Anti tank Aircraft

[tigercat]

On a tangent would I be right in thinking that the Mosquito would be rather stealthy where it came to radar given it's wooden construction. I imagine it would still be vulnerable to heat seeking missiles though

[rickshaw]

The big spinning props and the big honking blocks of metal which are the engines tend to stop it being rather stealthy.

The Mosquito was never designed or used for close air support, it was a strike and interdiction aircraft in its fighter-bomber versions.   Its structure was not designed to survive heavy AA and speed would be its only advantage.

[Maverick]

I would wonder about the heat generated from the engines.  Jets generate beaucoup heat, but I don't think that an piston engine would generate enough heat to have an IR weapon lock.  That being said, a burp pass from a fighter armed with a Vulcan or the like and it's bye-bye wooden 'not so' wonder.

Regards,

Mav

[tigercat]

http://www.nabulletproof.com/Ballistic_Wood_Door.php

They'd have to be made by this company. And I thought I'd seen everything

[deathjester]

I would wonder about the heat generated from the engines.  Jets generate beaucoup heat, but I don't think that an piston engine would generate enough heat to have an IR weapon lock.  That being said, a burp pass from a fighter armed with a Vulcan or the like and it's bye-bye wooden 'not so' wonder.

Regards,

Mav

Erm, yes.  Most up to date IR weapons have been known to lock on to a hot wing leading edge ( hence the 'All Aspect' apellation to any Sidewinder from the -L onwards)

Maybe some sort of cooled exhaust on a low speed aircraft - it's commonplace on Helo's, but I've not seen it done on fixed wing.

[jcf]

That being said, a burp pass from a fighter armed with a Vulcan or the like and it's bye-bye wooden 'not so' wonder.

Regards,

Mav

The same is true of an aluminum airframe.
The notion that wood construction = fragile is mistaken.

[Maverick]

DJ, would the wing leading edge of a Mosquito generate the same heat as a modern aircraft?  I'd like to think not.

Jon, I realise the Mosquito was quite resilient, I merely mentioned in passing the effect an M61 burst might have on said airframe.  It would have a very similar effect on a Lancaster, Fortress or any other aircraft of the era, although the Wellington might have a better chance.

Regards,

Mav

[Weaver]

Could you armour a Mosquito? Not against heavy rounds obviously, but against small arms fire? You could put armoured bulkheads ahead of and behind the cockpit and armoured shields in front of the engines. The radiators would be a problem (as with all water-cooled aircraft) but you could at least put a sheet of armour inside the bottom wall of the duct: most fire will be coming from ahead and below rather than straight ahead.

[Maverick]

Whilst I don't know enough of the construction methods used on the Mossie and whether they'd lend themselves to armour, one of the basic ideas that DeHavilland had was to not armour them and allow speed and agility to come to the fore.  I guess armouring them kinda is a devolution of the design rather than evolution.  That said, one wonders if things weren't considered when they moved into the intruder/fighter bomber role, especially with the Tse-Tse aircraft.

Regards,

Mav

[jcf]

Mossies and Hornets had cockpit armour plate, and it was added after basic construction just like an alloy airframe.
There is nothing about its construction methods that prevent it being armored.

Armor as an integral part of the structure is not a common aircraft feature, in most cases it is an add on.

As to construction technique, here is a page on the Hornet that shows the methods used on it and the Mosquito:
http://users.skynet.be/BAMRS/dh103/fuselage-construction.htm

BTW the De Havilland fast bomber concept was for a fast, unarmed aircraft, which is not the same as unarmoured.

[Maverick]

Jon, i realise the Mosquito had armour in places, but it isn't what I'd describe as an armoured aircraft.  Something like an Il-2 was more of what I had in mind, but yes you are right, unarmed was a criteria of the DeHavilland design.

Regards,

Mav

[Hobbes]

DJ, would the wing leading edge of a Mosquito generate the same heat as a modern aircraft?  I'd like to think not.

The more modern the missile, the lower the temperatures it'll lock onto. First generation IR missiles pretty much needed a jet exhaust; modern ones can be programmed to strike any part of the airframe.

[Weaver]

DJ, would the wing leading edge of a Mosquito generate the same heat as a modern aircraft?  I'd like to think not.

The more modern the missile, the lower the temperatures it'll lock onto. First generation IR missiles pretty much needed a jet exhaust; modern ones can be programmed to strike any part of the airframe.

I'd imagine the whole of the engine cowling would be warm enough to lock onto these days.

[Hobbes]

Try the entire airframe. Given that differences of a few degrees show up pretty well in modern civilian IR imaging devices (e.g. the units used to check house insulation), airframe heating should be enough to lock on to.

[Mossie]

Ed S used to drive A-7's & OV-10's, he confirms that IR missiles can indeed lock on to piston aircraft.

http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,29309.0/highlight,overwhelming.html

As to the IR missiles, yes, they will lock onto a piston or turboprop a/c.  In the OV-10, we used to fly as targets for the ARMY Stinger and Chapparel units.  They could easily get a lock-on if we just flew over.  If we employed very low altitude tactics and kept our speed up, they had a very difficult time acquiring us in time for a lock-on.

Ed