Heinkel "Y"

borovik

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
5 May 2007
Messages
795
Reaction score
330
Heinkel "Y" (late 1944)
Rocket-powered vertical take-off interceptor.

The project would take off vertically, using the rocket engine (probably HWK 109-509A + 4-RATO / Startraketen 4 x SG34 /) When high acceleration to the speed at which the ramjet (Three Pabst pulsejets). Armament: 2 - MK-103. Spent fighting kit plane was used as Bachem "Natter" for ram attacks.
What a weight and size specifications are not available.

Source: E. Ruzhitsky «European aircraft vertical takeoff»
In addition to this information, there is a mention in the magazine «Mechanix Illustrated» № 2, 1946,
(Figure 4)
http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2009/02/24/supersonic/?Qwd=./MechanixIllustrated/2-1946/supersonic_plus&Qif=supersonic_plus_0.jpg&Qiv=thumbs&Qis=XL#qdig

Via posting by Hesham -
Imagination of the future from the past.
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2504.30.html

No other additional information a fortiori documents. :(
 

Attachments

  • He 'Y'.jpg
    He 'Y'.jpg
    27.9 KB · Views: 308
  • Heinkel ' Y '.jpg
    Heinkel ' Y '.jpg
    25.8 KB · Views: 286
  • Heinkel 'Y'.jpg
    Heinkel 'Y'.jpg
    86.9 KB · Views: 299
  • Y.jpg
    Y.jpg
    75.9 KB · Views: 333
What an odd design.... Really awful forward visibility, likely uncontrollable with power on if one of the tip pulsejets is damaged or fail, the fixed Y-wing seems completely useless unless the idea was to turn without rolling. I can't see why this wing/engine arrangement would have been chosen over a conventional left-and-right wing and more inboard or fuselage placement of the engines.

I wonder if the source was much more than the artists impression attached above? Does the article say? The text above seems focused on the delta-winged design.
 
Not to bother anyone with my scepticism again, but the caption of the "Heinkel Y" speaks of "Triebflügel", so may it be just a misinterpretation of the Focke-Wulf Triebflügel ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not to bother anyone with my scepticism again, but the caption of
the "Heinkel Y" speaks of "Triebflügel", so may it be just a misinterpretation
of the Focke-Wulf Triebflügel ?
Yes, because the wings of the aircraft were part of a rotating ring assembly around the fuselage, and Heinkel's VTOL tailsitter fighter studies were the Lerche and Wespe.
 
I don't understand something with the triebfugel, how can the wing spins without the fuselage is spinning to? how the fuselage could be stabilized with this huge propeller?
 
I don't understand something with the triebfugel, how can the wing spins without the fuselage is spinning to? how the fuselage could be stabilized with this huge propeller?
It is not an engine in the fuselage that pushes the wings to rotate. It's the wingtip jets on the wings themselves.
So, in theory, there is no torque exerted on the fuselage.
 
I don't understand something with the triebfugel, how can the wing spins without the fuselage is spinning to? how the fuselage could be stabilized with this huge propeller?
It is not an engine in the fuselage that pushes the wings to rotate. It's the wingtip jets on the wings themselves.
So, in theory, there is no torque exerted on the fuselage.
I saw that, but, you hae always some friction (in wikipedia they say that you can stop it with controls, but, you must give a lot of power, how the fuel is put in the reactor, if it in the wings, is it not too heavy? An dif you haven't for any reasons the same angle, the same trust in the reactors, what happens?, i think it's not a viable project for these reasons, he is to big, and asking to much trust and he is not viable for the war (you have to shoot in the wings, or controls panels, and at this speed, it will be easy, and the circumference is enormous for a propeller, so you just have to shoot in the cicle for a godd time, annd you have an aircraft without stabilisation). It's to dangereous to have it for the war.


i saw that, from the NASA, it's more viable :
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hK47qSTLI70
 
snark:
Ah, but it's a 'wonder-weapon', isn't it ?
The 'flying fortress' gunners will be shocked witless by this uber-tech whatsit, while their terrified pilots scatter all over the sky to be destroyed 'in detail'...

And, hey, keeps you off the draft to 'Russian Front', and will look great on CV when the US recruiters come around...
/
--
Thinking of several tip-jet helos: IIRC, they did not need much tail-rotor power to offset residual torque.

There's a lot of 'empennage' back there to give landing gear a fair spread. Tilting all clock-wise or anti-, like the 'mixer' on a V-tail, should serve.

An electric motor/generator could draw in-flight power from the spinning triskelion and, via a starter trolley, run the rotor up to speed like a 'jump gyro'....

FWIW, I suspect even those suicidally brave ME 163 pilots would consider this a bit too wild...

Although Hanna Reitsch would have likely flown it, and well.
 
Back
Top Bottom