Horten Jet Aircraft Projects

can anyone explain the logic behing this humungous nosewheel?

especially as rubber was a scarce material in ww2 germany
 
Wheelsize is a function of the weight carried by this wheel. In the case
of the Ho/Go 229 it was the nose wheel, which carried the larges part of
the aircrafts weight, contrary to most other nose wheel aircraft. I think,
its more a centerwheel landing gear, á la Lockheed U2, than a conventional
nose wheel landing gear.
 
Jemiba said:
Wheelsize is a function of the weight carried by this wheel. In the case
of the Ho/Go 229 it was the nose wheel, which carried the larges part of
the aircrafts weight, contrary to most other nose wheel aircraft. I think,
its more a centerwheel landing gear, á la Lockheed U2, than a conventional
nose wheel landing gear.
Click to expand...

yes .. but having two smaller wheels side by side instead of that single large one would possibly free up lots of valuable space - like for fuel or avionics ..
 
What is simpler to produce and maintain? I'd wager a single wheeled design is. It might also consume the same, if not more rubber since you've doubled the number of tyres in order to carry the weight as Jemiba suggested. I'd figure a dual-wheeled arrangement had been considered but a single wheel design simplified production, eased maintenance, and used less materials and this is what was selected. ;D

agricola64 said:
yes .. but having two smaller wheels side by side instead of that single large one would possibly free up lots of valuable space - like for fuel or avionics ..
Click to expand...
 
borovik said:
Johnbr said:
Do you have any on the HO 18.
Click to expand...
It may be outside the main theme (not the night fighter)))
It is still in the process, while only 2 views
Click to expand...

Strange, in David Myhra's book "The Horten Brothers and their all-wing aircraft", 1998, this project is labelled Junkers EF140, a counter-proposal made by a Junkers-led team to the original Horten XVIII proposal.
In other hand, the EF140 designation was also assigned to a post-war FSW bomber prototype built in Soviet Union by OKB Baade.
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,4168.msg33194/highlight,ef-140.html#msg33194
 

Attachments

  • The Horten Brothers-Myhra2.jpg
    The Horten Brothers-Myhra2.jpg
    52.8 KB · Views: 1,258
agricola64 said:
can anyone explain the logic behing this humungous nosewheel?

especially as rubber was a scarce material in ww2 germany
Click to expand...
It was intended as additional cushioning so that the HoIX could be flown from substandard, muddy runways

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Apparently, this was a common design feature for postwar Soviet aircraft - if my distant memory seves me well... but don't quote me on that; it's heresay :-\
 
Blohmundvoss, thanks for the reply... it makes a great deal of sense

not unlike the B-24 Liberator wheels nicked for the Ju 287 prototype?
 
The Ho/Go 229 was designed with a wheel of that size and using a tail wheel
of the He 177 probably would have brought savings in development time and
so eased later series production. There were other cases, too, I think, where
parts from one aircraft were used for another.
The Ju 287 prototype with its Liberator wheels was another story. They just were
the fastest way to get this "concept demonstrator" airborne, but surely wouldn't
have been used in later variants. ;)
 
Yaaay! for serendipity ;)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mind you, i need post no references to state that the Allies had bombed Luftwaffe airfields silly towards the end of the war; a fact not lost on the RLM - and likely to be factored into initial design spec.s from the outset. At the risk of straying off-topic: damaged airfields were a major impetus to postwar development of VSTOL technologies [eg. the Ryan XP-13 Tailsitter and, ultimately, the Harrier]. Serendipity (due to material shortages and the like) aside, this does not exclude the hypothesis that aircraft such as the Go 229/Ho IX...and others like the Ba 349 Natter... were designed to operate from damaged airfields from the outset.

Regards :)
 
Hi everybody

More Horten X A very interesting plane !

Supersonic research airplane
http://www.twitt.org/Farnborough_06.html#top
http://www.twitt.org/FarnFig25.jpg
http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurflugel/Horten_Nurflugels/ho_x__xiii_b_/ho_x_2.jpg

A BIG THANKS goes to Justo for his great drawings here !
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3553.0.html

Are these the armed Horten X ?supersonic? "Fighters" ?
http://www.geocities.com/unicraftmodels/fut/futgerm/futgerm.htm

Here the Horten XIIIb
http://www2s.biglobe.ne.jp/%7EFlyWing/FlyingWing_Horten.html
http://www2s.biglobe.ne.jp/~FlyWing/image/H_XIIIb_3view.gif
Should the XIIIb have a "water cockpit" ?

Here the Horten X "VOLKSJÄGER"
http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurflugel/Horten_Nurflugels/ho_x__xiii_b_/ho_x.jpg

Many greetings
 
Another iteration of the 'people's fighter' Horten H X
It has some similarities with the model of Sharkit, but it is definitely another option (and little-known IMHO)
-Hans-Peter Dabrowski "NURFLUGEL" Waffen-Arsenal special band 18
 

Attachments

  • HX initial.jpg
    HX initial.jpg
    51 KB · Views: 1,064
Bolshoi ;), Anatoly,

as always. Thanks for sharing.
 
Hi everybody

COOL ! Thanks a lot ! borovik
Here the Horten "KAMPFJÄGER"
http://renax.club.fr/sharkit/Kampfjag/Kampfjag.htm
Was there also a fighter version of the Horten X research plane ?(maybe with water cockpit ?)(supersonic ?)
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3553.0.html

Thanks a lot for help
 
sharkit site changes his url,
now:
http://www.sharkit.com/sharkit/HoEnt1/HoEnt1.htm
DSCN3757.JPG

and:
http://www.sharkit.com/sharkit/Kampfjag/Kampfjag.htm
Kampfjag.jpg
 
Horten Ho.X drawings
-From
-German Jet Genesis by David Masters , Jane's 1982
-Paper Planes of the Third Reich-Toros-1946-1989
-Unknown source
 

Attachments

  • Escanear0001.jpg
    Escanear0001.jpg
    209.2 KB · Views: 752
  • Escanear0002.jpg
    Escanear0002.jpg
    327 KB · Views: 326
  • Escanear0003.jpg
    Escanear0003.jpg
    300.7 KB · Views: 328
  • Escanear0004.jpg
    Escanear0004.jpg
    120.5 KB · Views: 381
-Horten X "experimental supersonic" ...please see http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3553.0/highlight,horten%20ho%20x.html
 
-Horten X "Volksjäger"
from "Nurflügel" by Reimar Horten and Peter Selinger, 1985
 

Attachments

  • Escanear.jpg
    Escanear.jpg
    98.3 KB · Views: 388
-Horten X "Postwar"
from "The Horten brothers and their all-wing aircraft" by David Myhra-Schiffer,1998
 

Attachments

  • Escanear.jpg
    Escanear.jpg
    106.9 KB · Views: 374
Justo,

thanks for posting the original drawing of the Ho-X from the mentioned book.

If I may ask - is my impression correct that some of your drawings seem to be highly speculative or even fictional?
 
I did a search through all the different posts concerning Horten flying wings, and couldn't find any post to help me, which is why I am starting a new thread.
I am trying to find out the size & shape of the Luftwaffe's 1250 liter fuel tanks, which were supposed to go on the production version of the Horten 229 (and maybe other aircraft). Does anybody have any drawings or dimensions of these tanks? I want to put them on my model of the proposed photo-reconnaissance version.
Larry
 
Here is one by Bentley.They were to be self sealing tanks.
 

Attachments

  • 229s52.jpg
    229s52.jpg
    27.6 KB · Views: 1,298
I thought they were supposed to be droppable, underwing fuel tanks, for longer range.
I can't really make anything out on your small drawing, but thanks for posting it.
Larry
 
The picture posted shows the internal wing tanks. The only drawing (also from Arthur L. Bentley - see here) that I have seen that shows drop tanks is this one:

229p.jpg


Regards,

Greg
 
I remember that Gibbage argued that the internal structure of the Go-229 had no provisions for the ETC-500 racks (which means that the 3x1000 version was truly speculative pitch). This may apply to droptanks as well (as the wing tanks were quite expansive). I recall that Shick and Meyer also reported R4M provisions for the night fighter variant and I read somewhere else there was some pressure to add some type of vertical stabiliser after the crash (but I've never seen an illustrations on this).
 
Avimimus said:
I remember that Gibbage argued that the internal structure of the Go-229 had no provisions for the ETC-500 racks (which means that the 3x1000 version was truly speculative pitch). This may apply to droptanks as well (as the wing tanks were quite expansive).
Click to expand...
That is interesting information. The drawings show that bombs or drop tanks could be carried, but if the ETC-500 racks can't be installed, then that is not possible?!?
Since you (and others) say that the internal wing tanks were quite large, that may be the 1,250 liter fuel tanks that were mentioned, and I just assumed that they were larger drop tanks. I should've realized my stupid mistake, considering how large 900 liter drop tanks are, and how they wouldn't even fit under the Ho-229's wings. :-[

Cheers,
Larry
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom