the flying wing

[4Prop]

I think we should go and re-label all of dave's "wish's" and hijack them ALL!!!!    and then  to get  but when we wake up we'll be like   

[USAF2010]

i cant see anbody in this forum who has asked for the flying wing yet
Role Fighter/Bomber
Manufacturer Gothaer Waggonfabrik
Designer Horten brothers
First flight 1 March 1944
Number built 3
Role Glider
National origin Germany
Manufacturer Horten Flugzeugbau
Designer Walter Horten and Reimar Horten
First flight 1937
Number built 19
Developed from Horten H.II
Role Blended wing aircraft
National origin United States of America
Designer Raoul J. Hoffman
First flight 1934
Number built 1
Role Experimental glider
Manufacturer Slingsby
Designer L.E. Baynes
First flight July 1943
Primary user Royal Aircraft Establishment
Number built 1
remember indiana jones it was this air craft that made a big impact during that film

the flying wing could carry 3x 3000lb bombs

it could fly 1000 naut miles

it could be adapted to take of from a cv if wings were hinged

it was a great aircraft capable of 600 mph in a dive with 4 nose mounted cannon


(Image removed from quote.)

Oh god, someone laced the water supply with LSD again... 

[Butcher]

Oh god, someone laced the water supply with LSD again... 

Who cares, thats one of the best posts i've seen in a very long time.

[davidwales]

ok i know it wont get passed , bad idea !!!

[dirtdart]

Man, go big or go home:



Prototype built, destroyed by resistance before complete.  Would perk at 100 next to the B-29.



Just looked cool. 



Saw service, it evacuated the red skull before the end of the war and Captain America could capture him. 

[davidwales]

ok i admit this idea is rubbish ,got carried away reading about it like that pic though , how do you delete the thread ?

[blood_scout67]

ok i admit this idea is rubbish ,got carried away reading about it like that pic though , how do you delete the thread ?

dave u cant i've tried oh before you make a thread next time listen to a little advice check the stats with a book the internet ask a friend and finally make sure not to put some stupid stuff thank you
now the flying wing looked cool but never got of the drawing board good try though

[Martyn]

I've read up a bit on the captured HO-229 protoype. RAF pilots refused to test fly it because, although it looked cool it was in fact a design disaster (and the engines were pretty unreliable too).

For instance, (from what I've read) it had no internal bulkheads between the pilot and the engines, there was an oil pump directly behind the pilot, there was no cockpit floor (canvas cloth only) until the front wheel was pulled up. I guess this was why Gotha wanted to redesign it before it went into production.

I'm sure that if the Germans had more resources the design would have been much better - but they didn't and it wasn't.

Also, the broad flying wing design encounters severe aerodynamic problems when approaching subsonic speeds - particularly thick wing designs. This is why modern supersonic aircraft are long and thin, not short and broad. Can you imagine being the fastest fighter in the sky but knowing that if you go just slightly over speed you'll suddenly break up? Zoom'n'Boom would take on a different meaning.

[FLS]

If you think Gotha designed the Horten flying wing you better do some more reading.

[Martyn]

Please read again. I never said Gotha designed it.

They didn't design it - the Horton brothers did. They wanted to redesign it. The Horton brothers adapted their glider designs to a jet-plane without getting in the proper expertise. The result was therefore not as good as it could have been.

[FLS]

The Hortens didn't adapt their glider design. They designed the Ho-229 from scratch to meet the payload and range design criteria they were given. The problems with the engines were out of their control but their design was good. The Hortens were the experts in flying wing design, they could hardly have gotten "proper expertise" from anyone else. Their sailplanes set performance records and their powered aircraft would have done the same.

[davidwales]

the french resistence destroyed it before they could test it , have you heard of the bell ????

[Martyn]

True - but they had no experience in designing jet powered aircraft, although with the engines mounted inboard and with the shared components behind the cockpit I suspect that no-one had worked on that sort of configuration before. I understand that they didn't discuss these issues outside of their own team where a more experienced engineer may have pointed out a few things for them.

The aerodynamic design was excellent - ground breaking in fact - but with that version there would have been issues with pilot safety, particularly in the event of turbines shedding blades, leaky fuel lines catching fire, oil leaks under pressure (most of these directly into the cockpit) etc. They may not have had the resources to do a proper job but the result was an aircraft that was considered unsafe by some. The Gotha team wanted to improve on that, but it is unclear to what extent. Its also unclear what impact that any proposed 'improvements' would have had on the all-up weight and certainly unit cost.

I think had they been given more time and resources to do a better job on the internal structure it would have been a fantastic plane - although a bit dodgy at high speed.

I can't get over the lack of cockpit floor (if that's correct). A bit draughty on take-off I reckon.

[Krusty]

Don't boost the Horton design into the god-like status. It was a design. One of many. It wasn't the only crazy Nazi flying wing design, it was just the lucky 1-in-a-million that made it off paper. It did not meet the criteria for its design, it did not meet basic areodynamic safey standards, and it would have been a massive flop.

There's a reason that the flying wing design isn't used. It needs fly by wire design and constant computer corrects to keep it from slipping or spinning out of the sky. Even when they have a vertical surface or engine pods to give them some stability, they were dodgy. Put the pure wing shape with no obsctructions? Disaster.

The internal engines were also a bad idea. These had very short lifespans and had to be removed and accessed constantly. Not to mention the fact that the reason all engines were external up to this point was the MASSIVE heat they gave off. They had to be separated from the airframe to keep the plane from bursting into flames.

No, the Horton design smacked of ignorance on the designers' part... It was an interesting idea that failed on too many counts and could never have recovered. It's as much a pipe dream as Hitler's "Amerikabomber" that would pound New York into submission and end the US involvement in WW2...

And you know how well THAT went for Hitler, right?

[dirtdart]

There's a reason that the flying wing design isn't used. It needs fly by wire design and constant computer corrects to keep it from slipping or spinning out of the sky. Even when they have a vertical surface or engine pods to give them some stability, they were dodgy. Put the pure wing shape with no obsctructions? Disaster.

Bah...  Jack Northrop was a fool.  His engineering prowess undermined by a Krusty quote.