Kasyanenko KPI-5 and others

[borovik]

Kasyanenko KPI-5 and others... or Luft'19/II
Several projects WWI united by one common desire to improve agility/ manoeuvrability, relegating the engine to the abaft cockpit, near the center of mass of aircraft:
1) Junkers J-5 II
2) Draft airplane M. Yefimov's of 27.8.1916
3) Airplane brothers Kasyanenko KPI-5
Sources: «Wings of the Motherland» № 2 2002
«Tech and arms» № 3-4 1995

 

[borovik]

drawing by I.Sultanov

 

[Wurger]

Excellent, Anatoliy, as always. Thanks a lot for those "goodies".

 

[robunos]

A couple more for you, the RAF FE.6, and the french Dufaux C1.

from 'War Planes of the First World War: Figters', volumes two and four.
Apologies for the poor quality, they're scans of a xerox copy.
Also some more here:-

http://www.losteagles.com/download/losteagles1/lost_eagles.pdf

cheers,
Robin.

 

[redstar72]

Robunos, thanks for the link! The described machines are very interesting; some of them I knew before, but a lot of them I didn't knew. Also thanks for the FE.6 drawing; it's a very unusual airchart, and I didn't hear about it.

You have a little mistake in the Dufaux index: it's a two-seat fighter, so it isn't "C1", but Dufaux C.2. Here is the drawing, the same as yours, but larger:
http://www.wunderwaffe.narod.ru/Magazine/AirWar/85/Draw/02.gif

The specifications of Dufaux C.2:
Wingspan - 7.96 m
Length - 6.10 m
Height - 2.80 m
Empty weight - 530 kg
Takeoff weight - 740 kg
Engine - Le Rhone 9J (81 kW / 110 hp)
Max. speed - 140 km/h
Endurance - 2 hours

Only one prototype was built in 1916, and it crashed during the landing after its 4th flight. I'm adding a photo, unfortunately with poor quality.

 

[robunos]

it's a two-seat fighter, so it isn't "C1", but Dufaux C.2.

'Lost Eagles' refers to it as Dufaux C1, 'War Planes of the First World War: Fighters' simply refers to it as the 'Dufaux single engined scout'
French great war aircraft designations aren't my strong point, I have to say....

cheers,
Robin.

 

[Tophe]

at http://www.ailesahs.com/wp/?page_id=1577
is mentioned “(1915-1916 Project of fighter Dufaux-C1, two-seat biplane, with pusher propeller in the middle of the fuselage. The prototype was tested in 1916.”
In “the complete book of fighters” is the same picture, better quality, with a little article, and just the name Dufaux fighter.
A modern model show it even better, with French article, at
http://www.pionnair-ge.com/spip1/spip.php?article35

the picture being http://www.pionnair-ge.com/spip1/IMG/jpg/Dufaux-C1-profil.jpg

 

[Avimimus]

Hello,

Sorry to dredge up an old thread, but it just occured to me:
How is the KPI-5 supposed to work? (the variable incidence wings???)

 

[Tophe]

The photographs of the KPI-5 seem to show all the wires/beams are connected to a central point in the fuselage side, so a rotation command/unlocking may be applied by the pilot, and the airflow pushes the wings in the other position (what is made with power on the F-8 Crusader). For braking in flight/dogfight or higher lift for take-off/landing at minimum speed. But to have the wings back in the other position, some force has to be applied, and maybe there is a connection with the engine, either direct or through a battery/electric engine or something. No? (just my guess, not historical source)

 

[borovik]

A box of the wings could pivot about the nodes on the middle rack (manual), which ensured the flight path change due to the vector controlled lift, ie Tophe rights .

VKh-4 / "Dvuhvostka", "Anadva", "Anatra-Hion number 4" (1915-1916)
Engines 2 - "Salmsom" power of 140 hp
Length 7700mm
Span 19000mm
The crew of 3-6 people

 

[ww1Steve]

Hello,
Sorry to dredge up an old thread, but it just occured to me:
How is the KPI-5 supposed to work? (the variable incidence wings???)

I've been building a model and hence studying what photos are available as best I can. I can't detect any control wires to the elevators so I suspect they are fixed tailplanes, and all the climb/dive control was done by moving the wings. The drawings posted above don't show any elevator control wires either.
Tophe, the drag would be the same on the top wing as on the bottom, so the 'neutral' position for the wings would be the angle of attack with the minimum drag. Increasing or decreasing the angle of attack from that neutral position would need some stick force. How that would compare to the force needed to move elevators I don't know.

Edit: Having just looked at the Maslov book the two pictures on page 160 seem to show the tailplanes at different angles, so maybe that were movable

 

[Airborne2001]

This design looks so futuristic for its time.

 

[GRach]

Kasyanenko KPI-5
Resin model 1:72
Made in Russia