Hi folks,
I couldn't find an appropriate thread, so here goes - whiffs for Italian WWII fighters. To start, here are some FIAT G.55 whiffs I've done:
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi37.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe68%2FGTwiner%2FMore%2520Creations%2Fg55bc.gif&hash=0926e75f1492ce27c5c5e6bd634552247bafce87)
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi37.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe68%2FGTwiner%2FMore%2520Creations%2FG55super.jpg&hash=c0141d81251b0b4b86d5ea02ce80f68e1bcc7f39)
Regards,
Greg
Here's a whif made from a Yak-17 (jet engine faired into lower fuselage) and an Me-262 (wing engines and wings).
I presume that Italy steals some of Germany's jet engine technology, makes a slightly inferior product, but puts THREE engines on (typical Italian penchant for tri-motors).
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi28.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc219%2FSSgtBaloo%2FSuperstuff%2FSuper%2520Transport%2FCaproniLampo.png&hash=cb98b3be3d5d6ff16e74ea29c1ecac079c2cb2e3)
The Caproni Lampo was a development of the Caproni-Campini (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campini_Caproni_CC.2). It was smaller, lighter, and more significantly, faster and more maneuverable. The first prototype had a conventional tail with both a vertical stabilizer and rudder and a horizontal stabilizer and elevator. When the P-50 (http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1652599#post1652599) began operations in the Battle for Britain, the designers decided that their plane would have a butterfly tail also. This delayed production and the Lampo didn't enter production until after the liberation of Italy.
The lampo was capable of cruising at 375 MPH. It was highly maneuverable and was more than a match for any propeller-driven plane with the possible exception of the FW-190, which had a slight edge in speed.
One hundred and five examples of the Lampo were produced, and served the Free Italian forces through the rest of the war and into the early fifties, by which time they had been relagated to trainer status.
Not an Italian subject, but did you know your "Royal Rangerplane" was a "real" whif, that is, a Westland P.12?
Picture (un-doctored) below
The most intriguing Italian whiff I can think of was a tri-motor heavy fighter. After a little searching,
I found the relevent thread at the Secret Projects Forum.
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1339.0/highlight,italian.html
The aircraft in question is the IMAM RO 67 project-while I remember seeing the plan views for it there, I
gather the images are now only available to registered members. It doesn't look like it would be too
difficult to bash out of a trio of old Frog MC 202s, or some Supermodel 205s....
Quote from: sequoiaranger on November 19, 2008, 12:22:07 PM
Not an Italian subject, but did you know your "Royal Rangerplane" was a "real" whif, that is, a Westland P.12?
Picture (un-doctored) below
Yes. I just wanted to try doing that configuration as a "passenger" plane. From what I've read it had excellent handling qualities and was STOL or close to it.
Quote from: GTX on November 18, 2008, 10:31:39 PM
<...> To start, here are some FIAT G.55 whiffs I've done: <...>
Damn, those are sexy! :wub:
Reposting some I have used earlier
G-55/Me-109 hybrid
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi48.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff224%2Farc3371%2FGW105B-1.jpg&hash=da9b1f8756f1e7e66a1749816933a2329dd002e6)
Better visibility G-55
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi48.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff224%2Farc3371%2FG55C.jpg&hash=4b72f4c658212446c465a8e2a9a0bb085141552d)
Re-engined Re-2000´s
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi48.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff224%2Farc3371%2Fre2000b.jpg&hash=baea488c44fa4eeef7a913be30f92843029c04d2)
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi48.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff224%2Farc3371%2Fre2000d.jpg&hash=4cfd72e6003eaab8ac7c2a8dc1dd84933fc2717d)
Doc Yo, I believe this is tha aircraft.
I can't imagine that the pilot can see ANYTHING from the cockpit that far back, with the wing and three engines blocking his forward vision. How would he ever land the thing?
I did, however have a trimotor Italian thing going, myself, once upon a time......
Mine would look almost identical from nose-on view ('cept the tri-tail in place of the twin).
Hmm... here's a thought for the trimotor heavy fighter...
Wings come back from the RO 67 a little, cockpit moves forward to sit a little closer to the engines. Two heavy MG's in the cowling over the nose 603, 20/30mm motorcannon, maybe one in each engine for that matter. Refit the gear to a tricycle gear, perhaps?
Just my thoughts.
>Refit the gear to a tricycle gear, perhaps?<
Now yer talkin'! It would look kinda like a Grumman P-50 (F5F Skyrocket).
>20/30mm motorcannon, maybe one in each engine for that matter.<
Though I had thought of that for my trimotor, I realized that it just wasn't done in reality, and I think I kinda figured out why.
The central engine points directly ahead--fine for a cannon to be aimed, and any roll of the plane still keeps the gun on target.
Any engine-mounted cannon out on the wings will be, by necessity, pointing straight ahead, too, parallel with the nose cannon (can't angle the guns inward to converge like ordinary wing guns). There seems to be only limited cases when this might be anywhere near efficient as a gun platform. It would be too rare to be lined up just right to shoot at another twin-engined plane (to hit the engine nacelles), that is, only a few degrees out of the 360 of possible angles. Any slight roll and the guns are just shooting out into space.
Perhaps some MG's mounted over the engine, firing through the propeller arc like most single-engined Italian fighters, could be canted enough to converge, but unless the engine itself was canted in (creating a weird thrust vector), any driveshaft-mounted cannon would just fire straight ahead. It might work for ground attack (light trucks, buildings, tents, etc), but not fighter-vs-aircraft.
I love what I call "Celebes Island Camouflage"--those squiggly amoebas of green on sand.
Well my other thought might have been to put guns in the wings, but with the overlapped nature of the propellers, an interrupter gear would be a necessity, and hellishly short on rate of fire between synchronizing the propeller arcs. I suggested two cowling guns as well, I was given to thought similar to the 109G-6 with the two heavy caliber MG's in the cowling and a cannon in the motor mount. The other suggestion would be to add a belly mount with the additional cannons. Put radiators in the wing root leading edges, another two possibly under the wing engines. You could use license-built 605's, and probably get some quick performance out of it.
That's just my thoughts off the top of my head.
Continuing with my G.55 ideas - how about an extreme high altitude fighter with stretched wings and turbocharger (under fuselage):
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi37.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe68%2FGTwiner%2FMore%2520Creations%2F24.jpg&hash=cf54d041fa64c6a72b2dd5afe7813f1287401ef7)
Regards,
Greg
Veeery Innnteresting, GTX-I have a weakness for long winged birds, and that one looks mighty nice. I'd
suggest a cranked wing ( w-wing, inverted gull wing, call it what you will ) but I can't call to mind a
single example of the Italian designers using the planform...
Starship 1- Thats the one! Thanks very much for linking the images.
Sequoia-Very nice concept, and a wonderful execution.
How about a Twinned G55:
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi37.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe68%2FGTwiner%2FMore%2520Creations%2Fg55Z.jpg&hash=837c4695d0b91c9980e6473c42adef934f37167f)
Regards,
Greg
Also very nice. If you'll permit kibitzing, I'd lengthen the fuselages, and shorten the inter-wing just a bit.
Another link, and I'll shut up for a bit. This the link to the CHANDELLE archive, and you'll want to look at
the March 1998 ( Vol. 3 ) issue, which contains an article titled "Might Have Beens: Italian Twin-Engined Fighters
ca. 1943. Contains good info and drawings ( in color ) of the S.M. 91 & 92, the Corsaro and one I
had forgotten about, the Caproni Ca 183bis-a dual power fighter...
http://www.worldatwar.net/chandelle/
You'll have to do a little clicking to get to it as the individual issues don't seem to allow direct links, but I
doubt you'll be disappointed if you do get lost...
Doc, if you look at close pictures of the G.55, it actually had an inverted gull to a degree, or at least one image I saw over at Wikipedia when I looked it up, of a ANR G.55 it appeared to have it.
Having a G.55 or Re-2005 fully tuned for Reno would be great. :wub: :wub:
:cheers:,
Daryl J.
Quote from: Sauragnmon on November 21, 2008, 05:35:49 PM
Doc, if you look at close pictures of the G.55, it actually had an inverted gull to a degree, or at least one image I saw over at Wikipedia when I looked it up, of a ANR G.55 it appeared to have it.
The center section is pretty much flat with dihedral on the outer wing panels.
Jon
Quote from: GTX on November 21, 2008, 01:51:47 PM
How about a Twinned G55:
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi37.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe68%2FGTwiner%2FMore%2520Creations%2Fg55Z.jpg&hash=837c4695d0b91c9980e6473c42adef934f37167f)
I believe Trophe can correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there a twin G.55 project numbered G.58? I'm pretty certain I've seen it written up in a book on the G.55 as well as in Trophe's twin-tails book.
My take on a BMW801 powered Re.2000:
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi37.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe68%2FGTwiner%2FMore%2520Creations%2Fv06.jpg&hash=293d725dd4ea3af4a3d511fa774963041341cbb6)
Regards,
Greg
I'd thought of a triple C.205, all built around a triangular configuration, a tail-sitting 3-engined VTOL single-seater.
In Italy... A secret British military mission orders 300 Caproni Re2000 fighters. (German intervention in April effectively vetoes the deal and British attempts to obtain the fighters through a Portuguese intermediary fail with the Italian declaration of war on June 10th.)
(Being skeptical of the information, I researched further and found this)
.... as soon as the Italian Government had authorised "Reggiane" to solicit export orders for the fighter, demonstration flights were arranged for a number of foreign delegations. War clouds had already burst over Europe, and a number of countries were anxious to strengthen and modernise their fighter defences.
December 1939 saw the arrival of a British Mission in Italy led by Lord Hardwick, the purpose of which was to purchase arms and particularly aircraft. Wing Commander H N Thornton, representing the Air Ministry, visited several of the Caproni factories, including the "Reggiane" works at Reggio Emilia. Negotiations were initiated for the purchase of Isotta Fraschini marine engines, a thousand 20-mm cannon, 300 Ca313 light reconnaissance bombers, 100 Ca.311 trainers, and 300 Re.2000 fighters! On December 22nd, pilots Gray and Barnet accompanying the British Mission flight tested the Re.2000, and a month later, on January 26, 1940, the Director of Aircraft Contracts confirmed the British order for the "Reggiane" fighters. Surprisingly, on March 8, 1940, the German government signified its approval to the Italian government of the sale of Italian aircraft to Britain, but within a few weeks, on April 6th, this approval was withdrawn. Nevertheless, on May 15th Count Caproni and Lord Hardwick finalised a scheme whereby the aircraft would be sold to Britain by Portugal, the Caproni group having a Portuguese subsidiary, the Soc Aeroportuguesa. However, on June 10, 1940, Italy entered the war on Germany's side, and thus the devious schemes prepared to evade the German embargo on the sale of Italian aircraft to Britain came to nought.
http://www.histaviation.com/Reggiane_Re_2000.html
Now when will we see some Re-2000's in sand-and-spinach camo from someone out there? And then.....what happens when the British Re-2000's meet up with the Corpo Aero Italiano??
:blink:
Some Re-2000´s I did a while a go
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi48.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff224%2Farc3371%2FXX98.jpg&hash=a7df6a193d23c1ed603cfe00b8b1da0a87523b9a)
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi48.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff224%2Farc3371%2FXX97.jpg&hash=53e91c2445bd3a6fc6bdb58bc1a34f4448c573e2)
Lend lease
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi48.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff224%2Farc3371%2FXX99.jpg&hash=bc3c97883eeaaad43b6bef01602d2eef41173c82)
And also ordered by the French
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi48.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff224%2Farc3371%2FXX96.jpg&hash=38c681a98628a779659745d14aeb4e68b28d9361)
As for the Corpo Aero Italiano it didnt use the Re-2000 (neither did the RA as a whole in any significant numbers)
I had posted this one on my thread. Does it for here?
>As for the Corpo Aero Italiano it didnt use the Re-2000 (neither did the RA as a whole in any significant numbers)<
Yes, I know. The CAI used CR-42's and Fiat G-50bis fighters. However, I was thinking more on the CAI frame of mind being attacked by Italian fighters.
Or maybe the "export" Reggianes would end up in Malta, The Western Desert, or Singapore. Maybe in China paired up with the look-alike Seversky P-35's! Lots of "whif" potential there!
Sorry to have misunderstood what you were saying, the way i thought was that the Re-2000´s would be used in secondary theaters once the immediate invasion threat had passed so, the dessert, Malta, CBI and East Africa could be interesting areas. china that was buying wjat ever they could lay their hand would probably be interested especially if the Italian mission goes home later than historical
De-spatted CR-42:
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi37.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fe68%2FGTwiner%2FMore%2520Creations%2Ffiatcr42DS.jpg&hash=610587bb981abb1d7c5b0b1ed6dc0ba5cc7fbc95)
Regards,
Greg
Oh, BdB is soo not going to like it. :wacko: I think it looks cool! :thumbsup:
I've always thought the "British" Re 2000's would have been posted to the Middle and Far East. So in India they would have looked very much like the Mohawks that were actually used. Very much early war temperate scheme including the red/white/blue roundels. Possibly would of been out of service before the SEAC scheme came in. Could see them in Singapore instead of the Buffalo's ?
Geoff P has built a DAF Re 2000 in 1/48. Nice model
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi48.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff224%2Farc3371%2FZXUK.jpg&hash=9e20031b8c778de36a985be51a1d3e62d111b590)
Like this?
What about a British Re.2000 re-engined with a Bristol engine, a Taurus or a Hercules.
Hi Arc
Very much like that except it would have had the early type roundels with wider white and yellow rings as per the attached Spitfire profile. (Couldn't find a colour pic of a RAF Mohawk)
Will probably get the Italeri kit out of the stash when I get home and do an Indian based RAF Re ;D
New attempts
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi48.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff224%2Farc3371%2FZXUK2.jpg&hash=05b8752a5f2ea2603a7d8b64cf7656d96d40c17c)
Re.engined
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi48.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ff224%2Farc3371%2FZXKL.jpg&hash=7acb443bdca4d1ac5fa10d5101c6e97a7b1a6534)
Quote from: NARSES2 on July 25, 2009, 03:43:30 AM
Geoff P has built a DAF Re 2000 in 1/48. Nice model
Thank you. It's in the background of this pic, I cannot find a proper one of it. Unfortunatly you cannot see the sharkmouth on the nose as it's 112 Sqd.
Thanks
Going back to the earlier discussion about three-engined fighters and the difficulties of arming them, how about a twin boom design, like the SM.91, with a third engine on the back of the central pods with a pusher propellor? You then have the nose of the pod clear for an efficient armament layout and the favourable one-engine-per-drag-body ratio of a conventional fighter, with the added bonus of reduced prop-wash drag from the pusher engine (pushers are inherently more efficient than tractors).
On the subject of twin-engine Italian fighters, there were also two IMAM designs:
Ro.57: http://www.comandosupremo.com/Ro57.html
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi35.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fd165%2Fhws5mp%2FThe%2520Whiffery%2Fro57-1.gif&hash=a58ab7dffcb5b49c2b3fa508a710f280f32f4da4)
Is that sexy or what? The nearest thing to a productionised Grumman Skyrocket I can think of.... :wub:
There's a kit of it too: http://www.modelingmadness.com/scotts/axis/previews/splhobby/sh72082preview.htm
Ro.58: http://ww2drawings.jexiste.fr/Files/2-Airplanes/Axis/2-Italy/03-Attack-Aircrafts/IMAM-RO.58/IMAM-RO.58.htm
This was an enlarged Ro.57 with Db.601 engines and two crew. On flight test, it allegedly performed better than an Me-410, but it was too late to be put into production before the end of the war in Italy.
I've always liked the Ro 57 and I've the Special Hobby kit in the stash and an old resin oneI got cheap somewhere - this thread is increasing my build list expotentialy :banghead:
Breda 88 is even better ;D
Quote from: Aircav on July 27, 2009, 03:50:43 AM
Breda 88 is even better ;D
That the "Lince"? Good looking but dreadful performer IIRC. How very Italian..... ;D
Imagine the Ro.57 with 801's under the cowlings... I Love the canopy design, it just looks so raked back and sleek... the Ro.58's a little meh, she's like a knock off of the 110 really.
The SAI 207/403 "Dardo" fighters and Caproni-Vizzola F.6 has always interested me not sure if there are any kits of these birds
Quote from: Sauragnmon on July 27, 2009, 10:53:52 AM
Imagine the Ro.57 with 801's under the cowlings... I Love the canopy design, it just looks so raked back and sleek... the Ro.58's a little meh, she's like a knock off of the 110 really.
It'd look great with a pair of jets: BMW 003s before the end of the war, or Derwents just after it, in either case carried well forward of the wing to maintain the same CofG. The undercarriage would need a re-think though.
Another Italian twin (and another Special Hobby kit :wub:) the somewhat odd Fiat Cr.25, which could be a transport or a long range fighter depending on the version:
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hannants.co.uk%2Fpics%2FSH72036.jpg&hash=7c9ace632d1e74324ea6f3ff190bbd7e21cbd014)
Or like other older design transport planes, it could double as a bomber.
Quote from: apophenia on July 27, 2009, 06:49:04 PM
There at least two SAI 207 kits (in resin, naturalmente).
LF Models 7218 in 1/48
http://www.stormomagazine.com/ModelArticles/SAI207/Ambrosini207_CB.html
RS Models 92036 in 1/72
http://www.hyperscale.com/2008/reviews/kits/rs92036reviewpm_1.htm
That RS 1/72nd one is injection actually.
the SM.91 prototype was accidentally shot down by a Mc-205 who thought it was a P-38 -- would some of these whif designs cause more blue-on-blue events ??
LF do the F6 (I've got it), I've also got the RS 207 - nice kit
http://www.hannants.co.uk/search/?FULL=LF72074 (http://www.hannants.co.uk/search/?FULL=LF72074)
I dislike Centauro's canopy. So, what do you prefer?
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1080.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fj340%2Fysi_maniac%2FDrawing%2FG55_canopy.jpeg&hash=46e1dffbdc8132a42f979095cf569a1039784893) (http://s1080.photobucket.com/user/ysi_maniac/media/Drawing/G55_canopy.jpeg.html)
None of these, better give it a true bubble canopy?
Ooooo yeah. I could definitely see this with a Sea Fury bubble or even Spitfire Mk.24? NOT a mustang canopy though.
Of those two I'd go for the Spitfire canopy rather than the Zero one
A Seafire 17 canopy should work.
Just use a FIAT G59 canopy.
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.airwar.ru%2Fimage%2Fidop%2Fother%2Fg59%2Fg59-5.jpg&hash=a2411b0f34984e5ea00c04310c570faa5ce7f0e4)
Quote from: NARSES2 on October 09, 2018, 06:24:40 AM
Of those two I'd go for the Spitfire canopy rather than the Zero one
It is not Spitfire, it is F4U Corsair
Quote from: ysi_maniac on October 09, 2018, 04:25:30 PM
Quote from: NARSES2 on October 09, 2018, 06:24:40 AM
Of those two I'd go for the Spitfire canopy rather than the Zero one
It is not Spitfire, it is F4U Corsair
Ooops, my mistake :banghead:
<_< I think that italian cockpit where broader, in american style, than british or german or russian cockpits. But I can be wrong :rolleyes:
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1080.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fj340%2Fysi_maniac%2FWRK%2FitalianWWII_CS.jpg&hash=1bc32efd4238c38cff34134123ecae7961b9f9bc) (http://s1080.photobucket.com/user/ysi_maniac/media/WRK/italianWWII_CS.jpg.html)
In this order: Folgore, Veltro, Orione, and Centauro. Last one is a creation by Gabrielli, the others by Castoldi
Do you know why italian fighter were so similar, particularly cockpit area look the same? Did Castoldi and Gabrielli share papers?
AFAIK, Italian pilots were VERY conservative concerning the cockpit and the canopy. At least during the early WWII phases, they literally fought against closed cockpits, hence the open cockpit of the Fiat G.50. I am not certain if this had still an influence on the later designs, I guess that Italian designers were just lagging behind due to the earlier "problems" with the crews.
Quote from: Dizzyfugu on October 12, 2018, 12:22:36 AM
AFAIK, Italian pilots were VERY conservative concerning the cockpit and the canopy. At least during the early WWII phases, they literally fought against closed cockpits, hence the open cockpit of the Fiat G.50.
Very true Dizzy and it wasn't just the Italian A.F. either, although they did hang on longer. The R.A.F. and French Air Forces were also prone to this conservatism and quite possibly other air forces were as well. To some extent it's understandable, at least in the mid 30's, with expected operational heights still being relatively low enclosed canopies were seen as simply affecting the pilots vision for no advantage. It was really only with the increase in operational heights that this conservatism was overcome.
Overcrossing Dora-Veltro
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1080.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fj340%2Fysi_maniac%2FDrawing%2FDoraVeltro_X.jpg&hash=08f6f0626889a3496926966e756e3bd5ab89eca1) (http://s1080.photobucket.com/user/ysi_maniac/media/Drawing/DoraVeltro_X.jpg.html)
IMO top one is beautiful, and bottom one is extreme.
A shorter Fw 190 fuselage would IMHO look better? The Italian scheme suits the Fw 190 well, though.
Have to say, do like the top one. Very sleek. :thumbsup:
Piaggio P.119:
http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fww2/p119.html
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.airwar.ru%2Fimage%2Fidop%2Ffww2%2Fp119%2Fp119-1.gif&hash=4508b1dde229b7d484bdc7e6cfc4a2085e6dd8a8)
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.airwar.ru%2Fimage%2Fidop%2Ffww2%2Fp119%2Fp119-3.jpg&hash=cc96c39641a6deb5ed15747a3038c1330aef54c6)
Early layout concept:
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alieuomini.it%2Ffiles%2Fanteprima%2Fmedium%2F119_e%2C6616.jpg&hash=2a4dd30445965b305e9067b69bc02efe643336b8)
A RADIAL engine in the middle of the fuselage? That's different for sure.
Cooling must have been a bit of a problem I'd have thought.
Cooling air ducted in from under the leading edge by he look of it.
Which will be a high pressure area in flight but ground running could lead to overheating unless there is some sort of fan.
Using that as a guide, you could imagine converting any centrifugal-jet-engined fighter to a mid-engined prop-job by replacing the jet with a radial. IIRC, I worked out that a Centaurus would fit in place of a Nene, so prop Sea Hawk, prop Attacker, prop Panther all become possible.
A Centaurus engined Swift, just what RAF Fighter Command would have needed. ;D ;)
Cogs are turning...
I've got a kit of that Piaggio :thumbsup:
What if....?
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi68.tinypic.com%2F2hhn3ur.jpg&hash=032a20402c8cef66fe873367c241c560b044ab8a)
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi64.tinypic.com%2Fzwdpg.jpg&hash=b24c3fc73ae92ef71a2d52fa0ed78f8842bb8da9)
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi66.tinypic.com%2Fmhfr4z.jpg&hash=506d379ea989e7bdf48825152ee72e3c59c9e82c)
Particularly like the "Shinden" . I assume it is, rather than a development of the S.A.I. SS4 ?
Quote from: Weaver on November 08, 2018, 09:07:29 PM
Using that as a guide, you could imagine converting any centrifugal-jet-engined fighter to a mid-engined prop-job by replacing the jet with a radial. IIRC, I worked out that a Centaurus would fit in place of a Nene, so prop Sea Hawk, prop Attacker, prop Panther all become possible.
I've had all the bits for a Centaurus Attacker in a box for some time but have yet to do any gluing. It would have been the Supemarine answer to the Mustang FTB
Quote from: The Wooksta! on December 03, 2018, 01:54:36 PM
I've had all the bits for a Centaurus Attacker in a box for some time but have yet to do any gluing. It would have been the Supemarine answer to the Mustang FTB
So a Centaurus powered Swift would be well on the cards, hmmmmmmmmmm...........
Not from me, anyway! I've enough Spitfires to build and the few Swifts that are in The Plan (4 max) are just an epilogue.
I have one that's not destined to be an FR5........... ;D ;)