As reported by Klassiker der Luftfahrt, the leading German aviation magazine, an ambitious project has been conducted in Germany for the last few years. Heinz-Dieter Sippel has been working on building a flying, powered replica of the Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet and plans to unveil it at 2024 AERO Friedrichshafen, Europe’s most important trade show for general aviation which will take place in April on the shores of Lake Constance at the Friedrichshafen exhibition center right next to Friedrichshafen Airport, Germany.
The Messerschmitt Me 163 was intended to counter the overwhelming flow of bombers against Germany’s cities. It was the first aircraft to break the magic barrier of 1,000 km/h – and in doing so became the fastest aircraft in WWII. The Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet, designed by Alexander Lippisch, was one of the most spectacular aircraft to appear in the German skies before 1945. The radical interceptor with a rocket engine was denied great success but it still became famous.
![Me 163B Werknummer 191907 is part of the collection of the Australian War Memorial in Canberra. [Photo by James Kightly]](https://vintageaviationnews.com/wp-content/uploads/AWM-Komet-James-Kightly-1024x731.jpg "Powered Replica Me 163 Komet to Fly in Germany 2")
![The Me 163 glider replica being towed for takeoff at the 2009 airshow at La Ferté-Alais, France. [Photo via Wikipedia]](https://vintageaviationnews.com/wp-content/uploads/Messerschmitt_Me_163_Komet_flying-1024x683.jpg "Powered Replica Me 163 Komet to Fly in Germany 3")
The new 1:1 scale replica is the work of Heinz-Dieter Sippel. After years of work, he built his Me 163B entirely from composite materials in a lightweight sandwich construction. Sippel received support from the German Society for the Preservation of Historic Aircraft and the company Silence Aircraft.
Like the original, the replica measures 5.99 meters from nose to tail and the wingspan is 9.3 meters. However, the weight of the real Komet, which was 4.3 tons, was far more than Sippel’s Me 163B. The replica should weigh only 240 kilograms. The speed also seems quite comfortable at around 140 km/h. A JetCat turbine type P1000-Pro with a kilonewton of thrust provides propulsion. It is powered by kerosene (Jet A-1), diesel, or petroleum. The start is either in F-tow or self-start.
Born in Milan, Italy, Moreno moved to the U.S. in 1999 to pursue a career as a commercial pilot. His aviation passion began early, inspired by his uncle, an F-104 Starfighter Crew Chief, and his father, a military traffic controller. Childhood adventures included camping outside military bases and watching planes at Aeroporto Linate. In 1999, he relocated to Atlanta, Georgia, to obtain his commercial pilot license, a move that became permanent. With 24 years in the U.S., he now flies full-time for a Part 91 business aviation company in Atlanta. He is actively involved with the Commemorative Air Force, the D-Day Squadron, and other aviation organizations. He enjoys life with his supportive wife and three wonderful children.
Am I reading this wrong, or is the statement backwards? “…the weight of the real Komet, which was 4.3 tons, was far less than Sippel’s Me 163B…” Shouldn’t Sippel’s Komet weigh far less than the real Komet? Otherwise, excellent article!
Well spotted, 787cape! This has been corrected.
Just wondering; what powers the replica?
Hammer
.. direct from your model-aircraft:
JetCat Typ P1000-Pro
The 163B is the aircraft designation, not the weight.
It says “was far more”….
It never weighed 4.3 tons , that was probably the power of the rocket engine , the airframe was less than 2000 kg
Its empty weight was less than 2,000kg yes, but fully loaded it would weigh a maximum of over 4,300kg, AKA 4.75 tons
https://ingeniumcanada.org/aviation/artifact/messerschmitt-me-163b-1a-komet
That’s about right .. fully fuelled & loaded?
I will NEVER be able to dream as big and as fantastic as Heinz-Dieter Sippel! To dream of building a flying 1:1 replica of an Me-163B!! Even if it is built out of completely different materials and has only a fraction of the original’s perf!
Wingtip washout is quite noticeable in the production 163, when comparing the wing tip to the wing root. The replica appears to not only eliminate the negative camber wash out, but appears to go positive compared to the wing root. This is never done to my knowledge, so I assume my sights are at fault. I’ve only dreamed of building a very light look-a-like
Nothing like a harsh wingtip stall without wingtip washout to inhibit!!!
I agree, I noticed that after you pointed it out. The original had about 8 degrees washout at the tip, even scale RC models have similar details. Note The air gap between the elevon and the wing has been filled in, this might affect control reversal in a deep stall. I assume direction and guidance has been given on this project so there might be more information available in the future. Would be interested in following this.
A true replica needs to have the Swastika on its tail to be historically correct. No I’m not a believer in the Nazi Party, I’m just saying for historical correctness.
Germany is one of several nations where the marking is outlawed on flying aircraft. Some museum and other aircraft preserved statically in Germany do display it as part of their historical context.
Agreed. If it’s a “replica,” then replicate. A swastika on a WW II German airplane js NOT the same as a swastika being carried by a skinhead today.
It is a matter of law, not originality or opinion. It is not legal to have an airworthy aircraft with the outlawed Nazi party symbol on the tail in Germany, Elvis B.
The aircraft is to fly in Germany; the Hakenkreuz is not permitted on flying aircraft there. (An ingenious substitute, four narrow grey rectangles at angles to each other, appears on 109s and 190 replicas flying in Germany…)
The article leaves me with questions, is it piloted, or radio control. I’ve seen larger RC aircraft. Who’s flying the bird?
Test pilot Eric Brown RN flew the 163 several times, at least once powered.
Didn’t know ME263 weighed 4 tons, sounds kinda heavy considering small size. Nice to see replicas gliding/flying in friendlier skies now..
Would love to see it Airborne but with a pilot not remotely flown.
What a fantastic endeavor. Best of luck to all involved.
A most interesting story. I have been tracking the surviving Me 163s here: https://www.silverhawkauthor.com/post/german-luftwaffe-warplanes-1939-1945-messerschmitt-me-163-komet
Thanks Harold!
Fascinating design however such a death trap for the pilots with the courage to fly it for the few minutes it was powered. If you were able to even get it off the ground you still had to survive the mission and land it!!!
Jesus those things were death traps!,any article you read about them basically say if they didn’t kill you on take off there was certainly a good chance it would get you on landing….it only had a skid!!! Oh and the fuel it used would eat you alive.Eric whincle brown wrote great articles about it
And I’m not sure,but may have flown one using its own rocket motor,he certainly did tests gliding one.
Eric did fly it in Germany under full power and the highly dangerous fuel.
Now we need someone to replicate the Natter, with the replaceable cockpit section.
528 lbs empty weight for the replica? Doubt that.
Excellent news with flying repro ME262s now gracing the skies what better news to see a Komet also returning to the skies? An Arado 234 Blitz perhaps?
Cannot wait to see this luftwaffe legend rejoin the airworthy ranks.
Good luck in first flight.
I see these RC modeled all the time, very impressive, eould love to see this one fly!
Great! My compliments. The interest in the unique ME 163 would have thrilled my deceased father, Wilhelm (Willi, Eli ) Elias, who was part of the Lippisch group from the earliest R&D until the War‘s end. Heini Dittmar, Rudi Opitz (Pitz) being the first & second test pilots, the latter became my sailplane instructor in Dayton, OH. Best wishes for successful events!
Hi Karl..My father would also have been happy to see one flying again, even if the weight and performance are lacking. As for all of the “death trap” people, my father would just say that Dittmar and he were the two primary test pilots on that aircraft from start to finish, and somehow they made it out alive. Yes, there were some close calls in testing for them, but his opinion was that a number of the accidents could be attributed to overconfident experienced piston pilots trying to circumvent the normal transition training process. They didn’t respect all of the new technologies that were incorporated in this aircraft in order to achieve the performance it had. On an aircraft like this, that lack of respect can kill you.
Sir, with all the due respect, a lack of respect can kill you in ANY aircraft :-).
If powered via a jet engine, where did they site the intakes on the replica?
In a rough time scale, when would this aircraft be likely to be airworthy?