PDA

View Full Version : Friend for Lerche



Spectre1968
02-10-2007, 04:20 PM
So when can we have one of these then http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://www.luft46.com/ghart/ghtrb-2.jpg

RCAF_Irish_403
02-10-2007, 04:55 PM
LOL

Don't give 'em any ideas http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

I think i saw that thing on a History Channel program about what WW2 would've been like in 1946

stalkervision
02-10-2007, 05:28 PM
Getting greedy now huh? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Krt_Bong
02-10-2007, 05:39 PM
Sooo mebbe that Lerche wasnt so far fetched after all. Better hope the Bearing seal dont blow in that contraption..... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

FritzGryphon
02-10-2007, 06:26 PM
I'll bet those wheel fairings make it at least 100km/h faster.

Viper2005_
02-10-2007, 06:36 PM
It's an interesting idea, but have you considered the gyroscopic implications? Not to mention the P-factor associated with trying to get lift out of the poor thing.

There are also obvious issues with tip Mach (look at the intake design), and of course the optimisation of the spanwise twist distribution for the extremely wide range of advance ratios that such a design would have to deal with.

Pilot escape would have been an interesting issue.

Without wishing to rain on anybody's parade, the Lerche strikes me as being more sensible for many reasons. This thing looks like a total deathtrap.

Since the tipjet are almost certainly either pulsejets or ramjets, starting would probably be a whole lot of fun...

How does the pilot get into and out of his seat btw? Can you imagine a scramble?

BlitzPig_DDT
02-10-2007, 06:36 PM
The Lerche isn't that far fetched. The only thing holding it back was power. The rest of what 1C:MG/RRG did to it was more than possible back then and would have been done had development continued on it.

I suspect they overdid it slightly on the power, but otherwise, it's really not as unbelieveable as many like to think. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BlitzPig_DDT
02-10-2007, 06:40 PM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
It's an interesting idea, but have you considered the gyroscopic implications? Not to mention the P-factor associated with trying to get lift out of the poor thing.

There are also obvious issues with tip Mach (look at the intake design), and of course the optimisation of the spanwise twist distribution for the extremely wide range of advance ratios that such a design would have to deal with.

Pilot escape would have been an interesting issue.

Without wishing to rain on anybody's parade, the Lerche strikes me as being more sensible for many reasons. This thing looks like a total deathtrap.

Since the tipjet are almost certainly either pulsejets or ramjets, starting would probably be a whole lot of fun...

How does the pilot get into and out of his seat btw? Can you imagine a scramble?

I always wondered how they planned to keep the fuse from rolling with the rotors, despite powering them at the tips, the friction drag alone would torque that thing around. The V and H stabs wouldnt be effective until a good bit of airspeed was attained. Even though there would be high flow during lift off, I'd suspect most of the weather vaining effect would be lost to the massive propwash.

Plus, was it supposed to fly at a 45* angle or something?

Does look really cool though. I'd like to see more research done on such a design (similar to what 1C:MG/RRG did for the Lerche) just for fun and curiosity's sake. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The-Pizza-Man
02-10-2007, 09:04 PM
Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Viper2005_:
It's an interesting idea, but have you considered the gyroscopic implications? Not to mention the P-factor associated with trying to get lift out of the poor thing.

There are also obvious issues with tip Mach (look at the intake design), and of course the optimisation of the spanwise twist distribution for the extremely wide range of advance ratios that such a design would have to deal with.

Pilot escape would have been an interesting issue.

Without wishing to rain on anybody's parade, the Lerche strikes me as being more sensible for many reasons. This thing looks like a total deathtrap.

Since the tipjet are almost certainly either pulsejets or ramjets, starting would probably be a whole lot of fun...

How does the pilot get into and out of his seat btw? Can you imagine a scramble?

I always wondered how they planned to keep the fuse from rolling with the rotors, despite powering them at the tips, the friction drag alone would torque that thing around. The V and H stabs wouldnt be effective until a good bit of airspeed was attained. Even though there would be high flow during lift off, I'd suspect most of the weather vaining effect would be lost to the massive propwash.

Plus, was it supposed to fly at a 45* angle or something?

Does look really cool though. I'd like to see more research done on such a design (similar to what 1C:MG/RRG did for the Lerche) just for fun and curiosity's sake. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think the rotors/wings would have rotated to be fixed parallel to the fuselage so that it flew like a conventional aircraft(more or less) once it had taken off. How it would take off though is the big problem.

Badsight-
02-10-2007, 09:28 PM
Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
The rest of what 1C:MG/RRG did to it was more than possible back then and would have been done had development continued on it. naaaw , i dont believe that for a second

development on a similer VTOL carried on after WW2 in peacetime US . project canned after prototype crashes

the Lerch required flight surface control beyond 1940's tech

Viper2005_
02-10-2007, 11:26 PM
Pogo was cancelled because of the impracticability of landing such aeroplanes on ships at sea.

Lerche faced a far less demanding takeoff and landing environment, and of course by the time it was put on the drawing board pilots were considered fairly expendable.

I see no particular problem with the Lerche other than the fact that its accident rate would have been awfully high.

The biggest problem I have with the model in game is the unrealistic angles through which the pilot can rotate his head given his position.

DuxCorvan
02-11-2007, 08:04 AM
Simply put, if the concept works and it is so good and effective, where are the Lerches of 2007? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Philipscdrw
02-11-2007, 08:09 AM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
Simply put, if the concept works and it is so good and effective, where are the Lerches of 2007? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
The Harrier. :-)

Flying_Nutcase
02-11-2007, 08:14 AM
I'd like to see the pilot walk straight after flying that puppy. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/crackwhip.gif

Spectre1968
02-11-2007, 08:21 AM
How to get in and out (but not in a hurry)

http://www.luft46.com/ghart/ghtrb-1.jpg

Here`s one we captured http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://www.luft46.com/ghart/ghtrb-8.jpg

tigertalon
02-11-2007, 08:28 AM
Ah, the Fw Triebflugel.


Originally posted by The-Pizza-Man:
I think the rotors/wings would have rotated to be fixed parallel to the fuselage so that it flew like a conventional aircraft(more or less) once it had taken off. How it would take off though is the big problem.

I don't think the wings would stop in a fixed position (since they are curved and would induce much drag). They'd probably just pitch into a more favourable position and still keep rotating, like an ordinary prop:

http://www.luft46.com/ghart/ghtrb-6.jpg


Personally I'd rather see this then lerche.

Krizz1972
02-11-2007, 08:41 AM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
Simply put, if the concept works and it is so good and effective, where are the Lerches of 2007? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://www.luft46.com/misc/wes1003.html

BlitzPig_DDT
02-11-2007, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
Simply put, if the concept works and it is so good and effective, where are the Lerches of 2007? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Sometimes technology is right for an era but not for a later one. There are some damned impressive steam cars, for example, but we don't see them today.

The F-15 has a thrust to weght ratio of >1. It just needs a short take off roll and then it can more or less do what the Lerche does, and actually outclimb it.

In fact, climbing fast is generally a way to get blown up now adays, unlike in WWII. But if you just need to get airborne and to alt quickly before heading to target, all the modern fighters do it. VTOL as point defense is an outdated philosphy.

VTOL as ground support however, isn't, but the Harrier (as mentioned) can carry more ordnance by acting like a regular aircraft when and where possible, or using STOL. Again, someting the Lerche could not do.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Choctaw111
02-11-2007, 03:05 PM
I have always liked the Treibflugel. I personally like this more than the Lerche. It looks much more scary http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif. Maybe someday.

TopGunBkk
02-12-2007, 01:13 AM
I think this game is getting like some sci-fi show
They wasn't used only as experimental.
So therefore u shouldn't put them in any historical missions.

Like the stupid V-2 65% of the time they failed to hit targets and blew up at the launch sites.
Thats why they never work in the game either
lol!


The Germans were idiots.
Complete fools look at some old films
U see what I'm saying is true.

www.youtube.com (http://www.youtube.com)

look under history

zecek51
02-12-2007, 01:23 AM
When are we going to get more aircraft that actually flew i.e: the meteor, the vampire, the barracuda, the swordfish etc. there seems to be a definite bias towards German fantasy projects that never even made it off the drawing board.
Am I alone in feeling there is a marked lack of British WW2 aircraft in the game?

BBB_Hyperion
02-12-2007, 01:33 AM
Well license fees might be an issue http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I personally would like more futuristic stuff.

These look interesting.

http://www.luft46.com/mrart/mr119.html
http://www.luft46.com/mrart/mr119-1.jpg

http://www.luft46.com/dsart/ds500.html
http://www.luft46.com/dsart/ds500-3.jpg

From the concepts this is intresting
http://www.luft46.com/oddities/mep1090.html

Spectre1968
02-12-2007, 01:46 AM
Originally posted by zecek51:
When are we going to get more aircraft that actually flew i.e: the meteor, the vampire, the barracuda, the swordfish etc. there seems to be a definite bias towards German fantasy projects that never even made it off the drawing board.
Am I alone in feeling there is a marked lack of British WW2 aircraft in the game?

Meteor, Vampire and Swordfish Yes

Barracuda is far too Ugly http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

OMG The Thunderbirds were Nazis
http://www.luft46.com/mrart/mra6-3.jpg

BlitzPig_DDT
02-12-2007, 08:28 AM
http://www.luft46.com/junkers/3bjgap.gif

http://www.luft46.com/junkers/jugap1.gif

Unnamed Junkers Ground Attack plane FTW! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Not sure about guns, but give it some MK-103s (or at LEAST 108s), and the Blitz's divebombing sight and it would ROCK.

Failing that, I'd like to see the Ar-234-D model, which is what we have (the Blitz), 'cept with HeS-011A engines. No 3D modeling necessary, just an engine boost. AND, a loadout option to put MK-103s on the outer bomb pylons. We already have that for the FW-190A8, and there is precedent as a gunpod was planned (as was the D version using the Henschel Hirth engines).

And.... it would be nice to see the HeS-011s stuffed into the 229 as well for a '46 version. And it should have 4 MK-108's rather than 2 MK-103s anyway, and it should also have an ordnance capability (those were the intent). The bombr rack could be hideaway even (once the iron is dropped, the rack could retract and cover up).

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

Spectre1968
02-12-2007, 09:27 AM
Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
http://www.luft46.com/junkers/3bjgap.gif

http://www.luft46.com/junkers/jugap1.gif

Unnamed Junkers Ground Attack plane FTW! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Not sure about guns, but give it some MK-103s (or at LEAST 108s), and the Blitz's divebombing sight and it would ROCK.

Failing that, I'd like to see the Ar-234-D model, which is what we have (the Blitz), 'cept with HeS-011A engines. No 3D modeling necessary, just an engine boost. AND, a loadout option to put MK-103s on the outer bomb pylons. We already have that for the FW-190A8, and there is precedent as a gunpod was planned (as was the D version using the Henschel Hirth engines).

And.... it would be nice to see the HeS-011s stuffed into the 229 as well for a '46 version. And it should have 4 MK-108's rather than 2 MK-103s anyway, and it should also have an ordnance capability (those were the intent). The bombr rack could be hideaway even (once the iron is dropped, the rack could retract and cover up).

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

Correct me if I am Wrong but if you move the engine from the wing roots to inbetween the tail unit you would have an A-10.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v435/POLISH_PILOT/maybea10-1.jpg
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/a-10-19990422-f-7910d-517-s.jpg

Maybe http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Did the germans make a 1000rpm 30mm Gatling gun

ploughman
02-12-2007, 09:33 AM
Spooky, that's one German napkin with foresight.

BlitzPig_DDT
02-12-2007, 09:38 AM
That's why the artists impression has the sharkmouth on it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Badass looking plane anyway ya slice it though. I'd LOVE to have that in the game.

But, if you look at the Ar-234B... Jet powered, 2 jet engines, (often painted green, but n/m), ground attack dedicated, large payload, able to level bomb or dive bomb, has a nav computing system that points to the next way point, has an Instrument Landing System, AND a CCIP (Constantly Calculated Impact Point).

That is a bloody A-10, 1944 edition! lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

flyboy_112th
02-12-2007, 09:57 AM
Spectre, that's exactly what I was thinking!

AKA_TAGERT
02-12-2007, 10:09 AM
Give em an inch, they want a mile

Spectre1968
02-12-2007, 10:40 AM
Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:
That's why the artists impression has the sharkmouth on it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Badass looking plane anyway ya slice it though. I'd LOVE to have that in the game.

But, if you look at the Ar-234B... Jet powered, 2 jet engines, (often painted green, but n/m), ground attack dedicated, large payload, able to level bomb or dive bomb, has a nav computing system that points to the next way point, has an Instrument Landing System, AND a CCIP (Constantly Calculated Impact Point).

That is a bloody A-10, 1944 edition! lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

ILS in 1944 nice

Perfect except the guns fire backwards