A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...

[Furball]

Talking about sea plane firms...





worlds only flying boat jet fighter?

[g00b]

The Convair XF2Y Sea Dart was a SUPERSONIC flying boat fighter.

http://www.taliaferro.net/waltermiddy/page3.html

[BUG_EAF322]

Yep was thinking about that convair.

But that avro went in service wasnt it ?

That would leave it as the worlds only operational seajetfighter.

[Pongo]

GH, if the US had tones of trouble with the 4 20mm's that port 3 feet behind the intake flaming out the engine there is no way those rockets are leaving the intake duct and its not shutting down the engine.
You know this is just my opinion, but I would say there is no way either of those weapons are staying in those locations.
Are you familier with the gunval project?

[GRUNHERZ]

Pongo, the rockets are not in the duct. Thery are arranged in a circle about the fuselage. The duct is seperate. Also there iseem to be tubes to channel the rocket exhausae out of the fuselage so I dont think the initial exhause would be a problem.

As for guns being close to the intake duct see the Mig 15.  It can be done and the Migs dirty smoke belching russian guns are very very close to the duct.



As for rockets see the F86D.  Lets assume that the Blom Voss design has the initial rocket exhust channeled outside the plane and that the reockers are not in the intake duct.  Then it's not much different than the way the F86D does it with its rocket pack.  The only questuion is will the rockers sustained motor fire cause problems as it passes the intake. If the F86D solved it then there is no reason to think it was insurmountable.

[GScholz]

Um ... the retractable launcher on the F-86D is quite a lot farther away from the jet intake than on the B&V. The two lower launchers on the B&V are actually INSIDE the jet intake.

Off the top of my head I can think of the F-104, A-10 and F-5 that all had their gun armaments moved or modified to avoid engine damage. The A-10 prototype even crashed because of this (I have a nice photo in my A-10 book of the pilot ejecting after both his engines blew up when he test fired the gun).

[Pongo]

GH
Your pictures are great examples of how such weapons have to be located on a service aircraft and contrast very nicely with what blohm and voss proposed.

The 30mm are gathered arround the intake.
All the R4ms that I can see would exit the intake or at best the lip.
It wouldnt work. For reasons that probably never occured to B&V becuase they had never developed a jet fighter before.

[GRUNHERZ]

The Migs 37mm gun muzzle is right up there, just like the top 2 30mm. The bottom 30mm are pretty much where the 23mm are. If the russians could solve it then so could the germans with theoir cleaner burning guns.

As for 86D. Well the rockets would still be burning when they passed the just inches below the intake. Where does that exhhause go?

[Pongo]

If the MIG people had been able to mount the cannons that close they would have. THey are probably podded out like that to give distance from the intake for exaclty the reasons we are talking about.

The rocket pod on the Dog Sabre is probably were it is for exactly the same reasons.

I can only think of the defa 30 mm on late G91s as being anywhere near as close to the intakes as that design. Talking cannons of course.

[Furball]

Originally posted by g00b
The Convair XF2Y Sea Dart was a SUPERSONIC flying boat fighter.

http://www.taliaferro.net/waltermiddy/page3.html

cool, forgot about that one!

One thing i very much doubt though... is this

Armament: 21500lb (never fitted)

That.. could really fit the equivalent load of a grand slam bomb?  surely that is a typo.