What I found via a quick search is a description intended for modellers, but with some sources given and
from what I could check still yet, it seems to be quite ok. https://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=9&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjXyO-359_SAhUHCBoKHZruDSsQFgg-MAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.modellbau-lippstadt.de%2F05_galerien%2Fmanfred%2Fbauberichte%2Fbaubericht%2520arado%2520ar%2520234%2520p-5%2520panoramageraet.pdf&usg=AFQjCNESurx-LGeYdUtwu6aA1cdASImayw&sig2=GAU55ru79l3QgVLlEH8xmQ&bvm=bv.149760088,bs.1,d.bGg
It says, that during 1944 research was done by the "Er probungstelle Werneuchen" for low drag radar installations.
The much smaller antennas for the centimetric radars could be used for cleaner installations, than before.
Nose, ventral and dorasl installations on the Ar 234 were tested in a wind tunnel, the latter two should give a panorama
view to track aerial targets, shadowing the bomber stream up to distances of 45 km. That radar set (FuG 240 Berlin N1a)
should be installed into a Ar 234 C-3.
The P-5 is mentioned as a night fighter with a FuG 244 Bremen 0 in a nose installation and a FuG 350 Naxos (passive
There's no mention of a variant carrying both
, the nose and the dorsal sets, although such a model is shown ...
To my opinion, a nose mounted radar would have been needed for a standard nightfighter, the dorsally mounted variant
for shadowing, both roles are hardly interchangeable. The aircraft would have needed both sets, workload for the radar
operator would have doubled, energy needs, too.
Mentioned sources are:
Geheimprojekt der Luftwaffe : Band 3
Die deutsche Luftrüstung Band 1-4
Gebhard Aders: Geschichte der deutschen Nachtjagd 1917-1945, 1. Auflage 1977, S.271