Author Topic: Horten's 'Flying Wings'  (Read 6311 times)

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #15 on: December 12, 2016, 10:21:32 PM »
>>>

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #16 on: December 15, 2016, 11:58:50 AM »
The redundant portion from the original wheel moulding can be used to provide two struts and support bar required to complete the new assembly...

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #17 on: December 15, 2016, 12:04:36 PM »
Dummkopf!

I've just realised I need to open up the wheel wells (See marked sections) but have already joined the upper and lower sections....! Ah well, it may not be such a disaster as there were no actual 'wells' just open space in the airframe! Now where's that drill?

'Donner und Blitzen!' as they say in all the best comics. (Donner kebab for the non-vegetarians)

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #18 on: December 16, 2016, 04:19:47 PM »
Having cut out the front wheel well (Nearly exhausting my range of Celtic expletives!!) I am continuing with the building of the complex strut assembly, taking this from the published diagrams rather than the surviving aircraft in the US as the undercarriage there was modified to provide more support on public display. The wheel well itself will incorporate some framework that was fitted between the upper and lower wing/fuselage surfaces but that will be all. Two additional struts will form the final attachment of the undercarriage oleo to the bay but this 'dry-fit' will give some idea of what it might look like

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #19 on: December 17, 2016, 11:53:45 AM »
Tubular framing adds some depth and detail to wheel well for nose undercarriage - much will be barely visible after painting. Also added split linking strut to nose wheel door to fix against link on strut. Note: All U/C doors need to be sanded down to about 1 mm thickness as in the kit they are moulded between 3 and 4 mm. Finally, I have left just enough of a ledge to add door links and 'plumbing' before painting.

zak

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5320
  • Grumpy by name and nature
    • View Profile
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #20 on: December 17, 2016, 01:04:31 PM »
Good progress, coming along nicely.
Grumpy by name and nature

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #21 on: December 18, 2016, 09:33:05 AM »
As previously mentioned, construction of the 1/1 scale HO 229 followed normal Horten practice. The entire centre section was composed of welded tube construction and the wings (single spar) wood construction with ply covering. The undercarriage was a completely retractable three-wheel, tricycle layout with the front wheel taking about 50% of the total weight when resting on level ground. One noticeable difference in trying to replicate the undercarriage is that whilst the much mentioned front wheel assembly simply retracts in to the void of the fuselage, the main u/c seems to have a more defined wheel well. Studying the available photographs and plans released by the Smithsonian, neither the PM nor Revell kits provide a correct assembly here. The PM is over simplified (photo) and the Revell seems more conjectural than practical. The PM kit gives us a shallow impression (photo) whereas the Revell offering (previous photos) proffers a deep trench-like affair for the main strut. I can find no evidence of this?
« Last Edit: December 18, 2016, 09:34:38 AM by Pen-Pusher »

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #22 on: December 18, 2016, 09:37:47 AM »
Unfortunately with the PM kit (building) the u/c doors are about minus 1 mm all round. (How I wish I had checked all this before starting!) The ‘cut’ lines leave you with a 1 mm strip that requires removing on the main u/c door (Photo) which is okay if you’re placing the machine on it’s very basic legs (photo) so to speak; but leaves us with the problem of scratch building the inner doors which (as they would have to be!!!) having a curious cross-section and profile….

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #23 on: December 18, 2016, 10:43:27 AM »
The complex nose wheel linkage between the main oleo and door is finally fitted...

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #24 on: December 19, 2016, 09:03:46 AM »
I've ordered a book from Germany which includes detailed plans for the main undercarriage so meantime I've attached these by PVA to allow for removal and alteration later. Now I have to return to the cockpit details and decide on a colour scheme...

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #25 on: December 24, 2016, 05:16:54 PM »
Christmas Eve and the first 'hairy-stick' application of Vallejo is encouraging. I've chose a North African 'Desert' scheme which, of course is speculative - but as the scheme on the only surviving aircraft is obscure and different on both wings - it'll have to suffice!

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #26 on: December 24, 2016, 05:18:42 PM »
Undersides...

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #27 on: December 29, 2016, 11:38:45 AM »
More research reveals the Ho-229 (Go-229) IX was of mixed construction, with the centre pod made from welded steel tubing and wing spars built from wood (Photo #1). The wings were made from a series of two thin, carbon-impregnated plywood panels (3 mm and 4 mm) pressure-glued with a resin, charcoal and sawdust mixture (See diagram on Photo #2) Production models would have seen this covering glued by a heating process using resin alone and two special furnaces had been built for this process. (These were recovered by British and US Army engineers, dismantled and flown back to their respective countries. In the UK, De Havilland used these extensively). The production models would most likely incorporate several flex-strips of rubber which had been tried on other experimental aircraft.
 
The wing had a single main spar, penetrated by two jet engine inlets, and a secondary spar was used for attaching the moving surfaces. It was designed with a 7g load factor and a 1.8× safety rating; therefore, the aircraft had a 12.6g ultimate load rating. The wing's chord/thickness ratio ranged from 15% at the root to 12% then 8% at the wingtips. The aircraft was fitted initially with retractable tricycle landing gear, with the nose gear assembly on the first two prototypes sourced from a He 177's tail-wheel system (wish I’d known this earlier!!!) with the third prototype using an He 177A main gear wheel rim and tire on its custom-designed nose-gear strut work and wheel fork.
 
A drogue parachute housing would have been fitted on the underside of the tail to slow the aircraft on landing. The pilot sat on what was the German’s ejection seat. A special pressure suit was also developed by Dräger for the prototypes which would not be pressurised. The aircraft was originally designed for the BMW 003 jet engine, but as that engine was not quite ready, the Junkers Jumo 004 engine was substituted.

Lateral and vertical control was achieved with elevons and spoilers. The control system included both long-span (inboard) and short-span (outboard) spoilers, with the smaller outboard spoilers activated first. This system gave a smoother and more graceful control of yaw than would a single-spoiler system.

Weapon loads must be pure speculation at this point. One drawing of the twin-seat version produced at the Gotha factory in 1945 shows provision for two under wing pods (canon/rocket ?) outboard of the centre-section. Whatever the intended role for this aircraft was, its legacy must also include an ongoing fascination by many modellers today.

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #28 on: December 29, 2016, 12:05:25 PM »
Anyway, the colour scheme finally chosen for this offering is based on an experimental scheme tried out on two Me 110's in North Africa c.1942. The sand base colour will be covered with two shades of disruptive 'blotches' following a standard camo-pattern.... (I hope?)

Pen-Pusher

  • Guest
Re: Horten's 'Flying Wings'
« Reply #29 on: December 29, 2016, 06:23:27 PM »
More progress...