"Arbeitsflugzeug" Program

Wurger

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 25, 2007
Messages
844
Reaction score
1
Hi guys,

this interesting program was iniciated by the RLM when the Bomber-B program was antecipated to be a failure. It must be described as a "workhorse" or a multipurpose aircraft. Here I post some of the tenders, e.g. the Heinkel P.1065/1055 and the Blohm&Voss P.163. The Dornier contestant was the Do 417. Does anyone know more competitors to this particular program?
 

Attachments

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
8,188
Reaction score
1
The Blohm & Voss proposal would have been 'interesting', from an aircrew point of view.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
23,066
Reaction score
3
Wurger said:
Hi guys,

this interesting program was iniciated by the RLM when the Bomber-B program was antecipated to be a failure. It must be described as a "workhorse" or a multipurpose aircraft. Here I post some of the tenders, e.g. the Heinkel P.1065/1055 and the Blohm&Voss P.163. The Dornier contestant was the Do 417. Does anyone know more competitors to this particular program?
Hi,

may be you meant Dornier Do.317,the Dornier Do.417 is not right.
 

Wurger

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 25, 2007
Messages
844
Reaction score
1
Hello Hesham,

thanks for joining up. No, I am quite correct. The Dornier Do 417 was a real project, cited and published by Nowarra or Grihel. Please see our own thread:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,4781.0/highlight,dornier+do+417.html

Anything to add, ladds? It would be most welcomed.
 

Avimimus

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
1,873
Reaction score
0
Any idea what the twin 20mm were supposed to do on the P.1055?

Grey Havoc said:
The Blohm & Voss proposal would have been 'interesting', from an aircrew point of view.
Well, it was abandoned after they created add a second crew pod to the wing-tip of a BV-141 and decided it was just a very bad idea.
 

Antonio

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,347
Reaction score
1
I,ve got the whole project proposal from Blohm und Voss. Will post images when I get a chance
Please, please.
 

LowObservable

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,154
Reaction score
0
The advantage of the B+V design, from the crew's viewpoint, is that any fighter pilot's going to aim for the middle bit.
 

kiradog

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
76
Reaction score
1
Add some of the images I promised above. More to follow
 

Wurger

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 25, 2007
Messages
844
Reaction score
1
Many, many thanks for this great stuff, Gary. Boy, I love our hobby!!!!
 

kiradog

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
76
Reaction score
1
Thanx, Blohm und Voss projects are my fav.

Posted last couple images

The entire document contains about 157 pages which are mostly text and charts.


Gary
 

Wurger

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 25, 2007
Messages
844
Reaction score
1
Hi Gary,

please feel free to post anything you have ;D on german WW2 projects, not necessarily by B&V ;) . Thanks once again.
 

sgeorges4

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Oct 8, 2017
Messages
353
Reaction score
1
sorry for the up,but do you have some other document about the heinkel P.1055 please?
 

riggerrob

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
278
Reaction score
0
Those MGs on wing tips have great arcs of fire, but I suspect that rolling manuvers would make gunners airsick with all the changes in Gravity.
 

sienar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
520
Reaction score
0
riggerrob said:
Those MGs on wing tips have great arcs of fire, but I suspect that rolling manuvers would make gunners airsick with all the changes in Gravity.
Not more so than normal. There were similar concerns with the P-82 and it was found that the pilot/co-pilot didn't experience any undue effects because of the off center seating arrangement.
 

cluttonfred

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 31, 2008
Messages
1,316
Reaction score
0
Website
cluttonfred.info
The Luft46.com page on this design says this about the configuration, "In order to test this unconventional arrangement, the asymmetrical BV 141 had a second cockpit installed on the wingtip with the controls coupled to those in the main cockpit. This led to the discovery that this arrangement warranted no further development.: Does anyone have any pics if and/or other information on that modified BV.141?

Source: http://www.luft46.com/bv/bvp163.html
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
7,949
Reaction score
1
In the FRX Magazine N° 68 there's an article written by U.W.Jack (member here, too) just about this theme, including a
reconstruction of that testbed.
 

rinkol

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 22, 2013
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
"In order to test this unconventional arrangement, the asymmetrical BV 141 had a second cockpit installed on the wingtip with the controls coupled to those in the main cockpit. This led to the discovery that this arrangement warranted no further development."

It would seem that the frontal area would be at least as much as for a conventional twin engine design, at least if the DB 613 was used as the engine. Powerplant non-availability would have been a fundamental issue in any case.
 

sienar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
520
Reaction score
0
cluttonfred said:
The Luft46.com page on this design says this about the configuration, "In order to test this unconventional arrangement, the asymmetrical BV 141 had a second cockpit installed on the wingtip with the controls coupled to those in the main cockpit. This led to the discovery that this arrangement warranted no further development.: Does anyone have any pics if and/or other information on that modified BV.141?

Source: http://www.luft46.com/bv/bvp163.html
There are a few more pics I've seen in various books, but can't remember which ones off the top of my head.
 

Attachments

alfakilo

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
71
Reaction score
0
riggerrob said:
Those MGs on wing tips have great arcs of fire, but I suspect that rolling manuvers would make gunners airsick with all the changes in Gravity.
Quite possibly, but, if nothing else, it would have complicated their aiming problem.

cluttonfred said:
The Luft46.com page on this design says this about the configuration, "In order to test this unconventional arrangement, the asymmetrical BV 141 had a second cockpit installed on the wingtip with the controls coupled to those in the main cockpit. This led to the discovery that this arrangement warranted no further development.
This makes me wonder what the test objectives were...to test an "unconventional arrangement", the designers imagined an even more unconventional arrangement.
 

cluttonfred

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 31, 2008
Messages
1,316
Reaction score
0
Website
cluttonfred.info
Thanks for posting the test bed image. It's odd to me that B&V even proposed the wingtip fuselage pod when the BV.141 layout with the pod just outside the propeller arc had already proven quite workable. Two slim, fighter-like pods in positions similar to the BV.141 with two crew in each one would have minimized the effect of the seating off the centerline but still given the gunners clear arcs of fire. The position of the horizontal tail and the types of turrets could have been adjusted to leave no blind spots.
 

alfakilo

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Messages
71
Reaction score
0
Here is a link to a good explanation of the aerodynamic advantages of the asymmetric design:

http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurflugel/n_o_d/weird_01.htm
 

iverson

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
226
Reaction score
0
sienar said:
cluttonfred said:
The Luft46.com page on this design says this about the configuration, "In order to test this unconventional arrangement, the asymmetrical BV 141 had a second cockpit installed on the wingtip with the controls coupled to those in the main cockpit. This led to the discovery that this arrangement warranted no further development.: Does anyone have any pics if and/or other information on that modified BV.141?

Source: http://www.luft46.com/bv/bvp163.html
There are a few more pics I've seen in various books, but can't remember which ones off the top of my head.
I've always assumed that this image was a fake made up using a smaller copy of the BV141 fuselage. It's hard for me to see how the structure of the normal wingtip--as the image appears to show--could be adjusted to work with an extra nacelle. Any ideas on the provenance of the picture?
 

hole in the ground

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
238
Reaction score
0
You might find that this variant just had extremely restricted speed and manoeuvre limits to keep g-loading down.
 

sienar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
520
Reaction score
0
iverson said:
sienar said:
cluttonfred said:
The Luft46.com page on this design says this about the configuration, "In order to test this unconventional arrangement, the asymmetrical BV 141 had a second cockpit installed on the wingtip with the controls coupled to those in the main cockpit. This led to the discovery that this arrangement warranted no further development.: Does anyone have any pics if and/or other information on that modified BV.141?

Source: http://www.luft46.com/bv/bvp163.html
There are a few more pics I've seen in various books, but can't remember which ones off the top of my head.
I've always assumed that this image was a fake made up using a smaller copy of the BV141 fuselage. It's hard for me to see how the structure of the normal wingtip--as the image appears to show--could be adjusted to work with an extra nacelle. Any ideas on the provenance of the picture?
Found the source pic, so it is definitely fake.
 

Attachments

Top