Horten Whif

[AeroplaneDriver]

After reading the Horten discussion last night I started looking at the Revell kit in the stash, toying with a few diferent whif ideas.

So where is it headed..?




First the spures.  Everything looks really nice-lots of detail.

After closing in the nosegear bay a little and finding a suitable seat to replace the kit seat, I noticed that the two cannon bays in the kit would make nice (if small) bomb bays.  Once they are boxed in each bay will carry 2 or 3 500lb bombs.  Notice it looks like the new nosegear will be a little more proportional than the monstrosity on the original.  Something long and dainty maybe...say for example and Italeri A-4E nosegear...?




I took a break from the fuselage to work on the wings.  Here the upper and lower halves of the left wing are marked for the wingfold...



...followed by cutting and work starting on detailing the fold mechanism...




In May 1958 the US Navy signed a contract with Northrop to modify the highly advanced WWII German Horton 229 for carrier operations.  Having significant experience with flying wing aircraft, but no experience with naval aircraft, Northrop brought Douglas onboard as a subcontractor.  The basic Horten design was unchanged, but all internal systems were updated and the two large cannon bays were replaced with bomb bays capable of carrying up to 3 500lb bombs.  The massive trademark nosegear was replaced with one adapted from the A-4.  The arrestor hook mechanism form the A-4 was also modified for the new aircraft.  A simple manual wingfold mechanism was added to give the aircraft a small footprint aboard ship.

The first YA-8 flew in late 1962.  Of special interest to the Navy was the reported low radar signature of the flying wing design.  The aircraft was very small, with a crapmed cockpit and limited range and weapons capability, but early flight tests were to prove that the concept was sound.  Only 80 A-8 Stingrays were ordered for the Navy, but the type did see combat in Vietnam.  While the aircraft did not make a significant contribution to that conflict, it provided valuable experience that later went into the A-12 Avenger naval strike aircraft.

[Joe C-P]

Carrier

based


Ooooo...

[Ian the Kiwi Herder]

A carrier based Horten.... Oh yes, that wil look superb in IJN colours.... sorry, did I say that out loud ?.  Seriously though, alongside the Do335 the ONLY Luft '46 subject that lights my fire is the Horten. One of those things I regularly trawl eBay for, never found one at a decent price yet..... or I'm just too late !

Looking forward to seeing this one develop, Nick.

Ian

[GTX]

Definitely looking forward to this one.

Regards,

Greg

[frank2056]

I love the Ho229! It's also a great design for whiffing. I have a post WWII document on my site Comparing the 229 against the Gotha P.60

Frank

[noxioux]

Excellent idea, and I especially like 'opening the door' for the later Flying Dorito.

[AeroplaneDriver]

No progress pics tonight, but I've got the hinge made for the wingfold (1/72 scale working hinge made from a strip of Evergreen), and the bomb bay is boxed in (only one will be open).  I'm amazed at how small this aircraft is.  There wasnt really room to box in the inboard section of the bomb bay without impinging on the area that would be occupied by engine, so instead of a straight wall I used a section of drop tank to represent the curved profile of the engine heat shield as one wall of the bomb bay.

It'll make more sense when I can post a pic tomorrow.

The final model will be displayed with one wing folded and the other spread and with one bay open and the other closed.  I'm toying with the idea of AIM-9Bs on the bomb bay doors, sort of like the gear door Sparrow installation tried on the early F-16s.

[AeroplaneDriver]

A couple of update pics for tonight.  First, I need to decide how to make the wings fold; straight up like and A-6, Bucc, F-18, etc, or rotate and fold backwards like the TBM or E-2.  I started thinking it would just be a normal upward fold, but with it being such a short aircraft, both height and lengthwise, I almost think the backward fold looks a bit better.  From a shipboard perspective, length would make more difference in footprint than height, so the practical solution would probably be the upward fold, but aesthetically I think I like the rear on better, so I can always come up with some reason for the rear fold.  Anyway, what do you guys think?





Last pic is of the proposed weapons fit.  The bay with the bombs will be open, but will still have the Sidewinder on the door.  I havent decided yet if I want to leave the rest of hte airframe clean or add two more Sidewinders just outboard of the doors, on pylons that would protrude out ahead a little further.

[GTX]

I'd go with the upward fold.

Regards,

Greg

[Aircav]

Found this 1/144 Naboo Z3 Space Cruiser by Lovo Francesco on an Italian modelling site earlier today