Thanks very much, folks – all those points about pressurisation and fatigue (etc.) strike me as convincing.
Besides pressurisation worries and bird-strikes on the plexiglass nose, another concern I might have is the clearance for the ventral air intake on take-off – I worry a real Miles SST would just have scooped up anything moveable on its runway.
I like the 'Napkinwaffe' point too and (although I may be biased here) I think the Miles SST makes contemporary transonics like (e.g.) the DFS 346 look a bit puny. With that said, the Miles design seems just too big a leap into the dark, especially for a company whose main expertise lay with training aircraft.
Cheers, 'Wingknut'.
 
Wingknut said:
Thanks very much, folks – all those points about pressurisation and fatigue (etc.) strike me as convincing.
Besides pressurisation worries and bird-strikes on the plexiglass nose, another concern I might have is the clearance for the ventral air intake on take-off – I worry a real Miles SST would just have scooped up anything moveable on its runway.
I like the 'Napkinwaffe' point too and (although I may be biased here) I think the Miles SST makes contemporary transonics like (e.g.) the DFS 346 look a bit puny. With that said, the Miles design seems just too big a leap into the dark, especially for a company whose main expertise lay with training aircraft.
Cheers, 'Wingknut'.

Hi,
Whittle was already working on a supersonic tubofan with re-heat at that time.
me thinks the swept wing design is circa 1945/1946
The Lockheed "Sloggard" or "Sluggard" supersonic airliner circa end of 1945
 
Hi,
here's my renders of a mi35 libellula:

04641-10976.jpg


i hope it will please you.

regards
 
Very nice render! The only thing that bugs me a bit is the choice of color. You want a different kind of green, with more yellow in it probably, and slightly darker.
 
3-view of the M.39B Libellula. A 5/8 scale flying model of this aircraft was flown in July 1943, pilot George H. Miles.
 

Attachments

  • Miles M39B.jpg
    Miles M39B.jpg
    357 KB · Views: 409
Hi!

Miles M.39b Libellula 3D-MODEL.
https://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/miles-m-39b-libellula-3d-model/1064986

And other projects.
 

Attachments

  • Libellula_heavy_bomber.jpg
    Libellula_heavy_bomber.jpg
    97 KB · Views: 573
  • Glider_Tug.jpg
    Glider_Tug.jpg
    81.4 KB · Views: 557
  • Airspeed Horsa.jpg
    Airspeed Horsa.jpg
    161 KB · Views: 541
GTX said:
Not sure how the Airspeed Horsa fits into this?
The second project is a glider tug which able to tow the Horsa. Please watch explanation of the second picture.
 
Miles Fleet Fighter tandem wing project and m-20
 

Attachments

  • Miles M.35 Libellula.jpg
    Miles M.35 Libellula.jpg
    720 KB · Views: 394
  • Miles M20 Fighter to Air Ministry Specification-14.pdf
    1.3 MB · Views: 52
:)Miles M.39B Libellula
General characteristics
Crew: 1
Length: 6.76 m
Wingspan: 11.43 m rear wing, front wing
Height: 2.82 m
Wing area: 17.42 m2 rear wing 5.73 forward wing
Aspect ratio: Front wing 10.1, Rear wing 7.5
Airfoil:
Front wing: NACA 23018 at root, NACA 2412 at tip
Rear wing: NACA 23021 at root, NACA 2415 at tip
Empty weight: 1,091 kg
Gross weight: 1,270 kg
Fuel capacity: 113.65 l
Sweepback on leading edge rear wing 21° 0′ 48″
Powerplant: 2 × de Havilland Gipsy Major IC inline piston engine, 140 hp (100 kW)
Maximum speed: 164 km/h
Stall speed: 95 km/h flaps down
Rate of climb: 5.6 m/s
Wing loading: 55 kg/m2
Power/mass: 0.16 kW/kg
 

Attachments

  • Milesm-35.jpg
    Milesm-35.jpg
    499.3 KB · Views: 134
  • Miles tandem wing project.jpg
    Miles tandem wing project.jpg
    182 KB · Views: 333
Robinson got it mostly correct about wing sweep.

We doubt if Miles early swept wings had anything to do with supersonic airflow.
Rather, swept wings provided two benefits: yaw stability and balance.
Swept wings place tip rudders farther aft of the centre of gravity, improving both yaw stability and yaw control.
Balance is aided by installing main wings aft of the centre of gravity. If you want a short fuselage, then you need to sweep wings.
Miles tandem wing/canards resemble Burt Rutan’s canards (Vari Viggen, Vari EZ, Long EZ, ARES, Solitaire motorglider, Beechcraft Starship, etc.) in planform. His first canard - Vari Viggen) had a straight trailing edge, but a massive cut-out for the propeller. The propeller and engine had to be mounted that far forward for balance. Rutan uses swept main wings to keep their lift aft of the centre of gravity (rear passenger’s belt buckle). Rutan achieves pitch stability by moving the centre of gravity ahead of the main wing and heavily-loading the canard. Sweep is doubly important with single pusher propellers (Republic Seabee and Sea Rey).
 
Last edited:
On the aerodynamics of the Miles Libellula tandem-wing aircraft concept, 1941 – 1947
Brian J Brinkworth FRAeS

https://www.aerosociety.com/publications/jah-on-the-aerodynamics-of-the-miles-libellula-tandem-wing-aircraft-concept-1941-1947/
 
Schneiderman said:
On the aerodynamics of the Miles Libellula tandem-wing aircraft concept, 1941 – 1947
Brian J Brinkworth FRAeS

https://www.aerosociety.com/publications/jah-on-the-aerodynamics-of-the-miles-libellula-tandem-wing-aircraft-concept-1941-1947/

Amazing find my dear Schneiderman.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    276.2 KB · Views: 165
  • 2.png
    2.png
    120.5 KB · Views: 149
  • 3.png
    3.png
    80 KB · Views: 125
  • 4.png
    4.png
    193.5 KB · Views: 114
  • 5.png
    5.png
    142.8 KB · Views: 130
  • 6.png
    6.png
    103 KB · Views: 140
Hi people, I am trying to find 3 views etc of the Boulton Paul P.99 as I wish to make an RC model of it. Is there anyone out there that can oblige? Stay safe in these tough times.
 
From Decollage Magazine.
 

Attachments

  • Décollage___le_magazine_de_[...]_bpt6k97676754_5.jpeg
    Décollage___le_magazine_de_[...]_bpt6k97676754_5.jpeg
    2.1 MB · Views: 111
Hi!

Miles M.39b Libellula 3D-MODEL.

And other projects.

Miles proposed a remarkably ambitious project, considering how difficult it was for the new glider/paratrooper forces to get anything special built.
Aside from gliders, the Air Ministry/Royal Air Force were stingy about building any equipment specifically for airborne troops. Shortages of tow-planes forced the RAF/USAAF to fly hundreds of DC-3/C-47s as tow-planes, when they were more valuable for dropping paratroopers. C-47 Dakota was the first RAF airplane with a door well-suited to dropping paratroopers.

See the book "Churchill's Spearhead" about development of equipment for airborne troops.
 
While looking for an unrelated item, I came across an interesting (for me) letter from G.H. Miles in a 1978 issue of Air Enthusiast (number 6).

It concerned a 1946 supersonic research aircraft with a capacity of 20 passengers. I attach the letter and a three-view layout that was with the correspondence.

I noticed the similarities to the drawings from Jemiba in Reply #22 submitted way back in 2010 and thought they might be of interest.
 

Attachments

  • Air_Enthusiast_6_1978_Miles letter 1.jpg
    Air_Enthusiast_6_1978_Miles letter 1.jpg
    689.3 KB · Views: 85
  • Air_Enthusiast_6_1978_Miles letter2.jpg
    Air_Enthusiast_6_1978_Miles letter2.jpg
    2 MB · Views: 118
Already in 1943 George Miles designed a 20 seat supersonic passenger aircraft, based on
the experiences with the "Libellulas". Powered by a group of jet engines in the rear fuselage,
fed by a ventral intake, the forward wing would have had a span of 13,7m, the rear wing of
22,3m, length 30,2m and MTOW 36 tons. Expected cruise speed was 1.2 Mach.
(from InterAvia April 1957)

A clearer view.
 

Attachments

  • 48-1.png
    48-1.png
    134.1 KB · Views: 81
The closest I’ve seen to this are in racing drones—-instead of the simple cruciform/plus sign configuration, the arms holding the blades now seem very like Miles’ early designs. I would think a good low canard of size, shoulder mount wing and T-tail would each have clean air to bite into, as it were.
 
From Aeroplane monthly 1990,issues 9 & 10.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    2.2 MB · Views: 37
  • 2.png
    2.png
    2.4 MB · Views: 31
  • 3.png
    3.png
    1.9 MB · Views: 33
  • 4.png
    4.png
    2.3 MB · Views: 31
  • 5.png
    5.png
    2.4 MB · Views: 29
  • 6.png
    6.png
    2.6 MB · Views: 33
  • 7.png
    7.png
    1.8 MB · Views: 39
  • 8.png
    8.png
    1.2 MB · Views: 40

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom