Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Oh the idea is to basically alter nearly everything about the design.I read through this with an open mind and I really don't think there's really anything more you can do to improve the basic layout, the old term is "you can't polish a turd."
That's what makes it so interesting, the airframe had fairly clean lines in some ways, but was built around ridiculous requirements.Like many failed projects, the YFM-1 was designed to a basically flawed concept
Of course, the idea would be to use the basic lines, but otherwise alter almost everything else. I am curious if the variable position barrels was a requirement or simply a way to get around the limits of the 37mm ballistics?I was going to say the best way to improve the YFM was start again. From scratch.
Twin tails are generally a major boon to single engine-out handling in a high powered twin.I don't like pushers or twin tails
Hey, you're only an enlisted guy. You're expendable.How would you like to be a 37mm nacelle gunner? "Time to bail out! But wait, what is that spinning behind me? Oh no, it is the propelle
I've a small question concerning the YFM design itself. Does it necessarily have to be stuck with just the two engines, or, could the tail have been modified to accept a pusher configured engine, with a cruciform tail just ahead of it?Like many failed projects, the YFM-1 was designed to a basically flawed concept, so the USAAC had to bear considerable responsibility* for its failure*, but Bell also needed to bear the rest.
To de-suckify:
The plane I would envision would look like a mid-wing twin, with two high muzzle velocity cannon under the nose, plus either RCMG or HMG, also firing forward. I don't like pushers or twin tails, but that's mostly a matter of taste. Definitely flaps, probably Fowlers.
- require a speed, at all altitudes, at least 15% greater than the specification for the next generation bomber and no more than 10% less than the next generation fighter, i.e., if the bomber is 250 mph and the fighter is 350 mph, the bomber destroyer must do 315 mph.
- limit the crew to two (goal) or three (absolute limit)
- if it's a twin, require a positive rate of climb with either engine out and safe OEI behavior
- it must be capable of all normal fighter maneuvers, including spins, in all loading conditions
- there must be independent and direct escape routes from each crew position
- something better than the M4 37 mm gun for main armament.
_--------------------
* The army liked the plane enough to buy it. Possibly,Bell was as well connected as Hughes, but I don't think there were many aviation projects invo!ving Howard Hughes that he didn't screw up.
I'm basically lining things up to use the pythagorean theorem to correct for the slight slant on the image. I'm planning to correct that on all of them.
Not exactly the way I would like to go.Hey, you're only an enlisted guy. You're expendable.
Not your choice to make, Soldier!Not exactly the way I would like to go.