Anti tank Aircraft

deathjester · March 08, 2011, 07:04:01 AM

On the subject of armouring the Mosquito, how about making the whole plane out of Metalite, the same thing the Vought XF5-U1 was made from - it was supposed to be really hard to damage.

PR19_Kit · March 08, 2011, 09:33:37 AM

Was it Metalite or Mallite?

The only reference I can find to Metalite in the aviation fileld concerns aircraft lighting systems, but Mallite was a balsa/aluminium sandwhich used for aircraft floors amongst other things.

Weaver · March 08, 2011, 10:14:58 AM

Crusaders were made of something similar, wern't they? I know they had a lot of problems in the Phillipines with the layers de-bonding due to the humidity. A Vought team went out there to fix it on the cheap, and eventually came up with a laminate of local hardwood veneers that did the job, thus making the Phillipine Crusaders the last (partly) wooden fighters in operational service anywhere.

deathjester · March 08, 2011, 11:30:31 AM

Cool! I didn't know about the Philipine Crusaders - I thought they were made of aluminium....

jcf · March 08, 2011, 11:33:42 AM

Quote from: deathjester on March 08, 2011, 07:04:01 AM
On the subject of armouring the Mosquito, how about making the whole plane out of Metalite, the same thing the Vought XF5-U1 was made from - it was supposed to be really hard to damage.

The Hornet used a composite wood and metal internal structure and under wing panels of aluminum sheet bonded to wood.

simmie · March 08, 2011, 05:10:28 PM

If we are talking present day, then the airframe of choice could be lined with layers of Kevlar (similar to that used in bullet-proof jackets). It could be moulded in to the structure with carbon woven through it.

in the 60's the RAF carried out trial combat betwean a Lightning and a Spitfire Pr19. This was to assess the Firestreak missile against piston engined opposition in case javelin's over Malasia met Indonesian Mustangs during the 2nd emergency. I believe they could get a lock, but the Lightning was not to get in to a turning fight. This maybe incorrect as I am working from memory here.

rickshaw · March 09, 2011, 01:01:50 AM

Basically right, Simmie. Not sure of the model of the Spit but it was the absolute last one still in the RAF and I believe IIRC formed the basis of the BB flight. IIRC it wasn't to see if they could get a lock on with the missile but rather to see what tactics could be, against Indonesian F-51s. The result was just a reinforcement of what Galland found with the 262 - use your superior speed and climb to take slashes at the propeller plane and don't try and mix it with them. The conclusion was that if they encountered an Indonesian F-51 and it wanted to have a dogfight, it would be toast. I'd personally have though just using the downwash would have been sufficient - going past at Mach 2 would cause a slower aircraft real problems IMO. Cannons were to be the weapons of choice as well. This was, BTW all part of the leadup to Konfrontasi, in 1964-5.

tahsin · March 09, 2011, 02:00:47 AM

While out of tangent with the thread's current direction , I think it was to be "ordinary" Oerlikon guns in a twin installation for the A-10 and I have just read the ultimate proof of Pentagon's enthuasism about the Gatlings . It seems the Phantom was qualified for 15 .30 caliber minigun pods . Here cometh the 90 gun fighter ... But it is said it was ineffective for air to air work . Oh , really !!!?