Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 122 of 123  [ 1226 posts ]  Go to page « 1119 120 121 122 123 »
Author Message
Rhade
Post subject: Re: Planebucket Discussion ThreadPosted: August 8th, 2020, 8:09 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 2804
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 12:45 pm
Location: Poland
Page 118, Wal II with little job it can be "downgraded" to Wal I.

_________________
[ img ]
Nobody expects the Imperial Inquisition!


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Cascadia
Post subject: Re: Planebucket Discussion ThreadPosted: August 12th, 2020, 11:00 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 604
Joined: September 1st, 2010, 12:05 pm
Location: Germany
Some AU designs from Gollevainen

Borisov B-35 Backer
[ img ]

Borisov B-80 Boomerang
[ img ]

Borisov Grom Bullshot
[ img ]

Borisov Zarya Mastodon
[ img ]

Khabarovsk B-4 Backer
[ img ]

Khabarovsk B-6 Babel
[ img ]

Khabarovsk B-9 Backer-E
[ img ]

Korovin B-36 Blowlamp
[ img ]

Korovin B-37 Backswing
[ img ]

Korovin I-31 Flicker
[ img ]

Timokhin Molnya B Beaty
[ img ]

_________________
My deviantart account
http://cascadiasb.deviantart.com/?rnrd=191663


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Cargil48
Post subject: Re: Planebucket Discussion ThreadPosted: August 12th, 2020, 11:21 pm
Offline
Posts: 247
Joined: April 1st, 2018, 9:07 pm
The German Luftwaffe model sheet I'm working on at present. Most designs are from Cascadia, some of these a bit altered, new AU variants added and finally some more advanced ones made from scratch based from projects at the design boards when the war came to the end. These planes fit into the AU story I began with the Kriegsmarine (an alternate WWII scenario) and which lost steam because of an endless discussion about lengething a ship's hull...

[ img ]

(latest revision on 15.08.2020)

One thing you have to bear in mind: In this scenario the war is at first agaisnt the URSS. Germany has the necessary ressources to develop all the things they were developping then, had a functioning coordination on the technical side and especially had good fuel available for the engines. On the other hand, an alliance had been formed in central/northern Europe after the soviets invaded Finland (as described in the thread regarding the ships), therefore some countries cooperated with Germany in developing and testing new projects. I hope you may like this.

Another very important thing: Germany - in this scenario - pushed forward from the beginning two radical new concepts: the "Funkmess-System (FuMO)", known as radar, and the turbojet engine. FuMO was - again: in this scenario - pushed forward because primarily the aviation authorities saw immediately the chance for Air Traffic Control to track planes in real time and help them on their navigation, avoiding accidents and on the other hand, saw this as a great help to assist incoming planes to a given airport in foul weather. The jet engine was seen as a relatively cheap and less complicated substitute for the steam turbines and with a great advantage: It could be fired up in seconds, while a steam turbine took more or less half an hour to become operational, if not more... For big warships, a big, big advantage. They could cruise with Diesel engines and when the need arose, in less than half a minute they had full power at hand, firing up the jet engines.

These two points allowed Germany to make a huge step forward between 1938 and, say, 1943. From then on, it was make more and more evoltutions of both new technical devices, as we know.

Edit: To those who think I'm pushing far too forward the timeline of all the things I present and I say here: Look at which technical level Germany was in May 1945! They had various types of radar, with IFF; they had jamming devices for enemy radars; they had already dish antenna radars on the nose of some airplanes; they had a myriad of projects of new airplanes, some quite radical. Now imagine this whole bunch of facts being developed in an European scenario as described in the the ship thread already mentioned. All I present here is perfectly feasible. What I ask myself is why it took so long for the British and the Americans to develop some of the German projects... especially bigger transport airplanes with swept wings and jet engines. Junkers had already some prototypes built in 1945...

When this list of mine will be ready, in a few days, I will present every new plane I've added to this project, one by one. As I said before, all either existed basically as shown, or with some relatively small changes I made, or they existed in form of projects to satisfy Hitler's growing madness in the last eight or ten months or so.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Cargil48
Post subject: Re: Planebucket Discussion ThreadPosted: August 15th, 2020, 9:18 pm
Offline
Posts: 247
Joined: April 1st, 2018, 9:07 pm
Here is the final sheet which for me is the base of "my Luftwaffe" in the AU scenario. All based on real airplanes or on real projects being in the development phase as of May 8th, 1945.

Further developments will succeed, still belonging to the AU scenario, but continuing to be based on reality as close as possible. In other words, what could have happened to the European aircraft industry in a peacetime scenario, or at least in one where the URSS is defeated by the "Baltic Alliance" and a joint economical and defense cooperation treaty had been signed by the main European nations of Centre and Northern Europe??

Cooperate, not dominate...

[ img ]

Edit 1: Some evolutions between 1945 and 1954 added

Edit 2: Added some more concepts and especially a sheet containing the evolution of the BMW and Jumo jet engines used in the planes shown in this part list.

Edit 3: Added some more planes I found important to be on this list. (22-08-2020)


Last edited by Cargil48 on August 22nd, 2020, 11:32 am, edited 5 times in total.

Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Gollevainen
Post subject: Re: Planebucket Discussion ThreadPosted: August 16th, 2020, 8:04 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 4714
Joined: July 27th, 2010, 5:10 am
Location: Finland
Contact: Website
Cascadia wrote: *
Some AU designs from Gollevainen

Borisov B-35 Backer
[ img ]

Borisov B-80 Boomerang
[ img ]

Borisov Grom Bullshot
[ img ]

Borisov Zarya Mastodon
[ img ]

Khabarovsk B-4 Backer
[ img ]

Khabarovsk B-6 Babel
[ img ]

Khabarovsk B-9 Backer-E
[ img ]

Korovin B-36 Blowlamp
[ img ]

Korovin B-37 Backswing
[ img ]

Korovin I-31 Flicker
[ img ]

Timokhin Molnya B Beaty
[ img ]
Cool :) :) :)
Feel free to do the rest of the planes as well :D, specially those naval aviation ones.

_________________
Shipbucket mainsite, aka "The Archive"
New AU project "Aravala"


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Cargil48
Post subject: Re: Planebucket Discussion ThreadPosted: August 22nd, 2020, 12:40 pm
Offline
Posts: 247
Joined: April 1st, 2018, 9:07 pm
So let's start with the analyzis of the planes on my part list regarding Germany between, say, 1937 and 1960. Two things to have in mind: This list is not complete, it contains what I see as the most important types developed and built during that timespan and second, this is an AU list, altough most items are either real or very close to the real ones or even belonged to those designs and projects the Allies found on the drawing boards of the aircraft factories in April/May 1945. My aim is to try to figure out a scenario which is AU mostly, yes, but what could on a realistic basis have happened if... Which way German technics would have taken if the basic scenario would have allowed all involved to work continuously on their projects and - very important! - without the material shortcuts which hampered their work, as we know and - equally important...- without the military and the leaders of Germany constantly messing with their job... Best examples for what I am saying are the F-86 "Sabre", the MiG 15 and the French jet engine SNECMA "Atar", which was heavily based on the BMW 119-003 (used mainly on the Arado 234) and its derivatives powered up to the legendary "Mirage" fighters...

So let's start with the smallest plane, but which was for Germany as important as the Piper Cub was for the US, the Fieseler Fi 156 "Storch":

[ img ]

Its history is well known and documented, I added a version of my own, the "K-1", which is different mainly in the version of the Argus inverted and aircooled V8. As everyone in the General Aviation business knows, the air cooled engines used on all GA planes work well until having not more then six cylinders. The Lycoming 8 cylinders had problems with the cooling of the last row of cylinders. Ah, you may say, the Porsche 917 had even 12 air cooled cylinders and had no problems with its cooling! Yes, I know, but why? Because it had a "flat 12" eingine and a big ventilator on top of the middle of the engine producing the necessary cooling.

This being said, "my" Fi 156 had a slightly different cooling arrangement where this is done with air and with oil. An effective oil cooler and the necessary injection pumps spraing cooled oil in bigger quantities to the inside of the cylinder heads - especially on the exhaust side - solved the problem, even in operations in hot climates. Another alteration: The cylinder heads had in this version two intake valves instead of one and a variable pitch three bladed propeller was installed. The intake boost of the engine was tuned so mthat the power given by the engine rose only slightly (from the original 600 hp to 650 hp), but the continuous power output rose significantly to 465 hp. Result of better materials used, of the better mixture intake and also of the improved oil cooling and overall lubrification.

The Fi 156 K version continued to have three seats, one front for the pilot and two back plus a compartment for some luggage behind them. A subversion could have in front two seats, the necessary shoulder space for the two occupants was achieved by the bulbuous shape of the side panel and the windows, as was seen in the real model as well as with a somewhat higher upper part of the cabin allowing more headspace.

Other improved items: The landing gear had longer shock absorbers allowing harsher landings on unpaved terrain; the cabin ventilation and heating was improved; the firewall was strengthened and the lower attachment point for the engine mount was lowered; better radios were instaslled for comm and nav and all subvariants were equipped for blind flying. The K-4 subvariant had even electrically de-icing of the front leading edge slats, the front of the tail surfaces as well as for the propeller. This feature, though an expensive one, proved vital for year round operations in colder climates.

The "Storch" was built until 1952 in Germany, Austria, The Czech Republic, Romania, Spain and Finland and even today in the "Ultralight" scene some replicas in 3/4 scale are offered.


Last edited by Cargil48 on August 22nd, 2020, 4:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Cargil48
Post subject: Re: Planebucket Discussion ThreadPosted: August 22nd, 2020, 3:10 pm
Offline
Posts: 247
Joined: April 1st, 2018, 9:07 pm
Next airplane to be presented here is totally AU, a twin engined Ju 52, complete designation Ju 52/2m. The original /3m flew for the first time in 1930, revolutionized air transport at least in the thirties, but by end of that decade it was already outdated. Its main drawback was too little engine power for the aerodynamics and the weight it had to transport. Its positive side was the enormous lift given by those wings with the "Junker flaps" serving as "slotted flaps". However, as soon as the Douglas DC-2 and -3 were presented to the world, the Junkers was outdated. Too slow and to expensive to operate, in the words of Erhard Milch, then president of the Luft Hansa who operated several of the tri-engined 52. Thus, one of the first tasks the "Luftfahrt Ministerium" was given in 1937 was to ask Junkers to conceive a two engined version which should have slightly less corrugated aluminium skin to lower the drag, stronger engines than the BMW 132 A-3 (725 hp for take off) such as the combined power of the two new engines should be at least 25% higher than the power of the three BMW 132 engines together. And the engines should be fitted with three bladed propellers with variable pitch. The outcome in mid 1939 looked like this:

[ img ]

The Junkers Ju 52 2/m had roughly the same dimensions as the /3m: 18,10m long and a wingspan of 27,95 meter with a total wing area of 96,8 square meter (against 110,5 sq.m. of the /3m variant). This was compensated by an empty weight of 5.195kg against 5.720kg of the bigger and older brother. The total weight of the two engined model was allowed to be roughly the same (max take off weight of 10.500 kg). This was made possible by various factors: Less drag of the entire plane; more powerful engines producing more thrust through the three bladed propeller and designed to use 98 octane fuel instead of the 87 octane fuel the original BMW 132 was designed for. BMW even designed a new variant of its "Bramo" nine cylinder engine, augmenting the total capacity from 27,7 liter to 29,65 liter and using new, stronger materials which in 1937/38 were available and in the end of the twenties not (steel resistance, duraluminium, hollow exhaust valves, stronger bearings and most of all lubricating oils with much improved qualities) allowing to improve the compression ratio to 7,2:1 instead of the original 6,5:1. Also the effectiveness of the engine was increased by using fuel injection instead of a carburator. Although having a bigger capacity (by some 2 liter) than the BMW 132 model, the overall weight of the engine could be kept within reasonable limits (585kg to 515kg). The power output, however, was dramtically higher: 1.435 hp. This was also due to a different setting of the centrifugal compressor, to a continuous 7,5 bar, which the previous engine model could only use for three minutes, during the start. A vital part to be kept in sight by all maintenance crews was the use of proper lubrating oil and to keep the respective oil cooler constantly clean. A drop in lubricating effectiveness could have catastrophic consequences. This is why export variants had a somewhat reduced compression ratio (6.8:1) and a slightly reduced compressor boost, all in all reduciong the total engine output to 1.300 hp at take off and 1.235 hp continuous.

The civil version of the Ju 52/2m had a cabin allowing ten rows of three seats (2 + 1) a toilet in the rear and a seat for a flight attendant. Some of the engine improvements of the BMW-134 engine were from 1939 on incorporated into the 132 "Bramo" version, allowing for an increase in power to 975 hp at take-off and 750 hp continuous, using 98 octane fuel. But this kind of higher graded fuel became in the late thirties available in all major European airports (as well as obviously in the US ones). One point which must be said here as well is the improvement in the engine's electrical systems, comparing to those used in the engines developed in the late 20s/early 30s, allowing the development of higher electric discharges to the spark plugs, by themselves also of better quality.

This variant of the Junkers Ju 52 was produced until 1955 by Junkers itself but under license also in Finland, Romania and Spain. Later improved versions had not anymore the corrugated skin since new construction methods were in the meantime developed without decreasing the overall resistance of the frame and the components. Romania exported hundreds of units into the newly formed countries in the former USSR, from Moldavia to the caucasian nations, Finland to the Scandinavian countries as well as to the Baltic Countries and to Ingria (another (re)formed republic after the fall of the URSS in 1945 (AU...).

Last note: From 1942 on, a new variant offered a retractable main gear as well as improved instrumentation which showed the usual German metric units but also the ones used in the UK and the US in a second scale of each instrument. A later variant, produced from 1945 on, even offered a full panel with instruments in imperial values. Contrary to Douglas, Junkers still offers support for this model, as many are still being operated in distant regions with rough terrains (Karelia/Laponia, Novgorod Republic, Caucasia, Circassia, Georgia, Armenia, Kurdistan, Indonesia and in several countries of the Andes region). Also BMW continues to offer support to the engine, through MTU/Germany in which it holds an interest.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Cargil48
Post subject: Re: Planebucket Discussion ThreadPosted: August 26th, 2020, 5:32 pm
Offline
Posts: 247
Joined: April 1st, 2018, 9:07 pm
The Junkers Ju 52/3m is here on the list since it is one of the best known German planes ever produced. There is little to be said, except that the most powerful variant was the Ju 52/3mg5e powered by three BMW 132 T-2, delivering each 830 hp. However, it is also a known fact that the Ju 52/3m was inferior to the DC-3, being some 100 km/h slower and carrying less passenger, making its (civil) operation costlier. The Ju 52 was the last mass produced aircraft of the generation of the 20s, while the DC-2/3 were the first of the new generation of the (then) modern transport aircraft

[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Cargil48
Post subject: Re: Planebucket Discussion ThreadPosted: August 26th, 2020, 5:54 pm
Offline
Posts: 247
Joined: April 1st, 2018, 9:07 pm
Now I present to you one of the German airplanes which I consider a missed oportunity, the Siebel Si 204 double engined transport aircraft. Originally designed in response to an RLM development order for a small civil transport aircraft in 1938, it was at the end produced for the Luftwaffe due to the war. It was planned as a small all-metal passenger aircraft with two crew and eight passenger for German airline Deutsche Luft Hansa (DLH) carrying roughly half the number of passenger than the Ju 52/3m but at some 50 km/h faster cruise speed and almost the double distance... And while the three engined heavy Junkers climbed at 3,9 m/s, the lighter and more agile Siebel could reach 6 m/s... It is easy to imagine a bigger version, carrying some 18 pax and powered by the above referred (AU) bigger BMW radial 134 "Bramo" engines delivering some 1.400 hp. The potential was there...

[ img ]

It is easy to imagine a bigger version, the length being somewhat equal to the Ju 52/3m, but with a slightly wider cabin, carrying some 24 pax in eight rows of 2+1 (for longer distances) or even 30 pax in ten rows of 2+1 (in shorter distances) and powered by the above referred (AU) bigger BMW radial 134 "Bramo" engines delivering some 1.400 hp. The potential was there and it could look like this...

[ img ]

Note: In "my AU" this bigger version would have been designed, developped and produced in a "joint-venture" between Dornier and Siebel, given the vast experience in bigger airplanes Dornier had at the time (and production facilities). Deutsche Luft Hansa would finally have its more economicl medium range plane and soon direct links between the major cities would have been established, linking Berlin to Helsinki, to Stockholm, to Oslo, to Kopenhagen, to London and to major other capitals and it coulçd do so lowering the ticket fares.

In the meantime, another airplane arrived on the scene which revoilutionized the airline scene, the Focke-Wulf 200 "Condor". This airplane resulted from a proposal by Kurt Tank of Focke-Wulf to Dr. Rudolf Stuessel of Deutsche Lufthansa to develop a landplane to carry passengers across the Atlantic Ocean to the US. At that time this was unusual, as airlines used seaplanes on long over-water routes. To fly long distances economically, the Fw 200 was designed to cruise at an altitude of over 3,000 m (9,800 ft) - as high as possible without a pressurized cabin. The Deutsche Lufthansa issued a specification in June 1936. The first prototype, the Fw 200 V1, made its first flight after just over one year of development, on 27 July 1937, with Tank at the controls. It was an all-metal, four-engined monoplane powered by four American 875 hp Pratt & Whitney Hornet radial engines, and intended to carry 26 passengers in two cabins. It had a operational time of flight of 14 hours at a cruising speed of 335 km/h but the civil variant, if carrying 18 passengers plus baggage and some cargo, had an average range of 3.560 km.

[ img ]

Until the arrival of the Douglas DC-4 in 1942, the Fw 200 "Condor" was the most modern airplane in the world. It was replaced in 1943 by the Fockie-Wulf Fw 300 "Albatross" (AU), basically a modernized version of the "Condor" but powered by much stronger BMW radials delivering each 1.480 hp which, given the pressurized cabin, allowed the new plane to fly at maximum altitudes of roughly 7.920 meter (+- 24.000 ft.). It carried up to 40 passengers (single class). If the "Condor" broke real barriers, the "Albatross" with its capability to fly "over the weather" set effectively new standards in intercontinental flights. Like its rival, the DC-4, the intercontinental variants of the Fw 300 "Albatross" could be fitted out with seats transforming in sleeping berths, though this meant it could only carry 20 passenger. These, however, flew long-distance with the best comfort possible, with three meals served aboard by three "stewards".

[ img ]

Two years later, in 1945, the latest four engined propeller civil airplane from the part of Focke-Wulf was presented, the Fw 330 "Adler", basically a stretched Fw 300, carrying a total of 60 passenger on European routes and 6 + 44 passenger in a two class arrangement for long haul routes. The engines were again from BMW, double row 18 cylinder supercharged aircooled engines delivering 1.800 hp for five minutes during the initial start phase and 1.500 hp up to an altitude of 18.000 ft. Max ceiling continued to be 24.000 ft, for reasons of comfort of the passenger, due to the altitude differential. Up to 18.000 ft. the engine's double stage compressors maintained boost values pressurizing the cabin to sea level.

Both models endured an enormous success worldwide and were sold in two variants: passenger and cargo transport. Together mainly with the competing US airplanes, the international aviation made enormous progress during the 40s, paving the way for yet another step up during the 50s...

[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Laforest
Post subject: Re: Planebucket Discussion ThreadPosted: May 27th, 2021, 10:40 pm
Offline
Posts: 296
Joined: June 6th, 2014, 1:07 am
Hi to all, long time out, real life gets in the way some times.

Made this but i am not sure about the authors of some of the original drawings, if anyone know please tell me to include their credits, thanks in advance.

Bell 206 Cascadia?
Airbus H-225 Darthpanda?
Hughes 300 Darthpanda?
Aviocar unknow
Hughes 500 Darthpanda?
Grumman Goose unknow

Prefectura Naval Argentina 1947-2020
All aircraft operated by the service.

[ img ]


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 122 of 123  [ 1226 posts ]  Return to “Parts Sheets Discussion” | Go to page « 1119 120 121 122 123 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]