digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About
See the original image at dailymail.co.uk

Sleek, swift and deadly: Hitler's stealth bomber (w/PICS)

dailymail.co.uk — It could be something out of Star Wars or a version of America's feared B2 stealth bomber. This is Hitler's stealth fighter-bomber, a little known secret weapon which might have altered the course of the Second World War. The plane has been recreated and its radar-beating capability put to the test by the men who built America's stealth bomber.

Who dugg this? Made popular Jul 8, 2009

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

68 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • dwright99, on 07/08/2009, -1/+27You know the Germans make good stuff.
  • mark076h, on 07/08/2009, -0/+22They would have won if they did not start bombing London and other non military targets, they were days away from grounding the RAF, one of the biggest military mistakes in history.
  • sotose, on 07/08/2009, -0/+18That and the whole USSR thingy.
  • skipvt, on 07/08/2009, -2/+20Buried. This story is *****. The reason the sky wasn't full of flying wing planes (and this wasn't the first) was the fact that it was too hard to fly. The only reason we have them today (the B2 bomber) is now we have the computer power to compensate for the aerodynamic drawbacks of the design.
  • Fuel90, on 07/08/2009, -0/+15I want to see this thing fly.
  • fuzzybeard, on 07/08/2009, -0/+13That's what Generalfeldmarschall Goering said!
  • WinkyMcGee, on 07/08/2009, -1/+13Wasn't this on Digg like... Last week?
  • Stinger911, on 07/08/2009, -0/+12Wow, very cool. You gotta hand it to the Germans. They had some seriously awesome and innovative hardware for their day. Most modern U.S. military tech seems to be an evolution of old German hardware. Panther tanks had deflective armor, now so do M1A1s. Look at modern American infantry helmets, too. Very similar design. It's a shame that the military and scientific genius of so many intelligent and noble Germans was squandered by a nefarious and foolish leader.
  • inactive, on 07/08/2009, -0/+11Their technilowcal prowess was impressive and their spelling was fwar bewter than ours too.
  • QreepyBORIS, on 07/08/2009, -0/+10Man, digg is giving me crazy WWII secret/vaguely stealth-like flying wing jet-powered aeroplane deja-vu with all these articles on the Ho 2-29.
  • Bluesky0010, on 07/08/2009, -0/+9Put engines in it already.
  • expert01, on 07/08/2009, -0/+7No, it reminds him of home.
  • positron, on 07/08/2009, -0/+6You'd have a hard time NOT seeing something related to Hitler on the "History" channel.
  • SirBruce, on 07/08/2009, -3/+9You know the Germans always make good stuff!
  • Raptor007, on 07/08/2009, -1/+6It reminds you of localhost?
  • fuzzybeard, on 07/08/2009, -1/+6Put enough thrust and the right flight control software behind it, and even a brick can fly.
  • bringitontimx, on 07/08/2009, -2/+6I saw this on the History Channel the other day.
  • Pinkertinkle, on 07/08/2009, -0/+4Maybe if the Hitler had spent the effort developing a practical four engine strategic bomber they could have won the Battle of Britain.
  • Cockslap, on 07/08/2009, -1/+5Thank you hitler for taking charge of the German war machine! God forbid if someone competent had taken charge.
  • JitMaster, on 07/08/2009, -0/+4I like flying the Ho 2-29 in BattleField 1942: Secret Weapons of WWII, on the allied side the game has a F-85 Goblin jet fighter. Does that exist too ?
  • Amazetbm, on 07/08/2009, -1/+5Regardless...in the hands of a good pilot, it could have been a nightmare for the allies. Test pilot Erwin Ziller flew the Ho-229 in mock dogfights against the ME-262 and the Ho-229 was found to have superior combat performance.
  • MasonZombie, on 07/08/2009, -0/+3It's a shame that it takes a war to make technological advances of this magnitude.

    Nonetheless, fight war not wars.
  • _skin_, on 07/08/2009, -0/+3I have been looking for a torrent for a week or more. I can't find one anywhere. I don't see where they are going to replay this episode either. The episode I wanted was from the national geographic channel.
  • mikedoth, on 07/08/2009, -2/+5Probably, several times since then. I'm getting annoyed by the duplicates on this site.
  • Gravey9, on 07/08/2009, -0/+3That thing is just sexy.
  • UnPublicSafety, on 07/08/2009, -2/+5Why do they call it Hitler's stealth bomber, did Hitler make them him self? They don't call the any of the other nations' weapons by the people that were running the nation at that time.
  • SoCalCove, on 07/08/2009, -1/+3Without a doubt many of the prototype Japanese and German designs toward the end of the war would be downright amazing and potential game changers if they could have deploye at the start of the war with sufficient numbers and on going resources throughout the course of the war ( google a few american pilots talking about first encounters with German jets in WW2 ).

    But in reality the jets (and engines) were downright a nightmare to build and the fuel far deadlier to maintain and load. German jets (Me163) would actually blow up on the launchpad in at least one occasion (or more). I give kudos to their engineers, they are so far past the bleeding edge for their time, that they were as much a threat to themselves as it was to the allies. But the resources to commit to this to make a military difference was not enough.


  • expert01, on 07/08/2009, -0/+2I know, they make a full sized replica and it doesn't even work?

    Fine then, let's pay them to make a real one, same design, with completely modern everything. I like the sleek look over the angles of the B-2
  • 4AntiStupid, on 07/08/2009, -2/+4Well, I guess never let reality get in the way of a good story. The jet engines were the key technology and not any kind of stealth capability. Fortunately the early German jets were far more dangerous to the ground crew and pilots than anyone else.
  • BinaryFragger, on 07/08/2009, -0/+211 days ago, to be exact:

    http://digg.com/design/Hitler_s_Stealth_Fighter_Re ...
  • freezerburn666, on 07/08/2009, -0/+2pulled behind a ***** glider? ***** that *****. what the *****.
  • Cyberdactyl, on 07/08/2009, -0/+2Can anyone tell me if the wing spars in the wire frame iso view are drawn correctly?

    The 'break' at about a 20 degree angle of the spar's leading edge looks wrong.
  • drinking12many, on 07/08/2009, -0/+2That was the problem with the design even the best pilots could easily lose control. The YB-49 suffered similar problems and killed several pilots.
  • Heath05, on 07/08/2009, -0/+2But isn't that also the problem?
    The Ho-229 is meant to be a bomber, not a fighter; without fly-by-wire I doubt it can be stable enough for bombing.
  • chuckles08, on 07/08/2009, -0/+2The pictures of hitler's stealth bomber reminds me of the flying saucers spotted by Kenneth Arnold in 1947 [PIC] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Arnold_crescent_ ...
  • Amazetbm, on 07/09/2009, -0/+2A11YND. The engine flamed out. Jet engines of that era were notoriously unreliable.
  • A11YND, on 07/08/2009, -0/+2until he, you know.. died because the aircraft controls didn't respond correctly and he crashed into the ground.
  • SillyRabbits, on 07/08/2009, -2/+4Actually flying wings aren't too hard to fly (although they did have some funny quirks - see the YB-35 and YB-49). The reason the B2 needs fly-by-wire controls is that the airfoil has be optimized for minimum radar cross-section and that particular design happens to be somewhat aerodynamically unstable. There's nothing preventing a nice flying wing design that doesn't need computer assistance (of course, these days, with cheap computing power you might as well sacrifice flight stability and improve the airplane's flight performance).
  • zoomaKabu, on 07/08/2009, -3/+4Well good for you
  • billysmusic, on 07/08/2009, -0/+1Check mininova...you may have some luck there ;)
  • underloons, on 07/08/2009, -0/+1http://www.google.com/search?q=technilowcal&ie ...
  • _skin_, on 07/09/2009, -0/+1Are you saying its there because I looked and its not. BTW... Mininova is like the only place to look.
  • 4AntiStupid, on 07/08/2009, -0/+1Pick up a history book???
  • drinking12many, on 07/08/2009, -0/+1The US also built similar planes in the 30's and 40's with the YB-35 and YB-49 problem being they are instable as can be. It takes computers making changes to the flight control surfaces constantly to keep the B-2 flying. The two pilots edwards and forbes were killed flying the YB-49 which is how edwards and forbes air force bases got their names.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YB-49
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YB-35
  • MasterGrief, on 07/08/2009, -0/+1I'm sure the angles are there for a reason, but this sort of thing is exactly why I lose interest in aircraft after about 1970: Plane design was much more interesting when we weren't so sure on the best way to do it.

    A few years ago, I found out that Wikipedia had a section devoted entirely to experimental Nazi aircraft. Here's the link, if you're interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_jet_aircraft_ ...
  • SoCalCove, on 07/08/2009, -0/+1Correct me if I am wrong, but I seldom see high performance (tight turning) aircraft in the wing design. Though it makes more efficient cruising, I can imagine with less drag from vertical fins/wings/stabilizers.

    I would imagine this is one reason why we dont see flying wing dogfighters, though am sure an aerospace engineer could expand on this.

    Guess having tail fins with ailerons allow greater X axis turning. Though am sure smaller airframes in a wing design can compensate for lack vertical ailron (F117 (though it isn't a true wing) turning would be physically easier than the size of a B-2)

    Just wanted to add, with UAV and armed robotic vehicles growing in use, I can imagine we will see some VERY cool designs in the coming years. With a smaller frame, less weight with no need for a cockpit and performance specs which dont need to be 'reduced' to compensate for a human pilot...its going to be an interesting time for 'post' modern warfare as we go in unmanned military vehicles. The wing design which am sure will be revisited again and again. (Some tech blog mentioned hummingbird style robot spies...very cool stuff coming up).
  • MasterGrief, on 07/08/2009, -1/+2So intelligent they knew it would be practically suicidal to revolt.

    That said, I'm sure there were scientists who were happy to be Nazis.
  • MasterGrief, on 07/08/2009, -0/+1Yes. Everything in that game had some sort of historical basis, I'm pretty sure. Here's the Goblin:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XF-85_Goblin

    It wasn't in the air until after the war, and even then, it wasn't very good at pretty much anything, but it did exist.
  • skipvt, on 07/08/2009, -0/+1If that is true, then the flying wing design would have dominated the air since they are a more efficient aircraft. The flying wing concept has been around since 1910, yet we really don't see a lot of them...
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 69 of 69 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.