Fully armed Nazi bomber planes 'buried below East Berlin airport'

The Scotsman ^ | July 22, 2003 | Allan Hall

[Recourse]

Tue 22 Jul 2003

Fully armed Nazi bomber planes 'buried below East Berlin airport'

ALLAN HALL IN BERLIN

AN AIRPORT used by hundreds of thousands of tourists and business travellers each year could be sitting on top of thousands of live bombs.

Papers among thousands of files captured from the Stasi, the secret police of East Germany, claim tons of live Second World War munitions were buried in concrete bunkers beneath the runways of Schoenefeld airport in East Berlin. It is now the main destination for discount airlines, such as Ryanair, and numerous charter companies.

Not only did the commissars intern munitions beneath the runways, but also entire Nazi fighter planes, all fuelled and fully bombed-up, according to the Stasi.

The captured files of Interflug, the former East German government airline and the airport authority of the DDR, are now being examined to see if the Stasi claim is true.

Experts believe it entirely feasible that, in the aftermath of the Second World War, with Berlin littered with millions of tons of unexploded ordnance, the Soviets could well have pressured local officials to move to clear the airfield as swiftly as possible.

"They would have stuffed them anywhere they could - there was simply too much stuff to blow up all at once," said Karl-Heinz Eckhardt, a Berlin historian. "There was a warren of massive Nazi bunkers beneath the site of the present airport that would have suited their purposes."

City authorities claim the airport is perfectly safe, but a thorough check on the claims in the Stasi files - 140 km of them that will still take a number of years to decipher - is being undertaken.

Nearly two million passengers a year pass through Schoenefeld. According to the Stasi files, the ammunition was buried in bunkers between eight and nine metres deep.

A spokesman for the airport said: "We became aware of the bunkers in 1993, four years after the fall of the [Berlin] Wall. A check was undertaken then and everything was determined to be safe."

But he conceded that he was astounded at the claims that fully-fuelled and bombed-up aircraft lie beneath the runways and said new tests about the safety of the structures will be carried out.

He added: "We had no idea that so much ordnance is supposedly under there."

Frank Henkel, the Conservative interior ministry spokesman, said: "This must be investigated thoroughly and immediately and the runways strengthened if necessary."

Berlin, with its sandy, dry soil, was perfect for the bunker-building of the Third Reich. Hundreds of thousands of them were constructed during the 12-year lifespan of the Nazi government: for every one metre of building above ground in modern-day Berlin, there are three metres below ground.

Bunkers are being discovered every day and a group called Underground Berlin has turned several of them into tourist attractions.

This article:

  http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=792292003

Secret War:

  http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=222

[BenLurkin]

It took almost 60 years to find these... how long will it take to find Iraq's WMD

Bears repeating.

[Young Werther]

Replica ME-262s are being built! Check it out

ME-262! Enjoy

[Southack]

"Go do a google search on it. It is commonly accepted that Germany was the leading scientific country of the age in the early 20th century."

Oh please. Do you think that WW1 Germany was anywhere even CLOSE to Dr. Robert Goddard in 1920?!

Rocket Scientist
Robert Goddard

He launched the space age with a 10-ft. rocket in a New England cabbage field

---

BY JEFFREY KLUGER

Robert Goddard was not a happy man when he read his copy of The New York Times on Jan. 13, 1920. For some time, he had feared he might be in for a pasting in the press, but when he picked up the paper that day, he was stunned.

Not long before, Goddard, a physics professor at Clark University in Worcester, Mass., had published an arid little paper on an outrageous topic, rocket travel. Unlike most of his colleagues, Goddard believed rocketry was a viable technology, and his paper, primly titled "A Method of Reaching Extreme Altitudes," was designed to prove it. For the lay reader, there wasn't much in the writing to excite interest, but at the end, the buttoned-up professor unbuttoned a bit. If you used his technology to build a rocket big enough, he argued, and if you primed it with fuel that was powerful enough, you just might be able to reach the moon with it.

Goddard meant his moon musings to be innocent enough, but when the Times saw them, it pounced. As anyone knew, the paper explained with an editorial eye roll, space travel was impossible, since without atmosphere to push against, a rocket could not move so much as an inch. Professor Goddard, it was clear, lacked "the knowledge ladled out daily in high schools."

Goddard seethed. It wasn't just that the editors got the science all wrong. It wasn't just that they didn't care for his work. It was that they had made him out a fool. Say what you will about a scientist's research, but take care when you defame the scientist. On that day, Goddard--who would ultimately be hailed as the father of modern rocketry--sank into a quarter-century sulk from which he never fully emerged. And from that sulk came some of the most incandescent achievements of his age.

Born in 1882, Goddard was a rocket man before he was a man at all. From childhood, he had an instinctive feel for all things pyrotechnic; he was intrigued by the infernal powders that fuel firecrackers and sticks of tnt. Figure out how to manage that chemical violence, he knew, and you could do some ripping-good flying.

As a student and professor at Worcester Polytechnic Institute and later at Clark, Goddard tried to figure out just how. Fooling around with the arithmetic of propulsion, he calculated the energy-to-weight ratio of various fuels. Fooling around with airtight chambers, he found that a rocket could indeed fly in a vacuum, thanks to Newton's laws of action and reaction. Fooling around with basic chemistry, he learned, most important, that if he hoped to launch a missile very far, he could never do it with the poor black powder that had long been the stuff of rocketry. Instead, he would need something with real propulsive oomph--a liquid like kerosene or liquid hydrogen, mixed with liquid oxygen to allow combustion to take place in the airless environment of space. Fill a missile with that kind of fuel, and you could retire black powder for good.

...
In 1929, an 11-ft. missile caused such a stir the police were called. Where there are police there is inevitably the press, and next day the local paper ran the horse-laughing headline: MOON ROCKET MISSES TARGET BY 238,799 1/2 MILES. For Goddard, the East Coast was clearly becoming a cramped place to be. In 1930, with the promise of a $100,000 grant from financier Harry Guggenheim, Goddard and his wife Esther headed west to Roswell, N.Mex., where the land was vast and the launch weather good, and where the locals, they were told, minded their business.

In the open, roasted stretches of the Western scrub, the fiercely private Goddard thrived. Over the next nine years, his Nells grew from 12 ft. to 16 ft. to 18 ft., and their altitude climbed from 2,000 ft. to 7,500 ft. to 9,000 ft. He built the first rocket that exceeded the speed of sound and another with fin-stabilized steering, and he filed dozens of patents for everything from gyroscopic guidance systems to multistage rockets.

By the late 1930s, however, Goddard grew troubled. He had noticed long before that of all the countries that showed an interest in rocketry, Germany showed the most. Now and then, German engineers would contact Goddard with a technical question or two, and he would casually respond. But in 1939 the Germans suddenly fell silent. With a growing concern over what might be afoot in the Reich, Goddard paid a call on Army officials in Washington and brought along some films of his various Nells. He let the generals watch a few of the launches in silence, then turned to them. "We could slant it a little," he said simply, "and do some damage." The officers smiled benignly at the missile man, thanked him for his time and sent him on his way. The missile man, however, apparently knew what he was talking about. Five years later, the first of Germany's murderous V-2 rockets blasted off for London. By 1945, more than 1,100 of them had rained down on the ruined city.

Rebuffed by the Army, Goddard spent World War II on sabbatical from rocketry, designing experimental airplane engines for the Navy. When the war ended, he quickly returned to his preferred work. As his first order of business, he hoped to get his hands on a captured V-2. From what he had heard, the missiles sounded disturbingly like his more peaceable Nells. Goddard's trusting exchanges with German scientists had given Berlin at least a glimpse into what he was designing. What's more, by 1945 he had filed more than 200 patents, all of which were available for inspection. When a captured German scientist was asked about the origin of the V-2, he was said to have responded, "Why don't you ask your own Dr. Goddard? He knows better than any of us." When some V-2s finally made their way to the U.S. and Goddard had a chance to autopsy one, he instantly recognized his own handiwork. "Isn't this your rocket?" an assistant asked as they poked around its innards. "It seems to be," Goddard replied flatly.

Goddard accepted paternity of his bastard V-2, and that, as it turned out, was the last rocket he fathered while alive. In 1945 he was found to have throat cancer, and before the year was out, he was dead. His technological spawn, however, did not stop. American scientists worked alongside emigre German scientists to incorporate Goddard's innovations into the V-2, turning the killer missile into the Redstone, which put the first Americans into space. The Redstone led directly to the Saturn moon rockets, and indirectly to virtually every other rocket the U.S. has ever flown.

Though Goddard never saw a bit of it, credit would be given him, and--more important to a man who so disdained the press--amends would be made. After Apollo 11 lifted off en route to humanity's first moon landing, The New York Times took a bemused backward glance at a tart little editorial it had published 49 years before. "Further investigation and experimentation," said the paper in 1969, "have confirmed the findings of Isaac Newton in the 17th century, and it is now definitely established that a rocket can function in a vacuum as well as in an atmosphere. The Times regrets the error." The grim Professor Goddard might not have appreciated the humor, but he would almost certainly have accepted the apology.

[pierrem15]

Sorry, I wasn't clear: I meant the way the jet engines are mounted bunched together, the way the B52 has each pair of engines tightly coupled. Of course, the principles of aerodynmaics and structural engineering with a similar technology level (compared to today) might have also produced the similarities.

[BenLurkin]

That is really cool!

[VOA]

Prop version at www.planesoffame.org; specifically there is a photo at this URL:

http://www.planesoffame.org/photo%20gallery/pages/visitor%20submissions/flyingwing-mjoy.htm

[Southack]

c#63

[Burkeman1]

I don't know but considering that WWI was between 1914 and 1918 I don't think your post has any relevance.

[elbucko]

Well- it was true. Their weapons were better than ours in both wars (the two exceptions being the M1 infantry rifle of the Americans and our long range bombers.)

I totally disagree, but agree on the Garad. It's mostly mythology and wishful thinking that give the romance of being "advanced" to many German, so-called, "Superweapons". I will, however, give credit where due. The German "88" was lethal in all its applications. Artillery to air defense. That's as far as I go.

[VOA]

The father of a friend of mine was in Germany at the end of the war (Airborne),
and supposedly he was trying to figure out a way to disassemble an Me-262 and ship it back.

Maybe it was just loaded onto the deck of a ship, lashed down, and brought over....

from the website for Wright-Patterson Air Force Base Air Force Museum for
their Me-262:

The Me 262A on display was brought to the U.S. from Germany in July 1945 for flight evaluation.

URL is:
http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/air_power/ap11.htm

[Southack]

If you want to limit the conversation to before Goddard's 1920's liquid-fueled rocket flights, you can start with the 1911 Colt .45 automatic handgun. Moreover, the U.S. had invented and employed the tickertape machine (transmitting **digital** data), in addition to having already invented by WW-One the telephone, telegraph, radio, airplane, machine gun, submarine, lightbulb, phonograph, and motion picture.

By 1917, the American Zimmerman had mathematically proven that for an encoded message to be unbreakable, it had to have a Key longer than the message, that the Key must be entirely random, and that the Key could never be used twice. Thus, from 1917 until today, secure U.S. codes have never been cracked (although some have been compromised by spies).

So what did the Germans in 1918 have to compare with any of that?!

[elbucko]

Whittle's centrifugal design, although functional, was never practical beyond minimal requirements.

The Whittle design was made by General Electric and used in the F-86 in Korea. It was also copied by the Russians and used in the Mig-15 and 19. The axial flow turbojet engine is superior to the centrifugal design, however the metals did not yet exist to accomplish enough shaft RPM to satisfy reliable compressor ratio differentials. The Whittle was more reliable until the little detail of "Flame-out" was resolved by superior US metallurgical technology.

[DCBurgess58]

I saw the ME-262 at the Smithstonian in D.C., it was awesome to stand next to the real thing.

[AnalogReigns]

"Frank Henkel, the Conservative interior ministry spokesman, said: 'This must be investigated thoroughly and immediately and the runways strengthened if necessary.'"

Goodness gracious...they have possible (probable?) TONS of live ammunition, along with potentially extremely valuable aircraft there, and all he wants to do is strengthen the runways???

In one of the richest neighbrohoods in Washington DC a few years ago they discovered things that had not been cleaned up properly by the military--it was a former munitions test ground from WWI. LOTS of gov. money spent digging up what ended up being mostly just shrapnell--I think they found at most a couple of live rounds, but there were potential mustard gas shells there, can be called WMDs.....so well, your tax dollars at work. A different mentality from Germany, for sure.

[Burkeman1]

German Tanks against the Sherman? Even Czech confiscated armored vehichles in the Wermacht had more armour and stopping power than our Shermans. What about the MG42 heavy machine guns? Far superior to ours. The MP32 machine pistol had a faster rate of fire and more accuracy against the Thompson sub machine gun. German artillery was light years ahead of ours in both killing power and accuracy. German aircraft were far better (but numbers meant everything and we easily defeated them in the air). On nearly every level German heavy weapons and light weapons were far better than ours. Even though the Garand was far superiour to the K98 bolt action mauser- even that was a great accurate weapon. I also forgot the BAR- A great ligh machine gun. But the Germans produced the MG44 late in the war to match it and it was better than the BAR.

[Burkeman1]

Apparently a modern army with technology that made our army look like they were from the Civil War in the first engagements.

[Southack]

U.S. M2 Browning heavy machine gun .50 caliber circa 1920 (in use today as pictured).

[WorkingClassFilth]

"What did they ever invent on their own?"

Off the top of my head I believe they invented...

1) The first Rocket powered fighter, the ME-163 Komet.

2) The 88mm cannon, widely known as the finest artillery piece of the war.

3) The coal-scuttle helmet which America now employs.

4) The suspender web system for infantry kit which America now employs.

5) The MG-42, which is the direct ancestor of the M-60 machine gun America now employs.

6) Sonic cannon which were experimental, but aimed at destruction of men and material by sound waves.

7) Flying saucer jet aircraft.

8) Jet propelled medium bombers.

9) Assault rifles that could shoot around corners.

10) The modern gas-operated assault rifle.

11) The second generation of sub-machine guns (MP-38/40).

12) Squad assault tactics with automatic weapons.

13) Paratroops and paratroop assault tactics.

14) Blitzkrieg doctrine.

15) The Tiger tank, which easily mastered any allied tank it encountered.

16) Rocket artillery.

17) Amphibious vehicles.

18) Snorkel systems for tanks fording rivers.

19) Wolf pack tactics for U-boat warfare.

20) Submarine cargo ships.

21) The process of cracking coal derivatives for petroleum and a mess of other industrial uses.

22) Plywood technologies and the plastic manipulation of wood for industrial use.

23) The P-38 pistol - the first double action automatic in common service with a falling hammer safety.

24) The Volkswagen Beetle.

25) The Autobahn - you and I know it as the interstate freeway systems.

26) Robotic vehicles for mine destruction.

27) Enigma code generators which stumped all Allied attempts to break until an actual unit was captured.

28) Modern military camouflage. From the use of 'feldgrau' in WWI to the wide range of seasonal, theater, mission and unit specific patterns in WWII.

29) Butt-kicking style in uniforms that have induced millions of collectors across several generations.

And of course,

26) The original reason for the phrase: "Je me rends!"

[VOA]

German Tanks against the Sherman?

I saw a German tank commander on C-SPAN's coverage of a D-Day 50th anniversary
panel discussion run by Stephen Ambrose.
This fellow was part of the Panzer units belatedly sent to repel the Normandie invasion (IIRC).

He said something to the effect that "The Sherman was no problem; we could take
care of ten of them with no difficulty. The real problem was that there
was always an 11th Sherman."

The comparison of the virtues of quality and quantity of arms betweeen the
Axis and Allies in WWII is really interesting. I'm no military expert, but
the general feeling I get is that the Germans had superior arms/technology
that allowed them to carry on a long, tough war...but this came with some costs:
diversion of resources to create somve over-engineered weapons, over-confidence that
their superior weapons would always carry the day but failure to consider
the "swarm" of lots of forces with inferior weapons, etc.

Technology was the German ace-card; fortunately they found out that
their hubris trumped any advantage they had from their weapons.

I shudder at the "what if" scenario in which Hitler held his ambition in check
for an extra five years and German physicists develop an A-bomb before everyone else,
while America stayed pre-occupied with crawling out of the pit of The Great Depression.

[elbucko]

German Tanks against the Sherman?

Yes. I believe the Sherman had the nickname "Zippo"; it would light every time it was hit.

To argue the merits of American war technology with that of the Nazi era German is futile. The Germans began preparing for war in the mid 30's. The American Army had more mules than tanks when the Germans began to march. By June of 1945, America had harnessed the atom (yes I know, with the help of German Jews).

If this discussion was a horse race, the German horse would have a five furlong advantage at the start. At the wire, the American horse would still be accelerating, while the German horse would be dead and being hauled off to the glue factory, 20 lengths behind the American.