HOME | DD

Ravenzwood β€” Me 163 Komet

Published: 2011-07-19 09:53:12 +0000 UTC; Views: 14344; Favourites: 213; Downloads: 705
Redirect to original
Description The Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet, designed by Alexander Lippisch, was a German rocket-powered fighter aircraft. It is the only rocket-powered fighter aircraft ever to have been operational. Its design was revolutionary, and the Me 163 was capable of performance unrivaled at the time. Messerschmitt test pilot Rudy Opitz in 1944 reached 1,123 km/h (698 mph). Over 300 aircraft were built, however the Komet proved ineffective as a fighter, having been responsible for the destruction of only about nine Allied aircraft.

Active combat operations began in May 1944, although on a small scale. As expected, the aircraft was extremely fast; and for a time, the Allied fighters were at a complete loss as what to do about it. Singly or in pairs, the Komets attacked, often faster than the opposing fighters could dive in an attempt to intercept them. In any operational sense, the Komet was a failure. Although they shot down 16 aircraft, mainly expensive four-engined bombers, that did not warrant the efforts put into the project. With the projected Me 263, things could have turned out differently, but due to fuel shortages late in the war, few went into combat, and it took an experienced pilot with excellent shooting skills to achieve "kills" with the Me 163.

As part of their alliance, Germany provided the Japanese Empire with plans and an example of the Me 163. One of the two submarines carrying Me 163 parts did not arrive in Japan, so at the time, the Japanese lacked a few important parts, including the turbopump which they could not make themselves. The Japanese Me 163 crashed on its first flight and was completely destroyed.

This replica is a glider.
Related content
Comments: 57

BritishGypsum4 [2019-03-25 20:55:10 +0000 UTC]

Lovely striking red colour.

πŸ‘: 1 ⏩: 0

xeon2018 [2018-03-09 18:02:16 +0000 UTC]

...and the svastika in the tail??

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

Grand-Lobster-King In reply to xeon2018 [2019-02-11 19:43:09 +0000 UTC]

Banned symbol.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

davincipoppalag [2017-01-24 15:27:57 +0000 UTC]

I was in a glider club here in Connecticut and interestingly enough, our FAA examining pilot and club member was Rudy Opitz, who had been one of the chief test pilots in the Me 163 flying it in glider mode.. he lived here in Stratford until he died in his late 90s a couple years ago. acepilots.com/german/opitz.htm…

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

FoxTrot2069 [2016-10-09 13:03:46 +0000 UTC]

So the basic purpose of the aircraft was to shoot down attacking bombers?, the rockets got such little fuel to carry

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

Grand-Lobster-King In reply to FoxTrot2069 [2017-02-02 07:25:27 +0000 UTC]

I think this plane flew for literally like 5-10 minutes super fast and the allies couldn't hit it and then when it tried to glide down and land the allies would blast the hell out of it.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

FoxTrot2069 In reply to Grand-Lobster-King [2017-02-02 11:04:02 +0000 UTC]

But wasn't the reason the plane failed was because you had to send out one after another when attacking an enemy air raid?

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

Grand-Lobster-King In reply to FoxTrot2069 [2017-02-02 16:04:13 +0000 UTC]

I think it failed for the reason my original comment stated. But that could have been a reason also.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

FoxTrot2069 In reply to Grand-Lobster-King [2017-02-03 06:24:50 +0000 UTC]

Oh ok

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

C-195 [2014-12-06 20:02:54 +0000 UTC]

Favourite experiment fighter of the war and makes for a supreme RC model.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

AgentTasmania [2014-11-06 07:26:42 +0000 UTC]

This rocket technology (Shared with the V2/A4) killed more people in construction than in action.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

aero3-5 [2014-09-18 15:49:02 +0000 UTC]

The test model for the first two-barrel Walter rocket engine got to a speed of 713mph. and tore off half of the rudder. My source is William Green's "Warplanes of the Third Reich".

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

Shadowhawk1997 [2014-08-28 06:25:55 +0000 UTC]

YAY, The Flying Death Trap

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

TheAnonnymusPanzer In reply to Shadowhawk1997 [2016-05-31 02:32:10 +0000 UTC]

LOLz, THATS RIGTH FOOL,
WATCH OUT, ITS A TRAP!!!!!Β 

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

JDunk1971 [2014-08-13 01:36:01 +0000 UTC]

Was someone insane enough to build one of these, or is this just a very good painting?

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

Ravenzwood In reply to JDunk1971 [2014-08-13 17:51:38 +0000 UTC]

This pic isΒ of a glider.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

JDunk1971 In reply to Ravenzwood [2014-08-14 01:18:30 +0000 UTC]

Wasn't the ME-163 almost uncontrollable in a glide?

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 2

Anzac-A1 In reply to JDunk1971 [2015-03-07 20:48:24 +0000 UTC]

No, it was designed as a glider before they thought to stick a rocket engine in it. The 163 was actually incredibly agile both under power and gliding. In fact, one Me 163 pilot went up against a Canadian Mosquito in a dogfight, and was able to out-turn it and shoot it down.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

Ravenzwood In reply to JDunk1971 [2014-08-14 17:36:47 +0000 UTC]

Not that I know of. I do know that they we more vulnerable to enemy fighters when gliding.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

JDunk1971 In reply to Ravenzwood [2014-08-15 03:13:37 +0000 UTC]

Here's a small history of the plane. Β  Good concept, but the technology just wasn't up to par.

www.militaryfactory.com/aircra…

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

rc-1260 [2014-07-26 20:02:05 +0000 UTC]

PFFT IT'S THE RED COMET XD

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

CliffRatt [2013-08-06 15:56:43 +0000 UTC]

Wow, don't get to see many of these anymore!!

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

Turdy1 [2012-11-04 04:15:08 +0000 UTC]

A little correction about the bit about the Japanese Komet. The most the Japanese received was an instruction booklet, but they managed to faithfully reproduce the aircraft. And while the first one did crash, a few others were built. Two actually survive today.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

Crypto-137 [2011-08-30 18:57:07 +0000 UTC]

OMFG this is awesome

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

Enterprise206 [2011-07-21 06:38:42 +0000 UTC]

has anyone built up the guts to put a rocket motor in one of these replicas? be awesome sight

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

Turdy1 In reply to Enterprise206 [2012-11-04 03:59:47 +0000 UTC]

Sadly, no. I honestly would love to fly that. I'd even fly it with only the landing skid as opposed to the wheel they have under this one.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

Mrpalaces [2011-07-20 23:46:39 +0000 UTC]

Best-glider-ever.

Great picture.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

13aceofspades13 [2011-07-20 01:27:28 +0000 UTC]

didn't know they painted them red. i guess another disadvantage if i can remember correctly is they where rocket propelled and had a very short endurance.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 3

Turdy1 In reply to 13aceofspades13 [2012-11-04 03:56:13 +0000 UTC]

One was painted red. The day of Wolfgang Spates's first mission, and the first for the Komet, the ground crew painted it red like the Red Baron's Dr.1. Spates was not amused and had them repaint it after the mission.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

Enterprise206 In reply to 13aceofspades13 [2011-07-21 06:36:39 +0000 UTC]

and wanted to be shotdown

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

Merhlin In reply to 13aceofspades13 [2011-07-20 02:55:45 +0000 UTC]

Yes, a "flash in the pan" really. The ones used in military missions were not painted red to my knowledge, (which is limited to reading and all the history stuff I can watch on TV.) But hey, I'm no authority.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

focallength [2011-07-19 20:31:39 +0000 UTC]

Nice shot. @Snowleopard59 - They actually were good gliders since they were designed to glide back to their base after using up their fuel supply. That is, of course, assuming it didn't blow up on the ground. The fuel they used was seriously nasty stuff.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

Merhlin In reply to focallength [2011-07-20 03:07:11 +0000 UTC]

If I had several thousand feet to "glide" in one of the original jet powered ones (once out of fuel) I could cover some miles in returning to base but the glide ratio had to be pretty pathetic. The original engine powered plane wasn't going to be riding any thermals or rising on the lift of air coming over ridges. Compared to all the classic "gliders" I know of, without their characteristic long wing span for lift, this doesn't strike me as much of a sailplane. My guess is that it's design is more for eye appeal than true soaring function, based on the laws of physics and flight that I am aware of.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 2

focallength In reply to Merhlin [2011-07-20 15:35:59 +0000 UTC]

The blending of the wings to the fuselage would also provide some lift, and since they didn't operate too far from their bases, they really didn't need to glide that far. That and they were at a high altitude so they could build up some speed on the way back. Not much, but some.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

IanKeenan In reply to Merhlin [2011-07-20 06:25:58 +0000 UTC]

Believe me, they could glide, those wings could generate an astonishing amount of lift. One of the main problems with the type was ON landing, it didn't want to, and when it did there was a 50/50 chance it would flip over onto its back and explode. The majority of losses weren't by enemy fire.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

Ravenzwood In reply to IanKeenan [2011-07-21 05:42:21 +0000 UTC]

Also the majority of these intercepters that were shot down, were downed when gliding back to base. Since they made a nice slow target for fighters.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

IanKeenan In reply to Ravenzwood [2011-07-21 06:21:53 +0000 UTC]

Ah yes I forgot about that - done it myself in several flightsims!

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

E-terminal-rampage [2011-07-19 19:20:13 +0000 UTC]

Awesome also...

You've been tagged

Rules:
1. Answer the 10 questions, made by your tagger
2. Then type up 10 new questions, and tag 10 people to answer them.
3. They can be random questions, but mustn't be anything rude or sexual.
---------
1.What is the meaning of life to you?
2.Why do you think we are here?
3.Is the number 42 significant to you?
4.What is your favorite color?
5.what is your favorite animal?
6.what sandwich would you get at subway? Or if not subway, what sandwich shop?
7.if you could go back in time when would it be?
8. if you could change one thing that happened in this life what would it be? Why?
9.what is your favorite thing to do? Why/
10. when will you strike when the time is right, or on the eleventh hour?

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

hugegadjit [2011-07-19 17:15:25 +0000 UTC]

What are the odds of a Farnborough visit for this? Maybe a member of the Jackass team could be persuaded to take one up with a full tank of peroxide for a powered flight?!

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

Merhlin [2011-07-19 14:07:05 +0000 UTC]

Can't imagine it would glide well at all with it's stubby wings. But lovely photo.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

EbolaSparkleBear In reply to Merhlin [2011-07-19 17:14:35 +0000 UTC]

All you need is lift.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

Yuxtapuestoelmono [2011-07-19 13:32:02 +0000 UTC]

SON OF A GUN IT IS REAL! O_O

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

Claveworks [2011-07-19 13:27:44 +0000 UTC]

Nice to see this fly even as a glider.

Here's my rendering of the famous red 163: [link]

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

Ravenzwood In reply to Claveworks [2011-07-20 01:59:27 +0000 UTC]

Looks good, as do the others.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

Darkaiz [2011-07-19 13:21:39 +0000 UTC]

Nothing could have saved germany, even though this aircraft does look quite cool.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 3

MelvWolfe In reply to Darkaiz [2013-05-28 17:41:18 +0000 UTC]

The Surface to Air missiles they had developed and could have produced in the thousands even, could have saved them. Hitler was obsessed with offensive and revenge weapons instead of those that could have stopped the Bomber offensive in its tracks.

As for the Luftwaffe...bunch of idiots lead it which believed that the Bf-109s were enough.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 0

putrick In reply to Darkaiz [2011-07-20 08:43:19 +0000 UTC]

Some historians claim that Nazi-Germany built it self to death. Tanks were made to last a 100 years when they had a life span of six weeks, tank sights were highly advanced but there were no time to fiddle with the knobs, the sight were usually kept at 300 meters and then the experienced gunners made an educated guess...

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

Darkaiz In reply to putrick [2011-07-20 12:14:43 +0000 UTC]

Yeah, and they simply had too little materials to build stuff. No matter what kind of advanced mega-super-duper-advanced thing they would've made at the end of the war, they would still have lost simply because their factories had been blown into smitherines... and then there was the soviet army which had over 10 million soldiers during the later stages of the war... Ouch.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1

putrick In reply to Darkaiz [2011-07-20 16:08:46 +0000 UTC]

Actually, when US intelligence and USAAF went over the results of strategic bombing post-WW2 they found that German production wasnΒ΄t much affected. Late in the war USAAF concentrated on bombing logistic hubs (train stations, road junctions, depots) and POL (Petroleum, Oil, Lubricants) facilities. That on the other hand had HUGE effect.
The mega-super-duper-advanced things, were the things that stole valuable resources from things that actually could have helped. For example, the Panzerkampfwagen IV with the high velocity 75mm was enough to fight the war. There was no need for Tiger and Tiger II, the Panther was more or less a German version of the T-34, but no one dared to tell Hitler that.
Yes, in attacking USSR, Nazi-Germany had to have ended the war before 1943, otherwise USSR would out build them, which they did.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 3

13aceofspades13 In reply to putrick [2011-07-22 07:14:16 +0000 UTC]

yea that was one of the issues, for example the Jagdtiger Tank destroyer, it was a massive 72 tonne monster. but most of them where lost to Mechanical failure rather than being destroyed buy the allies. a lot of the King Tiger tanks where also lost the same way. also Tiger tanks where also lost a lot of the same way, they had a lot of big tanks, but they broke down easy, some of there equipement, also was simply to complex and over engineered.

yet some of the stuff they where using, greatly out of date, though a good fighter the BF-109 Messerschmitt was a good example, buy the end of the war was a greatly outdated fighter, the primary reason it had such a hard time compeeting with many allied fighters, there solution to make it more up to date was just to shove more powerful engines in it and more up to date equipement but the airframe itself was almost a Decade old design. the earliest variants like the BF-190D where powered buy a simple 900HP inverted V-12, later variants like the BF-109G-10 where powered buy the DB-605D engine with MW50 Water Methanol injection, creating 1,800HP literally 1,000 more horsepower than earlier variants like the BF-109Bs and BF-109Cs.

πŸ‘: 0 ⏩: 1


| Next =>