Focke-Wulf swept-wing pusher fighter with contra-rotating propellers

[blackkite]

Blackkite, I think you're right about the cooling air exit, and I've just found this, from Putnam's 'McDonnell Douglas' Volume 1, page 363;

"The laminar-flow wing with double slotted flaps housed the fuel tanks and the oil and coolant radiators which were fitted with ground cooling fans."

Later, on page 363-4, it says this; "...limited efficiency of the cooling ducts. Solutions...were found relatively quickly..."

I think these fans would have to have been driven electrically, and not directly off the engines.

cheers,
Robin.

Thank you so much Robin and Jens!
Don't feel so sad Jens. Never mind. F1 car has no fan.

 

[Flitzer]

A few profiles...


Peter

 

[blackkite]

Wow almost jet fighter.
Beautiful! I want to see RC model flight movie of this fighter.

 

[blackkite]

At last I get this super book today from England. Many thanks Basil!
There is a following description for Focke-Wulf high performance fighter with Jumo 222E/F in page 36.

"This arrangement, which included a cooling fan to provide additional air flow when taxing and during take-off, permitted a reduction in the radiator's surface area."

It's hard for me to find radiator cooling fan in general arrangement drawing.
I also find that Curtiss XP-55 had engine over heat problem when taxing. XP-55 had limitation for taxing time. If pilot violated this limitation, engine over heat occured immediately.
Excuse me for frequent posts for this topic. I only want to know the truth.　

 

[Jemiba]

And good to know it in the end ! Still strange, that some companies simply seem to have ignored,
what others already knew and even incorporated into their projects !

 

[Basil]

Blackkite, good to hear you like the book. It is much more structured than the book about bombers and the one about ground attack planes (different authors). Yes, it would be interesting to know of which kind of cooling fan it was thought of.

 

[Orionblamblam]

I'm going to have to hunt down a microfilm reader/copier at some point. Photography ain't cuttin' it.

 

[blackkite]

Oh!!

 

[Justo Miranda]

I have nothing best... :-\

 

[Justo Miranda]

Hi Blackkite
A typical Focke Wulf series of homothetic solutions for several engines

 

[blackkite]

You did it, Justo!!
How about challenge Kawanishi TB, too.

 

[Wurger]

Excellent drawings, Justo. Only one remark: on the last page, the top engine is not the Argus As413. It is a project from the Daimler-Benz stable, a 24 cylinder H liquid-cooled engine intended to develop 4000Hp.

 

[Orionblamblam]

Found a microfilm scanner. From the looks of it, though, I'm going to have to go back and try again, tinker with the settings. Bleah.

 

[blackkite]

I think bottom one had a electric motor drive cylindrical radiator cooling fan located the nose of the aircraft for taxing and ground engine test.

 

[Jemiba]

... and try again, tinker with the settings. Bleah.

Inversing and somewhat increasing contrast already makes it somewhat better, I think.

 

[blackkite]

Thanks Jens!
What a surprising aircraft it was.!

 

[Justo Miranda]

Typical Focke Wulf cooling system

 

[Justo Miranda]

Additional info

 

[blackkite]

Thanks! Very impressive design.

 

[dannydale]

Wow that is an awesome design bro! It reminds me of an olde-timey version of my hypothetical Little Yellow Reno Racer contrarotating-pusher-prop plane design a bit.

 

[blackkite]

Wow that is an awesome design bro! It reminds me of an olde-timey version of my hypothetical Little Yellow Reno Racer contrarotating-pusher-prop plane design a bit.

Sorry off topic, but please show us your hypothetical Reno Racer.

 

[dannydale]

Wow that is an awesome design bro! It reminds me of an olde-timey version of my hypothetical Little Yellow Reno Racer contrarotating-pusher-prop plane design a bit.

Sorry off topic, but please show us your hypothetical Reno Racer.

This thing. I feel like I need to register it on the "Known Fakes" thread now. B)

 

[Jemiba]

This thing. I feel like I need to register it on the "Known Fakes" thread now. B)

Looks a bit, as if Luigi Colani met Ralph McQuarrie ...
But as long, as it didn't appear somewhere, stated as "real", I wouldn't include it in the fake list, sorry !

 

[dannydale]

This thing. I feel like I need to register it on the "Known Fakes" thread now. B)

Looks a bit, as if Luigi Colani met Ralph McQuarrie ...
But as long, as it didn't appear somewhere, stated as "real", I wouldn't include it in the fake list, sorry !

Thank you for the compliments. I love both of their work!

 

[Justo Miranda]

Wow that is an awesome design bro! It reminds me of an olde-timey version of my hypothetical Little Yellow Reno Racer contrarotating-pusher-prop plane design a bit.

Sorry off topic, but please show us your hypothetical Reno Racer.

This thing. I feel like I need to register it on the "Known Fakes" thread now. B)

Beauty!

 

[blackkite]

Indeed!! It may be a transonic prop Reno racer.

 

[dannydale]

Muchos gracias, Justo! Blackkite, that's kinda sorta the idea. Not sure if it was the Louisiana heat or the smoking pipe that got to me at the time B)

 

[Stargazer]

Flippin' heck! I actually DID store it in an "unidentified" folder of mine, thinking it was a genuine project... See?

 

[Nick Sumner]

Hi Justo, in your post of 16th March, scan FW005, one of the engines is labelled 'Argus 413'. I have previously seen this drawing labelled 'Daimler Benz H24 project' (notably in LJK Setright's 'Power to Fly' but also elsewhere), do you have definite confirmation that it is the Argus engine? Just curious.

 

[Justo Miranda]

Sorry, I believe this is my mistake.
I received the information from an anonymous source.

 

[dannydale]

Flippin' heck! I actually DID store it in an "unidentified" folder of mine, thinking it was a genuine project... See?

Oh snap! Guess it's off to the Known Fakes thread with the thing then, lol! To whom do I apologize?

 

[hesham]

Hi,


does anyone hear about Focke Wulf P.0310.025-1005 fighter ?,which was
also from the same family of P.0310.025 aircraft .

 

[hesham]

does anyone hear about Focke Wulf P.0310.025-1005 fighter ?,which was
also from the same family of P.0310.025 aircraft .

I don't know if that drawing was to P.0310.025-1005 fighter project or not ?.


From Jet & Prop 5/1992.

 

[Jemiba]

... P.0310.025-1005 fighter project ...

That's not a type, but a drawing number and the text says, that it was the "high performance
fighter", either to be powered by aa Jumo 222 or an Argus AS 413. The same type, as we had
before here.

 

[hesham]

Thank you my dear Jemiba,


and I know the 0310.025 is a drawings number,I am asking if there is any 3-view survivor
to 0310.025-1005 ?.

 

[pathology_doc]

I wonder just how much a swept wing benefits a prop fighter. I know for straight winged aircraft that published figures for in-service aircraft suggest a sort of brick wall beginning around 475mph at full-throttle height and going up to 500mph for fighters with enough raw power, but there are two aspects to this - one is the local flow over the wing, which only really gets hairy in a dive (or possibly with buffet-boundary issues in high-altitude manoeuvering) and which either careful selection of section, thinning, or sweepback can alleviate; but the other is tip losses in the props at speed, which is a lot more difficult to get around with the sections then known.


You can get around the tip losses a bit by reducing prop diameter for the same RPM and adding blades (multi-bladed props, either as contraprops or five or six-bladed singles), but IIRC with the state of aerodynamics in the 1940s (even in Germany), you run up against problems there too.


I'm sure the engineers at FW (for which probably read, "Kurt Tank") figured there was nothing to lose, and with jet projects in the pipeline as well (either alternative powerplants or separate projects) the work on swept wings wouldn't be wasted, but it'd be interesting to see the comparisons.


OT: It seems to me that the flipside of this argument is the fitment of the Spiteful wing to the Supermarine Attacker - nominally the original elliptical Spitfire wing had the better high-Mach performance (or at least reached higher numbers when pushed to the limit), but it seems there were more obvious structural benefits in choosing the Spiteful wing despite its alleged lower critical Mach number (e.g. better performance vis a vis roll rates at high speed, resistance to aileron reversal, wide-track undercarriage and so forth, and probably a lot more that I don't know about). Among other things, I'm guessing that the low-drag part of the Spiteful section curve was predominant in the performance envelope in which a RR Nene could drive the airplane in S&L flight, which made for better fuel consumption and so on and so forth. Oh, to be able to pick Joseph Smith's brains on this one!

 

[Jemiba]

As the engine was to be relatively far aft, I'm wondering if chosing the swept wing
was purely for aerodynamic reasons, or maybe just for getting the CG in correct place ?

 

[Steve Pace]

Look at the Curtiss XP-55 Ascender with its sweptback wings and rear engine. -SP

 

[pathology_doc]

As the engine was to be relatively far aft, I'm wondering if choosing the swept wing was purely for aerodynamic reasons, or maybe just for getting the CG in correct place ?

We may never be certain, since the return of the pusher into large numbers of design concepts wasn't until well into the era where compressibility issues started becoming important. CG issues are certainly a possibility; Wikipedia says XP-55 performance was under 400mph (at least with the V-1710 engine), suggesting it at least wasn't looking at compressibility problems in S&L flight.

 

[blackkite]

You can see static radiator three side view in the original drawings for the Focke-Wulf P.1310251-13/II.
Engine ram air intake position is interesting.
Main landing gear were twisted and retracted into the fuselage.

http://www.luft46.com/fw/fwp0310b.html

GEHEIMPROJEKTE DER LUFTWAFFE Jagdflugzeuge 1939-1945, Motor buch Verlag,1944, ISBN 3-613-02631-1