Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: GRUNHERZ on February 07, 2005, 04:02:26 AM

Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: GRUNHERZ on February 07, 2005, 04:02:26 AM
Imagine being in a bomber and facing this:

Speed of Me262.

4 30mm cannon each firing 1200 mine rounds a minute.

56 internally mounted 55mm R4M rockets each capable of destroying a heavy bomber by itself..

A rear gunner with 20mm cannons of his own to shoot at you too.


(http://www.luft46.com/bv/215w-2.gif)

http://www.luft46.com/bv/bvp215.html

Neat design...
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: GScholz on February 07, 2005, 09:08:59 AM
Spaceship One with guns?
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: Bodhi on February 07, 2005, 09:14:50 AM
would have been neat had they built it, but one round from a 7.62 aa gun on a panzer would have taken it out.
Title: Re: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: rshubert on February 07, 2005, 09:23:31 AM
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Imagine being in a bomber and facing this:

Speed of Me262.

4 30mm cannon each firing 1200 mine rounds a minute.

56 internally mounted 55mm R4M rockets each capable of destroying a heavy bomber by itself..

A rear gunner with 20mm cannons of his own to shoot at you too.



Neat design...


Not a design, a PROPOSAL that apparently never even generated a mockup or windtunnel model.  In other words, it ranks right up there in practicality with the sonic cannon and the two-stage V2 design with pilot.
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: Wolfala on February 07, 2005, 01:29:54 PM
May've been a design PROPOSAL...


BUT - comma...I bet ya no one thought up of using bleed air to heat the wings for de-icing upto that point.

Eh?

Wolfala
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: GScholz on February 07, 2005, 05:16:35 PM
I think they would have had to move the rocket launchers, and maybe the guns as well. If not the engines will ingest a lot of smoke, which is dangerous.
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: Pongo on February 07, 2005, 05:20:24 PM
yup, they would have been flaming out the engines constantly. Like the F86 did when they tried to add cannons outside the intakes.
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: Scrap on February 07, 2005, 05:54:16 PM
That thing just looks too cool to have worked out :cool:

(http://www.luft46.com/bv/3bbp215.jpg)
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: SELECTOR on February 07, 2005, 06:23:01 PM
front section upto the wings looks like a mig15
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: MANDO on February 07, 2005, 06:36:40 PM
Curiously, Blohn & Voss was very active in the last months of the war, not only with drawings, but also with real prototypes.

Take a look at this:

Blohm & Voss 155 (http://www.luftwaffepics.com/lbv1551.htm)
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: GRUNHERZ on February 07, 2005, 10:07:00 PM
Yea the engines would have eaten smoke, but they seemed to figure that out i  the MiG 9 and the F86D.

But who cares, its a cool design. :)
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: Pei on February 09, 2005, 04:18:27 AM
Quote
Originally posted by MANDO
Curiously, Blohn & Voss was very active in the last months of the war, not only with drawings, but also with real prototypes.

 


That's something I had noticed too. I wonder why a Sea plane firm became so active?
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: Pongo on February 09, 2005, 10:18:43 AM
Quote
Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Yea the engines would have eaten smoke, but they seemed to figure that out i  the MiG 9 and the F86D.

But who cares, its a cool design. :)

Oh I aggree. Its very cool but all those R4Ms going off in the intake duct are going to stop the engine. They were not ever going to deliver that aircraft armed in that way.
Why is the pilot wearing a neck brace?
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: GRUNHERZ on February 09, 2005, 10:57:44 AM
The rockets are arranged around the outside perimiter of the intake duct. I dont think they are in the airflow for the engine. Also notoce there seem to be shafts from the back of the rocket tubes leading to the outside of the plane - maybe this is where the rocket exhaust went.
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: GScholz on February 09, 2005, 11:53:10 AM
Um ... the airflow for the engine is quite a lot wider than the intake itself. All the guns would probably have to be moved further back on the fuselage, and the rockets out on the wings.
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: Furball on February 09, 2005, 01:08:18 PM
Talking about sea plane firms...


(http://www.britishaircraft.co.uk/pictures/sra1.jpg)


worlds only flying boat jet fighter?
Title: Flying boat fighter
Post by: g00b on February 09, 2005, 01:34:48 PM
The Convair XF2Y Sea Dart was a SUPERSONIC flying boat fighter.

http://www.taliaferro.net/waltermiddy/page3.html
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: BUG_EAF322 on February 09, 2005, 02:55:30 PM
Yep was thinking about that convair.

But that avro went in service wasnt it ?

That would leave it as the worlds only operational seajetfighter.
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: Pongo on February 09, 2005, 04:59:02 PM
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?
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: GRUNHERZ on February 09, 2005, 05:35:45 PM
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.

(http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/air_power/ap42.jpg)

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.

(http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/airdef/f86d-002.jpg)
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: GScholz on February 09, 2005, 06:09:17 PM
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).
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: Pongo on February 09, 2005, 06:36:43 PM
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.
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: GRUNHERZ on February 09, 2005, 08:57:16 PM
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?
Title: A monster nightfighter/destroyer design...
Post by: Pongo on February 09, 2005, 11:34:46 PM
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.
Title: Re: Flying boat fighter
Post by: Furball on February 10, 2005, 11:52:47 AM
Quote
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

Quote
Armament: 21500lb (never fitted)


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