Stargazer

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
25 June 2009
Messages
13,621
Reaction score
2,639
The MBI book on the Heinkel He 162 presents several contenders in the "Volksjäger" competition, including the Blohm & Voss P 211.

Blohm und Voss came up with a very simple-looking design, an unswept high-wing concept together with an unswept tail fixed on a tubular spar, which was connected to a fuselage nacelle equipped with a nose air intake and featuring a retractable nose landing gear.

A few days later, the company converted the offered type P 211 to a low-wing aircraft with a swept wing and a delta-shaped tail. In this configuration, the P 211, once considered the favorite for the tender, could according to calculations achieve a maximum speed of up to 865 km/h and reach an altitude of 8,000 meters. Its highest speed at sea level to reach 765 km/h, while the maximum initial rate of climb would be 17.8 m/s. The aircraft was to be equipped with two 30 mm cannons.

Attached below are three-view arrangements of the two proposals described above.
 

Attachments

  • P 211.gif
    P 211.gif
    192 KB · Views: 2,298
Some original BV P.211 scans
 

Attachments

  • p.211_a.jpg
    p.211_a.jpg
    872.1 KB · Views: 2,177
  • p.211_b.jpg
    p.211_b.jpg
    631.9 KB · Views: 1,871
Hi,


from the book; Blohm & Voss Bv.138,by Heinz J. Nowarra,here is the Bv P.110,
and also the P.111 with a more info about P series,which was connected with
Bv.138.
 

Attachments

  • P.110.JPG
    P.110.JPG
    46.3 KB · Views: 1,408
  • BV P.111.JPG
    BV P.111.JPG
    76.4 KB · Views: 584
Wow! That BV P.111 was really taking the word "asymmetric" to a whole new level!!! :eek:
 
Johnbr said:

Thanks for the link. Unfortunately you have to be a member to view the pics. All I can see is a page full of this...

video.gif
 
Hi,


the Blohm and Voss P.188 early four studied designs.
 

Attachments

  • P.188.JPG
    P.188.JPG
    43 KB · Views: 1,190
Hi,


from the file, Projektbeschreibung Blohm & Voss BV-P 215.
 

Attachments

  • 7.JPG
    7.JPG
    70.3 KB · Views: 420
  • 6.JPG
    6.JPG
    70.1 KB · Views: 367
  • 5.JPG
    5.JPG
    70.2 KB · Views: 375
  • 4.JPG
    4.JPG
    71.7 KB · Views: 380
  • 3.JPG
    3.JPG
    64.3 KB · Views: 869
  • 2.JPG
    2.JPG
    57 KB · Views: 920
  • 1.JPG
    1.JPG
    61.2 KB · Views: 988
Avimimus said:
Those R4M installations always made me worry about gas injestion

The main exhaust of the rockets was diverted via vents, I think.
What would be of interest to me, is the tiltable installation in pic 6, called "Geradbahnschuß"
(straight line shot). For a use as a kind of "schräge Musik" the angle is too low, I think.
So, what was it for ?
 
My guess is that it would be desirable to have the target elevated high enough that there was no chance of it being obscured by the nose. If you lose sight of a target at night it can be very hard to spot again.


On the other hand, oblique guns typically required flying at speeds that were close to those of the aircraft being attacked - hence the emphasis on surprise attacks from the darker area below the target. The surface area of the target is much larger when viewed from below, but the tactic was apparently still reliant upon nearly matching speeds. Obviously, this is less than ideal in a high speed jet platform - so the tendency might have been to lower the level of obliqueness.


A fully mobile installation capable of tracking the target as the 215 passed under it might also have worked. Is there any evidence that these were two fixed positions rather than a fully mobile installation? I know that mobile installations were being experimented with for the Hs-129 during this period (similar to the KABB projects in Russia).
 
The idea with keeping the target in sight may well be valid, the lower angle, than in other oblique
gun installations could be result of the higher approaching speeds with this night fighter. With those
five Mk 19 a short burst would have been enough to kill a heavy bomber, contrary two just two
MG 151/20 as often used. A fully movable, or beter horizontally stepless movable installation probably
would have meant a movable sight, I think, as in a gun turret. For the pilot, this would have meant a
tremendous workload, flying the aircraft and keeping the sight on target. Could have been a task for
the crew member besides him, but the gun sight is shown at the pilots station, so I wold guess, that
only two positions were envisaged.
 
Hi,


in the file called; Kurzbeschreibung Miniatur-Jager mit P 213,here is the Blohm
and Voss P.213 in details.
 

Attachments

  • 213.JPG
    213.JPG
    63.8 KB · Views: 421
hesham said:
Hi,


in the file called; Kurzbeschreibung Miniatur-Jager mit P 213,here is the Blohm
and Voss P.213 in details.

Pulse-jet powered, armed with a MK 108 cannon. One of the projects under the Miniaturjägerprogramm, part of the overall Jägernotprogramm (Emergency Fighter Program).
 
Hi,


from the book; Bron Strategiczna Trzeciej Rzeszy,here is the P.188 in details.
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    68.3 KB · Views: 528
Stargazer,


I meant the internal constructions of each drawing,and not the variants.
 
hesham said:
I meant the internal constructions of each drawing,and not the variants.

Then it's best to say "here is the Blohm and Voss P.213.01.01 in details" and "here is the P.188.02 in details" to avoid confusion.
 
More P.188 drawings. Note tilt/adjustable wing used for takeoff
 

Attachments

  • P188_2.jpg
    P188_2.jpg
    573.6 KB · Views: 826
  • P188_1.jpg
    P188_1.jpg
    406.5 KB · Views: 860
kiradog said:
More P.188 drawings. Note tilt/adjustable wing used for takeoff


Thank you ! this adjustable wing for the P 188 was unknown for me : The same was used for the BV 144 ...
 
Hi
 

Attachments

  • BV.jpg
    BV.jpg
    170.4 KB · Views: 804
  • BV 001.jpg
    BV 001.jpg
    106.8 KB · Views: 748
  • BV 002.jpg
    BV 002.jpg
    99.1 KB · Views: 391
  • BV 003.jpg
    BV 003.jpg
    76.7 KB · Views: 369
  • BV 004.jpg
    BV 004.jpg
    104.7 KB · Views: 374
  • BV 005.jpg
    BV 005.jpg
    103 KB · Views: 380
I've often wondered why the concept of adjustable wings, which provide increased incidence for STOL properties at takeoff, has never been more exploited in the course of aviation history. It would seem to me like a very sound and efficient addition to many aircraft.
 
Adds lots of weight and complexity when you can get the same effect with just more nose-up pitch.
 
That's seems to me to be a gross oversimplification. A variable incidence wing can be particularly useful for carrier operations to keep the nose down for visibility at low speeds and allow the gear to be short and strong. The Vought F8 Crusader was a good example as was the Supermarine 322 Dumbo, which would have outperformed the Fairey Barracuda using the same powerplant had it ever gone into production.

Kartek said:
Adds lots of weight and complexity when you can get the same effect with just more nose-up pitch.
 
Correct, but as you mentioned, all aircraft, that actually used this technology were built as carrier aircraft.
But maybe it was seen as a way to achieve STOL performance for bigger aircrat and so reduce dependency
of long runways. During that stage of war, large airfields already were a prime target.
 
The Skyhawk, F-5 and English Phantoms all used longer nose gear to achieve the same effect with no significant visibility problems during approach or landing, CV or otherwise.
 
Justo Miranda said:
Germany 1945....short takeoff run! ::)
That's kinda what I'm wondering too since they are tilting the thrust as well as the wing.
B&V did some tre weird stuff, just because it's German doesn't mean it was a good idea lol.
 
Kartek said:
B&V did some tre weird stuff, just because it's German doesn't mean it was a good idea lol.

Ha ha! I like that! Welcome to the forum Kartek!
 
Stargazer2006 said:
Kartek said:
B&V did some tre weird stuff, just because it's German doesn't mean it was a good idea lol.

Ha ha! I like that! Welcome to the forum Kartek!
Thanks, I've been looking to get back into aviation after a long stint in firearms.
Found this place while looking for a photo I used to have of the McDonnell swing wing mock-up but never found it :-( lol
 
The writing says "Flügel in Landestellung", which means :wing in landing position, so the reason really
seems to have been a better STOL performance and not for the use of weapons.
 

Attachments

  • P188_2 note.jpg
    P188_2 note.jpg
    13.8 KB · Views: 1,575
Jemiba said:
The writing says "Flügel in Landestellung", which means :wing in landing position, so the reason really
seems to have been a better STOL performance and not for the use of weapons.
Thanks for the translate.
Surely they meant take-off AND landing since landing would imply a lighter load and thus naturally easier/shorter landings than take-offs.
 
Principally we have an early design for vectored thrust indeed. But I agree with
the statement "because it's German doesn't mean it was a good idea", something
that tomy opinion is too often overlooked.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom