Airplanes I've never seen before (from old magazines)...

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
14,769
Location
Orange County, California
I have absolutely no interest in a Natter replica, but something in that spirit, maybe with prone pilot position... would be a hoot!

Yeah, I'll just drop this right here. Towed takeoff, but prone pilot. Please note the maximum dive speed for which it was engineered, in the link below.

blohm_bv-40.jpg

Blohm und Voss BV-40 "Glide Fighter"
 

Aesquire

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2014
Messages
3,098
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
Ok.....

In that case I'll suggest the Ohka Model 22, a turbojet that used a Hirth 4 cyl. engine ( licence built ) to spin a compressor, with fuel injected into the compressed air to produce thrust. I can see this being fairly easy to build in a home shop, and even the engine isn't beyond a clever home experimenter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishikawajima_Tsu-11
Might be a bit more difficult to find a Betty to launch from. There is a reason I prefer landing gear.

MXY7_Ohka_Cherry_Blossom_Baka_Ohka-3bs.jpg

The Smithsonian has done a lovely restoration on a Model 22.
https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/kugisho-mxy7-ohka-cherry-blossom-22

1280px-Yokosuka_Ohka_Model_22.svg.jpg
 

Aesquire

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2014
Messages
3,098
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
I have absolutely no interest in a Natter replica, but something in that spirit, maybe with prone pilot position for vertical takeoff, would be a hoot!
That means the pilot would be standing up at launch and all G forces would be trying to drain the blood from his brain.
Which, come to think of it, isn't a horrible idea, since the pilot would be unconscious as the Natter broke up in flight. ;)

There are a few unsuccessful aircraft that might be fun to try to do a better replica and "prove" their viability... but Vertical takeoff rocket interceptors that are designed to break in 2 and have the pilot bail out for landing under a chute might not be one of them.

If it's really your preference I'd suggest RC control for the test flights.
 

FritzW

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2011
Messages
3,896
Location
Las Cruces, NM
Something about the BV-40 cockpit makes me think of a Star Wars fighter (a lot of Blohm und Voss stuff reminds me of Star Wars :gig: )

If I ever got serious about a prone airplane idea I'd start with the BV-40.
 

Riggerrob

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
2,336
Location
Canada
March, 1962 Flying:

View attachment 64677

Looks pretty hot.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Circa 1993, a new group tried to revive the Palomino as a kitplane. It had two seats in tandem and a much larger engine. There was a lot of talk about the Palomino kits during Oskosh 1993, but I never heard anything afterwards.
I packed a custom parachute for the test pilot. It included an extra D-Ring (US Navy pattern) because he did most of the test flights over the Pacific Ocean and he wanted to be able to quickly attach his harness to s helicopter rescue hoist.
 

Autodidact

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2009
Messages
4,513
Location
Oklahoma
OK, so here's the airshow routine: kiddie pools are relatively cheap, so you set one up out in the grass on the side of the runway opposite the crowd, and then you have a pickup truck with an elevating launch ramp and back it up to the kiddie pool and elevate the ramp, driver gets out and takes off running, "Natter" launches and disappears into the vertical distance and after a minute or two comes screaming down for a high speed pass, pull up to vertical/rolls and stuff, comes in and extends gear and lands, pops drag chute - ta da!
 

Twodeaddogs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
1,216
Location
Dunlavin, County Wicklow,Ireland
The "Natter" was interesting because the story of the failed test launch was, in one account, an opportunity for the pilot, who was under some kind of punishment detail, to redeem himself. Supposedly, he took off and was able to correctly detach the rocket portion and bale out, but struck or was struck by the rest of the airframe as he tried to bail out and fell to his death. Another account has it that he was hit by his canopy and fell back to earth in the cockpit, unconscious, to his death. Either way, it was a hell of a way to pay for a punishment.
 

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
14,769
Location
Orange County, California
The "Natter" was interesting because the story of the failed test launch was, in one account, an opportunity for the pilot, who was under some kind of punishment detail, to redeem himself. Supposedly, he took off and was able to correctly detach the rocket portion and bale out, but struck or was struck by the rest of the airframe as he tried to bail out and fell to his death. Another account has it that he was hit by his canopy and fell back to earth in the cockpit, unconscious, to his death. Either way, it was a hell of a way to pay for a punishment.
Every account I've read of the sole piloted Natter launch - and I have two books dedicated to the Natter alone - is that the canopy came unlatched during the vertical launch and the pilot was struck by part of same departing the airframe and likely knocked unconscious. He never left the cockpit, and was killed when the airplane impacted the ground at the end of its ballistic trajectory. I've never heard the first version, although it sounds suspiciously like the end of the pilot of the Northrop XP-79B.
 

Aesquire

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2014
Messages
3,098
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
http://www.luft46.com/misc/sackas6.html

I'm willing to bet that not only will the folk here point out what was wrong, they'd tell us how to do it better.

If you read the text, it's a good example of adding ballast by reflex instead of careful thought. After adding steel sheet to the trailing edge control surfaces they had trouble raising the tail? How many aircraft have hit the big fail after X pound of ballast was added to the tail?

On the Natter matter.... One successful test flight might have changed my mind on it's desirability. At least the jet powered Japanese Ohka was flown. A Me-163 "replica" of lighter construction and a pusher prop instead of the often exploding rocket engine?
 

BJC

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
14,335
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
Anyone remember a small, single seat, high wing, all aluminum, probably powered by a 65 HP Continental one-of-a-kind homebuilt that was featured in, IIRC, Air Progress circa 1962. It was designed and built by an airline pilot, and had plates on the wing tips.

Any info or photos will be appreciated.


BJC
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
16,219
Location
Memphis, TN
Looks like a Ed Fisher answer.

Looks like the designer was a racer.

1949 = 1pClwM; 85hp Continental C-85. Midget racer Screaming Meany (p: Carl Thompson) [N1210M].

Mighty Mite c.1957 = 1pChwM; 85hp Continental C-85; span: 16'0" length: 17'0" v: 165/150/50 range: 300. Fully aerobatic. [N5M].

Poncho 195? = 1pM midget racer. Proved too tricky for competition flying. Forward fuselage incorporated in Mighty Mite.
 
Top