I thought "missile with a man in it" was the 104 Starfighter nick name?
Improve That Design: How Aircraft Could Have Been Made Better
- Thread starter Zipper730
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
BINGO! In the zero launch version, an SA2 with an "organic" guidance system.
- Thread starter
- #523
Regarding the following
Shortnose P-37
I was thinking that the stuff that W wuzak had proposed including repositioning the radiator within the wing, the intercooler under the engine, as well as the following...
As for taking some design influence from the P-53/P-60, it seems that the XP-60A would be the best configuration to use, as it seemed that Curtiss couldn't quite get the belly-radiator design.
Shortnose P-37
I was thinking that the stuff that W wuzak had proposed including repositioning the radiator within the wing, the intercooler under the engine, as well as the following...
- Radiator & oil-cooler repositioned to wings
- Intercooler positioned under the engine
- Auxiliary fuel tank positioned behind/below pilot
- Radio transmitter & receiver positioned aft of the pilot
- Battery repositioned aft of the pilot
- Hydraulic tank & pump repositioned aft of cockpit
As for taking some design influence from the P-53/P-60, it seems that the XP-60A would be the best configuration to use, as it seemed that Curtiss couldn't quite get the belly-radiator design.
Last edited:
Interestingly I have been giving the Okha some thought lately for some reason, why not fit it with a tractor Sakae?, it would outrun everything in the air and with say 50G of fuel have a range of over 100 miles.
Admiral Beez
Major
Ha. As soon as I read the above my first thought was I bet the authors of this post and the "earlier thread" are the same.
What would be the point of a Okha with a engine where the war head had been ?
No warhead, no big boom.
A fuselage designed to be pushed from the back, with just a heavy load on the front would take a little redesigning to withstand being pulled and torqued from the front. Then you'd need to add some kind of method of carrying a external bomb.
The biggest flaw of the Ohka was it's need to be carried by a mother aircraft.
A Okha with a propeller assist would greatly extend the launch range, but not get rid of the need for a mother aircraft.
The need to provide clearance for the propeller of the Ohka would mean the Okha would hang down even more on the mother aircraft.
I wonder if anything in the Japanese inventory had the ground clearance to carry such tall device under it ?
MiTasol
1st Lieutenant
One model of the Okha did have a propeller assist.
The Ohka Model 22 was powered by a four cylinder in line engine driving a ducted fan and did not need additional clearance. Smithsonian have one, see Kugisho MXY7 Ohka (Cherry Blossom) 22. Unfortunately none of the ten photos show the engine
For more detail see Francillion's Japanese aircraft of the second world war
The Ohka Model 22 was powered by a four cylinder in line engine driving a ducted fan and did not need additional clearance. Smithsonian have one, see Kugisho MXY7 Ohka (Cherry Blossom) 22. Unfortunately none of the ten photos show the engine
For more detail see Francillion's Japanese aircraft of the second world war
Last edited:
P-39 Expert
Non-Expert
I believe the piston engine was used to compress the intake air for the Ohka's jet engine, not actually needing a propeller.
That sounds about right if this is the one at NASM Udvar Hazy. That model of the Ohka has a couple side intakes but doesn't have a propeller. We took a guest from Japan to visit the museum and this was the display that seemed to attract the most attention.
It says it was never operational.
Did it ever fly at all, ? or was it just a proposal with a mock-up?
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The model 22 was never used in combat and several were recovered after the war. There's one at the Smithsonian.
MiTasol
1st Lieutenant
Fifty were completed and full scale production was planned but never achieved.
On the material available to Francillion in the late sixties it flew only only once. I doubt that any other flights have been found in other records since
Last edited:
MiTasol
1st Lieutenant
In place of the propeller it has a single stage "axial compressor" (in other words a ducted/shrouded fan - which is in turn a propeller with many blades) with what is basically an afterburner behind the compressor. There is a little more detail at Air Technical Arsenal Tsu-11 Campini-type engine and interestingly this claims only three engines were built though with 50 aircraft delivered and others partially built this seems open to question. Maybe only three were shipped to the US. I will check the records I know of. EDiT Data on Japanese aircraft shipped to United States for study purposes. Report No. 15c does not even list this aircraft, let alone any engines
There are a number of photos of the engine at https://www.enginehistory.org/Piston/Japanese/japanese.shtml and interestingly the engine had port type fuel injection and obtained its air supply from behind the fan thus ensuring a small level of supercharging. There is no indication of how the engine was cooled as the compressor air all bypasses the engine. There are no photos of the compressor
My web search shows there is a webpage https://everything.explained.today/Tsu-11/ but my browser says it is not available.
There is a wiki page at Ishikawajima Tsu-11 - Wikipedia and further detail in the page Hitachi Hatsukaze - Wikipedia
Last edited:
MiTasol
1st Lieutenant
From
Unfortunately I do not have the diagrams.
Note that the 110hp engine is now 150hp so that small amount of supercharging had a major effect if this report is correct. And the weight of 1lb/lb thrust is very high.
Note also that, like Smithsonian, they say only 3 engines were built.
Unfortunately I do not have the diagrams.
Note that the 110hp engine is now 150hp so that small amount of supercharging had a major effect if this report is correct. And the weight of 1lb/lb thrust is very high.
Note also that, like Smithsonian, they say only 3 engines were built.
Last edited:
Sorry I had a blonde moment, a pusher Sakae instead of the rockets.
MiTasol
1st Lieutenant
More on the Tsu-11 including a photo of the compressor and some interesting history challenging the only 3 built narrative.
http://www.enginehistory.org/Piston/Japanese/Mawhinney/nasm_research_3.shtml
http://www.enginehistory.org/Piston/Japanese/Mawhinney/nasm_research_3.shtml
P-39 Expert
Non-Expert
Always thought the P-40 radiator arrangement was very good. Virtually all the radiators and ducting were "hidden" in the area below the engine and ahead of the wing, only adding a very small amount of space to the frontal area. I think that even this could have been reduced by substituting rectangular coolant and oil radiators, or ones similar to those used on the P-40F. Altogether a very neat and compact arrangement. P-40 was one of the few US fighters that met cooling requirements during tests.
Biggest problem with the P-40 was excessive weight.
Admiral Beez
Major
Westland Whirlwind.
- Belt magazines feeding from behind and under pilot to nose.
- Fuel sharing valve between sides and engines.
- Two stage supercharger on Peregrines for both low and high altitude performance. No, not Merlins, if we go that route we might as well make a Welkin.
- Larger or different flaps for shorter and slower takeoff and landings.
- More internal fuel for increased endurance. Consider underwing or chin radiators to free up wing roots for fuel.
Kevin J
Banned
Chin radiators were tested out by Rolls-Royce, IIRC, top speed at sea level on 100 octane went up from 338 mph to 362 mph. Details are on another forum, you'd have to do a search for it. So theoretically, you could easily add more fuel. I think we've gone through the Whirlwind development issues in another thread. The problems with the Whirlwind are twin engine complexity, low diving speed and lack of a suitable engine, then there's cost; why buy the Whirlwind when you can a Warhawk or Mustang for half the price that does the job as well as or better.
wuzak
Captain
I would like to see that mate.
But since I have no idea where to look, perhaps you could find it for us.
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
