PDA

View Full Version : CHECK OUT THIS 1946 VID



ottoramsaig1959
10-30-2007, 07:16 AM
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fec_1193264549

ottoramsaig1959
10-30-2007, 07:16 AM
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fec_1193264549

Skunk_438RCAF
10-30-2007, 07:26 AM
The Luftwaffle/Rammstein theme is waaay overdone.

Billy_BigBoy
10-30-2007, 01:08 PM
What the frack is this!?!

If this is the future of a modded 1946, I am out of here. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/disagree.gif

mbfRoy
10-30-2007, 01:18 PM
It's not IL2... and it looks like **** to be honest.

ploughman
10-30-2007, 01:23 PM
I give that four stars too. It's ****!

BlitzPig_DDT
10-30-2007, 01:47 PM
Lots of REALLY cool things in there that we need for our '46.

(of course, a Vampire and Meteor would be nice additions as well - I'm an insatiable plane wh0re http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

Schwarz.13
10-30-2007, 02:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Skunk_438RCAF:
The Luftwaffle/Rammstein theme is waaay overdone. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree!

But i do like Rammstein and tbh would much rather have watched the actual video for Sonne (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eyckdVA2uo) ,which is great! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

JG51_Rudel
10-30-2007, 07:25 PM
What we need is another weirder version of the Lerche,

The Focke-Wulf Trifleugel.

Can you imagine if the Trifleugel ever took to the sky during WW2.

BlitzPig_DDT
10-30-2007, 10:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG51_Rudel:
What we need is another weirder version of the Lerche,

The Focke-Wulf Trifleugel.

Can you imagine if the Trifleugel ever took to the sky during WW2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That thing is cool. But I've always wondered how they would keep the body from rolling with the aerofoils. Since the engines are on the tips of the aerofoils, you wouldn't have torque rolling the body the opposite way, but you would have friction dragging the body along with the blades.

I guess at high speeds that cruciform tail would keep it steady, but what about at low speeds - or while taking off and landing?

ottoramsaig
11-02-2007, 11:05 AM
Hey folks don't attack the messenger! I happened to find on Live Leak, figured someone might know what it is.........Otto

Billy_BigBoy
11-02-2007, 12:15 PM
Sorry, didn't mean to be personal. Frankly, good find http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Viper2005_
11-02-2007, 12:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
I guess at high speeds that cruciform tail would keep it steady, but what about at low speeds - or while taking off and landing? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rotor wash would mean that the tail would almost always have had a reasonable amount of flow to work with once the vehicle left ground effect.

The sizing trade studies would have been rather interesting, but that's another story. I suspect that actually one of the biggest issues would have been at the transition between breakout and rolling friction in the bearings, especially on a cold day. I suspect that one of the most dangerous jobs in the Luftwaffe would have been inserting and removing chocks at appropriate moments during the starting and shutdown sequences...

However IMO the biggest problem associated with the concept would have been gyroscopic precession, since the rotating masses involved are frankly scary, and would probably have resulted in extremely nasty cross-coupling of the controls...

Not that there wouldn't have been other issues; starting the ramjets would have been something of a nightmare, and the sfc wouldn't be good, even despite the "gearing down" effect of the large tip driven fan. Variable pitch would have been necessary to handle the wide speed range of the aeroplane (failure modes would be terrifying, especially if the blades didn't all adopt the same angle), and the twist implied at the top right hand corner of the flight envelope wouldn't have done much good for hover performance. So again you'd get into trade studies between speed and hover performance.

Rocket boosters would help of course; landing (apart from being somewhat unlikely) would have taken place at much lighter weights and therefore even with a very non-optimal twist distribution there would probably be excess thrust available...

Landing this sort of vehicle on a windy day wouldn't be fun for all sorts of reasons!

Fun though the paper studies would be, I think that hardware would be a nightmare of epic proportions, and the cynic in me suggests that many of the more bizarre "Luft46" concepts were actually intended to keep the designers out of the Wehrmacht rather than to actually culminate in Service aeroplanes; novel concepts were perhaps more likely to hold the interest of the politicians than "just another aeroplane". Also of course, the more outlandish the concept the less able other people are likely to be to criticise outlandish performance claims, and so the easier it is to sell your creation as some kind of "wonder weapon"...