HOME | DD
CUTANGUS β SIDE VIEW OF HEAVY VTOL
Published: 2009-10-20 19:46:55 +0000 UTC; Views: 17512; Favourites: 100; Downloads: 1705
Redirect to original
Description
The same aircraft but in side view.Related content
Comments: 22
With all those rotor blades, I am guessing one would not want to bail out.
π: 0 β©: 0
So to land you point the nose, and start turning down the thrust? Hope they have rear view mirrors!
π: 0 β©: 0
Thanks very much for your appreciated comment. I'm surprised too by the utility of 3D Studio Max to do such technical representations.
π: 0 β©: 0
Don't discount inflight refueling as well as drop tanks extending the range.
The transition to a vertical landing from horizontal flight would be challenging but definitely not impossible.
π: 0 β©: 1
I do some numbers at an imaginary Soviet 1960's V.T.O.L. interceptor using four of the supreme 15.000 shp Kuznyetsov NK-12M (2.300 kg weight without propellers), and sadly concluded that, considering the vertical take off power-to-weight ratio, only a small fuel quantity can be carried on board, so only a brief interceptor flight was possible (useless as a long-range interceptor).
Only the use of external rocket assistance can help to put airborne more fuel load for a prolonged flight.
The other solution is, as you point out, the use of in flight refuelling just after the right height has been taken.
π: 0 β©: 0
How would you land such a beast?
Same way you would land a B-wing. Very carefully.
π: 0 β©: 0
It would have to land in a frame of some sort.
π: 0 β©: 0
Loved the thing the first time I saw the 'flying' image.
Um, just a few questions and such.
You've seen the images/data on such concept craft as the Heinkel 'Lerche'
[link]
Or the Focke-Wulf 'Triebflugel'
[link]
Just asking.
Um, so, my ideas/comments/suggestions?
Could the machine fly with three engines arraigned in a 'Y' type configuration? Thus allowing the rear gunner to be moved back into the forward cockpit, the Luftwaffe seemed to prefer to keep all their crew 'together' in the same pressurized compartment.
Reduce the crew to two and have the pilot lying prone and forward, as in the Lerche, and the gunner 'lying' almost flat and looking backwards. Have the 'back' of the machine sloping 'down' from the cockpit, thus allowing the rear gunner to have a much better view over the 'rear' deck while in flight.
Hope I haven't ranted and mumbled on too much. In all a wonderful piece of art that both inspires and 'looks' the part.
Cheers!
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks a lot for the comment.
Yes I knew both designs, and I love the TriebflΓΌgel a lot for his ingenuity (how to have a lot of ascensional power with only three little statojets).
The "Y" arrangement is equally valid, but I choose four because this number fits better with the slab-faced fuselage.
The big size allows for a seated pilot instead of prone piloting, that is good for long duration flights but bad for vertical landing.
π: 0 β©: 1
True, but four landing legs also lead to greater instability on the ground. I do believe the tests the Germans and the British did with '
Was just thinking a little out loud. Since it's a craft that can possibly 'hang' vertically, by strapping bombs to it you would have a wicked, and strange, 'Anti-Stuka'. With the pilot looking 'backwards', ala Arado Blitz, and dropping the bombs 'backwards' down the plane as it hovered stationary over its target.
Again, my mind wandering off into strange territory.
Cheers!
π: 0 β©: 0
Kind of reminds me of a prop driven missile in a way. I hope it has a good load of fuel with those four big engines.
I find your designs rather interesting in that they are so radical from the 'norm. They bring the same feeling that comes after seeing the anime 'Royal Air Space Force: Wings of Honneamise' only further down the time line and looking at a kind of Eurpoean theater of war instead.
π: 0 β©: 0
How would you land such a beast?
Overall it looks really awesome.
π: 0 β©: 1
In the rear end of each four engine pods, there is a big wheel leg under the tulip cover.
They came slowly from the sky pointing upwards, the tail turret gunner can see the land approaching.
I'm not discarding the idea that he, the tail gunner, can get control over trottle and stick in the last part of the flight, or simply can be done under automatic control, using a radioaltimeter and a gyroscope.
π: 0 β©: 1
I like the idea of the tail gunner being 'given' the stick by the pilot for the landings, though it'd suck if he had been shot up or something...
π: 0 β©: 0
