Focke-Wulf "1000x1000x1000"

Great work ! I just wouldn't follow with regards to "stealth", although it surely is in the "good
tradition" of National Geographics and their "sensational" Horten story.
But although the good old CSS Tenessee (drawing via http://www.cityofart.net/bship/tennessee.html)
looks externally quite similar to the USS Sea Shadow, I wouldn't call the former a "stealth ship" !
 

Attachments

  • css_tennessee_plan.gif
    css_tennessee_plan.gif
    50.1 KB · Views: 590
stealth...that the german's technologie in the late war 2.....on there UBOOT with "alberich" rubber caoting...and in air on the horten planes....but for you i will call...'low radar signature".....

just a sample ...

I used analyse in rhino... 0°TO 90°...to see the reflective surfaces....Red surfaces are criticals because at 90°



 
Yes jemiba....bullet deviation (on you ship) or radar microwave deviation is the same fight.... ;D
 
gery said:
stealth...that the german's technologie in the late war 2.....on there UBOOT with "alberich" rubber caoting...and in air on the horten planes....but for you i will call...'low radar signature".....

just a sample ...

I used analyse in rhino... 0°TO 90°...to see the reflective surfaces....Red surfaces are criticals because at 90°
Click to expand...

Gery, I am not so sure that your analysis of angles of reflection really illustrates much about radar signatures. Do you have a model of something contemporary that you could show in the same light? For example, a DH Mosquito from the same angles?
 
Well, to call stealth a "German technology" .... ok, there were anti-radar coatings used...
The point about the Horten aircraft as actually meant as "stealth aircraf" still has to be
proven, nevertheless. Just remember, that they developed that shape of aircraft, when
actually there still was no radar in use !
But that story still makes for good sensations, as we have seen by this National Geographics
"documentation" !
But the renderings look great, so just keep on.
Of course, I would be very interested, too, to see the Mossies reflective surfaces ! ;)
 
Maybe you should talk to someone like Click2Detail to get this turned into a model kit?
 
Is this the same design as this one?
3bf1000b.gif


"Cuz the nosewheel's going to be problematic on your model.
 
Yes but a little "germanised".....with a real airfoil for a fliying model... a credible air intake......and a true "low radar signature" body shape

i think that the original blue print is very "americanised" and designed after the ww2 may be in 50's..???
 
Fantastic!!! I thanks you a lot for post big renders. A enjoy them a lot. I don't like the Nightfighter version the antenna interrupts the beautiful lines of the plane. ;)

Can I ask what airfoil are you using?

I understand you're using Rhino how do you create that "paper like" renders?
 
Looks great. One minor nitpick though: surely something as advanced as this would utilise something akin to the FuG 240 "Berlin" radar by the time it entered service and thus have a enclosed radar such as on this Ju88G:


Ju88-berlin.jpg
 
Thanks Alcides, i used Rhino 4 and 5 (blueprint) and hypershot...an old powerfull plugin....for airfoil..i used Horten standard



Orion, basing on a personnal study of WW2 german aircraft building...for example, they never designed a W style body and don't designed straigth line jet exaust...

Gtx, i prefer using this style of antenna....more typical german...
 
gery said:
Orion, basing on a personnal study of WW2 german aircraft building...for example, they never designed a W style body and don't designed straigth line jet exaust...
Gtx, i prefer using this style of antenna....more typical german...
Click to expand...

Great renderings, but I don't understand the former point about the straight line jet exhaust. Looking at the Ho/Go 229,
or other German flying wings or deltas, where is a non-straight exhaust ?

And "typical German" for the late war jet designs was, I think, a radome covering a dish antenna, as shown by GTX.
BTW, single seat night fighter designs were quite rare, as the workload from handling the radar was well known.
 
They never designed that.....because the german spirit at this time was "all streamlined"....and here you have got a vortex....it's a modern concept used by usaf...




I prefer antenna.....more graphic.....
 
This design of body is just "no credible".....too the design of jet intake.....this engines was not powerfull and started at hands with a little two stroke buzz engines.....




 
gery said:
GTX Using a "Fug berlin" in the noze is not realist....it's create an obstacle to pilote viewpoint.....
Click to expand...

Absolutely right, I think, but maybe that's just showing soem shortcomings in that concept ?
Another thing to consider perhaps is, that the FuG 220 was a development from around 1943.
If ..the Fw 1000x1000x1000 would have been servicable in, say1947 ?
Four yerars in the field of radar development wasn't just much time then, it were aeons !
But if you want to cling to that type (maybe because the advance of the Red Army had led to the biggest
part of the German radar scientists and engineers being captured and brought to Siberia by the Russians,
so that all could be done was making due with outdated electronic equipment ;) ), perhaps you should consider
moving the antennas to the wing leading edges, as was done with the FuG 216 antennas in the Fw 190 ?
(photo via http://www.oncamouflagedwings.org/saw/sanmmh14.jpg )
 

Attachments

  • Fw-190_FuG-216.jpg
    Fw-190_FuG-216.jpg
    43.7 KB · Views: 344
Details of this installation on the FW190 on show at Johannesburg War Museum:
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0259.JPG
    IMG_0259.JPG
    674.2 KB · Views: 329
  • IMG_0279.JPG
    IMG_0279.JPG
    704.9 KB · Views: 292
I acknowledge the potential for the dish array/ radome interfering with pilot vision though one could potentially alleviate this by offsetting the radome etc slightly lower (with probably a teardrop fairing underneath to 'blend' back into the fuselage - maybe something akin to the nose on the F7U-3P in profile).

129747-ac4.jpg


I certainly think the FuG 220 Lichtenstein SN-2 style 'Hirschgeweih' antennas as shown would be overly drag inducing and potentially even structurally unsound on a jet such as this. A more streamlined/advanced design using something akin to the 'Berlin' radar would be more likely.

I also tend to agree with Jemiba's comment re the single seater. A two seat arrangement would be far more likely for a dedicated nightfighter. The pilot would have their hands full flying and handling the early jets. To also ask them to handle the radar might be too much.
 
The question is.....Who designed some "what if" german's project like "Luft 46".......and where...????
 
A lot of drawings on Luft'46 is based on real German's drawings. I have somewhere scanned copy of film with original Blohm-Voss drawings. But every redrawing it as a lot of "improvements"
 
Wow! I never realised it was this small. I always thought it was a two-seater with a capacious cockpit... Maybe two and a half times larger. I guess I should've looked at the dimensions...

It was somewhat larger than the 3d model (based on Orion's drawings), even if elements of the design were unfinished. But I still thought it was much larger.
 
Avimimus said:
Wow! I never realised it was this small. I always thought it was a two-seater with a capacious cockpit... Maybe two and a half times larger. I guess I should've looked at the dimensions...
Click to expand...

In some way it was a delta winged version of the Ar 234 and with regards to that, even Gerys alteration of the
cockpit is quite plausible, as there is some similarity.
Actually with the intended performances, the Focke Wulf design would just have beaten the Arado with regards
to maximum speed. Oh, and not to forget with regards to stealth, of course ! ;D
 
Good thought Jemiba... ;) ....yes some similarity with ARADO 234 ;D

"even Gerys alteration of the cockpit is quite plausible"...and Greatly recommended for a good pilote viewpoint... ;D

i think that a double seats version is possible.....i will make it... ;)
 
gery said:
i think that a double seats version is possible.....i will make it... ;)
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should think about side-by-side seating then, as in most (planned) twin seat versions
of the Ar 234 ?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom