All-Aircraft-Simulations
request: Blomn & Voss BV-38 - Printable Version

+- All-Aircraft-Simulations (https://allaircraftsimulations.com)
+-- Forum: IL2 MODS Download & Discussion (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=267)
+--- Forum: IL-2 4.09m (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=348)
+---- Forum: IL2 MODS Discussion Section 4.09m (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=292)
+---- Thread: request: Blomn & Voss BV-38 (/showthread.php?tid=64255)

Pages: 1 2

- Loht773 - 21.08.2009

Well, the closest thing to the Indiana Jones fantasy "BV 38" is the real Argentinean "I.A 38 Naranjero", a flying wing desinged by the Horten brothers in 1953 and a prototype wich flew completed in 1959. It was a transport aircraft desinged for the transportation of fruit around the country. Unfortunatly its engines werent powerful enough to make it a reliable aircraft and it wasent mased produced, plus Juan D. Per

- vampire_pilot - 22.08.2009

I am mostly all for 46 planes but the IJ-flying wing - not really - I say before tackling this one there are other "real drawing-boad-projects" to tackle.

and I would love the 141. it is Lucas' B-Wing if I remember correctly.

- AERIAL STURGEON - 22.08.2009

KG64_cnopicilin Wrote:I have that in my "Worlds worst aircraft" by Jim Winchester. It has lots of weird planes Big Grin
I have the same book. I'd take anything that you read in it with a grain of salt because the author was pretty clueless about a number of things. One glaring example that springs to mind is the Brewster Buffalo. The author cites its performance at Midway as the F2A-3 as justification for it being "bad," yet completely ignores its amazing success (as the F2A-1/B-239) on the Finnish front. The most successful single airframe in aviation history was a Buffalo flown by two pilots.

As for the Bv-141, it certainly wasn't a bad aircraft. Blohm und Voss had brilliant engineers, and the 141 was one of their most brilliant projects. According to everyone that actually flew it, it was a dream to fly. Its off center design made it, from a piloting standpoint, virtually aerodynamically perfect. The pilot really had very little to worry about when it came to yaw and trim, and visibility from it was unmatched.

The only reason that it wasn't produced was because the RLM and Goring didn't like the way it looked.


But I would like to see it in the sim. Unlike the Lerche, it actually flew. Tongue

- caldrail - 22.08.2009

Quote:According to everyone that actually flew it, it was a dream to fly.
Not according to Captain Eric Brown. The airframe he flew had been well looked after but nonetheless did not impress him at all with its flying qualities.

From Wikipedia... It would seem that the displacement of lift vs weight, and thrust vs drag, would have induced tendencies to yaw and roll requiring continual trimming to control... Now whilst the aircraft is listed as being stable and manoeverable, I can assure you that constant trimming isn't just a pain the backside, it's also a distraction and ultimately tiring. You need to be careful with aircraft descriptions, especially those on the internet, whose enthusiasm often has little to do with knowledge. That's why accounts from the people who handled these aircraft are so important.

Eric Brown did say (amongst the anecdotes of finding it and getting permission to fly) was that....

- "It did what they said it could, but the handling wasn't in the same league as the FW-189..."

- "Not very impressive, but interesting..."

William Green mentions persistent hydraulic and engine problems (Indeed, Eric Brown curtailed his test flight because the engine was misbehaving, which had been changed and run-up regularly before the close of hostilities) . Also, ailerons were over sensitive in the prototypes but I understand this problem was addressed.

- KG64_Cnopicilin - 23.08.2009

AERIAL STURGEON Wrote:
KG64_cnopicilin Wrote:I have that in my "Worlds worst aircraft" by Jim Winchester. It has lots of weird planes Big Grin
I have the same book. I'd take anything that you read in it with a grain of salt because the author was pretty clueless about a number of things. One glaring example that springs to mind is the Brewster Buffalo. The author cites its performance at Midway as the F2A-3 as justification for it being "bad," yet completely ignores its amazing success (as the F2A-1/B-239) on the Finnish front. The most successful single airframe in aviation history was a Buffalo flown by two pilots.
Maybe finns were so good 'cause much less weight without any carrier stuff in it, but still there are lots of planes not as good as the brewster, ryysteri, as we call it in finland Smile

- caldrail - 23.08.2009

The Finns were also capable and motivated pilots, which counts for a lot. When they collected the Bf109G in Germany, they ignored German advice and flew the Messerschmitts in a manner they considered ordinary practice. The more cautious Germans, well aware of the 109's propensity for swerving on take off runs and bumslandung on return, were horrified at the apparently risky methods employed by Finnish pilots. It was simply what they were used to.