Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I was literally coming into this thread to post this answer (the XF-12 that is). What a beauty.Ditto on the B-35 Flying Wing, but for late war deployment in the Pacific where its range and payload would exceed that of the B-29. Initial contracts specified late 1943 delivery of the first prototype. WW2 B-35 production might have been possible if this project had a higher priority, perhaps to augment and be the immediate successor of the B-29 with the B-32 cancelled?
However, my other favorite that never made it into full production is the Republic XF-12 Rainbow. Republic XF-12 Rainbow - WikipediaView attachment 764064
The effects the SSTs had on the upper atmosphere was actually a real thing.MAIN reason Concorde/Tu144/Boeing SST failed was economic, pure and simple. It couldn't be justified even as a corporate/national image booster.
Ozone was just the media whipping boy of the day, with spray cans, refining plants, and conifer forests all sharing the blame in the activist movements.
(my bold)Despite only being fitted with basic DB 603's making ~1,750 hp, they had superprop level performance and would've been absolute monsters had they been mass produced.
The G.56 had an official top speed of 688 kmh / 428 mph - but Captain Valentino Cus reached a top speed of 708 kmh / 440 mph - and a climb rate of I believe 22 m/s?(my bold)
Please, do tell.
Any source that proves that the bigger and draggier G.56 was faster than the Fw 190D-9, on about the same power?The G.56 had an official top speed of 688 kmh / 428 mph - but Captain Valentino Cus reached a top speed of 708 kmh / 440 mph - and a climb rate of I believe 22 m/s?
The Re.2006 had a slated top speed of 750 kmh / 466 mph and likely would've had similar climb rate to the G.56 as the base planes had extremely similar climb rates.
I define "superprop" as a purely piston-engined aircraft capable of 700 km/h in level flight with a climb rate of at least 20 m/s, and the Series 6 fighters fall into this camp.
Here's the official data sheets done on the G.56.Any source that proves that the bigger and draggier G.56 was faster than the Fw 190D-9, on about the same power?
I'm inclined to believe the Re.2006's top speed on this one. The base Re.2005 had a top speed of 628 kmh / 390 mph, slightly faster than the G.55 (623 kmh / 387 mph) and slightly slower than the C.205V (642 kmh / 399 mph).'Slated' top speed is a dead giveaway. The XP-39 have had the slated top speed of 390-400 mph, but that never happened. Same for 370 mph Beaufighter, or the 460 mph Typhoon.
700 kmh was the number I settled on after much consideration regarding how to define a superprop, as it would open the door for a few more aircraft I'd consider worthy for the title. I can share the spreadsheet I made with the help of a friend for superprop fighter aircraft if you desire.Allied aircraft (Merlin Mustang, P-47s with wi and 150 grade, Tempest, Spitfire XIV) were actually making 700 km/h in 1944 in service.
The superprops like the P-51H, Sea Fury, (Sea) Hornet, Ta 152 (at least when outfitted with all of the bells and whistles),Spiteful and post-war Spitfires were in the 750 km/h zone, for actual service.
Thank you for the dataNotice that these graphs are with a DB 603A making only 1,510 hp, the G.56 piloted by Valentino Cus likely had the full 1,750 hp DB 603.
I'm inclined to believe the Re.2006's top speed on this one. The base Re.2005 had a top speed of 628 kmh / 390 mph, slightly faster than the G.55 (623 kmh / 387 mph) and slightly slower than the C.205V (642 kmh / 399 mph).
There was a modified Re.2005 prototype designated MM.495 that was fitted with a DB 605A-1 with MW50 and a new VDM 3-bladed propeller. This relatively minor modification was enough to propel the aircraft to 720 kmh / 447 mph at 7,300 metres.
700 kmh was the number I settled on after much consideration regarding how to define a superprop, as it would open the door for a few more aircraft I'd consider worthy for the title. I can share the spreadsheet I made with the help of a friend for superprop fighter aircraft if you desire.
Here's the official data sheets done on the G.56.
From what I understand, the Re.2005 was extremely aerodynamically efficient with quite a sophisticated wing design - with a few quotes here and there describing it as "aerodynamically perfect". Perhaps It has something to do with that? Maybe lack of drag compared to the G.56 or cleaner lines. I'm not entirely sure, however it definitely would be above the 700 km/h mark regardless.I'm not inclined to believe that a 5 km/h faster base fighter can became a 50-70 km/h faster fighter because the new type of the same engines are installed in both aircraft.
I'd again ask for the sources.
Here you go. Just be wary that some of the planes weren't fully built and that this is by no means a complete list.If you want to share your stuff, I'm 100% okay.
From what I understand, the Re.2005 was extremely aerodynamically efficient with quite a sophisticated wing design - with a few quotes here and there describing it as "aerodynamically perfect". Perhaps It has something to do with that? Maybe lack of drag compared to the G.56 or cleaner lines. I'm not entirely sure, however it definitely would be above the 700 km/h mark regardless.
These are the ones I have at the moment, there's some manuals linked with the aircraft but I can't seem to find PDF's for them.
Here you go. Just be wary that some of the planes weren't fully built and that this is by no means a complete list.
They were Italian-made, of course they were perfect! All things are possible with faith in Il Duce!Italians were certainly free to describe their aircraft the way they wanted
IMO - if the 630 km/h Re.2005 was "aerodynamically perfect", the 645 km/h fast MC.205V would've been probably above perfect, no?
That makes a lot of sense.In all seriousness, I believe those remarks are referring to things other than its top speed. The C.205V was certainly fast, but it ranked as only 'average' in the type test and mock dogfights Germany did with the Series 5 fighters + the Bf 109 and Fw 190 A-5. Perhaps the manoeuvrability was less than stellar, which would definitely put it in a bad light given how the other two Series 5 fighters could turn with Spitfires.
The Re 2005 had wing about 20% larger than the C205 Veltro. 220sqft to 181sqft. The G.55 had 227 sq ft.The c205 veltro was excellent. The g55 was equal at low/mid altitude but superior at high altitude with its bigger wings. It also had more potential to receive the Db603
The re2005 had the most advanced skin and wing construction but it was tiny with no plenty room for development.
Both caught the attention of the RLM. In fact, part of the reason why the G.55 was so intriguing and appealing was due to the G.56 being a reasonable possibility.The G.56 was a prototype.
It was the G.55 that caught the attention (and was field tested) of the RLM.
In the twin engine category I would include for Germany the Ta 154A (Jumo 213E) and an, albeit hypothetical, Fw 187 (DB 605).Here you go. Just be wary that some of the planes weren't fully built and that this is by no means a complete list.