Print

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

[max_thehitman]

Bombs were also planned in a semi recessed bomb bay in the fuselage.

I have to disagree with you. In the belly of this aircraft (fuselage) lays the jet engine and
there is no room to add bombs. It is also not a good idea to place bombs next to these very
early jet engines in the same compartment.

This airplane was never built and flown, It was merely in prototype form, so no tail design was
ever proven good or bad.

[Metatron]

Actually if you read the Oleg Maddox description of the plane he states that he had to make the tail 'unrealistically' strong by the standards of the day to make up for the then unforeseen design flaw.

[Verhängnis]

Bombs were also planned in a semi recessed bomb bay in the fuselage.

I have to disagree with you. In the belly of this aircraft (fuselage) lays the jet engine and
there is no room to add bombs. It is also not a good idea to place bombs next to these very
early jet engines in the same compartment.

This airplane was never built and flown, It was merely in prototype form, so no tail design was
ever proven good or bad.

And I have to disagree with you there, because as clearly shown on this advanced diagram the engine is placed in the rear of the aircraft thus allowing for some space for the fuselage to be pushed upwards slightly to put the Bomb out of the airflow and reduce drag. The bomb would have been placed between the nose and main landing gear where like I said there is clearly room to recess the fuselage.



And about the tail I thought post war testing was done on the wind tunnel model and then a small scale model of the Ta-183 in the United States and it was proved to have stability problems at higher speeds therefore that could be the basis on why Oleg had to strengthen the tail unrealistically for IL-2.

[max_thehitman]

Well, building a real airplane and test fly it is one thing and creating it in 3d for a game is
another thing completely diferent. I have seen "bricks" with no wings and engines fly better
than an F-16 jet-fighter, but that is because in a game anything is possible. We all know that.
According to many books I have in my collection and also according to some websites on the internet,
this aircraft was drawn up and a few small models were actually built to test them in wind tunnels.
Whatever came out of those tests only those guys know, because much information was lost in
the last years after the fall of the Third Reich. Some have speculated and even confirmed that this design was the idea behind the Russian Mig-15 and the American Sabre Jets. Perhaps some of it is true.
Same thing with the Argentinian built FMA IAe 33 Pulqui II. Which by the way, was also Kurt Tank´s design and idea, which utilized some of this jets design. The Pulqui II's development was comparatively problematic and lengthy, with two of the four prototypes being lost in fatal crashes.
... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FMA_IAe_33_Pulqui_II
The jet engine was still very new to these early designers and so was some tecnological know how
on  how these faster than propeller airplanes behaved at (and in) certain speeds.
The other aircraft you might be refering to that was taken to the USA and tested there was the
already built (but not test flown) Messerschmitt p 1101. Its design is very similar to this jet, but its
tail design and wings are much diferent. http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=658
http://www.luftarchiv.de/index.htm?/flugzeuge/messerschmitt/me1101.htm
It later was test flown by NASA and renamed Bell "X-5".
According to what may be drawn up in blueprints may not be what can actually be done in the real airplane. Placing a bomb in that area as you mentioned could have brought tragic consequences to this airplane as some other experts have debated upon in other forums dealing with Axis history and aircraft (I am no expert) but I am not going to argue with you on this matter, because we both have no real proof if it could have been done, because this airplane was never built or test
flown. BUT in a flight sim game and in a flightsim world anything is possible and it can and will fly great,
that much we can both agree on with a smile 

[Verhängnis]

And agree with you now max.

And the reason the Pulqui is so similiar is because Kurt Tank accepted contracts to work in Argentina.
There, he designed the IAe Pulqui II based on the Focke-Wulf Ta 183 design that had reached mock-up stage by the end of the war. It was a state-of-the-art design for its day, but the project was axed in 1953 due to Argentina's financial crisis.

And I that most of the Ta-183 design documents were siezed by the Soviets where they still exist in archives today or so I am told.

And I am no expert either, but anyway enough of this, I am glad to have it in IL-2 as it is now one of my favourite aircraft.

[bada]

if i may just add my 2€cents:

the pulqui has nothing to do with the Ta183.
The last one beeing studied and drawn by Multhropp and willy just stamp his own name on the bleuprints, normal actually,Multhrop was working for FW

The one thing the Pulqui and the ta183 have in commun is Tank's Name, but it's all. The structure of the airframes of both planes isn't comparable.
Shape is another thing: if the pulqui ressembles the ta183, then the P1101,Saab Tunnan, LA15,Mig15, and even tha Sabre(just to quote some) are also ressembling the Ta183 very much.
But Maybe one day someone will find the data on the 183 in the russians archives and we'll know more
Until then, take an appointement in EADS archives and check for the ta183 ORIGINAL bleuprints...they are there..with the 250kg bomb or the 300L tank

[Verhängnis]

I just found the answer to that.

Wiki-

After his appointment as project director for a new indigenous fighter program, Tank adapted the basic Ta 183 airframe for the Nene II engine, substantially resulting in a new design that only bore a passing resemblance to its forebear. The Nene was larger, heavier and more powerful than the Heinkel HeS 011 turbojet that had been planned for use in the Ta 183,[N 3] and therefore required a new, redesigned fuselage with a larger cross-section primarily due to the Nene's centrifugal rather than the HeS 011's axial compressor design.

So basically Kurt Tank as former Techincal Director at Focke Wulf as he was contracted by the Argentinians he still had alot of his staff from Focke Wulf with him and obviosuly some Ta-183 Diagrams however Hans who designed the Ta-183 like you said was not with Kurt and his team. And due to the new requirements and specifications that the "New" Ta-183 as you could say had to under go major redisign.

So until reading this on Wikipedia I did not no that so thanks for clearing it up.   

[bada]

glad i could help

[DimAurora]

Brilliant! I respect this wonderful Ta-183 that does just the right amount of damage. 

[tater718]

4.101 SAS 3.06
Works like a charm!

[michael109]

Hello,
I'm a newby and tried to install that plane.
Using 4.11 game version and SAS Modactvator 4.06
I'm using the latest button file from 01.01.2013
4111_SAS_Offline_Buttons.
But after add the plane in the air.ini file I get a 60% crash.
Please can anybody help?
If it is useful I can send a logfile of the crash

cheers
michael

[SAS~Malone]

hi michael
considering this mod is almost 3 years old, it is likely it won't work for 4.11...
but, post the logfile if you like, we can look at it....