Rob Arndt
2010-09-14 19:58:50 UTC
Discussion:
(too old to reply)
David E. Powell
2010-09-14 20:10:56 UTC
I can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
Rob Arndt
2010-09-14 20:17:00 UTC
Post by David E. Powell
I can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
In 1945 the Germans were experimenting with a range of Me-262 typesI can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
including the Heimatschutzer high-speed models, the HG series with
more swept wings in day and night fighter versions, and various models
with BK and revolver cannon installations.
This HG.III is more like HG.IV as the real one under construction was
an inline 3-seat Nachtjaeger with He S 011 engines. No one clearly
knows what happened to it. Some state that it was not completed while
others say it was involved in a landing accident with another Me-262
and damaged severely. Or that it was taken by US troops or merely
scrapped...
Gordon knows more about this model than I do.
Rob
Eunometic
2010-09-18 14:18:24 UTC
Post by David E. Powell
I can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
Advanced versions of the Me 262 were needed to maintain a lead onI can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
allied fighters by 1946. Swept wings to get the craft to Mach 0.95
and in the 45 degree sweep versions perhaps break the sound barrier.
There are more aesthetically pleasing versions of this craft with a
conventionally placed canopy. More or less the same wing with the
engines moved to the roots of the wings, the orginal place anyway.
http://games.softpedia.com/progScreenshots/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator-2004-Messershmitt-Me262-HG3-Screenshot-16407.html
The keepfin canopy must have allowed plenty of room for a large fuel
supply.
Rob Arndt
2010-09-18 17:37:06 UTC
Post by Eunometic
allied fighters by 1946. Swept wings to get the craft to Mach 0.95
and in the 45 degree sweep versions perhaps break the sound barrier.
There are more aesthetically pleasing versions of this craft with a
conventionally placed canopy. More or less the same wing with the
engines moved to the roots of the wings, the orginal place anyway.
http://games.softpedia.com/progScreenshots/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator...
The keepfin canopy must have allowed plenty of room for a large fuel
supply.
It should be noted that there were three versions of the Me-262 HG.IIIPost by David E. Powell
I can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
Advanced versions of the Me 262 were needed to maintain a lead onI can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
allied fighters by 1946. Swept wings to get the craft to Mach 0.95
and in the 45 degree sweep versions perhaps break the sound barrier.
There are more aesthetically pleasing versions of this craft with a
conventionally placed canopy. More or less the same wing with the
engines moved to the roots of the wings, the orginal place anyway.
http://games.softpedia.com/progScreenshots/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator...
The keepfin canopy must have allowed plenty of room for a large fuel
supply.
and the one depicted is the III/3 version (sometimes mistakenly listed
as HG.IV) and not the original swept-wing dayfighter nor 46.5o swept-
wing inline 3-seat Nachtjaeger (pilot, navigator, radar operator) that
Gordon is seeking.
The history of these variants are complex due to two different
requirements Messerschmitt made in Jan and Feb 1945. One was for a He
S 011 powered machine based on the Me-262B-1 which evolved into the
original 2-seat Nachtjaeger that could be adapted to fit another
section for the navigator or alternatively and oblique gun
installation. The second proposal at first had more wing sweep, but
would still keep the Jumo engines podded... until this too was evolved
into the He S 011 engines being buried in the wing roots.
No concrete proof is found of actual construction; however,
Messerschmitt's secret Oberammergau facility had some information on
the first type captured there and evaluated by representatives of De
Havilland and Bell aircraft companies since April 29, 1945. No
aircraft was on the premises though, only the Me P.1101 and flying
models of the P.1112 project.
There are persisitent rumors of one HG.III being constructed near or
on a Me-262 base with a bad landing accident that damaged the
prototype under construction... but the source is never identified nor
even which version it was- dayfighter or Nachtjaeger. Given the time
period from requirements (Jan-Feb 1945) I suspect that possibly only
the wings could have been manufactured and possibly mated to a Me-262
fuselage. The He S 011s were not available and there was considerable
debate about whether this machine should be a 2-seater or 3-seater.
Rob
Eunometic
2010-09-19 14:07:44 UTC
Post by Rob Arndt
and the one depicted is the III/3 version (sometimes mistakenly listed
as HG.IV) and not the original swept-wing dayfighter nor 46.5o swept-
wing inline 3-seat Nachtjaeger (pilot, navigator, radar operator) that
Gordon is seeking.
The history of these variants are complex due to two different
requirements Messerschmitt made in Jan and Feb 1945. One was for a He
S 011 powered machine based on the Me-262B-1 which evolved into the
original 2-seat Nachtjaeger that could be adapted to fit another
section for the navigator or alternatively and oblique gun
installation. The second proposal at first had more wing sweep, but
would still keep the Jumo engines podded... until this too was evolved
into the He S 011 engines being buried in the wing roots.
No concrete proof is found of actual construction; however,
Messerschmitt's secret Oberammergau facility had some information on
the first type captured there and evaluated by representatives of De
Havilland and Bell aircraft companies since April 29, 1945. No
aircraft was on the premises though, only the Me P.1101 and flying
models of the P.1112 project.
There are persisitent rumors of one HG.III being constructed near or
on a Me-262 base with a bad landing accident that damaged the
prototype under construction... but the source is never identified nor
even which version it was- dayfighter or Nachtjaeger. Given the time
period from requirements (Jan-Feb 1945) I suspect that possibly only
the wings could have been manufactured and possibly mated to a Me-262
fuselage. The He S 011s were not available and there was considerable
debate about whether this machine should be a 2-seater or 3-seater.
There was supposedly a Me 262B2a, with a stretched fueselage for a twoPost by Eunometic
allied fighters by 1946. Swept wings to get the craft to Mach 0.95
and in the 45 degree sweep versions perhaps break the sound barrier.
There are more aesthetically pleasing versions of this craft with a
conventionally placed canopy. More or less the same wing with the
engines moved to the roots of the wings, the orginal place anyway.
http://games.softpedia.com/progScreenshots/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator...
The keepfin canopy must have allowed plenty of room for a large fuel
supply.
It should be noted that there were three versions of the Me-262 HG.IIIPost by David E. Powell
I can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
Advanced versions of the Me 262 were needed to maintain a lead onI can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
allied fighters by 1946. Swept wings to get the craft to Mach 0.95
and in the 45 degree sweep versions perhaps break the sound barrier.
There are more aesthetically pleasing versions of this craft with a
conventionally placed canopy. More or less the same wing with the
engines moved to the roots of the wings, the orginal place anyway.
http://games.softpedia.com/progScreenshots/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator...
The keepfin canopy must have allowed plenty of room for a large fuel
supply.
and the one depicted is the III/3 version (sometimes mistakenly listed
as HG.IV) and not the original swept-wing dayfighter nor 46.5o swept-
wing inline 3-seat Nachtjaeger (pilot, navigator, radar operator) that
Gordon is seeking.
The history of these variants are complex due to two different
requirements Messerschmitt made in Jan and Feb 1945. One was for a He
S 011 powered machine based on the Me-262B-1 which evolved into the
original 2-seat Nachtjaeger that could be adapted to fit another
section for the navigator or alternatively and oblique gun
installation. The second proposal at first had more wing sweep, but
would still keep the Jumo engines podded... until this too was evolved
into the He S 011 engines being buried in the wing roots.
No concrete proof is found of actual construction; however,
Messerschmitt's secret Oberammergau facility had some information on
the first type captured there and evaluated by representatives of De
Havilland and Bell aircraft companies since April 29, 1945. No
aircraft was on the premises though, only the Me P.1101 and flying
models of the P.1112 project.
There are persisitent rumors of one HG.III being constructed near or
on a Me-262 base with a bad landing accident that damaged the
prototype under construction... but the source is never identified nor
even which version it was- dayfighter or Nachtjaeger. Given the time
period from requirements (Jan-Feb 1945) I suspect that possibly only
the wings could have been manufactured and possibly mated to a Me-262
fuselage. The He S 011s were not available and there was considerable
debate about whether this machine should be a 2-seater or 3-seater.
place cockpit and properly balanced fuel tankage supply almost ready
to fly when the war ended. It lacked an increased sweep wing. There
were also the night fighter versions of the Ar 234P to fullfill this
role, probably a better craft for the job.
Interim solutions to the wing sweep issue were to simply sweep the
inboard section.
Walt
2010-09-19 16:00:04 UTC
On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 10:37:06 -0700 (PDT), Rob Arndt
there in addition to the P.1101. IIRC It was awaiting installation of
the MK213 30mm cannon.
Post by Rob Arndt
and the one depicted is the III/3 version (sometimes mistakenly listed
as HG.IV) and not the original swept-wing dayfighter nor 46.5o swept-
wing inline 3-seat Nachtjaeger (pilot, navigator, radar operator) that
Gordon is seeking.
The history of these variants are complex due to two different
requirements Messerschmitt made in Jan and Feb 1945. One was for a He
S 011 powered machine based on the Me-262B-1 which evolved into the
original 2-seat Nachtjaeger that could be adapted to fit another
section for the navigator or alternatively and oblique gun
installation. The second proposal at first had more wing sweep, but
would still keep the Jumo engines podded... until this too was evolved
into the He S 011 engines being buried in the wing roots.
No concrete proof is found of actual construction; however,
Messerschmitt's secret Oberammergau facility had some information on
the first type captured there and evaluated by representatives of De
Havilland and Bell aircraft companies since April 29, 1945. No
aircraft was on the premises though, only the Me P.1101 and flying
models of the P.1112 project.
There are persisitent rumors of one HG.III being constructed near or
on a Me-262 base with a bad landing accident that damaged the
prototype under construction... but the source is never identified nor
even which version it was- dayfighter or Nachtjaeger. Given the time
period from requirements (Jan-Feb 1945) I suspect that possibly only
the wings could have been manufactured and possibly mated to a Me-262
fuselage. The He S 011s were not available and there was considerable
debate about whether this machine should be a 2-seater or 3-seater.
Rob
About Oberammergau...there was at leasdt one Me262a (and maybe 2)Post by Eunometic
allied fighters by 1946. Swept wings to get the craft to Mach 0.95
and in the 45 degree sweep versions perhaps break the sound barrier.
There are more aesthetically pleasing versions of this craft with a
conventionally placed canopy. More or less the same wing with the
engines moved to the roots of the wings, the orginal place anyway.
http://games.softpedia.com/progScreenshots/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator...
The keepfin canopy must have allowed plenty of room for a large fuel
supply.
It should be noted that there were three versions of the Me-262 HG.IIIPost by David E. Powell
I can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
Advanced versions of the Me 262 were needed to maintain a lead onI can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
allied fighters by 1946. Swept wings to get the craft to Mach 0.95
and in the 45 degree sweep versions perhaps break the sound barrier.
There are more aesthetically pleasing versions of this craft with a
conventionally placed canopy. More or less the same wing with the
engines moved to the roots of the wings, the orginal place anyway.
http://games.softpedia.com/progScreenshots/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator...
The keepfin canopy must have allowed plenty of room for a large fuel
supply.
and the one depicted is the III/3 version (sometimes mistakenly listed
as HG.IV) and not the original swept-wing dayfighter nor 46.5o swept-
wing inline 3-seat Nachtjaeger (pilot, navigator, radar operator) that
Gordon is seeking.
The history of these variants are complex due to two different
requirements Messerschmitt made in Jan and Feb 1945. One was for a He
S 011 powered machine based on the Me-262B-1 which evolved into the
original 2-seat Nachtjaeger that could be adapted to fit another
section for the navigator or alternatively and oblique gun
installation. The second proposal at first had more wing sweep, but
would still keep the Jumo engines podded... until this too was evolved
into the He S 011 engines being buried in the wing roots.
No concrete proof is found of actual construction; however,
Messerschmitt's secret Oberammergau facility had some information on
the first type captured there and evaluated by representatives of De
Havilland and Bell aircraft companies since April 29, 1945. No
aircraft was on the premises though, only the Me P.1101 and flying
models of the P.1112 project.
There are persisitent rumors of one HG.III being constructed near or
on a Me-262 base with a bad landing accident that damaged the
prototype under construction... but the source is never identified nor
even which version it was- dayfighter or Nachtjaeger. Given the time
period from requirements (Jan-Feb 1945) I suspect that possibly only
the wings could have been manufactured and possibly mated to a Me-262
fuselage. The He S 011s were not available and there was considerable
debate about whether this machine should be a 2-seater or 3-seater.
Rob
there in addition to the P.1101. IIRC It was awaiting installation of
the MK213 30mm cannon.
Rob Arndt
2010-09-19 17:18:58 UTC
Post by Walt
On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 10:37:06 -0700 (PDT), Rob Arndt
there in addition to the P.1101. IIRC It was awaiting installation of
the MK213 30mm cannon.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Thanks Walt,On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 10:37:06 -0700 (PDT), Rob Arndt
Post by Rob Arndt
and the one depicted is the III/3 version (sometimes mistakenly listed
as HG.IV) and not the original swept-wing dayfighter nor 46.5o swept-
wing inline 3-seat Nachtjaeger (pilot, navigator, radar operator) that
Gordon is seeking.
The history of these variants are complex due to two different
requirements Messerschmitt made in Jan and Feb 1945. One was for a He
S 011 powered machine based on the Me-262B-1 which evolved into the
original 2-seat Nachtjaeger that could be adapted to fit another
section for the navigator or alternatively and oblique gun
installation. The second proposal at first had more wing sweep, but
would still keep the Jumo engines podded... until this too was evolved
into the He S 011 engines being buried in the wing roots.
No concrete proof is found of actual construction; however,
Messerschmitt's secret Oberammergau facility had some information on
the first type captured there and evaluated by representatives of De
Havilland and Bell aircraft companies since April 29, 1945. No
aircraft was on the premises though, only the Me P.1101 and flying
models of the P.1112 project.
There are persisitent rumors of one HG.III being constructed near or
on a Me-262 base with a bad landing accident that damaged the
prototype under construction... but the source is never identified nor
even which version it was- dayfighter or Nachtjaeger. Given the time
period from requirements (Jan-Feb 1945) I suspect that possibly only
the wings could have been manufactured and possibly mated to a Me-262
fuselage. The He S 011s were not available and there was considerable
debate about whether this machine should be a 2-seater or 3-seater.
Rob
About Oberammergau...there was at leasdt one Me262a (and maybe 2)Post by Eunometic
allied fighters by 1946. Swept wings to get the craft to Mach 0.95
and in the 45 degree sweep versions perhaps break the sound barrier.
There are more aesthetically pleasing versions of this craft with a
conventionally placed canopy. More or less the same wing with the
engines moved to the roots of the wings, the orginal place anyway.
http://games.softpedia.com/progScreenshots/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator...
The keepfin canopy must have allowed plenty of room for a large fuel
supply.
It should be noted that there were three versions of the Me-262 HG.IIIPost by David E. Powell
I can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
Advanced versions of the Me 262 were needed to maintain a lead onI can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
allied fighters by 1946. Swept wings to get the craft to Mach 0.95
and in the 45 degree sweep versions perhaps break the sound barrier.
There are more aesthetically pleasing versions of this craft with a
conventionally placed canopy. More or less the same wing with the
engines moved to the roots of the wings, the orginal place anyway.
http://games.softpedia.com/progScreenshots/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator...
The keepfin canopy must have allowed plenty of room for a large fuel
supply.
and the one depicted is the III/3 version (sometimes mistakenly listed
as HG.IV) and not the original swept-wing dayfighter nor 46.5o swept-
wing inline 3-seat Nachtjaeger (pilot, navigator, radar operator) that
Gordon is seeking.
The history of these variants are complex due to two different
requirements Messerschmitt made in Jan and Feb 1945. One was for a He
S 011 powered machine based on the Me-262B-1 which evolved into the
original 2-seat Nachtjaeger that could be adapted to fit another
section for the navigator or alternatively and oblique gun
installation. The second proposal at first had more wing sweep, but
would still keep the Jumo engines podded... until this too was evolved
into the He S 011 engines being buried in the wing roots.
No concrete proof is found of actual construction; however,
Messerschmitt's secret Oberammergau facility had some information on
the first type captured there and evaluated by representatives of De
Havilland and Bell aircraft companies since April 29, 1945. No
aircraft was on the premises though, only the Me P.1101 and flying
models of the P.1112 project.
There are persisitent rumors of one HG.III being constructed near or
on a Me-262 base with a bad landing accident that damaged the
prototype under construction... but the source is never identified nor
even which version it was- dayfighter or Nachtjaeger. Given the time
period from requirements (Jan-Feb 1945) I suspect that possibly only
the wings could have been manufactured and possibly mated to a Me-262
fuselage. The He S 011s were not available and there was considerable
debate about whether this machine should be a 2-seater or 3-seater.
Rob
there in addition to the P.1101. IIRC It was awaiting installation of
the MK213 30mm cannon.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
... no HG.III to go with the documents...
Also found at Oberammergau was a Motorstopmittel device known as a
"Magnetic Wave" device in US Intel reports (An Evaluation of German
Capabilities in 1945). The company ELEMAG of Hildescheim helped design
the weapon of which various types were found outside Berlin and also
at Lofer, Austria. Dr. Gold also proposed a gas mixture that could
wreck an Allied engine if ingested. That is found in his declassified
interrogation.
Rob
LIBERATOR
2010-09-19 07:21:37 UTC
Post by Eunometic
allied fighters by 1946. Swept wings to get the craft to Mach 0.95
and in the 45 degree sweep versions perhaps break the sound barrier.
There are more aesthetically pleasing versions of this craft with a
conventionally placed canopy. More or less the same wing with the
engines moved to the roots of the wings, the orginal place anyway.
http://games.softpedia.com/progScreenshots/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator...
The keepfin canopy must have allowed plenty of room for a large fuel
supply.
You guys rock!Post by David E. Powell
I can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
Advanced versions of the Me 262 were needed to maintain a lead onI can see moving the motors to the wing roots, but the canopy has the
Gee Bee thing going.
I would have been thinking "Straight 262 volume production" by
1944....
allied fighters by 1946. Swept wings to get the craft to Mach 0.95
and in the 45 degree sweep versions perhaps break the sound barrier.
There are more aesthetically pleasing versions of this craft with a
conventionally placed canopy. More or less the same wing with the
engines moved to the roots of the wings, the orginal place anyway.
http://games.softpedia.com/progScreenshots/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator...
The keepfin canopy must have allowed plenty of room for a large fuel
supply.
I want one built for airshows.
Now we just need some designers..
Daryl Hunt
2010-09-14 21:33:34 UTC
Never happened. Was just a pipe dream. I see the arrogantes all
talk about "If it was Built" how wonderful it would have been.
It wasn't built, it never went to tooling, it never made a test
flight, etc...
Since you won't post the information on it, I did it for you.
talk about "If it was Built" how wonderful it would have been.
It wasn't built, it never went to tooling, it never made a test
flight, etc...
Since you won't post the information on it, I did it for you.
LIBERATOR
2010-09-19 07:18:53 UTC
GOD LORD JESUS IT IS A MIRACLE!
(Eeeew!)
(Eeeew!)
Daryl Hunt
2010-09-19 07:51:28 UTC
No miracle. Someone with very little idea what a production
Aircraft needs to look like to function had way too much time on
their hands.
Aircraft needs to look like to function had way too much time on
their hands.
Rob Arndt
2010-09-19 08:20:37 UTC
No miracle. Someone with very little idea what a production
Aircraft needs to look like to function had way too much time on
their hands.
Please, by all means Daryl... tell us why Messerschmitt should notAircraft needs to look like to function had way too much time on
their hands.
have continued to develop the Me-262 Nachtjaeger design evolution to
match the progressive wing sweep advances that were tested and proven
as well as the fitting of the new He S 011s for both the dayfighter
and Nachtjaeger Me-262s in development???
German nightfighters were to be jet-powered as well and where else to
begin but with a tested design instead of wasting time designing and
building one of the other projekt aircraft.
This again shows how little you know of the Me-262 evolution, and of
the 1944-45 HG series, The HG.I flew in 1944 and achieved 606 mph. The
HG.II with V-tail and the HG.III would have raised the Mach limit up
to 0.94 at 20,000 ft. So, it was a worthy effort. So were the
Heimatschutzer versions and Pulkzerstorers with heavy BK armament.
But thanks for you OPINION.
Rob
Daryl Hunt
2010-09-19 08:32:37 UTC
Post by Rob Arndt
have continued to develop the Me-262 Nachtjaeger design evolution to
match the progressive wing sweep advances that were tested and proven
as well as the fitting of the new He S 011s for both the dayfighter
and Nachtjaeger Me-262s in development???
German nightfighters were to be jet-powered as well and where else to
begin but with a tested design instead of wasting time designing and
building one of the other projekt aircraft.
This again shows how little you know of the Me-262 evolution, and of
the 1944-45 HG series, The HG.I flew in 1944 and achieved 606 mph. The
HG.II with V-tail and the HG.III would have raised the Mach limit up
to 0.94 at 20,000 ft. So, it was a worthy effort. So were the
Heimatschutzer versions and Pulkzerstorers with heavy BK armament.
But thanks for you OPINION.
Rob
Yer an idiot. There is a reason NO future fighters looked likePost by Daryl Hunt
No miracle. Someone with very little idea what a production
Aircraft needs to look like to function had way too much time on
their hands.
Please, by all means Daryl... tell us why Messerschmitt should notNo miracle. Someone with very little idea what a production
Aircraft needs to look like to function had way too much time on
their hands.
have continued to develop the Me-262 Nachtjaeger design evolution to
match the progressive wing sweep advances that were tested and proven
as well as the fitting of the new He S 011s for both the dayfighter
and Nachtjaeger Me-262s in development???
German nightfighters were to be jet-powered as well and where else to
begin but with a tested design instead of wasting time designing and
building one of the other projekt aircraft.
This again shows how little you know of the Me-262 evolution, and of
the 1944-45 HG series, The HG.I flew in 1944 and achieved 606 mph. The
HG.II with V-tail and the HG.III would have raised the Mach limit up
to 0.94 at 20,000 ft. So, it was a worthy effort. So were the
Heimatschutzer versions and Pulkzerstorers with heavy BK armament.
But thanks for you OPINION.
Rob
that. Now, you tell me what that reason was? Was it that
everyone hated german designs so much or that it just wasn't a
good design to begin with.
But nice drawing on the old Gausthous Napkin, though.
Rob Arndt
2010-09-19 08:50:04 UTC
Post by Rob Arndt
have continued to develop the Me-262 Nachtjaeger design evolution to
match the progressive wing sweep advances that were tested and proven
as well as the fitting of the new He S 011s for both the dayfighter
and Nachtjaeger Me-262s in development???
German nightfighters were to be jet-powered as well and where else to
begin but with a tested design instead of wasting time designing and
building one of the other projekt aircraft.
This again shows how little you know of the Me-262 evolution, and of
the 1944-45 HG series, The HG.I flew in 1944 and achieved 606 mph. The
HG.II with V-tail and the HG.III would have raised the Mach limit up
to 0.94 at 20,000 ft. So, it was a worthy effort. So were the
Heimatschutzer versions and Pulkzerstorers with heavy BK armament.
But thanks for you OPINION.
Rob
Yer an idiot. There is a reason NO future fighters looked likeNo miracle. Someone with very little idea what a production
Aircraft needs to look like to function had way too much time on
their hands.
Please, by all means Daryl... tell us why Messerschmitt should notAircraft needs to look like to function had way too much time on
their hands.
have continued to develop the Me-262 Nachtjaeger design evolution to
match the progressive wing sweep advances that were tested and proven
as well as the fitting of the new He S 011s for both the dayfighter
and Nachtjaeger Me-262s in development???
German nightfighters were to be jet-powered as well and where else to
begin but with a tested design instead of wasting time designing and
building one of the other projekt aircraft.
This again shows how little you know of the Me-262 evolution, and of
the 1944-45 HG series, The HG.I flew in 1944 and achieved 606 mph. The
HG.II with V-tail and the HG.III would have raised the Mach limit up
to 0.94 at 20,000 ft. So, it was a worthy effort. So were the
Heimatschutzer versions and Pulkzerstorers with heavy BK armament.
But thanks for you OPINION.
Rob
that. Now, you tell me what that reason was? Was it that
everyone hated german designs so much or that it just wasn't a
good design to begin with.
But nice drawing on the old Gausthous Napkin, though.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
No postwar a/c built with engines in the wing roots nor 45o sweep???
Do you REALLY wanna go there?
Idiot.
Rob
p.s. Keep posting on German a/c so that I can dance circles around
you :)
Daryl Hunt
2010-09-19 09:10:14 UTC
Post by Rob Arndt
No postwar a/c built with engines in the wing roots nor 45o sweep???
That wasn't a lone German discovery. The chinese figure that outPost by Daryl Hunt
that. Now, you tell me what that reason was? Was it that
everyone hated german designs so much or that it just wasn't a
good design to begin with.
But nice drawing on the old Gausthous Napkin, though.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Really???Post by Rob Arndt
have continued to develop the Me-262 Nachtjaeger design evolution to
match the progressive wing sweep advances that were tested and proven
as well as the fitting of the new He S 011s for both the dayfighter
and Nachtjaeger Me-262s in development???
German nightfighters were to be jet-powered as well and where else to
begin but with a tested design instead of wasting time designing and
building one of the other projekt aircraft.
This again shows how little you know of the Me-262 evolution, and of
the 1944-45 HG series, The HG.I flew in 1944 and achieved 606 mph. The
HG.II with V-tail and the HG.III would have raised the Mach limit up
to 0.94 at 20,000 ft. So, it was a worthy effort. So were the
Heimatschutzer versions and Pulkzerstorers with heavy BK armament.
But thanks for you OPINION.
Rob
Yer an idiot. There is a reason NO future fighters looked likePost by Daryl Hunt
No miracle. Someone with very little idea what a production
Aircraft needs to look like to function had way too much time on
their hands.
Please, by all means Daryl... tell us why Messerschmitt should notNo miracle. Someone with very little idea what a production
Aircraft needs to look like to function had way too much time on
their hands.
have continued to develop the Me-262 Nachtjaeger design evolution to
match the progressive wing sweep advances that were tested and proven
as well as the fitting of the new He S 011s for both the dayfighter
and Nachtjaeger Me-262s in development???
German nightfighters were to be jet-powered as well and where else to
begin but with a tested design instead of wasting time designing and
building one of the other projekt aircraft.
This again shows how little you know of the Me-262 evolution, and of
the 1944-45 HG series, The HG.I flew in 1944 and achieved 606 mph. The
HG.II with V-tail and the HG.III would have raised the Mach limit up
to 0.94 at 20,000 ft. So, it was a worthy effort. So were the
Heimatschutzer versions and Pulkzerstorers with heavy BK armament.
But thanks for you OPINION.
Rob
that. Now, you tell me what that reason was? Was it that
everyone hated german designs so much or that it just wasn't a
good design to begin with.
But nice drawing on the old Gausthous Napkin, though.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
No postwar a/c built with engines in the wing roots nor 45o sweep???
a thousand years ago.
Sure, why not. Let's take a reasonable look at your
vaporvunderweapon on design.
Placement of Cockpit. To bag it, just fly towards it from the
front and fire on it. The pilot won't ever see it coming with
the AC itself in the way of everything in the forward lower
quadrant. Now about trying to taxi that thing. Grandma got
runned over by a ME-262.III.
What good is the tail section. It doesn't have the necessary area
to control the AC at slower speeds. Comon, you gotta slow down
once in awhile. Like landing, takeoff, etc.. If (and I use that
world loosely) you get it off the ground, IF you get it up to
speed, you make one flight and then kill yourself bringing it in
for landing.
This idiot understand aerodynamics better than you. And I am a
piker compared to some others in here. But I have designed and
flown Model AC and understand what makes them work. Flight of
the Phoenix made a point there. But I can't put the big words to
it and made trial and error flights. Yes, some succeeded while
others didn't but my failures didn't kill the pilot in the process.
Not this time, either. Your VunderVaporVeapon is just a drawing
and the actual AC would have looked far different. No dancing,
just fact.
Daryl Hunt
2010-09-19 09:57:30 UTC
Post by Rob Arndt
No postwar a/c built with engines in the wing roots nor 45o sweep???
Do you REALLY wanna go there?
Idiot.
Rob
p.s. Keep posting on German a/c so that I can dance circles around
you :)
Here is a cleaned up version. It's as applicable as any otherPost by Daryl Hunt
that. Now, you tell me what that reason was? Was it that
everyone hated german designs so much or that it just wasn't a
good design to begin with.
But nice drawing on the old Gausthous Napkin, though.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Really???Post by Rob Arndt
have continued to develop the Me-262 Nachtjaeger design evolution to
match the progressive wing sweep advances that were tested and proven
as well as the fitting of the new He S 011s for both the dayfighter
and Nachtjaeger Me-262s in development???
German nightfighters were to be jet-powered as well and where else to
begin but with a tested design instead of wasting time designing and
building one of the other projekt aircraft.
This again shows how little you know of the Me-262 evolution, and of
the 1944-45 HG series, The HG.I flew in 1944 and achieved 606 mph. The
HG.II with V-tail and the HG.III would have raised the Mach limit up
to 0.94 at 20,000 ft. So, it was a worthy effort. So were the
Heimatschutzer versions and Pulkzerstorers with heavy BK armament.
But thanks for you OPINION.
Rob
Yer an idiot. There is a reason NO future fighters looked likePost by Daryl Hunt
No miracle. Someone with very little idea what a production
Aircraft needs to look like to function had way too much time on
their hands.
Please, by all means Daryl... tell us why Messerschmitt should notNo miracle. Someone with very little idea what a production
Aircraft needs to look like to function had way too much time on
their hands.
have continued to develop the Me-262 Nachtjaeger design evolution to
match the progressive wing sweep advances that were tested and proven
as well as the fitting of the new He S 011s for both the dayfighter
and Nachtjaeger Me-262s in development???
German nightfighters were to be jet-powered as well and where else to
begin but with a tested design instead of wasting time designing and
building one of the other projekt aircraft.
This again shows how little you know of the Me-262 evolution, and of
the 1944-45 HG series, The HG.I flew in 1944 and achieved 606 mph. The
HG.II with V-tail and the HG.III would have raised the Mach limit up
to 0.94 at 20,000 ft. So, it was a worthy effort. So were the
Heimatschutzer versions and Pulkzerstorers with heavy BK armament.
But thanks for you OPINION.
Rob
that. Now, you tell me what that reason was? Was it that
everyone hated german designs so much or that it just wasn't a
good design to begin with.
But nice drawing on the old Gausthous Napkin, though.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
No postwar a/c built with engines in the wing roots nor 45o sweep???
Do you REALLY wanna go there?
Idiot.
Rob
p.s. Keep posting on German a/c so that I can dance circles around
you :)
drawing on the 262. I call mine Me-262 HG.IV art.
Loading Image...
You will notice the rear stabs have been increased and the
cockpit has been moved forward. Now, smart Guy, where did I get
the Cockpit from? You're the genius here.
Again, the original was just a pilot killer nothing more.
Rob Arndt
2010-09-19 16:58:04 UTC
The Me-262 HG.III/3 design is nothing out of the ordinary with the
cockpit arrangement. Similar cockpit locations were for the:
- Me P.1106:
http://www.luft46.com/mess/mep1106.html
- Horten Ho XIIIb:
http://www.luft46.com/horten/ho13b.html
Loading Image...
- Lippisch P.13a:
Loading Image...
What you are trying to depict is HG.III dayfighter:
Loading Image...
The 3-seater Nachtjaeger would look like this:
Loading Image...
And the HG.III/3 looks like this:
Loading Image...
For comparison:
HG.II:
Loading Image...
Me-262B-1a/U1:
Loading Image...
Rob
cockpit arrangement. Similar cockpit locations were for the:
- Me P.1106:
http://www.luft46.com/mess/mep1106.html
- Horten Ho XIIIb:
http://www.luft46.com/horten/ho13b.html
Loading Image...
- Lippisch P.13a:
Loading Image...
What you are trying to depict is HG.III dayfighter:
Loading Image...
The 3-seater Nachtjaeger would look like this:
Loading Image...
And the HG.III/3 looks like this:
Loading Image...
For comparison:
HG.II:
Loading Image...
Me-262B-1a/U1:
Loading Image...
Rob
JasiekS
2010-09-20 07:34:09 UTC
OK, Rob! This is my OPINION: don't insist on this canopy arrangement.
The aircraft with bubble canopy do have FLAT front screen for some
reason. In fact, it was discovered early that curvature of front fart of
canopy MAKES AIMING DIFFICULT. The more curvature (i.e. smaller radius
of curvature) the worse optical properties. In the drawing you presented
(and not for the first time) canopy HAD TO HAVE small radius of
curvature in front of the pilot. Regardless from poor visibility while
taxiing etc. this DOWNGRADES aircraft's capabilities.
Daryl (and vaughn on other occasion) are right that stabiliser seems to
be too small to provide directional stability. It HAD TO BE thick in
order to accomodate cockpit. OK, there is BIG root chord which gives big
maximum thickness - but where? NOT in the nose! This stabiliser with
canopy as its front part would have VERY BAD airfoil for transonic (we
are talking of supposed M>0.8) speeds. In the drawing by Gino Marcomini
there is some shadow behind canopy. This suggest some unregularity (it's
concave; a pit from the airflow point of view) - a place just made for
premature shock-vawe creation!
I repeat: this is my OPINION, but I strongly doubt that HG III/3, if
ever concepted, would look like this drawing.
The aircraft with bubble canopy do have FLAT front screen for some
reason. In fact, it was discovered early that curvature of front fart of
canopy MAKES AIMING DIFFICULT. The more curvature (i.e. smaller radius
of curvature) the worse optical properties. In the drawing you presented
(and not for the first time) canopy HAD TO HAVE small radius of
curvature in front of the pilot. Regardless from poor visibility while
taxiing etc. this DOWNGRADES aircraft's capabilities.
Daryl (and vaughn on other occasion) are right that stabiliser seems to
be too small to provide directional stability. It HAD TO BE thick in
order to accomodate cockpit. OK, there is BIG root chord which gives big
maximum thickness - but where? NOT in the nose! This stabiliser with
canopy as its front part would have VERY BAD airfoil for transonic (we
are talking of supposed M>0.8) speeds. In the drawing by Gino Marcomini
there is some shadow behind canopy. This suggest some unregularity (it's
concave; a pit from the airflow point of view) - a place just made for
premature shock-vawe creation!
I repeat: this is my OPINION, but I strongly doubt that HG III/3, if
ever concepted, would look like this drawing.
--
JasiekS
Warsaw, Poland
JasiekS
Warsaw, Poland