• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Luft 19

richard

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 1, 2006
Messages
571
Reaction score
45
It's not really a project ,but only a patent .

Kark Tapernon ; Düsseldorf , 27 April 1918
 

Attachments

  • Tapernon.jpg
    Tapernon.jpg
    78.5 KB · Views: 209

hole in the ground

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
237
Reaction score
4
possibly it is simply demonstrating an alternative location for the prop?

The advantage here being the ability to fire forward without an interrupter gear.
 

Jemiba

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,291
Reaction score
1,242
It really don't look like a detailed proposal. Especially it isn't recognisable, how
the fuselage would have been divided, so I would agree with hole in the ground.
The concept of the fuselage mounted prop seems to have inspired many designers
(see http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,4951.0/highlight,schwade.html)
The expected advantages, except a clear field of fire, probably were better aerodynamics.
And AFAIK all constructors trying such a design encountered problems with engine
cooling ! ::)
 

SSgt Baloo

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
6
Reaction score
2
Website
www.geocities.com
New guy here. After closely examining the illo., it appears to me that the proposal wasn't an in-the-fuselage prop, but an external prop mounted alongside the fuselage (presumably with another counter-rotating prop on the fart side).

SSGT40x33.png
BalooAni.gif
 

Jemiba

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,291
Reaction score
1,242
Welcome on board,

you may be quite right, it can well be something like here in this cutout from
a photo of the Morane Saulnier TRK (from "90 ans de succès, de MS à EADS
SOCATA").
Unfortunately I couldn't find the patent in the web still yet. Any clue, where to
look, richard ? ???
 

Attachments

  • prop.JPG
    prop.JPG
    69.8 KB · Views: 170

richard

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 1, 2006
Messages
571
Reaction score
45
In fact an early VTOL !! :eek:
The two prop are COAXIAL .
So far I understand ???,the device could stop the aircraft in the air ,and blowing the wing the plane land verticaly !
The same for take off .

My german being as poor as my english (but my tailor is rich :)),I give here the Original .

I am sure one of our german friends will help for the translation .
 

Attachments

  • Luft19.jpg
    Luft19.jpg
    50.5 KB · Views: 455

Jemiba

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,291
Reaction score
1,242
" Pat.33023 from 27th April 1918, published on 7th December 1920,
Karl Tapernon, Düsseldorf :
Aircraft with two propellers, positioned for and aft of the wing,
which can be set to rotate in the same or in opposite directions.
Counterrotating, the air pressed under the wing will hold the aircraft
steadily in the air and allows taking off and landing vertically "

BTW, the short description contains several errors in language, that, to my
opinion wouldn't have been there in an official document. Maybe, it's just
a later description of the drawing, but someone who tried to figure out,
what it shows ?
 

richard

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 1, 2006
Messages
571
Reaction score
45
Thank you ,Jemiba .

In the early patents ,you can find some oddities . ;D

I have found that in the official patents diary in Flugsport 1921 .
I think ,it's the original summary for this patent .
 

Jemiba

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,291
Reaction score
1,242
"I think ,it's the original summary for this patent ."

I always thought, drinking while on job was forbidden ... ;D
But, as was pointed out in another thread here, to file a patent,
not necessarily means, that it would work !
 

richard

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 1, 2006
Messages
571
Reaction score
45
I am not really found of exotic patent too .
You are right ,it's obvious ,this proposal can't work ,but it's funny,don't it ?
 

Jemiba

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,291
Reaction score
1,242
"..it's obvious ,this proposal can't work"

Simply as an aircraft with two props it would work and maybe it
even can be useful in certain cases. This could have been
one of those inventions, which turned out to be totally different
in the end , than intended by the inventor .
The first porcelain was made in euopr by soemone, who tried to
produce gold ! ;)
 

Tophe

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 18, 2006
Messages
1,149
Reaction score
44
Website
cmeunier.chez-alice.fr
Why do you say there is a nonsense in this invention? It seems (to me) just too optimistic: reversing the pitch of a propeller or the thrust of a jet has becomen very common, it simply brakes and reduces landing distance, not providing vertical landing... No?
 

Jemiba

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,291
Reaction score
1,242
As I understand it, they wanted to blow air under the wing from both sides,
probably to form a kind of air cussion. But there wouldn't have been a steady
airflow, so I don't think, that it is a practical solution.
 

Attachments

  • counter-blow.GIF
    counter-blow.GIF
    19.2 KB · Views: 64

Similar threads

Top