Ho229 : A great WWII fighter? or the greatest WWII fighter
- Thread starter MacDave99
- Start date
Yeah, no doubt. But the Hortens had been studying glider designs that were flying-wings and the German aircraft industry had long been interested in tailess aircraft. Even the basic design for the H0229 (the glider, cant remember what its designation was) performed rather well considering. I figured the addition of jet engies would have brought up a few 'problems'
Quite, Jack Northrop was working on flying wing designs from 1929 onwards. He put several in the air but hit the problems that Landshark has mentioned about stability without fly-by-wire and computers.
Apparently the Ho-229 was actually fairly stealthy, especially for a WWII aircraft; I recall a wood-heavy construction, to conserve strategic materials...that, and flying wings tend to have a reduced radar cross-section compared to more conventional aircraft. So, the Ho-229 was pretty hard to pick up on radar...
The Mosquito had the same advantage because of it's plywood construction. It had a radar profile less than a single seat fighter.
Right up and until it crashed from instability. As has been noted, flying wings are so unstable that they are effectively unmanagable. There was a reason that the YB-35 & YB-49 didn't make it into series production, despite some very impressive performance figures.
BTW: Usless fact of the day-Edwards AFB is named after an USAAF pilot who died, along with his crew, testing a YBR-49 that demonstrated the types instability.
Yeah, that's the problem...although actually, the one powered prototype that did fly crashed because of the engine catching fire. And the main thing that killed the YB-49, again, was engine trouble. But there were also structural fatigue problems, and as you mentioned, they handled weirdly...also, thick wings, so Mach limitation, etc.
Still...they got the things to fly, so it's not like they were impossible to pilot. Impractical for service, maybe, though.
And Forbes was the pilot; Edwards was the co-pilot. He got an air force base named after him, too. Edwards is much better known, though...
Flying wings require speed, trying to slow them down beyond a certain point causes stalls that can be terminal. I would doubt that a computer controlled system would allow that to happen. Otherwise you'd need a *serious* POD to get them flying in time for the Nazis, but as a plane flying for the Americans it would require the determination to keep up their speed and make sure engine maintenance was not a problem.
Again, dangerous characteristics or not, the thing was flyable. Damn hot ship, though...you'd need an excellent pilot and a way to overcome all the problems that were encountered, which I believe was just barely within the limits of 1940s-era technology and economic resources. Nazi Germany couldn't have managed it, though, especially not with Allied bombing raids reducing Germany and the occupied territories to rubble around the clock and the Soviets closing in. The Americans could have, but conventional aircraft, the advantages of a flying-wing notwithstanding, would have been a better use of their resources.
I'm going to hijack this thread now. Any way a real super-heavy tank could be viable?
In general.
Yes, I understand that they're maintenace nightmares and that the suspension and drivetrain will have to sustain terrible abuse. I also understand that most likely ground pressure will be so high that sinking into softer ground will be a problem. Yes, I also understand that they're huge, not to mention relatively immobile targets, and that this contribution to their vulnerability often more than compensates for any advantages that their superlative armor and armament offer. I also understand that until fairly recently, engines weren't powerful enough to provide a decent power-to-mass ratio and even then they'd be very fuel-thirsty vehicles. But damn it, super-heavy tanks are cool and I'd like to see them more often.
I agree. I love the German idea...the Ratte, with two 11inch naval guns and a whole plethora of other weapons. I could see super heavy tanks like the Ratte fighting like old-school battleships. Realistically though I could see them fighting as relocatable fortresses for defensive purposes
for
for
Landkruizers look nice on paper but would be easy targets for tac bombers and guided missiles.
I hereby re-jack this thread.
Yes, you would need a good pilot for the Ho229, and the Horten brothers were building glider craft like this much earlier - if the Germans could get this plane in the air earlier (say issue the 1000-1000-1000 requirement 18 months earlier and give the Hortens Luftwaffe back-up to get this plane flying in late '43) it could give them a *serious* advantage and prolong the war for a while. But the "coffin corner" on this plane would be brutal, and I'd take out the 30mm cannons and replace them with 20mm ones instead, even if the Mk 108 is a great cannon.
I hereby re-jack this thread.
Yes, you would need a good pilot for the Ho229, and the Horten brothers were building glider craft like this much earlier - if the Germans could get this plane in the air earlier (say issue the 1000-1000-1000 requirement 18 months earlier and give the Hortens Luftwaffe back-up to get this plane flying in late '43) it could give them a *serious* advantage and prolong the war for a while. But the "coffin corner" on this plane would be brutal, and I'd take out the 30mm cannons and replace them with 20mm ones instead, even if the Mk 108 is a great cannon.
First, the Landkruizers you could just land SAS paratroopers on they were so damn big (joking...but that would still be awesome)
And i more than agree about the Ho229. Although flying wings could be and often were unstable, they were still practical aircraft. Given some tweaking time, Im sure the Hortens could have made it an effective interceptor. The 30mm cannons were too short range, I agree with the 20mm cannon switch. Maybe even a pair of vertical stabalizers at the back...similar to the B-49 prototype.
And i more than agree about the Ho229. Although flying wings could be and often were unstable, they were still practical aircraft. Given some tweaking time, Im sure the Hortens could have made it an effective interceptor. The 30mm cannons were too short range, I agree with the 20mm cannon switch. Maybe even a pair of vertical stabalizers at the back...similar to the B-49 prototype.
(Coffin corner is when maximum speed isn't too far above stall speed and the pilot has an awful time trying to keep the aircraft within that critical speed window)
Yeah, flying wings have awful stall characteristics and handle oddly. I imagine that that might make dogfighting in the Ho-229 rather tricky...you could manage it, I suppose. It would make a wonderful interceptor.
Oh...how about arming it with R4Ms?