I thought "missile with a man in it" was the 104 Starfighter nick name?
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I thought "missile with a man in it" was the 104 Starfighter nick name?The first standoff AGM missile. "A missile with a man in it"! (Any aging cold warriors remember that phrase?)
Cheers,
Wes
BINGO! In the zero launch version, an SA2 with an "organic" guidance system.I thought "missile with a man in it" was the 104 Starfighter nick name?
Returning to the Ohka, it was normally released at a speed of around 280-325 Km/h and between 6,000 and 8,250m and glided towards the target at a glide angle of 5 degrees. The rockets could accelerate the Ohka to 860 km/h before entering a final 50 degree dive at up to 995 km/h (Isiguro & Tadeusz, page 159). The glider version reached 462 km/h in an unpowered dive, suggesting that it would be easy to reach sufficient speed to use a ramjet after launch.
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.This is loking a lot like an earlier thread
This is the way it should have been from the beginning....
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.
I believe the piston engine was used to compress the intake air for the Ohka's jet engine, not actually needing a propeller.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
View attachment 565589
For more detail see Francillion's Japanese aircraft of the second world war
View attachment 565590
I believe the piston engine was used to compress the intake air for the Ohka's jet engine, not actually needing a propeller.
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
View attachment 565589
For more detail see Francillion's Japanese aircraft of the second world war
View attachment 565590
It says it was never operational.
Did it ever fly at all, ? or was it just a proposal with a mock-up?
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.
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
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.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...
... I think it's a good idea.
- 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
Additionally, I'm curious if a shape similar to the XP-53 & XP-60D
View attachment 565561
View attachment 565562
would be realistic if it lacked the laminar-flow foil?
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.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.
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.