Heinkel He343

[blackkite]

Hi! I have two images for HEINKEL He343.
Anyone please show me which one is correct.

 

[Maveric]

Heinkel He.343V-2

 

[Maveric]

...both, your first drawing and your pic was the He.343V-2 and the other the V-3.

 

[blackkite]

Thanks Maveric.

 

[Johnbr]

Years ago I so photo of it.

 

[Flitzer]

A couple of model pics.

 

[Justo Miranda]

Hi

 

[Justo Miranda]

Hi

 

[Wurger]

Awesome ;D !!

 

[Maveric]

Great Justo...

 

[richard]

Thank you a lot !
What is the reliability for the Nr 7 and Nr 10 ?
At least ,the Nr 7 seems to be a what-if ? , don't it ?

 

[Justo Miranda]

Hypothetical

 

[richard]

Both ?

 

[Justo Miranda]

Yes

 

[blackkite]

Thanks Justo. Wonderful!!!
This one seems to be hypothetical or fake for me because we had never seen 3-side view of such simple podded engine concept and this concept was too advanced concept at the day.

 

[Wurger]

Hi Blackie, I`m afraid you`re not correct. The pod arrangements aren`t hyphotetical, they are ok. Germany was well acquainted with such technology at the time.

 

[blackkite]

Hi Wurger!
I have been thinking that this podded engine mount technology is Boeing's invention.
Of course German engineers invented many great aeronautical technology, such as swept back wing, forward swept wing, delta wing, flying wing, variable geometry wing, helicopter, some king of area rule, axial compressor jet engine, rocket engine, pulse jet engine, missile, space plane, etc.

 

[Wurger]

Hi Blackie, if memory serves me well it was George Schairer`s visit to Germany in the immediate post-war that "enlighted" him. I don`t have them with me, but please search for the initial B-47 stratojet bomber sketches. They are, from an aerodinamically point of view, backward. Straight wings and tailplanes, fuselage mounted turbojets and very chuby. After his return the B-47 sketches featured astounding differences.

 

[blackkite]

Hi! There is a opinion that Boeing's engineer Edward C. Wells and Robert Jewett invented "engines suspended in pods" layout.
Anyway Boeing's engineers discovered several merits of this layout.

 

[Stargazer]

Justo, once again your contribution is awesome!!! Are you the artist on all of these, or only the latter part?

What strikes me on the scale model shown in Blackkite's photo is not so much the engine arrangement as the ridiculously small size of the engines...

 

[blackkite]

Oh Star! Good point. How small is it?

 

[Justo Miranda]

Primary source

 

[blackkite]

Thanks Justo! I will try to get this book.
And how about following books?

 

[iverson]

Thanks Justo! I will try to get this book.
And how about following books?

Titles like the ones you show are just compilations of free internet articles printed out on a printer. A scam really.

 

[Skyraider3D]

And how about following books?

Indeed, avoid at all costs... these are print-outs from Wikipedia and a total scam!

 

[airman]

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor%C3%ADa:Aeronaves_de_Heinkel

B)

 

[blackkite]

Thanks airman! What language is it? ???

 

[Antonio]

Thanks airman! What language is it?

That's Spanish...if you need translation just PM me

 

[blackkite]

Thanks Antonio! I imagine that it's Latin area's language, but I can't identify exactly. ;D

 

[airman]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel

Heinkel and his airplanes !


More cool ! B)

 

[Justo Miranda]

German pod engines -post-1

 

[Justo Miranda]

German pod engines -post-2

 

[Justo Miranda]

German pod engines -post-3

 

[blackkite]

Wow!!! Thanks Justo. German engineers are great. :

 

[Jemiba]

As Justos posts already have shown, Junkers did quite a lot of research in the field of
fitting jet engines on pods and otherwise. Another example was the EF 68, which actually
wasn't a design for an asymmetrical aircraft, but just a test of two different pods. With
regards to the EF/EFo series I would like to remind, that not every number can be regarded
as a project in our sense, but often only as test for a configuration for just one design.
For example, the Ju 287 was covered by a whole range of EF-numbers.

 

[Wurger]

Thanks, Justo! An image is worth a thousand words.

 

[Artie Bob]

Based on the data I have seen, the Junkers EF and EF0 series were two quite separate groups of projects and each had their own numbering sequence, i.e., EF 101 would follow EF 100, but if there had been an EF0 101 it would have no sequential relation to the EF numbers. Possibly a good subject for a thread on Secret Projects would be a listing of the JFM "J", EF, and EFO series.
Best Regards,
Artie Bob

 

[airman]

Wow!!! Thanks Justo. German engineers are great. :

Great ?! Very genious !!! B)

 

[Jemiba]

According to Wolfgang Wagners book "Hugo Junkers. Pionier der Luftfahrt - seine Flugzeuge",
which contains a lot, although not all EF/EFo model numbers, those designation were used
for windtunnel models. It is stated, that from number 50 onwards the "EF" designation was used,
instead of "EFo". If that's true, it was just a change of designation, not two independent rows of
developments.
The listed models support this statement, as there are no "EFo" models with numbers above 49 and
no "EF" ones with numbers below 50.

 

[toura]

how are you Jens.
I don't understand !!
Look at my documents !! 2 times ef 30 ? and ef 23 to 50 ?
the 2 doc from "Hugo jUNKERS airplanes site"
Bye