Messerschmitt Me-163 Komet

1941

Back to the Virtual Aircraft Museum
  ROCKET PLANEVirtual Aircraft Museum / Germany / Messerschmitt  

Messerschmitt Me-163 Komet

Few aircraft (if any) can have been as hair-raising to fly as the Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet. The first production examples were delivered to a new fighter wing, JG 400, in May 1944, but it was not until 16 August of that year that these revolutionary aircraft had their first (unsuccessful) brush with an Allied bomber stream. Their development can be said to have originated from work begun in 1933 by Dr Alexander Lippisch at the German Gliding Research Institute (DFS) at Darmstadt, being based on the Lippisch-designed DFS 194. Dr Lippisch and his staff were transferred to Messerschmitt's works at Augsburg in January 1939.

In early 1940 the DFS 194 was equipped with a rocket motor at Peenemunde. After test flights by Heini Dittmar had confirmed speeds of up to 550km/h on the power of a single 2.94kN Walter motor, there was sufficient interest to initiate development. In 1941 the first Me 163 prototype was being tested in gliding flight and shortly after was fitted with a 7.35kN Walter RII-203 rocket motor. Speeds of up to 915km/h were achieved (limited by the volume of liquid propellants carried) and to gain some idea of the speed potential, this aircraft was towed to a high altitude before being released. Flown under power, a speed of over 1,000km/h was attained before the engine had to be throttled back because the aircraft was becoming uncontrollable.

Operational Me 163B were powered by the 16.67kN Walter 109-509A-2 rocket motor. Each had mid-set monoplane wings of wooden construction and the fuselage was a semi-monocoque all-metal structure. Landing gear comprised a tailwheel, jettisonable main-wheel trolley and a central underfuselage skid which was extended for landing.

Produced too late and in only small numbers (about 360 examples), they were in service in the defence of the Reich early in 1945 but had no significant impact upon the constant streams of Allied bombers attacking Germany. In theory their high speed and initial rate of climb of about 3,600m/minute should have made them a potent interceptor, despite the enormous hazards of training pilots and using these rocket-planes operationally. Had they enjoyed a longer period of development before introduction into service in the closing stages of the war, the story might have been very different.

The slightly larger Me 163C development - with aerodynamic refinements, pressurised cockpit and blister-type canopy, and more powerful Walter 109-509C rocket motor - was built only in prototype and pre-production form. It did not enter service, although it was almost ready for delivery to Luftwaffe squadrons at the time of the German surrender. With this version, endurance was increased from eight-ten minutes to twelve minutes; this could be extended by periods of gliding.

FACTS AND FIGURES

© Armament was two powerful but slow-firing 30mm cannon. The pilot had little time to aim and hold his fire before he was past the target. One or two hits was usually enough to destroy a bomber, however.

© The fuels in the Komet were highly corrosive and would dissolve organic material (such as the pilot). To avoid this, the pilots would wear special asbestos fibre suits.

© The Komet took off on a two-wheeled trolley, which was quickly jettisoned. A retractable skid was used for landing, a bumpy process which sometimes caused unburned fuels to mix and ignite.

© Combat tactics were to climb to altitude above the target and then turn off the motor to make diving attacks before restarting to climb again. When fuel was exhausted the Komet became a glider and very vulnerable to fighter attack.

Messerschmitt Me-163 Komet on YOUTUBE

Messerschmitt Me-163 Komet

Specification 
 CREW1
 ENGINE1 x rocket engine Walter HWK 109-509A, 15.7kN
 WEIGHTS
  Take-off weight4310 kg9502 lb
  Empty weight1908 kg4206 lb
 DIMENSIONS
  Wingspan9.3 m31 ft 6 in
  Length5.9 m19 ft 4 in
  Height2.8 m9 ft 2 in
  Wing area18.5 m2199.13 sq ft
 PERFORMANCE
  Max. speed955 km/h593 mph
 ARMAMENT2 machine-guns

Messerschmitt Me-163 Komet

Comments1-20 21-40
Ian, e-mail, 22.04.2009 12:34

Not only were they dangerous to land due to fuel residue exploding but were very vulnerable to fighters as the home approach was a glide. A lot of time & resources spent for very little return as only about 10 bombers were brought down.

reply

Trevor Ridgway, e-mail, 20.12.2008 20:04

Noah Schachtman ( spelling ? ) has a site which itemises the ingredients of T-Stoff & C-Stoff . The Hydrogen Peroxide interacts explosively with the Hydrazine Hydrate etc which propelled the rocket plane and which caused the deaths of the pilots when the craft landed roughly rather than any ground crew who would be filling the tanks BUT NOT MIXING IT ON THE GROUND.

reply

Tom, e-mail, 28.11.2008 21:14

Well, I studied in a chemistry lesson, that there are some gears, that separates H and 2O

reply

CB, e-mail, 26.05.2008 17:11

I would like to know where to get or how to make the liquid O2. Where can u get it? and any larger designs.
BTW, Rob, DON'T DOUBLE POST!!!

reply

Terrell CARTER, e-mail, 15.03.2008 23:39

do you know what fuels the the 163 used when put together ignited.

reply

Dan, e-mail, 15.03.2008 09:16

History channel did a story on it.

reply

ShelbS, 27.10.2007 05:19

I read that Me-163 pilots only managed to shoot down 9 or 10 bombers

reply

james millerIV, e-mail, 29.09.2007 18:50

need larger blueprints, top side and front view and each on separate plates or pages

reply

Tim, e-mail, 08.08.2007 04:16

Fuels: 82.3% concentration H2O2 & 100% pure liquid O2. Luftwaffe training films for ground crews show the volatility when exposed to air: a rag with 1 /2 oz of H2O2 on it has 3 DROPS of
liquid O2 placed on it. The rag immediately bursts into flames. Pilots were taught if they were forced to crash land while still carrying ANY amount of T-Stoff & C-Stoff (the operational names for the two chemicals) to eject the canopy, clamber out onto the wing, roll up into a ball, and jump rather than ride the craft into the ground. On more than one occasion, men trapped in crash-lands
were victims to the fuel tanks rupturing and filling the cockpit, dissolving them alive.

reply

Robert Allbright, e-mail, 24.01.2007 09:31

What were the two fuels this aircraft used? One was Hydrogen Peroxide and Nitrous Oxide. One fuel mixture was so dangerous that if you dipped you hand into the bucket of fuel, your hand would be reduced to bones only, no skin. I understand that more people were killed mixing the fuel than the pilots. Please get me information on these topics. Thank you. RGA

reply

Robert Allbright, e-mail, 24.01.2007 09:32

What were the two fuels this aircraft used? One was Hydrogen Peroxide and Nitrous Oxide. One fuel mixture was so dangerous that if you dipped you hand into the bucket of fuel, your hand would be reduced to bones only, no skin. I understand that more people were killed mixing the fuel than the pilots. Please get me information on these topics. Thank you. RGA

reply

1-20 21-40

Do you have any comments?

Name    E-mail


COMPANY
PROFILE


All the World's Rotorcraft


All rhe World's Rotorcraft AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com Avitop.com