redvannerIiRC it was a bit complicated and a political decision as well. Responsibility for the Natter project was transferred from Luftwaffe RLM to SS. Erich Bachem and his people did not think the Natter to be fit and ready for a manned flight. SS however wanted the first flight to be prior or on April 20., Hitlers birthday. Interestingly the pilot, Leutnant Siebert had no testpilott experience at all. He expected a court martial due to insubordience. SS approached him, saying he would avoid pünishment if he agreed to volunteer for testflying the Natter. As stated above in the description of the Natter’s instrumentation, an autopilot was installed, which flew the plane to a specified altitude. Leutnant Siebert however did not trust the autopilot, and ordered the autopilot to be disabled. After take off the Natter at some altitude went into the clouds, lost the canopy. When it reappeared, it went vertically into the ground with engine at full thrust. So it can be only a guess, why the accident happened. One explanation was,, that Siebert might have panicked, pulled the canopy release lever, lost his heading and ran right into the ground. Might be, might not, your guess is probably as good as mine….
Michael
redvannerA flyer would be quite a feat 😮 Any volunteers?
Bc
Thanks for posting, neat stuff
I’d guess the Me 163 would be the better plane regarding performance. As both, the Natter and the Komet use the same dangerous Walter
rocketengine and fuels, it will be a dangerous experience. Though with the Natter you’d skip the dangers of take off and landing. IMHO insurance might be a slight problem as well, especially lifeinsurance.
Michael
redvannerG-AWHA went to Germany, Siegerland airport, IIRC owner was at that time LSV Hellertal. German reg. was D-CAGI. Last flight (if you do not count the one under a CH-53 to Munich) was on an airshow. I am not sure, but I seem to remember the British pilot was a Tim ? Thomas. Standing several years in the open did nothing good to her. As the plane was not even locked (I know for sure, as I sat in the cockpit as a boy of 14), some “fans” lifted souvenirs. When she was donated to Deutsches Museum, the overall state was a very sad one. Pics below (not by me):
Michael
[ATTACH=CONFIG]235148[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]235149[/ATTACH]
redvannerFrom the 109 restorers group on Fb..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ErSWXk2uXgQ
If you use the link below, you can choose of several (11) DB 605 videoclips of this poster: :applause:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtMNMAbvsRrrSC9Ig1j5dcg
Michael
redvannerThank you for your pics and updates Matthias.
BTW if any of you is interested in even more pics of the DB 605, Matthias has a lot more posted on MeierMotors homepage, go to Messerschmitt Bf 109 G-6 “Schwarze 8” (“Black 8”).
Michael
redvannerThe mischievous small boy that still dwells within me notes that if the cross-section of a Bf110 engine cowling was so close to that of a Spitfire, how much fun it would have been to fit Merlins to a Bf110! One for the what-if brigade, methinks 😀
Seconded if there were several flying Me 110. As there are none AFAIK I am quite sure no one would do this conversion. Though never say never again.
Regarding the original idea of recreating the Spitfire V with DB 605…… well, I am still hoping someone has the balls, money and will to do it. It would be truly a one of a kind. As Spitfire V airframes are not that rare, it would be for sure an interesting project, main problem would be getting the DB 605. The problem with getting it approved by British Aviation Authorities….., well, you always could register it in Germany. As the original one was registered in Germany, it should not be that much of a problem. But I strongly doubt, I will see it. But never loose hope, lol. 😀
Michael
redvannerOooh interesting!
That’ll look grand coming round the bend with the 109E and three EADS DB Buchons in September.
There might be 3 DB Buchons around (though I am not sure if this September), but I strongly doubt there will be more than 1 EADS DB Buchons in the air at a given time. Why? Due to EADS´ (now Messerschmitt Flugmuseum´s) policy, they kept going for a lot of years. IIRC they state somewhere in their statues to conserve the a/c for future gnerations, keeping them flying. It translates as follows: Do not get too many hours on the engines, therefore keep participation at airshows restricted to (very) few, selected airshows, without long transfer flights. I can not remember that more than 1 of their 109´s were in the air at the same time, though I would not say it will never happen. It might be they get 2 of them in the air at the same time, but 3? I´d say the chance for that is nil. BTW G-6 D-FMBB is waiting for her main overhaul, while G-10 D-FDME is still waiting for her engine. Only airworthy one AFAIK is G-4 D-FWME. Additionally there is the question of pilots, I can only remember of 2 of them at the moment, Klaus Plasa and Volker Bau (but maybe I am not up to date).
Michael
(Pics taken by my friend Harald Wiegand in September 2014)
[ATTACH=CONFIG]234762[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]234763[/ATTACH]
redvannerand last but not least, the cannon-covering – Cockpit Messerschmitt Bf109G-14 Hangar10 collection Usedom (static display) –> source internet
[ATTACH=CONFIG]234623[/ATTACH]
I was able to sit in that G-14 some time ago. Space wasn´t too bad at all (being an ex-glider pilot myself, some cockpits offer way too much of space 😉 , and I´m a mere 5 ´9″ ), only thing that was rather annoying was the right part of the instrument panel (going quite low, where the lowest instrument and switch are sitting). This part is restricting the outward moving arc of the leg (when bending like you do, using the left rudder pedal to the stop) quite considerably. If you fly the G-14 you might get used to it, for sure sitting differently with parachute, avoiding banging your leg there by different kind of leg movement. That was the only item that seemed confining. if not ill-placed. But comfort wasn´t an issue in the first place, when designing the cockpit. To be fair, all other parts and items seemed well placed and logical to me.
Michael
redvannerThat’s interesting, since as far as I know, no German calls the Porsche a nine hundred and eleven. It’s a nine eleven, just as it is the U. S. (See my book “The Gold-Plated Porsche: How I spent a Small Fortune on a Used Car.”)
Well, Matthias is of course gramatically correct. Correct is: Einhundertneun, or Einhundertneunzig, to stress the “Onehundred” similar as Zweihundertzehn , Dreihundertachtundachtzig. like twohundredten, threehundredeightyeight. That is gramatically, officially correct. But…. you simply could say Hundertneun, Hundertneunzig – hundrednine, hundredninety – literally translated. It would be more common to say Me Hundertneun, Focke-Wulf Hundertneunzig, though not absolutely correct. And yes, of course you are right with the nineeleven, everybody would say Neunelf -911.
It depends on how correct you want to be, lol.
Michael
redvannerWhilst to a degree they may have done so in the heat of battle, but I doubt they called them that for their interrogation or report purposes. The scenario “I am claiming a vier motor over Osnabruck” just doesn’t work for me and conversational experience with German people also tells me different
It would be even more problematic when the same is applied to Zwei motors. 🙂Matthias, I am really enjoying the posts, particularly around the 109’s.
What is the DB supply availability relative to the airframes being worked on? I would expect that there are obviously enough for the airframes themselves, but are there spare engines available as well?
@ Bomberboy: In German: B- Vierundzwanzig or B-Siebzehn. It is somehow different, in German you first say the second number, then the first. Translated it would sound queer to say B fourtwenty, though B seventeen sounds all right. Same goes for the Me 262. In German we say : zweihundertzweiundsechzig, literally translated twohunderdtwosixty. Short zweisechszwei = twosixtwo. So literally translating can be frustrating, as it get´s you on the wrong path, lol. 😉
Cheers
Michael
redvannerGreat pics Matthias, thanks. It is obvious how nice the engine fits into the structure. A real beauty. If I had the money, I would put a DB 605 into my living room…., or better in my garage where I could let him roar……., lol
Michael
redvannerI found the following pic on airliners.net and thought I’d link it here, it seems progress is being made. Registration is N190AF to add to John Terrell’s list.
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Flug-Werk-FW/2571982/L/&sid=1531cc5bb297f4bb47a8002acce0703a
Interesting they intend to replace theASh engine with a R-2800 (same as the Frasca one at Chino). BTW Jerry Yagen bought the one formerly owned by Bob Russell, with engine and cowling off a Tu-2.
Michael
redvannerFrom me as well, welcome back again Matthias! Your reports were truly missed by the folks on this site (though I kept myself updated elsewhere 😉 ). You truly can be proud of your work!
Cheers
Michael
redvannerThe last two Buchons that came onto the open market (CAF’s, now with Richard Lake, and Kindsvoter’s, now in Germany) each took several years to sell. Boschung paid a premium price for theirs, and will be presumably expecting to sell them on at a profit. An interesting business plan.
Mike, the Kindsvater one was for sale by Hangar10 roughly around 2 to 3 years ago. The asking price was 2 million € IIRC. If it was the high price, or what else, AFAIK there was zero response. When there was the taxiing incident with damage, it was offered for sale as well. Also no response to my knowledge. So they decided to keep it and convert it to a G-12. I would not be surprised if the sale of the Boschung Buchons will take some time as well.
Michael
redvannerNow there is one Buchon of the ex-Connie Edwards batch up for sale by the new owner Boschung Global via Platinum Fighters.
It is c/n 166. reg. N90607, one of the single seaters. If I am not mistaken, it is Yellow 8, on the 4-a/c pics the last one in the rear. Call for price, lol.
Cheers
Michael
Link to Platinums homepage:
Sign In
