Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The DM-1 or P.13a might be even more applicable given those are all tailless delta wing configurations rather than tailless swept wings. (Northrop's XP-56 is more akin to the swept wing tailless designs used earlier by Lippisch and on the Me 163 -shame Northrop didn't follow that up with a Jet powered aircraft more similar to the XP-56 rather than the more flying-wing-like XP-79)The Vulcan (and B-58, space shuttle, etc) are more akin to the DFS194 and Me163 as the B-2 was to the HoIX, YB-35 and YB-49 types.
Spending extended periods within the transonic range above critical mach but below supersonic is one of the biggest problems both for losing control and for stressing the airframe (particularly due to shifts in center of lift that put stress and pressure distribution in ways the airframe was never intended for).There is only a little truth to the tailless claim. Wings have pressure distribution: much of the upper surface of a wing has a lower pressure than ambient and much of the lower a higher pressure. This generates a wings lift and also its lift distribution (ie pitching moment). As the wing approaches the speed of sound the behaviour of the air becomes non linear, compressible and so the centre of lift moves aft to the shock wave. The aircraft is now nose heavy an may not be able to pull out of a dive. P-38 and P-47's could end up in death dives. The improvised solution was to introduce dive recovery flaps under the leading edges to pitch the wing up.
While the tailless delta winged F4D Skyray was well known for its good handling characteristics, or even being a joy to fly.The Vought Cutlass was a tailless supersonic design, Americas first supersonic, after burner equipped, missile carrying fighter was tailless. It had problems but they came from the under powered engines and systems.
Immediately post-war, the then government banned all supersonic flight, and, by the time this order was lifted, the 108 had gone, and the Vampire and Venom were obsolescent.As far as I know, high-acceleration vertical dives were never attempted on the DH 108, and the potential for it safely breaking Mach 1 rather than tearing itself apart in sustained Mcrit stress was never tested.
I'm not sure if the De Havilland Venom ever dived through Mach 1, and while it's limiting mach was in the same .84~.86 of the Me 262, it still seems like it should have been able to break the sound barrier and recover under the right conditions. (and it did use a thinner airfoil than the Me 262)
I know the CF-100 managed it. (not sure if the F-94C or F-89 did)
That wouldn't apply to the suggestion of attempts at unpowered high mach or supersonic dives in the X-1, but yes, the British Government made a lot of odd, unfortunate, and often short-sighted decisions immediately post-war.Immediately post-war, the then government banned all supersonic flight, and, by the time this order was lifted, the 108 had gone, and the Vampire and Venom were obsolescent.
I know the CF-100 managed it. (not sure if the F-94C or F-89 did).
I was told by Tony LeVeir that the F-94 did go supersonic. He told me he once raced Chuck Yeager (who was flying an F-86) in a diving race in an F-94C without the wing tip pods and beat him.
AFAIK the F-89 was not able to go supersonic.
The F-18 has a straight wing.
The EF-10, F9F and F2H had straight wings, the F/A-18 has a trapezoidal swept wing.The F-18 has a straight wing.
Most modern supersonic aircraft opted for some compromise between full delta wing and low aspect ration tapered (trapezoidal) straight wings, be it tailed, canard, or tailless using elevons. I'm not sure 'swept' would quite apply to the F-16, F-18, or F-5, aside from there technically being some degree of leading-edge sweepback. (the F-16 almost a tailed delta, though, given its greater sweep)The EF-10, F9F and F2H had straight wings, the F/A-18 has a trapezoidal swept wing.
The EF-10, F9F and F2H had straight wings, the F/A-18 has a trapezoidal swept wing.
Perhaps by that definition a Curtiss P40 and Mirage III BOTH have a trapezoidal sweep wing?
This has been one confusing thread.
Horton 229 verses the DH Vampire.
The Horton, only 3 made, and only how many flights between those 3 ? 3 ? 4? 5?
And the Vampire over 3200 made, maybe 100,000 flights between them at least.
And the Vampire has had only how many remarks in the whole 9 pages of the thread ?
The Vampire was slow when compared to other fighters of the day but consider maneuvering speeds and acceleration during a close in dog fight, that was advantage the Vampire had, sought of like the Zero. Folks I've know who flew them told me they would out accelerate a Meteor and T-33.I'll have a go at that. The Vampire was slow, slower than the Meteor, Slower than the Me 262. If confronted with the Arado 234C hauling bombs or a 'true' bomb hauling Ho 229 (not the Ho IX test beds being restored) it wouldn't have been able to intercept it either.
It apparently was manoeuvrable, more so than the Meteor.
The question would be What would the Vampire be like in September 1944, which I am estimating as a plausible entry into service for the Ho 229 with Bombay. My guess would be that the Vampire would be still too slow. DeHaviland's did apparently make improvements.
The Vampire was slow when compared to other fighters of the day but consider maneuvering speeds and acceleration during a close in dog fight, that was advantage the Vampire had, sought of like the Zero. Folks I've know who flew them told me they would out accelerate a Meteor and T-33.
This guy has a good story about one flown in private hands, the owner Al Letcher is an old friend.
Model Airplane Memories: Al Letcher's Mojave Meteor and Vampire in 1/48 Scale
The Saab J29 was only modestly swept and featured a dogtooth, the Venom (which I'd lumped in with straight wings) used wing fences and was only about as 'swept' as the Me 262. (didn't manage a better critical mach number either, though that may not be a fault of the wing -same for the Me 262, I believe it was the fuselage that brought critical mach down to .86, or possible wing-fuselage interaction; I'm not sure if the wing root extensions of the HG-I increased the mach number or just decreased transonic drag in general)Perhaps by that definition a Curtiss P40 and Mirage III BOTH have a trapezoidal sweep wing?
The F18 has no trailing edge sweep, unlike an Su 27 or Thundercheif. You could argue that the trailing edge forward sweep is less than the leading edge backward sweep as what constitutes swept.
Either way, it's hardly swept at all and probably would have been impossible in aeroelastic terms untill the 60s but I grant you enough sweep to require dogtooth leading edges.
In 1944, say the Vampire managed to get into service with the 2,700 lbf Goblin I at similar performance to the initial production Vampire I of 1945 and you've got something considerably faster than the Meteor III, even with the long nacelles, though perhaps slower once the 2,400 lbf Derwent IV is ready. (assuming there's no re-examination of the metrovick engines with the 2,700 lbf F.3 seeming to manage acceptable reliability with the adoption of flame cans).I'll have a go at that. The Vampire was slow, slower than the Meteor, Slower than the Me 262. If confronted with the Arado 234C hauling bombs or a 'true' bomb hauling Ho 229 (not the Ho IX test beds being restored) it wouldn't have been able to intercept it either.
It apparently was manoeuvrable, more so than the Meteor.
The question would be What would the Vampire be like in September 1944, which I am estimating as a plausible entry into service for the Ho 229 with Bombay. My guess would be that the Vampire would be still too slow. DeHaviland's did apparently make improvements.
The low aspect ratios of delta wings (and extremely poor lift to drag ratio at high AoA -utilizing the wingtip vortex phenomenon) makes for higher drag in these situations than the likes of high aspect ratio flying wings.Deltas such as the F-106 can generate extraordinary high amounts of lift and good tight turns but they soon wash of speed and I suspect that flying wings might be the same.