PDA

View Full Version : Replica Horton built. Horton hear's a who.



Waldo.Pepper
04-09-2009, 09:48 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v516/WaldoPepper/book/HortonReplica.jpg

Falcke
04-10-2009, 06:00 AM
Was the Horten originally even intended to be a stealth fighter?

JtD
04-10-2009, 06:13 AM
I don't think so.

CUJO_1970
04-10-2009, 06:38 AM
Cool to see Northrup doing this, building a full-scale replica of the Go-229. Can't wait to see it.

Would just love to see one fly again though.

Xiolablu3
04-10-2009, 07:08 AM
Ecellent, cant wait to see the prog. Surely it will have fly-by-wire systems to control it?

Arent conventional flying wings supposed to be really hard to control? As in the early Northrop big bombers from the 50's?

Metatron_123
04-10-2009, 07:26 AM
Great news! Wouldn't it be great if they did a 'flugwerk' job on this? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Heliopause
04-10-2009, 08:35 AM
Nice project!
Didn't Northrop receive an Horten flying wing shortly after the German surrender for examining?

Choctaw111
04-10-2009, 08:40 AM
Wow. All these new full size repros being made today are really something.

Kettenhunde
04-10-2009, 08:55 AM
Ecellent, cant wait to see the prog. Surely it will have fly-by-wire systems to control it?


Just because it is a flying wing does not mean it requires fly by wire or is unstable. The location of the CG in relation to the NP is the important relationship.

http://www.century-of-flight.f.../europe_interwar.htm (http://www.century-of-flight.freeola.com/Aviation%20history/flying%20wings/europe_interwar.htm)

All the best,

Crumpp

berg417448
04-10-2009, 09:17 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Ecellent, cant wait to see the prog. Surely it will have fly-by-wire systems to control it?

Arent conventional flying wings supposed to be really hard to control? As in the early Northrop big bombers from the 50's?


One like this was flying in 1942 with no fly by wire required:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi...at-Chino-Airshow.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Airshowfan-dot-com--by-Bernardo-Malfitano--Image-of-N9M-at-Chino-Airshow.jpg)

crucislancer
04-10-2009, 09:40 AM
Cool! I'll be sure to watch. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

DrHerb
04-10-2009, 11:09 AM
Check this out (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9SMQHzZp5k) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

TS_Sancho
04-10-2009, 11:24 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Ecellent, cant wait to see the prog. Surely it will have fly-by-wire systems to control it?

Arent conventional flying wings supposed to be really hard to control? As in the early Northrop big bombers from the 50's?

IIRC the XB49 (Northrops wing design) had a problem with instability in the yaw axis which was deemed unsatisfactory by the USAF for a bombing platform.
I wonder if this replica will be capable of flight? I'm highly sceptacle of the premise of the Horton having been designed with stealth in mind. There seems to be a bit of a pseudo-history "secret nazi death machines that would have won the second world war but did not" fad going on at the moment and the bit at the end reminding everyone to tune into the writers own Hitler Stealth fighter production on the National Geographic channel. I'm not trying to discredit the show before seeing it, but sensationalist historical television is why so many people believe that 50 caliber machine guns killed Tiger tanks and the P51 Mustang won the war.
I have been of the impression that Kelly Johnsons A12/SR71 was the first aircraft designed with reduced eadar visibilty in mind. In fairness I have also heard that the design team wasnt interested in reduced RCS, that it was a happy surprise once the plane flew (although I dont know why else they would cant the vertical stabilizer inboard?).
Regardless of any other nonsence, regarding the Horton what an absolutley fun project to be a part of.

Xiolablu3
04-10-2009, 01:15 PM
Yeah, I understand that flying wings DID fly before fly-by-wire, but I gathered they were pretty unsafe and would never pass todays safety laws without some kind of flying 'aid'.

I could be wrong however. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The Horten wasnt designed to be stealthy, it was just accidently found to be that way because of the shape (see the 'hopeless diamond' re: stealth)

Waldo.Pepper
04-10-2009, 01:39 PM
Guys I think that maybe some are reading more into this replica effort than those involed with the project intended.

I didn't see anything in the single page article that said that this replica was air-worthy. I don't think that there is a person in the world who would, seriously, be willing to risk their life in the replica.

I think that it is being tested to investigate its radar cross section. (I.E. how stealthy the plane may have been.) Furthermore, they intend on using period radars that it would have faced.

If I speculate some more, I think that this means that they intend to test it out against an SCR-584 set, which for its time was an extremely advanced set. Perhaps suspended from a crane, or something like that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCR-584

I speculate that this is the set that they might be using, because it is one set that it would have faced (often). But more importantly because it is a set that I know some are still operable. I cannot think of another set from the war that is still operating anywhere. Though I suppose that it would be easy enough, possible, to simulate a wartime set, and do it within a hanger.

mortoma
04-10-2009, 08:41 PM
It's truly amazing that they give so much credit to the German designers of the day. Yes, German scientists and engineers were good and in some ways ahead of their time but it's just too much to even hint that the Germans were intentionally trying to create a radar stealthy aircraft in the design of the Horten flying wing. Probably would have been stealthy but that was purely coincidental and was not part of their original intent. Let's not give them too much credit, puleeese!!

Kettenhunde
04-10-2009, 09:19 PM
Yeah, I understand that flying wings DID fly before fly-by-wire, but I gathered they were pretty unsafe and would never pass todays safety laws without some kind of flying 'aid'.


Flying wings are no more unstable than any other aircraft. The key in determining stability of a design is the relationship between the Neutral Point and the Center of Gravity.

Tailless aircraft are a departure from conventional design. It was not until the 1940's that our knowledge of stability and control really began to grow. That is why Flying Wings might be perceived as being more unstable. They simply were radial design departures for which there was little practical knowledge. That makes a ripe situation for accidents.

All the best,

Crumpp

Feathered_IV
04-10-2009, 09:22 PM
Northrop Grumman eh? I hope the Horten family sue them for copyright. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

crucislancer
04-10-2009, 09:28 PM
Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
Northrop Grumman eh? I hope the Horten family sue them for copyright. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

LOL!

Xiolablu3
04-11-2009, 08:40 AM
Originally posted by crucislancer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
Northrop Grumman eh? I hope the Horten family sue them for copyright. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

LOL! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Classic!

Loco-S
04-11-2009, 11:47 AM
I dont know if any of you know this, but one of the Horten Brothers went to argentina at the end of the war, and made several "Nurflugels"..also there is a company making a remake of it and also restored one of the originals built in Argentina..

http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurflugel/nurflugel.html

http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurfl...-10/body_pul-10.html (http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurflugel/Horten_Nurflugels/PUL-10/body_pul-10.html)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXdTMswP19Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...Dd1w&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ah_Oa-Dd1w&feature=related)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8in4nEyiNA

JtD
04-13-2009, 12:02 AM
The Me-163 is pretty much a flying wing, too, and was in service in WW2. It also had good handling characteristics.

At the time the Horton flying wing was built, Germany needed a lot of things. One thing they didn't need, was a stealth aircraft. I'm not aware that Allied radar ranged all across Germany to inform the escort fighters of the position of German interceptors.

buchtik
04-13-2009, 01:54 AM
I've read somewhere that the Go-229 could be used for testing the stealth systems.Anyway, this is a nice plane and it is good idea to bring it to life.

ElAurens
04-13-2009, 06:13 PM
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/3936/n9m.jpg

Northrop N9M.

First flight, 1942.

No computer necessary.

Col.BBQ
04-14-2009, 01:46 PM
It doesn't have to be primarily stealthy against radar. I feel that the this plane was built to hamper visual detection from ground gunners with its low cross section and high speed.

VW-IceFire
04-14-2009, 04:45 PM
Its very interesting that they are doing this.

I very much doubt that the Go-229 was meant to be stealth...I had thought the design was mostly aimed around being more streamlined and being able to go faster.

The Mosquito was also somewhat "stealthy" for a WWII plane as the wood absorbed a great deal of the radar energy directed at them. Nothing on the level of modern day RCS reduction but an interesting byproduct of trying to make an all wood plane. Same with the 229...although I guess the cross section would be smaller wouldn't it!

I suspect many of the Russian WWII fighters due to their wooden construction would be similarly difficult to detect on period radar.

Viper2005_
04-14-2009, 06:22 PM
AFAIK, the Horten IX was designed with some stealthy features after it was realised that a wooden primary structure with no vertical surfaces would give it a fairly low RCS anyway.

The main thing that they did was put some carbon in the glue to make it radar absorbent.

However, I suspect that the real reason for doing this would have been propaganda, as it would obviously have increased pilot confidence, whilst a clearly visible production procedure of putting carbon into the glue would have been verifiable by those pilots through the grape vine.

It would also have inevitably produced some leaks to the effect that the aeroplane was stealthy, which might have diverted allied resources slightly.

I suspect that the aircraft will not be found to be stealthy from the front by modern standards because the engine compressor faces will be visible to radar.

However, against ground-based radar it might have done fairly well if flying at high altitude...

As has been pointed out, you don't need FBW to make flying wings work, provided that you do your homework. The Hortens had a pretty good track record; their designs flew, though they were not without some problems. The Horten IX/Go-229 itself did actually fly. The prototype's crash was due to engine failure AFAIK...

Bremspropeller
04-15-2009, 09:40 AM
Arent conventional flying wings supposed to be really hard to control?

No, except you're flying a Northrop shizzle-dizzle hole-in-the-ground-izzle.

PanzerAce
04-15-2009, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:


The main thing that they did was put some carbon in the glue to make it radar absorbent.


That was the big reason the plane had a lower RCS than expected, but it was not intentional, they just needed to make the glue that way to make sure it would stay together.