the canopy flicking backwards on its
hinge in the airstream; he would undo his seat belt and remove his
feet from the rudder pedal stirrups. By squeezing a lever mounted on
the control column, he would release a lock at the base of the column,
which would allow him to tilt the column forwards where it could
engage in and undo a safety latch for the nose release mechanism. He
would then lean a little further forward and pull a lever hinged near
the floor at the front of the cockpit. This action frees the nose
section, which self-jettisoned as a result of the reduced aerodynamic
pressure at the front of the fuselage. As the nose section separates,
it was intended to briefly pull on two cables that release a small
ribbon parachute stored on the starboard side of the rear fuselage.
The parachute subsequently opens and decelerates the Natter. The pilot
would be ejected from the cockpit by his own inertia and as soon as he
was clear of the fuselage, he would open his personal parachute and
descend to the ground.

A parachute was to eject the valuable Walter rocket motor from the
rear, which would decelerate the aircraft and eject the pilot with
inertia, but associated problems were still not fully resolved prior
to the war's end.


A very complicated process to shoot
down just one bomber, esp at a time when
every mission contained hundreds of bombers.

In article , Stormin' Norman says...

On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 18:01:28 -0500, Mitchell Holman
wrote:

A very complicated process to shoot
down just one bomber, esp at a time when
every mission contained hundreds of bombers.

That raises an interesting question. On average, I wonder what the
bomber kill rate was for traditional German fighters when the allied
bombers had long range escorts all the way to Berlin?

I also wonder if flak from the German 88's imposed a greater toll on
the bombers than the German fighters?





....according to this webpage...German fighters...

From
https://www.quora.com/How-effective-...ircraft-weapon

"A single gun had only a remote chance of hitting or damaging an Allied bomber.
But many guns were used increasing the chances of a hit or damage.

"Numerous bombers were damaged and some brought down. Numerous crew injured or
killed. But the greater losses were to German fighters



*

Stormin' Norman wrote in
:

On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 18:01:28 -0500, Mitchell Holman
wrote:

A very complicated process to shoot
down just one bomber, esp at a time when
every mission contained hundreds of bombers.

That raises an interesting question. On average, I wonder what the
bomber kill rate was for traditional German fighters when the allied
bombers had long range escorts all the way to Berlin?

I also wonder if flak from the German 88's imposed a greater toll on
the bombers than the German fighters?


My dad's squadron (B-26's) feared flak
much more than fighters. At least you could
shoot back at fighters and sometime you had
escort fighters to keep them busy. Flax was
just a section of sky filled with shrapnel
you had to fly thru to reach the target.
No evasion, you just hope your plane is
luckier than the next guys'.