• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.

    Post 16 Update

    Post 17 Warning

While were into Pusher's!

Gibbage said:
Meh. Its just another copy of a pre-war US design, the XP-54 Swoose Goose.

View attachment 8878
Click to expand...

i know nationalistic pride kicks in but the designs are in actuallity worlds apart... but given the advances over the period it is feasible for 2 opposites to come up with something similar, and it isn't a copy as if i recall the Germans had no knowledge of the Swoose Goose. intelligence or not what they'd have to go on would be very sketchy at best and the aerodynamic principles of such a design not fully understood... 2 alternate nations, 2 different projects sharing a common feature.. a jet twin boom, thats almost like saying today that the Yak-141 is a Harrier rip off, it isn't it's just intel detailed a VTOL aircraft and the Russians pieced 2 and 2 together and got 3.5, they missed .5 on the looks... theres a lot of co-incidental work on this blue marble we live on, in pursuit of a common goal 2 designs or more may come out into the open that are very similar...

yeah DH-2 was a real beauty in WW1 and literally it was a 'Cracking' pusher, due to vibration i think, sorry i'm sketchy tonight guys the girlfriend dropped a hell of a bomb at me earlier... still getting pelted by the shockwaves as we speak, think i may take a week off...
 
Found this awesome 'what if' image!


jsp_750x500_web.jpg
 
Gibbage said:
Meh. Its just another copy of a pre-war US design, the XP-54 Swoose Goose.
Click to expand...

The Vultee XP-54 was one of the more distinct aircraft creations designed during World War 2. Produced through the essentially "empty canvas / blank check" approach by an Army Air Corps initiative (the specification was known as "Request for Data R-40C") , the XP-54 (later nicknamed the "Swoose Goose" by Vultee employees) doomed itself to failure thanks to the integration of a myriad of unproven systems, subsystems, design philosophies and other factors generally out of Vultee's control. Sadly, this single-engine, twin-boom fighter of a most optimistic design would not progress past two "X" developmental aircraft.

The USAAF signed a contract order for the Model 84 (s/n 41-1210) on January 8th, 1941.

The Vultee XP-54 Swoose Goose was finally completed and ready for show in January of 1943. The aircraft was trucked out to the Mojave Desert to be assembled and flown. First flight of the initial XP-54 prototype was achieved on January 15th, 1943 and lasted 30 minutes, being more or less a success. After a move to Wright Field on October 28th, 1943, the Lycoming engine failed irreparably.

The second prototype first flew on March 24th, 1944 in another short test flight this time to Norton Army Air Force Base. Like the first prototype before it, the second prototype's engine inexplicably failed as well, putting an end to the XP-54 legacy - what little there was to it to begin with.

http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=412

Not what I'd consider either "pre-war" or worth 'copying'...
As Smoothie says, similar specifications and concepts are constantly apt to lead engineers in similar directions at similar times. Note that most tubeliners today are swept-wing with engines on the rear fuselage - that doesn't mean they are all 'copied' from the Sud Caravelle of 1955.

Rob
 
If you really want to get serious about pushers, you can't go past the D.H.2, or the Gotha G.IV!
 
I love all those Supermarine amphibs, there all very quirky designs that many of a down airman owes there life too!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top