Sovietwarplanes
October 18, 2019, 11:21:42 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This forum replaces the old sovietwarplanes.com whose domain has expired in January 2017. It has been updated with the posts of the year 2016.
The new location of the site 'Sovietwarplanes pages' is at http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: Fw-190 with soviet engine???  (Read 20461 times)
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5788


« Reply #15 on: October 07, 2011, 07:36:40 AM »

Hi Konstantin,
nice kits.
But it's not a fair proof that a plane never existed.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
KL
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1678


« Reply #16 on: October 07, 2011, 07:58:18 PM »

But it's not a fair proof that a plane never existed.

Massimo,
?Fw-190F M-82? is an esoteric subject, like German A-Bomb model.
How do you prove that German A-Bomb didn?t exist?  Do you need to prove it didn't exist?

Or let?s put it this way:  Regardless of all the historical evidence that Germans didn?t/couldn?t make an A-Bomb, there is a ?nice? model of German A-Bomb.  $22.00 only!

Happy modelling,
KL

PS. What is the purpose of "Luftwaffe 46" fantasies anyway???
Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5788


« Reply #17 on: October 07, 2011, 09:01:25 PM »

Hi Konstantin,
Quote
?Fw-190F M-82? is an esoteric subject, like German A-Bomb model.
How do you prove that German A-Bomb didn?t exist?  Do you need to prove it didn't exist?
It is clear that the German A-bomb didn't exist else they would have utilized it.
The parallel with an hypothetic test plane that could have been made in few weeks utilizing parts of other planes is merely arbitrary. I don't say that  it existed, but it can't be stated otherwise on the base that a resin aftermarket producer has made the conversion aside to a fantasy a-bomb.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
KL
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1678


« Reply #18 on: October 07, 2011, 09:16:37 PM »

Hi Massimo,
So far we have not seen any evidence the plane did exist.

Drawing of a plane (Photoshopped in 2 minutes!) and resin conversion set, doesn't mean the plane actually existed.

Cheers,
KL

Logged
Walker
Full Member
***
Posts: 224



WWW
« Reply #19 on: October 08, 2011, 02:37:14 AM »

+1  pure Luft'46
« Last Edit: October 08, 2011, 02:39:00 AM by Walker » Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5788


« Reply #20 on: October 08, 2011, 07:23:25 AM »

Hi Konstantin

Quote
Drawing of a plane (Photoshopped in 2 minutes!) and resin conversion set, doesn't mean the plane actually existed.
Nor that it didn't exist. A thing is to say that it could be fruit of fantasy, another that it was surely so. A so strong status should be positively proved.

Hi Walker,
Quote
+1  pure Luft'46
Eventually VVS '46.

Regards
Massimo
Logged
Graham Boak
Full Member
***
Posts: 117


« Reply #21 on: May 17, 2014, 09:11:58 PM »

Just to pick up on one dropped comment: there is no doubt that studying the Fw190 did have considerable effect on the later British and US radial-engine fighter designs.  Some of this was in hidden details, such as the colour-coding of different systems and the way details had been arranged for ease of manufacture and maintenance, but the key point was that Tank had managed to fit a powerful radial engine onto a fighter without suffering from base drag problems or an excessively fat fuselage.  Partly this was the tight cowling with frontal fan, and partly it was the way that the exhaust pipes had been clustered into groups and carefully placed for maximum benefit.  This was done so that the flow from the exhausts filled the overlap behind the wide engine and along the slim fuselage sides, otherwise a large source of base drag from rearward facing areas.  This was considered so important that Bristol abandoned development of the Centaurus with its traditional forward-facing exhausts and collector ring (itself a step forward in drag reduction at the time of introduction) in favour of the exhausts coming from the rear of the engine.  Sadly, the redesign took so long that this highly promising engine was too late for the war.  The same design feature can be seen on the Bearcat (as opposed to the Hellcat) although here less advantage has been gained from a slim fuselage.  Turbocharging of course to some extent will nullify or even remove this benefit, which is perhaps why the US was less interested.

The Japanese were to utilise the same technology more directly in the re-design of the D4Y Judy and Ki61 Tony for radial engines, with specific attention paid to the one Fw190 delivered to Japan.  The Ki61 to Ki100 is clearly a rather more awkward arrangement than any new design would be.

It is worth noting that Lavochkin was ahead of the other Allied and Axis fighter designers in introducing the same effect, no doubt thanks in part to having a more suitable engine to hand and the more immediate need for a superior fighter, but any direct influence has not been acknowledged, as far as I know.  I feel the engineering solution speaks for itself.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2014, 09:14:09 PM by Graham Boak » Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!