Fighter design by Leslie Peel (1944)

Barrington Bond

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 4, 2007
Messages
938
Reaction score
191
If you read the article you'll discover that it is not a "Bristol" design but one designed by a Private in the Army - Leslie Peel.

The only mention of Bristol is in relation to the sleeve valve engine that they persevered at and perfected.

Regards,
Barry
 

Jemiba

Moderator
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,377
Reaction score
1,666
Structurally this design probably would have been quite a
special adventure .... :D
 

red admiral

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 16, 2006
Messages
800
Reaction score
366
Its surprisingly similar to this fictional design which is from a Japanese website that holds competitions for fictional aircraft, ships and vehicles. The artwork is usually great.
 

Attachments

  • burglar_0.jpg
    burglar_0.jpg
    57.5 KB · Views: 779
  • burglar_1.jpg
    burglar_1.jpg
    31.7 KB · Views: 685
  • burglar_2.jpg
    burglar_2.jpg
    30.6 KB · Views: 649
  • burglar_3.jpg
    burglar_3.jpg
    31.4 KB · Views: 419
  • burglar_4.jpg
    burglar_4.jpg
    32 KB · Views: 359

lark

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
1,812
Reaction score
126
Yes indeed , or an early attempt of joined wing thinking..
 

Jemiba

Moderator
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,377
Reaction score
1,666
With its twin-booms, it looks more plausible, than this Bristol
design, I think. But with hindsight it may be easier to create
a WW II design .... ;D
 

archipeppe

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
1,974
Reaction score
1,191
But what kind of advantages could have this special design??
The configuration is one of the oddest I've ever seen.

Anyway thanks to Hesham for this special finding...
 

Jemiba

Moderator
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,377
Reaction score
1,666
The advantage would be the use of contrapropos without the use of a gear and
positioning the props in the in the middle, so without disturbing the airflow
around the nose. Was tried in some other designs, too, such as the BV P.192.
But if it is really worthwhile, I don't know .... ???
 

lark

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2006
Messages
1,812
Reaction score
126
The idea of two engines mounted front to front
was also used by Roberto Bartini in the intial design
for his DAR flying boat in the late 1930's.
 

Skybolt

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
2,295
Reaction score
222
Beautiful design, I suspect though that it would be possible only with much later structural engineering and materials... ???I tremble thinkg of the aeroelastic forces the aircraft would have been subjected ito n a gust: very much probably tearing it apart :(
 

Rickshaw

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
2,143
Reaction score
270
I rather think that bailing out would be a very interesting adventure in that aircraft. It would also have some very interesting stall characteristics, with effectively what would be a "blown" wing in the rear. Could make landing quite an interesting adventure as well, particularly with the location of the tail-hook.
 

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
28,647
Reaction score
6,517
I hope to see a model for this amazing fighter.
 

kcran567

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Aug 15, 2009
Messages
670
Reaction score
25
The first picture from flightgolabal is reminiscent of the Geobat which is a great circular wing design. Excellent.
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,220
Reaction score
891
Jemiba said:
As this thread came up again, I modified the title to give credit to the true designer. ;)

Cool. But why lose the mention "Bristol" in the title if this truly was a Bristol project? :(
 

Jemiba

Moderator
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,377
Reaction score
1,666
Stargazer2006 said:
Cool. But why lose the mention "Bristol" in the title if this truly was a Bristol project? :(

Because I cannot find a clue in the Flight article, that it really was. To my opinion, Bristol is
only mentioned with regards to the sleeve valve. All aircraft designs are just mentioned with
regards to their designers, for the one we are speaking about " Definitely in the class of annular
plan forms falls a project sent to us by a private in the army, Mr. Leslie Peel, whose design is shown in
model form ....."
But maybe I'm wrong, then I'll add Bristol to the title again, of course. ;)
 

riggerrob

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
1,824
Reaction score
1,276
Beautiful design, I suspect though that it would be possible only with much later structural engineering and materials... ???I tremble thinkg of the aeroelastic forces the aircraft would have been subjected ito n a gust: very much probably tearing it apart :(
The wings would be stiffer if they joined just outboard of the prop tips. ... perhaps more like the twin-booms on the speculative Japanese sketches. Those (speculative) booms need to be stiff enough to prevent forward and aft wings from flexing up and down relative to each other.
IOW a shorter load path will be stiffer.
Reducing aero-elasticity would also reduce the prospects of prop blades clashing.
We wonder if it is practical to join the two prop hubs with a ball-bearing ... to reduce relative motion.??????
 

riggerrob

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
1,824
Reaction score
1,276
But what kind of advantages could have this special design??
The configuration is one of the oddest I've ever seen.

Anyway thanks to Hesham for this special finding...
There are multiple advantages.

First, the pilot has great visibility.

Second, it can concentrate all guns in the nose ... simplifying alignment and aiming. Mounting heavy guns near the center-line increases roll rates.

Thirdly, it will balance better than most flying wings, tandem-wings and canards because heavy engines are near the center-of-gravity. That also allows for quicker pitch changes (versus Dornier 335 with props at the extreme ends of a long fuselage).

Fourthly, it balances engine weight without long drive shafts (Curtiss Ascender, Japanese Shiden, etc.).

Fifth, the rear prop is forward of the main wheels, eliminating the risk of prop strikes (on the runway) or the need for a tail bumper.

Sixth, the rudder is far enough aft (of the C. of G.) to provide meaningful stability and control.

Seventh, the rudder is a convenient place to hang an arrestor hook for carrier landings.

Eighth, the configuration is more of a tandem-wing or canard, specifically because the forward wing is smaller (narrower chord) than the rear wing. Both can provide lift. ... allowing the forward to wing to provide lift at high angles of attack. This would help with the STOL landings needed for deck landings. Consider that SAAB's Viggen and Grippen canards are among the few STOL jet fighters.

If you worry about the pilot bailing out past those spinning props, just bolt his seat to a lever arm (as suggested for Spitfire). The lever arm only has to be long enough to lift him above/below the prop arc.

In conclusion, whether this airplane could be successful is a question of balancing extra structural weight versus all the advantages mentioned above.
 
Last edited:

Spyinthesky

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Oct 31, 2021
Messages
4
Reaction score
6
There is an e-VTOL proposal that uses an almost identical wing form to that. Must be some perceived advantage to the design to have cropped up more than once and so far apart.
 

riggerrob

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
1,824
Reaction score
1,276
Its surprisingly similar to this fictional design which is from a Japanese website that holds competitions for fictional aircraft, ships and vehicles. The artwork is usually greBristol Burglar would be

Its surprisingly similar to this fictional design which is from a Japanese website that holds competitions for fictional aircraft, ships and vehicles. The artwork is usually great.
This fictional Bristol Burglar makes more sense structurally. By mounting booms just outboard of prop discs, it reduces the length, weight and flexibility of the whole structure. This stiffer structure also reduces the risk of props flexing out of alignment. We wonder if it is practical to directly connect the prop hubs to reduce relative vibrations. If the suggested bearing only limits the relative movement of the two props, it will further stiffen the entire airframe both vertical and horizontally. We also hope that shorter structural load paths will reduce vibrations.
 

Similar threads

Top