avatar_ysi_maniac

Ju-88, Ju-188, Ju-288, Ju-388, Ju-488, .... Ju-888

Started by ysi_maniac, November 03, 2008, 06:38:57 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

ysi_maniac

Will die without understanding this world.

Just call me Ray

Hmmm, well, can I ask a question?

Why did they go for the cockpit style they did for the 188 and thereafter? Pressurization? Aerodynamics? Visibility?
It's a crappy self-made pic of a Lockheed Unmanned Combat Armed Rotorcraft (UCAR), BTW
Even Saddam realized the hazard of airplanes, and was discovered hiding in a bunker. - Skydrol from Airliners.net

sequoiaranger

GTX-- I love the idea, and did a "carrier" Bf-110/410, but that was a "Doolittle Raider"-type that would be placed on deck via crane and only take off a carrier and fly to a land base, not really intended to operate off a carrier. The problem is the elevators. Even with folding wings, I believe a plane the size of a Ju-88 would have too long a fuselage to fit on a carrier's elevator. I am facing the same difficulty with my envisioned He-119 "carrier" bomber. I was trying to "invent" some sort of break-away tail that could be fastened back on once on the flight deck, but even MY imagination has a hard time wrapping around the concept (like, how would they treat control cables, etc?)


I am almost embarrassed to say I do not know the dimensions of a typical WW II carrier elevator, but they usually brought only ONE single-engined plane to the flight deck. Grumman's clever wing-fold meant TWO tightly-folded planes could be brought up to the flight deck, but I think the Avenger-sized aircraft was about as big a plane as could be handled. I know later, onboard the Forrestal-class US super-carriers, the twin-engined "Skywarrior" could be stowed, but I think the elevator size had grown sufficiently to do that.

Just a thought.
My mind is like a compost heap: both "fertile" and "rotten"!

jcf

Quote from: Just call me Ray on November 05, 2008, 10:59:51 AM
Hmmm, well, can I ask a question?

Why did they go for the cockpit style they did for the 188 and thereafter? Pressurization? Aerodynamics? Visibility?

D) All of the above.
"Conspiracy theory's got to be simple.
Sense doesn't come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated crap
actually is than they ever are about
whatever's supposed to be behind the
conspiracy."
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Weaver

Quote from: sequoiaranger on November 06, 2008, 06:12:19 AMI was trying to "invent" some sort of break-away tail that could be fastened back on once on the flight deck, but even MY imagination has a hard time wrapping around the concept (like, how would they treat control cables, etc?)

You could do it by having a mechanism at the break that transfers forces via surface contact rather than a "locked" link. Something like:

The cables from the cockpit operate a "push one way, push the other" mechanism at the join.

The mechanism pushes another mechanism on the other side of the join.

The second mechanism then pulls another set of control cables leading to the tail surfaces.

That's the theory  - what it does to control forces and feel is anyone's guess, but I'll bet it's not good, at least not without LOTS of development work. Not light either......
"We thank you, but this diversion is not true. Things never happened thus."

"Oh, but it IS true. Things need not have happened to be true. Tales and dreams are
the shadow-truths that will endure when mere facts are dust and ashes, and forgot."

- Sandman: A Midsummer Night's Dream, by Neil Gaiman

Just call me Ray

Rather than have a "break-away" tail you can have a "swing" tail, with all of the elevator connections packed to one side where the hinge would be.
It's a crappy self-made pic of a Lockheed Unmanned Combat Armed Rotorcraft (UCAR), BTW
Even Saddam realized the hazard of airplanes, and was discovered hiding in a bunker. - Skydrol from Airliners.net

Weaver

Or have a pioneering "all-electric" tail with the surfaces actuated by electric motors. It wouldn't be anything like as clever as modern fly by wire, but I think mid '40s tech could come up with artificial feel for the controls....
"We thank you, but this diversion is not true. Things never happened thus."

"Oh, but it IS true. Things need not have happened to be true. Tales and dreams are
the shadow-truths that will endure when mere facts are dust and ashes, and forgot."

- Sandman: A Midsummer Night's Dream, by Neil Gaiman

jcf

A folding tail would not that big a deal to engineer, heck they even use them on helicopters.

Jon
"Conspiracy theory's got to be simple.
Sense doesn't come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated crap
actually is than they ever are about
whatever's supposed to be behind the
conspiracy."
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

jcf

Quote from: Weaver on November 06, 2008, 07:59:34 PM
Or have a pioneering "all-electric" tail with the surfaces actuated by electric motors. It wouldn't be anything like as clever as modern fly by wire, but I think mid '40s tech could come up with artificial feel for the controls....

Nope, aircraft electrical generation and electric motor technologies of the period would not be
capable of providing the required power and speed.

Jon
"Conspiracy theory's got to be simple.
Sense doesn't come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated crap
actually is than they ever are about
whatever's supposed to be behind the
conspiracy."
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

GTX

Didn't the Fw191 use electrical actuation instead of Hydraulics or mechanical for majority of systems?

Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

GTX

QuoteThere is another book on the 288-388-488

This one maybe?  Just ordered it anyway:



Given how important the Bomber B program was, I'm surprised there isn't more detailed information on it.  There is after all a 300+ pg book on the Ju 388 (on to buy list):



regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

GTX

Lee,

Didn't you propose a Ju188 based Ju488 a while back?  I can't remember or find the exact post though?

Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

GTX

Ok, what are people's ideas for:


  • Ju 588?
  • Ju 688?
  • Ju 788?
  • Ju 888?

Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

jcf

Quote from: GTX on November 07, 2008, 12:00:57 PM
QuoteThere is another book on the 288-388-488

This one maybe?  Just ordered it anyway:




The Black Cross books by Regnitz are English translations of his 'vom Original zum Model' series
and all are absolutely excellent.

I have the translated version of the Ju 90 book and the, not translated and probably never will be, volumes on the Fw 200 (the airliners not the bombers and the best book on the subject) and Dornier Do X.

Jon
"Conspiracy theory's got to be simple.
Sense doesn't come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated crap
actually is than they ever are about
whatever's supposed to be behind the
conspiracy."
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

GTX

My own early Ju188 based Ju488  - based on Lee's concept (but with single tail fin amongst other ideas):



Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!