Focke-Wulf jet fighter

[Flitzer]

Hi all
at it again.

What is the correct type number for this Focke Wulf concept please?
I've seen it as TL, Design lll and Fw 252 Ent 3, but which one is the most accurate?

I know it was an alternative design at the time of the Ta183 drawings.

Many thanks.
P

 

[Bailey]

I've always known this as the TA 183 Design III. The type number 252 was already used by both Junkers and Horten, and I've always associated "TL" with the Flitzer.

Cheers Bailey.

 

[Flitzer]

A little more progress.

I'll go with Design lll, thanks Bailey.

Many thanks
P

 

[Justo Miranda]

Fw 252-Entwurf -3 , february 18,1945
Unknown source

 

[Justo Miranda]

Fw P.V Entwurf 3, also Fw P.011-37a
January 1944
Unknown source

 

[Flitzer]

Many thanks Justo.
Interesting.
On your flared fuselage/tail version, which mine is supposed to be, the guns are mounted high in the nose.
On the ref I have they are lower.
But I think yours are the correct location. (as usual ;D)
P

 

[Justo Miranda]

Bonus...

 

[Justo Miranda]

Bonus +

 

[Flitzer]

Thanks for the double bonus Justo.
Great stuff.

I notice you have all the stencils etc in place on bonus 1, could I ask if you have clear references for these please? i.e. What they say?
It's one area in which my refs are poor.

Many, many thanks
Peter

 

[Justo Miranda]

Stencils and some useful stuff -post-1
From "Luftwaffe 1935-1940" -c3 by Jaroslaw Wrobel & Janusz Ledwoch, AJ Press and two unknown sources

 

[Justo Miranda]

Stencils and some useful stuff -post-2
From "Luftwaffe 1935-1940" -c3 by Jaroslaw Wrobel & Janusz Ledwoch, AJ Press and two unknown sources

 

[Justo Miranda]

Stencils and some useful stuff -post-3
From "Luftwaffe 1935-1940" -c3 by Jaroslaw Wrobel & Janusz Ledwoch, AJ Press and two unknown sources

 

[Flitzer]

Justo
thank you, thank you, thank you.


When you do something, you really do it.

This lot should keep me busy

P ;D

 

[Michel Van]

OMG

thanks justo

by the way
Wat for a font the germans used on there Blueprints and documentation,
was dat DIN 1421 or DIN 1451 or another ???

 

[Justo Miranda]

I have no idea!
Attached additional info that may be helpful-post-1
please see also http://www.dafont.com/blockschrift-fur-fl.font

 

[Justo Miranda]

I have no idea!
Attached additional info that may be helpful-post-2

 

[Justo Miranda]

I have no idea!
Attached additional info that may be helpful-post-3

 

[Justo Miranda]

I have no idea!
Attached additional info that may be helpful-post-4

 

[Justo Miranda]

I have no idea!
Attached additional info that may be helpful-post-5

 

[Michel Van]

Thanks for "be helpful-post"
know i can draw accurate German WW2 aircrafts ;D

this show the Font i looking for

from Up-ship.com

 

[Orionblamblam]

Thanks for "be helpful-post"
know i can draw accurate German WW2 aircrafts ;D

this show the Font i looking for

from Up-ship.com

Years back when I was working on issue V5N6 of Aerospace Projects Review, I cobbled together some drawings and made an attempt to make them look appropriate to the WWII-German era. This included the font in the blueprints. I found a font in the standard collection of Microsoft Word that looked pretty close; see the attached. I don't recall what font it was, but I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to find... some standard Truetype font included in Microsoft Office 1999 release.

Not speaking German means that my fake blueprints are almost certainly laughably goofy to actual Germans...

 

[Orionblamblam]

Some actual title blocks from German WWII-era diagrams.

 

[Michel Van]

OMG that wat I looking for !
zillion Thanks Scott

to that font used on Diagrams (as Technical lettering)
its DIN 6776–1 replaced by EN ISO 3098

Din't know that was already been used in ww2...

 

[Jemiba]

Nowadays there quite probably is a digital font like this, but about 30 years ago, during
my apprenticeship, we simply learnt this as "Normschrift" (standard font). There were templates
available, but we always had to write by hand. And professional draughtsman proudly rejected
the use of such templates (We sometimes used them, but in most cases our foreman noticed : )
DIN 6776 already was a later form, avoiding acute angles, which often gave issues on micro fiches.

 

[Flitzer]

Again many thanks Justo and Scott.
Absolutely brilliant stuff.

The problem now is what to omit rather than searching for things to add ;D
A nice problem to have for a change.

P

 

[Flitzer]

Another version progress report.
inspired by Justo's bonus.

Still needs a little work around the Exhaust/tail boom.

Many thanks
Peter

 

[Justo Miranda]

Please note cap filler tank wings in "bonus"

 

[Flitzer]

Oh I have noticed Justo and will adjust.

Again many thanks for all your help.

P

 

[Apteryx]

Flitzer, your stuff just gets better and better.

 

[Flitzer]

Glad you like it Apteryx.

As far as my work improving? I don't think it would be possible without the massive help from so many here on site.

Many thanks
P

 

[Nick Sumner]

Just like to second what Apteryx said - your stuff really is first rate Flitzer.

 

[blackkite]

Hi!
Ta183.

(pictures from http://aviadejavu.ru/Site/Crafts/Craft22182.htm and Google)
Especially Ta183 fuselage tail shape is impressive compared with recent jet fighter. Also the length of Ta183 fuselage is very short. Vertical tail stabilizer is very long.
Why so short or why so long? Also horizontal tail stabilizer best position is the question.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJYRjpGnigU

 

[Jemiba]

Also the length of Ta183 fuselage is very short. Vertical tail stabilizer is very long.
Why so short or why so long?

A long jet pipe/intake was found to lower thrust (there's a photo of ground tests using a Me 262
with an elongated intake in Schick/Radinger "Messerschmitt Geheimprojekte"), but the overall
length is the momentum arm for the tailplane and cannot be shortened at will. So this
configuration probably was regarded as a good compromise.

 

[blackkite]

Umm....
How do you think about Mig-15 and F-86 design?

 

[Bill Walker]

I suspect the FW fuselage and jet pipe were kept short to minimize empty weight, and to minimize inlet and exhaust losses. The F-86 and MiG-15 had more thrust available, so they could carry a bit more structure in order to improve the aerodynamics, and were less bothered by the losses on a long inlet. Shifting the cockpit forward, and the engine aft, helped keep the jet pipe length down as well..

 

[Arjen]

De Havilland solved the minimum inlet and exhaust losses with the twin boom Vampire.
Image from wiki.

 

[blackkite]

I suspect the FW fuselage and jet pipe were kept short to minimize empty weight, and to minimize inlet and exhaust losses. The F-86 and MiG-15 had more thrust available, so they could carry a bit more structure in order to improve the aerodynamics, and were less bothered by the losses on a long inlet. Shifting the cockpit forward, and the engine aft, helped keep the jet pipe length down as well..

HmHm...Midship engine. Thanks a lot.

 

[Artie Bob]

What most have not seen is the second iteration of the Ta fighter design which had a longer more normal fuselage. There are microfilm copies of drawings for that aircraft at the US NASM archives.

Artie Bob

 

[Vladimir]

Bonus...

Bonus is SUPER! Thanks!

 

[Jozsef]

Fw 252-Entwurf -3 , february 18,1945
Unknown source

Hi Justo,

Do you have more original drawings from this jet?