Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mikoyan99]

One of the aircraft from the second world war that really fascinated me is the Blohm and Voss BV-141 reconnaissance aircraft/light bomber. It's the only truly asymmetric aircraft to have flown:




It's estimated that around 15-30 of these aircraft were built, with further production cancelled in favour of the Fw-189. In the sources I have (unreferenced), it's stated that the aircraft never saw "operational" service, which I take to mean combat use. I find it hard to believe however that the Luftwaffe would not have used 30 perfectly serviceable aircraft operationally under wartime conditions; has anyone come across any contradictory reports, or shed any more light on their non-use?
-Matt

[Ass Eagle]

They had other priority's in 1940. Namely the FW190 use of the BMW engine. Also RLM said 'nope', so no combat use of the BV141.

[ANDYTOTHED]

The original prototypes had more conventional layouts, and apparently their handling was superb.
When this layout was selected however it adversely affected the handling. This coupled with ever more pressing need of the 801 engine, as stated by Ice, and overall skepticism lead to the aircraft only being used by evaluation squadrons.

[mikoyan99]

The original prototypes had more conventional layouts, and apparently their handling was superb.
When this layout was selected however it adversely affected the handling. This coupled with ever more pressing need of the 801 engine, as stated by Ice, and overall skepticism lead to the aircraft only being used by evaluation squadrons.

Not true. The layout was common to all BV-141 variants. I know why the aircraft didn't go into production, i'm curious as to why the 30 aircraft built were not deployed.

[Ass Eagle]

Maybe his wife didn't like it.. His cat peed on one.. or the fact that 85% of the B&V factory was now making Fw200's, and couldn't spare the manpower to make replacment parts for it. BUT THE BIGGEST FACT IS that RLM didn't give the BV141 it's okie dokie.

[mikoyan99]

Maybe his wife didn't like it.. His cat peed on one.. or the fact that 85% of the B&V factory was now making Fw200's, and couldn't spare the manpower to make replacment parts for it. BUT THE BIGGEST FACT IS that RLM didn't give the BV141 it's okie dokie.

Let me re-phrase my question then - why didn't the RLM clear the existing aircraft for use?

[ANDYTOTHED]

The original prototypes had more conventional layouts, and apparently their handling was superb.
When this layout was selected however it adversely affected the handling. This coupled with ever more pressing need of the 801 engine, as stated by Ice, and overall skepticism lead to the aircraft only being used by evaluation squadrons.

Not true. The layout was common to all BV-141 variants. I know why the aircraft didn't go into production, i'm curious as to why the 30 aircraft built were not deployed.

woops, I meant that the original design had a conventional layout, but that was changed to allow the gunner a larger field of fire. This affected the aircraft's handling adversely.

[LuseKofte]

@Ice if you loose patience do not answere, I am getting really fed up about all the smartass coments popping up around the site lately. We do not want this kind of comunication.
You do obviously not know the answer so do not answer.

@miko Having a operational airplane means a lot of logistic, I can not understand why they wherent used in training, maby they canibalism the engine and aluminium, but getting them operationally at the front meant tons of spare parts and trained mechanics.

At everyone else, beeing an smartass in this site do not impress anyone, what is more we do not want any here. We want a calm breeze stay in here.
WTF is happening every xmas. Too much freetime?

[mikoyan99]

woops, I meant that the original design had a conventional layout, but that was changed to allow the gunner a larger field of fire. This affected the aircraft's handling adversely.

Do you have any images? The only one I could find of any prototype, the Ha.141, shares the same configuration:

I have to admit, i've heard the opposite in terms of maneuverability for asymmetric aircraft - but without a wind tunnel or flight test, I wouldn't feel comfortable commenting further. There are some curious technical questions raised by the design. Have you seen the film footage?

@miko Having a operational airplane means a lot of logistic, I can not understand why they wherent used in training, maby they canibalism the engine and aluminium, but getting them operationally at the front meant tons of spare parts and trained mechanics.

I'll accept the logic of that - the only point I'd make/question I'd ask is that the BMW801A engined versions shared their engine with the FW-190 - which should mean supply shouldn't be an issue operationally. For the airframe and skin, did the Luftwaffe employ tradesmen (uniformed) at the front to fabricate parts in the same way the RAF did, or were they manufactured centrally?
---------------------------------------
Of course, even given this I'll except it'd be inconvenient at the least to deploy the aircraft, not least for the sake of other spare parts. The reasoning behind my argument is that other nations in similar circumstances have deployed equipment without adequate spare parts in last ditch situations.

[LuseKofte]

The germans use to sell surplus planes to country like Finland, I cannot really find the logic in not using them either

[Tecnico66]

I read somewhere,that a british test pilot,flown a soviet captured Bv141,and his impression was "..in flight was nothing strange..",the reasons for the limited service,was for example that FW189,was twin engined (More survivability),and in my opinion the "odd" layout has a major part in its limited service,if pilots didn't thrust a plane,and none want fly it,then goes useless...and to be honest,now 60 years after,we when see a footage of a Bv141 flying tell to us "..incredible...is really flying.."

[starmountain]

Hi mikoyan99,

one fact, that this aircraft was not in operational service was the difficult handling and the lack of technical reliability.
The first 8 Bv 141 were the BMW 132 powered A-Versions who had, for example ,many different lengh sizes of the "stabilizer fuselage"
The reason for that were many test flights to solve the dynamic stability in flight modus.
In 1939, B&V and the RLM decided to launch the Bv 141B development with the stronger BMW 801 engine and a greater wing span and fuselage length. Before this B-Version started to his first test flight in January 1941, the planned production series of more than 100 Bv 141A and 161 Bv 141B were stopped from the RLM in March 1940. The reason for this decision from the RLM was the more successful Fw 189 with two cheaper Argus Engines, which were easier to produce.
The RLM and B&V decided after the stop of an production series to produce 18 Bv 141B, which were tested in different tasks. B&V had in 1940 the hope to bring the Bv 141B in service and be able to assure the RLM with good results of the Bv 141B flight tests.
But even the Bv 141B had many technical problems, which cant be solved during the test period.
In 1941, a test squadron of Bv 141B were planned from the RLM, but never went in service because of the lack of spare parts and the lack of priority on this aircraft. So all Bv 141 were used at schools, as test beds for engines and weapons and some more other tasks.

I hope, this little information answers most of your questions!

Best regards,

starmountain