DFS 40
type of aircraft
The DFS 40 was a tailless research aircraft designed by Alexander Lippisch as the Delta V in 1937. The DFS 40 was a more advanced design than the previous DFS 39 (Delta IV), and was built for comparison with that aircraft.
Where the DFS 39 had a pronounced fuselage with low-mounted wing, the DFS 40 was closer to a flying wing, with the wing-fuselage junction blended so that there was no clear dividing line.
The DFS 40 was flown for the first time by Heini Dittmar in 1938, shortly before Lippisch departed the DFS (Deutsche Forschungsanstalt für Segelflug - German Research Institute for Sailplane Flight) to begin work at Messerschmitt, taking much of his design team with him. Soon afterwards, without Lippisch there to supervise the project, the aircraft was crashed due to an error in center of gravity calculations that resulted in it entering a flat spin during flight. While the test pilot escaped by parachute, the DFS 40 was destroyed.
Specifications (DFS 40)
General characteristics
Crew: 1
Length: 5.1 m (16 ft 9 in)
Wingspan: 12 m (39 ft 4 in)
Powerplant: 1 × Argus As 8 4-cyl in-line piston engine, 89 kW (120 hp)
References
Bibliography
Ethell, Jeffrey L. (1978). Komet: The Messerschmitt 163. Shepperton, UK: Ian Allan. ISBN 0-7110-0827-2.
“DFS 40” enters the record as type of aircraft. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what type and aircraft can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“DFS 40” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, type and aircraft provides the most credible route into that argument.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jan 6, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q834526. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1937, 1938 and 1978.
Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “DFS 40”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow DFS 40 primary sources, DFS 40 archive and type research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “DFS 40”?
- What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “DFS 40” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.