Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
syscom3 said:Didnt the early flying wing designs have stability issues? Ive heard one of the reasons the Northrup designs went by the wayside was for that very reason.
I suspect that without modern avioncs and flight computers, all of the flying wings from the 40's wouldn't have been able to perform any military missions. They might have been stable flying straight and true, but the moment they had to do some maneuvers, that's the end of it.
syscom3 said:I'd say that given the state of the art for what was known about flying wing technology in the mid 40's, they were not going to be military ready.
Prototypes can fly but that doesnt mean they're operations ready or even flyable.
delcyros said:The stability issue are only valid for Northtrop flying wing designs, not for Horten. The reason lies in the discovery of the bell shaped lift distribution by Reimer Walter back in 1937. The Ho-I actually had some latent instability but with the Ho-II the problem was fixed and the Ho-IIF was fully acrobatic. Subsequent designs like Ho-V, Ho-parabola and Ho-VII, finally the Ho-IX always featured the bell shaped lift distribution and therefore should be classified as stable. Horten wrote Northtrop a letter in the late 40´s, explaining the effect of stability bell shaped lift distribution but he was ignored. The Ho-IX V1 (the unpowered glider) made some extensive flight tests and proved to be stable (as did the Ho-VII). However, there was always some criticism in the RLM about the stability of Horten´s gliders and they always had to prove their concepts. Once in 1944, the Ho-VII V1 made hard turns in tree top altitude at Rechline with one engine turned off to prove the stability. So far none of Hortens flying wing designs (including those of Argentinia) had a latent "Trudelneigung".
Twitch said:.........It was designed to carry a 4,400-lb payload not 10,000 lbs. as Davparlr is talking about. 7,400 miles was ample.
Would a dirty nuke?
As Bullockracing says they would have needed to commence a long range nuclear bomber project earlier. The Weimar Republic, long before Hitler, began a rocket program that reached fruition as the A-4 (V-2.) The A-9/A-10 were ready for construction. This was a 2-stage ICBM capable of reaching the eastern US. Given a couple of years it would have been in service. Had research into nuclear energy been authorized in the 20s, as rockets were, men like Einstein would have been involved in solving the puzzle before the Nazi ever became a factor in Germany.
Twitch said:The Horten brothers were no jamokes who just fell off the turnip truck. They were designing and building flying machines since the late 20s. The Ho 229 which would have become the Go 229 was in development since 1934 in forerunner machines. The all wing concept was not an off the wall idea with no foundation. As Delcyros mentions the design was extensively tested and found suitable.
lesofprimus said:And in an example of perfectly bringing a topic back on track, kiwimac goes with a fighter aircraft as best WWII aircraft.... Could make for an intresting discussion, defending that one...
I can see why u would pick those 2 planes kiwi, but I cant overlook the contributions of other planes that impacted the war effort more....
FLYBOYJ said:Best WW2 "PLANE." I would assume all around - yes this has been discussed before and its simple -
THE C-47!!!!