CLEARANCE: Top Secret
- Sep 3, 2006
- Reaction score
The photo "He 274 pic1.jpg" is labelled on my disk as Ateliers Aéronautiques de Suresnes AAS-01A at CEV in 1946.
it's looking minimum Fighter Me 328hesham said:
Or the first reason,to protect the mathership.Michel Van said:
Both is correct. This particular drawing in #48 is from Fritz Hahn "Flugzeugbewaffnungen" (p.407). He mentions both: a parasite fighter for defence of the He-177 on it´s one way trip to the USA and as a explosive carrier.hesham said:Or the first reason,to protect the mathership.Michel Van said:
OK my dear Jemiba.Jemiba said:If we take this drawing literally, it wouldn't make much sense as a Mistel explosive carrier, I think.
Still to be fitted with gun turrets would be unlikely then, and AFAIK, German Mistels for air-to-ground
missions were generally fitted with shaped charge warheads.
I think, for the best efficiency, that the parachute harness must be deployed "around" the tail, not below, as in the Do 217 installation:Wouldn't the parachute be hosted under the dummy rear turret cover with the attach point below the gunner position in the fairing?
Notice that this could be also a glider towing harness point.