Gotha P 60 flying wing projects

[topspeed3]

But the sweep angle is almost the same ?

 

[gery]

not the same concept....it's a high reynolds "supersonic airfoil".....all project of flying wings of 45 are subsonic....with "low reynolds" airfoil designed...the turbojets engines was not powerfull....without postcomb...

 

[Justo Miranda]

here is the P.60 lay out;

Also this P.60 like Ho-229 features a pretty heavy nose gear. Looking at the side view you can locate the CG by looking at the main gear position. CG has to be at very front end of the engines.
What is a leading edge flap..anyone know ? How do those drag rudders operate ?

Credit my drawing,please :

 

[Justo Miranda]

for me a better config....

Credit my drawing please :

 

[topspeed3]

Drawing is by Justo Miranda. ;D Nice drawing..have to hand it to you.

Please did you make all that just up...or are there facts too ?
Leading edge flaps...and internal set up ?

 

[gery]

yes, very nice drawing.....

 

[topspeed3]

Hey Gery !
I took the document on my computer with image of the definetinely original paper ( from LUFT46 with allied analysis ) and I got the lenght of the plane to be 9050 mm...when span is set at 12200 mm...and also the long leading edges seem to be at 51 degree angle. So there apparently ought to be more wing behind the engines than on the other illustration with details lets us to believe.
I could study it a bit more too.

rgds,
juke

 

[topspeed3]

Here are them above each others...and I also checked the the BMW 003 engine is 200 mm too long when the scale is 1:1 that means 6%.

 

[Stargazer]

Has it been settled that the Gotha Go P 60 was a real project or not?

And if it has, can the topic now be moved to the Early Projects section?

 

[topspeed3]

The AAF document looks real. ???

 

[Jemiba]

Even me, with quite a scepticism about a lot of those fancy German WW II projects thinks, that
the P.60 actually was a "real" project by Gotha, at least in the sense, that engineers/designers
worked on a flying wing project with this designation.
The problem, that actually led to this thread, to my opinion is, that the drawings, that can be found
too often are taken literally, although often just sketches may have survived, if at all and the conclusion,
topspeed3 mentioned in #5 may not be quite wrong here. We discussed the reasons for the enormous
amount of German projects from the end of WW II over and over again here in this forum, so I think,
there's no need to do it again here.

 

[topspeed3]

I think Gery wanted to model it so here is the engine correction done...and sweep change.

 

[Jemiba]

Don't know, if "correcting" the design is the best way to start with. To my opinion, a look at the available data and
drawings would be more helpful. Try to find out, what actually was drawn by the Gotha designers. Maybe, the drawings
we have, are "post '45" and just based on descriptions, vague sketches and very few hard data. Then a new attempt for
a reconstruction could be worthwhile.
But generally "correcting" a given design may be interesting for alternate history fans, but not for those interested in aviation
history. Don't believe, that in some years someone may come up with the "true" design of the Rockwell XFV-12, because he
corrected it in a way, that it would achieve VTOL then ! Sometimes we have to accept, that a design was a failure, although
it was an authentic project. "Improving" such a design has nothing to do with history, which without doubt is the main interest
of this forum.

 

[topspeed3]

Don't know, if "correcting" the design is the best way to start with. To my opinion, a look at the available data and
drawings would be more helpful. Try to find out, what actually was drawn by the Gotha designers. Maybe, the drawings
we have, are "post '45" and just based on descriptions, vague sketches and very few hard data. Then a new attempt for
a reconstruction could be worthwhile.
But generally "correcting" a given design may be interesting for alternate history fans, but not for those interested in aviation
history. Don't believe, that in some years someone may come up with the "true" design of the Rockwell XFV-12, because he
corrected it in a way, that it would achieve VTOL then ! Sometimes we have to accept, that a design was a failure, although
it was an authentic project. "Improving" such a design has nothing to do with history, which without doubt is the main interest
of this forum.

Exactly what I did. I used the RLM drawing under the Miranda's drawing to make it look like what is apprently was going to be like.
Maybe Miranda then tunes his sketch to same direction..as it is the known drawing of the bird in public.

 

[Zizi6785]

Is this a real project or just a fake kit?

 

[Michel Van]

Gotha P.60 C was real project at end of WW2

although this feature two engines vertical line up, one on top of fuselage and one direct under it on underside
this here show the two engines parallel on top of of fuselage, what give some advance for maintenance and lower landing gear.

but i don't now if this design feature are real on P.60C

 

[Zizi6785]

C-6 version is unknown for me. Is there any drawing about it?

 

[Avimimus]

The P.60c did exist and had two pilots (one behind the other, in a normal non-prone position). Most drawings I've seen of the P.60 show one engine on top and one below the fuselage.


The fact that the box calls it the 'raptor' doesn't inspire confidence (It wasn't developed enough to get a nickname). So, I'm leaning towards post-war creativity for most of the details in this kit (but I could be wrong).

 

[Zizi6785]

The back of the box:

 

[blackkite]

Is this a original drawing?

And...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgn49NOaIas

 

[Vladimir]

Hi,
here is interesting COMPARISONS OF THE Horten 229 AND THE Gotha P-60 ALL-WING AIRPLANES: http://www.luft46.com/gotha/229vsp60.html

 

[hesham]

Hi,
here is interesting COMPARISONS OF THE Horten 229 AND THE Gotha P-60 ALL-WING AIRPLANES: http://www.luft46.com/gotha/229vsp60.html

Nice find Vladimir,and from AW;

http://archive.aviationweek.com/image/spread/19451002/87/2

 

[Vladimir]

Cool! Thanks hesham!

 

[Flitzer]

A few profiles:

 

[Basil]

Hesham,

thx for the aviationweek link; this is a great find because it is certainly based on interrogation reports and is therefore a kind of original source.

 

[hesham]

In my files,

there was anther variant for Gotha P.60,rather than A,B & C versions.

 

[Zizi6785]

A new fake kit again, P.60D-1

 

[hesham]

A new fake kit again, P.60D-1

No Zizi,I meant a real variant.

 

[Zizi6785]

A new fake kit again, P.60D-1

No Zizi,I meant a real variant.

I want to see the original drawing!

 

[hesham]

No drawing,but just a different variant.

 

[Zizi6785]

No drawing,but just a different variant.

Yes, a fake variant

 

[hesham]

No drawing,but just a different variant.

Yes, a fake variant

What,I said a real one,based on P.60A.

 

[hesham]

In my files,

there was anther variant for Gotha P.60,rather than A,B & C versions.

It's Gotha P.60R,a two-seat flying wing interceptor and heavy day fighter,a design modification
of the P.60A fighter that had one HWK 509A rocket engine,mounted between the two BMW 003
turbojets,which could be installed either over or under the large wings.

 

[newsdeskdan]

In my files,

there was anther variant for Gotha P.60,rather than A,B & C versions.

It's Gotha P.60R,a two-seat flying wing interceptor and heavy day fighter,a design modification
of the P.60A fighter that had one HWK 509A rocket engine,mounted between the two BMW 003
turbojets,which could be installed either over or under the large wings.

I don't know what your files consist of but there was no P-60R. And only the P-60 B and P-60 C were considered for installation of rockets. This is my source (see attached).

 

[hesham]

OK my dear Dan,

give me up tomorrow to find my source,and send the evidence.

 

[hesham]

The Gotha P.60R is a real Project,the source;

Jet Planes of the Third Reich - The Secret Projects-volume one

 

[newsdeskdan]

The Gotha P.60R is a real Project,the source;

Jet Planes of the Third Reich - The Secret Projects-volume one

Griehl got some things right and some things demonstrably wrong. The period documents I've seen suggest to me that he got this one wrong. The project brochure is clear (see my earlier post) - you have the P-60 A, the P-60 B, the P-60 B mit R-Gerat, the P-60 C and the P-60 C mit R-Gerat. Even if the 'A' had been proposed with supplemental rocket engines, wouldn't it have just been the 'P-60 A mit R-Gerat'?

 

[hesham]

OK my dear Dan,

and it's not a big mistake,we can say P.60B-R or P.60C-R,but he meant there was
a real version of P.60 with rocket engine plus jets,and that's the point.

 

[newsdeskdan]

OK my dear Dan,

and it's not a big mistake,we can say P.60B-R or P.60C-R,but he meant there was
a real version of P.60 with rocket engine plus jets,and that's the point.

Certainly there was a P-60 B mit R-Gerat and P-60 C mit R-Gerat. I was leafing through Justo's Ultimate Flying Wings of the Luftwaffe the other day and there are a whole host of different P-60 types in there, including a P-60 A with rocket engines, although the drawing was marked 'speculative'. One thing I can say is that Justo is on the money with the two-seater P-60 C. It appears that between the issuing of the brochure I've got in mid-March 1945 (where it is a tandem arrangement two-seater) and the assessment of the submitted designs for the night and bad weather competition in late March, the P-60 C grows another seat and becomes the more familiar three-seater arrangement.

 

[Jemiba]

A "P-60 B (or C) mit R-Gerät" to my opinion can be turned erroneously into a "P-60R" quite
quickly. I once read, that the Fw 190 F-8/R3 (two Mk 103 guns under the wings) was
reffered to as "190R3" by pilots and technical stuff.
Maybe here something similar happened ...