The Arsenal VG. 60 is one of my all time favorite French projects.
... but the designation VG.61 & VG.64,are they real one or fake ?.
Nick Sumner said:I don't know of any French inverted 'V' engines but Arsenal used Jumo 213s on the He 274 prototype. Was the VG70 a late war or post war design featuring the Jumo 213?
I note that the 'VG 70' sideview in Reply #41 looks very much like the VG 60 in Reply #42. Is it possible that the Le Fana author has conflated the two?
I have the VG 70 as a Jumo 004-powered VG 60 derivative (work beginning in September 1944). The VG 60 was, initially to have an 'upright' Hispano (first HS 12Y-51, then HS 12Z). However, the VG 60's post-war (1946?) incarnation was, indeed, to be powered by an inverted V-12 Arsenal 12H (Jumo 213E).
The Arsenal VG. 60 is one of my all time favorite French projects.
Now there is this website here which mentions some variants:
![]()
Our Forums are moving to Discord
forum.worldofwarplanes.com
However, I have never heard of any of these variants. Searches have brought up nothing. Are these real, or jest theoretical/fantasy developments?
The Arsenal VG. 60 is one of my all time favorite French projects.
Now there is this website here which mentions some variants:
![]()
Our Forums are moving to Discord
forum.worldofwarplanes.com
However, I have never heard of any of these variants. Searches have brought up nothing. Are these real, or jest theoretical/fantasy developments?
An overview of the Arsenal VG-50 project.
I do not know how you established this number of 9 projects, but it is true that VG-50 designation was reused as generic number for multiple projects. It was initially a fighter, member of VG-30 familly, but during war, it was assigned to a bigger experimental plane for engine coupling experimentation. Some additional usages were suggested to justify the efforts of the team in Villeurbane: transatlantic, maritime patrol, etc.Amazing my dear Philippe,
and as you know,there were 9 different aircraft,carried this designation "VG.50".
Good question.What is the powerplants with those contraprops?
Hi,Michel Vernisse filed various patents for a mechanism "homéoceinétique" for engine coupling. The VG-50 was planned to be used as engine testbed for such coupling system. The engines planned were 4 Hispano-Suiza 12Z, coupled by pairs.
Please ,I heard that there was those Arsenal designations VB.11,VB.12 & VB.14,we know an odd designation in this series,called VB.16,who can
explain that ?.
Actually in this period,Arsenal developed a nine projects from VB.10, included VB.15, so may their series are from VB.11 to VB.19 ?.
but we must search good before confirm they were not existed.
I was able to look at the radiator photo through a translater, and the VG 60 radiator was huge. Perhaps it was for a "Mega-Miranda Effect" of sorts, even more so than the P-51?From Le Fana Nº 197 to 200
HiI was able to look at the radiator photo through a translater, and the VG 60 radiator was huge. Perhaps it was for a "Mega-Miranda Effect" of sorts, even more so than the P-51?
... but I can't talk about them because they are a part of my book.
Then why keep bringing them up?
Really? Which ones? Where are they coming from?the nine projects were really existed
I agree for VB.15, but what is this VB.16? What is your "reliable" source?we only have the VB.15 and VB.16 from reliable source
-The VB 16 designation comes from an article in Le Fana de l'aviation N°247 (June 1990) about the VB 10. It's only said that this VB 16 was "a(n unknown) derivative" of the VB 15.
I guess you mean mega Meredith effect....I was able to look at the radiator photo through a translater, and the VG 60 radiator was huge. Perhaps it was for a "Mega-Miranda Effect" of sorts, even more so than the P-51?
The so-called "Meredith" effect was known in France as "Leduc effect". René Leduc patented this effect in June 1933 (FR-770.326). He participated to implement it in the Breguet 482 engine cowling.I guess you mean mega Meredith effect....
The Lioré and Olivier H-47 seaplane had ring coolers designed to minimize their aerodynamic drag. The prototype flew in 1936, but it was only after the first flight that this type of cooler was apparently installed ... Meredith’s work on the additional thrust of coolers designed according to his principle was published in 1936 ... The most famous example of the application of the Meredith effect is obviously the famous NA P-51 Mustang... But it is good to remember that this was in the air in the mid 1930s and 1940s, and it still is today in formula 1 racing cars !..The so-called "Meredith" effect was known in France as "Leduc effect". René Leduc patented this effect in June 1933 (FR-770.326). He participated to implement it in the Breguet 482 engine cowling.
It is not required to have variable cross section nozzle to take benefit of this effect, it only requires a cross surface of the exhaust greater that the cross section of the inlet. But of course, having variable nozzle helps a lot to adapt to flight evolutions.
This geometry was allready invented by Hugo Junkers (''Duesenkuehler'') and used in the J1 (first all metal plane from 1914).The so-called "Meredith" effect was known in France as "Leduc effect". René Leduc patented this effect in June 1933 (FR-770.326). He participated to implement it in the Breguet 482 engine cowling.
It is not required to have variable cross section nozzle to take benefit of this effect, it only requires a cross surface of the exhaust greater that the cross section of the inlet. But of course, having variable nozzle helps a lot to adapt to flight evolutions.
I do not understand this statement. It is exactly the opposite: the cross section of the exhaust must be greater than the inlet. If it is not the case, the thermodynamic effect cannot provide thust.the exhaust cross section must be very small
Not true, just look at the graphs of this post, you can see exhaust flaps but no inlet flaps. Same is true for the P51, the very first variants had iinlet and exhaust flaps, while the later ones only used exhaust flapsI do not understand this statement. It is exactly the opposite: the cross section of the exhaust must be greater than the inlet. If it is not the case, the thermodynamic effect cannot provide thust.