nazi saucers

[NeuralDream]

The B-2 has nothing to do with the 229. Some Northrop Grumman engineers visited the museum 229 while building the B-2, but that was all. The closest well-known ancestor of the 229 is anothe Northrop aircraft from the late 1940s. The Northrop YB-49.

[stellung]

This is nonsense. Aviation writer Bill Sweetman made the obvious connection right down to the short tail of both aircraft.

[JTG]

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic. ... 46&start=0

[Edward L. Hsiao]

Anyone have links to Foo-Fighters?

Edward L. Hsiao

[AllenM]

I am not aware of any good links for the "floating mystery balls" or 'foo fighters.' Aside from the work of Josef Andreas Epp, who claims to have built circular aircraft, there is little other source material. My research indicates that this new 'secret weapon,' which has no given offensive capability, was a balloon harassment 'weapon' for use against Allied night-fighters. Balloons can be picked up on radar and would represent false targets.

[Ken S.]

"What Were the Mysterious “Foo Fighters” Sighted by WWII Night Flyers?"
https://www.airspacemag.com/history-of- ... 180959847/

Mysterious UFOs Seen by WWII Airman Still Unexplained
https://www.history.com/news/wwii-ufos- ... o-fighters

Veteran talks of the ‘Foo Fighters’
https://www.heraldtribune.com/article/L ... 5225778/SH

Bel Air man writes of UFOs in wartime
https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xp ... story.html

Apologetics aside, is a foo fighter a naive sighting of a real, historical weapon? No, it is absolutely not. Is it a Nazi flying saucer or an extraterrestrial spaceship? I'm afraid not, but these theories sell magazines and make lots of bucks. Many Ufologists have been very receptive to my refutation of the "jet" hypothysis because it tends to support their own claims of alien visitors. My intentions from the outset have been to resolve this mystery using a rational, although unorthodox, scientific method. It is my stern belief that what these airmen were reporting was an intensely real set of illusory experiences which have become associated with disorientation-vertigo syndromes in night flying. Perhaps one of the most steadfast reasons that Allied intelligence services were so baffled by these "encounters" was due to the fact that no studies existed at the time concerning vertigo, especially when night flying was involved.
https://www.456fis.org/HISTORICAL_&%20P ... ECTIVE.htm


Doesn't mention "foo fighter" but here's a short video about a veteran of the unit that first reported sightings of them:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTFztWHVVFo

[Cantankerous]

the russians got hold of the factory that were making the people fighter
and fw ta P183 which if u look at it's design is very simular to the migs of the fiftys :twisted:

No Focke-Wulf Ta 183 were built, only scale models. I do know the similalities between the early Mig jets and the Ta 183, the Brazillians had a jet called the Pullquie (spelling?) Kurt Tank himself helped design, it too was similar to the Ta 183 though it was somewhat refined.

I very much doubt that the Germans developed anything like the 'Foo Fighters' AKA the Kugelblitz or the Fuerball, they are just made up. The most advanced designs were aircraft like the Junkers Ju 187 (the forward swept-wing jet bomber), check out the Luftwaffe 46 site.

Is there any REAL evidence that suggests that the Germans develped any such advanced aircraft :

The Messerschmitt company constructed a prototype of the P.1101 swept wing jet fighter, which was nearly complete when US Army units overran the Messerschmitt facility in Oberammergau where the P.1101 was being built. The Horten brothers designed and built the Ho IX/Ho 229 flying wing fighter, of which two prototypes were made and four additional prototypes were in varying stages of completion, with the Ho 229 V3 nearly complete and the Ho 229 V4 was around 50 percent completion.

The Junkers forward swept wing jet bomber was designated Ju 287, not Ju 187. Two prototypes were constructed, with the fuselage and landing gear using components from derelict He 177s, Ju 188s, and downed B-24s, and the wings being built from scratch, and only the first prototype was flown, the second prototype being nearly complete before the Ju 287 program was suspended in late September 1944 due to the worsening war situation for Nazi Germany. The Junkers design with the RLM designation Ju 187 was a proposed follow-on to the Ju 87, designed in 1941 and differing in having a retractable landing gear and a tail empennage that could rotate 90 degrees. The Ju 287 designation was initially applied to a 1942/1943 design study by Junkers for a Ju 87 replacement that also utilized a vertical stabilizer which could swivel downwards at 90 degrees, but differed from the Ju 187 in that its vertical stabilizer was triangular. The Ju 287 dive bomber project only got as far as a mock-up before it was shelved in the first half of 1943.

[ewest89]

The usual "if it's not on the internet then we don't know" nonsense. Get some books. John Frost of AVRO Canada was working on a heel-shaped aircraft called Project Y. This was abandoned and work began on a completely circular aircraft. In 1938, Henri Coanda filed patents related to a circular aircraft he was working on. He didn't call it a saucer, he called it an aerodyne. In 1940, after the Germans conquered France, they enlisted Coanda for further development of his 'saucer.' At the end of the war, he was found by an Anglo-American intelligence team. He was wanted by the French government for collaboration. He was taken to the United States. Wright Field in Dayton, Ohio had all the available information. In Germany, the Counter-Intelligence Corps was tasked with locating anyone involved with the saucer project, including a relative of the Horten brothers.

In 1947, Wright Field sent a letter to Brigadier General Schulgen who requested their opinion on 'flying discs.' Their reply included valuable information but claimed to be unable to draw any final conclusion.

After the war, in a published interview, Henri Coanda stated that those who had worked with him had been captured by the Russians. The flying saucer had been completed for the U.S. Air Force by AVRO Canada, who then took possession. It was used as a highly secret reconnaissance aircraft, which explains any stories about aliens. Its circular shape made it hard to detect on radar.

The B-2 bomber is a direct descendant of the Horten IX.

The Horten XVIII was undergoing assembly in an underground factory in Kahla, in Thuringia. This was a jet propelled, intercontinental bomber.

https://www.amazon.de/Die-Realit%C3%A4t ... 3895396052

https://www.amazon.com/Secret-Projects- ... 1857802330

https://www.amazon.com/Nurflu%CC%88gel- ... 3900310092

Concerning the Natter:

https://mjamesmilitarybooks.com/product ... hird-reich

[Michael Kenny]

The B-2 bomber is a direct descendant of the Horten IX.

In the same way a nuclear aircraft carrier is a direct descendant of Noah's Ark

[T. A. Gardner]

The B-2 bomber is a direct descendant of the Horten IX.

No, that's complete BS. The B-2 is based on a long line of Northrop flying wings including the B-35 and B-49 flying wing bombers. The XP-79 is contemporary with the Horten IX (aka Go 229). Maybe you should read



Northrop didn't rely on anything the Horten brothers did in WW 2. Northrop had more hours of flight testing on their flying wings, more wind tunnel time, and well, everything else, on flying wings by the 50's than the Horten brothers would ever get. At least Northrop's flying wings actually flew more than once...

[Cantankerous]

The B-2 bomber is a direct descendant of the Horten IX.

No, that's complete BS. The B-2 is based on a long line of Northrop flying wings including the B-35 and B-49 flying wing bombers. The XP-79 is contemporary with the Horten IX (aka Go 229). Maybe you should read



Northrop didn't rely on anything the Horten brothers did in WW 2. Northrop had more hours of flight testing on their flying wings, more wind tunnel time, and well, everything else, on flying wings by the 50's than the Horten brothers would ever get. At least Northrop's flying wings actually flew more than once...

Arado, Messerschmitt, Focke-Wulf, and Heinkel also worked on designs for flying wing aircraft (almost nothing is known about the Heinkel P.1070 flying wing bomber project from early 1943 other than the fact that it had four turbojets). And it's unclear if the Horten brothers knew nothing about Northrop's aeronautical research when building their first tailless aircraft in the early 1930s.

[T. A. Gardner]

The B-2 bomber is a direct descendant of the Horten IX.

No, that's complete BS. The B-2 is based on a long line of Northrop flying wings including the B-35 and B-49 flying wing bombers. The XP-79 is contemporary with the Horten IX (aka Go 229). Maybe you should read



Northrop didn't rely on anything the Horten brothers did in WW 2. Northrop had more hours of flight testing on their flying wings, more wind tunnel time, and well, everything else, on flying wings by the 50's than the Horten brothers would ever get. At least Northrop's flying wings actually flew more than once...

Arado, Messerschmitt, Focke-Wulf, and Heinkel also worked on designs for flying wing aircraft (almost nothing is known about the Heinkel P.1070 flying wing bomber project from early 1943 other than the fact that it had four turbojets). And it's unclear if the Horten brothers knew nothing about Northrop's aeronautical research when building their first tailless aircraft in the early 1930s.

Pre-war, I suspect that the flying wing enthusiasts were working mostly independently of one and other. Certainly Chyeranovskii in the Soviet Union had only limited access to other nation's work. In the early 30's a lot of really seat of the pants experimental aviation was still going on. Given the economic situation globally, I'd guess that it was also difficult to just get enough funds to do anything other than doodle on paper.

My earlier post directly addressed what ewest posted. The B-2 owes NOTHING to anything the Hortens, and German aviation for that matter, did. Northrop had plenty of inhouse experience with flying wings. I'll add that the Horten brothers did continue to try and develop aircraft postwar--unsuccessfully--in Argentina like Kurt Tank did. Was at least able to get a few prototypes built.

[ewest89]

The B-2 bomber is a direct descendant of the Horten IX.

No, that's complete BS. The B-2 is based on a long line of Northrop flying wings including the B-35 and B-49 flying wing bombers. The XP-79 is contemporary with the Horten IX (aka Go 229). Maybe you should read



Northrop didn't rely on anything the Horten brothers did in WW 2. Northrop had more hours of flight testing on their flying wings, more wind tunnel time, and well, everything else, on flying wings by the 50's than the Horten brothers would ever get. At least Northrop's flying wings actually flew more than once...

Mister Gardner,

I have that book. I read it. Nothing you say is credible. You want a hard dividing line between German and American work. That did not happen. And you uncritically accept, again, the common story: The Horten Ho iX flew once. Ridiculous and unsubstantiated.

Get this book and read the review: https://www.cybermodeler.com/hobby/ref/ ... o229.shtml

[T. A. Gardner]

The B-2 bomber is a direct descendant of the Horten IX.

No, that's complete BS. The B-2 is based on a long line of Northrop flying wings including the B-35 and B-49 flying wing bombers. The XP-79 is contemporary with the Horten IX (aka Go 229). Maybe you should read



Northrop didn't rely on anything the Horten brothers did in WW 2. Northrop had more hours of flight testing on their flying wings, more wind tunnel time, and well, everything else, on flying wings by the 50's than the Horten brothers would ever get. At least Northrop's flying wings actually flew more than once...

Mister Gardner,

I have that book. I read it. Nothing you say is credible. You want a hard dividing line between German and American work. That did not happen. And you uncritically accept, again, the common story: The Horten Ho iX flew once. Ridiculous and unsubstantiated.

Get this book and read the review: https://www.cybermodeler.com/hobby/ref/ ... o229.shtml

Then you obviously didn't read it, or anything else about Northrop and flying wings during WW 2. The B-35 was proposed in early 1941 and two prototypes were approved for production right after Pearl Harbor. Northrop produced the N-9M scale aircraft as flying testbeds for the full-scale developments by late 1941 and the two B-35 prototypes were in advanced design stages by the end of 1942.

The Horton brothers had nothing close to that by the end of 1942. So, how did Jack Northrop and his engineers channel what the Horton's were doing and use it in their designs?

The B-35, and for that matter the XP-79 or even the MX-324 rocket flying wing, all precede the US knowing anything about what the Horten's were doing. They were US designs, using US engineering, and owe NOTHING to anything wartime Germany was doing with flying wings. NOTHING!

I'll add this from the link you gave as part of their book review:

The Ho 229 was to be the first viable combat aircraft out of this research.

This is nonsense. The Ho 229 flew just a few times for a few minutes. It never flew close to its intended top speed, and certainly didn't undergo enough flight testing to actually determine if it was anywhere close to a viable combat aircraft. Given Northrop's much more extensive testing of flying wings during WW 2, along with far more extensive wind tunnel testing, I say that statement in the review is utter nonsense.

Northrop, and the NACA, showed pretty conclusively that a jet flying wing was going to need a substantial vertical tail added to come close to being stable in flight. The Horten design lacked one, and that would have almost certainly showed up in a proper amount of flight testing--that never occurred.

[ewest89]

Your reply drips with bias. On the back cover of the book The Horten Flying Wing in World War II by H.P. Dabrowski, there are two photos: one shows the H VII, and the other, the B-2. The caption states: "Forty-five years lie between these two photographs!"