Mid fuselage propellors

[dogsbody]

Vickers Type 161.

http://www.nvva.nl/renekrul/catalogs/vickers.type.161.j9566.jpg

[kitnut617]

IIRC the initial design ideas at the time, were because there wasn't a reliable synchronization mechanism that allowed guns to be fired through propellers and this design allowed for the guns to be placed up front.  By the time of the Triebfluegel, the Germans had got into firing masses of unguided RP's (which were often mounted in the nose) at incoming bomber streams, so the mid-fuselage propellers came into play again.

[ChernayaAkula]

The Vickers Type 161 is a cool design! 

<...> Blow the blades off as the first stage of the ejection sequence. I think one of the Russian combat choppers was the first to do that in the RW, the Mil 28 perhaps?

As Weaver said, the Ka-50 is the one with the extraction rocket. The Mi-28 can also blow off its rotors, but the crew don't punch out with an ejection seat. They blow of the doors and inflatable bladders form ramps (much like an airliner's emergency slide) which they can use to slide out without striking any parts of the helo. They should then land with a parachute. How that works out in real life is another question, though.
I could swear I've seen a pic with the bladders inflated, but can't find it right now.

[GTX]

Is that Zero-based Greg?

Yep

[GTX]

How could you post about the Daimler Benz Jager without also posting some of Marek Rys' images:




More

Regards,

Greg

[dy031101]

The problem with all these things is not so much how to do it as what's the point? There don't seem to be an compelling advantages of the layout that couldn't be acheived just as well by say, a J-21-style pusher-engined twin-boom design that has far fewer structural challenges.

Those that put the engine in the back probably could free up space up front for heavy gun(s)......

As for the DB Jager...... I was going to think it maybe to help shielding the propellers in "air jousting" scenarioes, but then with the engine still where it is, that probably wouldn't matter.

[PR19_Kit]

How could you post about the Daimler Benz Jager without also posting some of Marek Rys' images:

Why would it need a spinner, presumably a static one, if the prop is about 20 feet astern of it?

[frank2056]

Why would it need a spinner, presumably a static one, if the prop is about 20 feet astern of it?

Covering the hub of the engine cooling fan? You can see the fan in the pics.

[Caveman]

clearly it is there for aesthetics...

[PR19_Kit]

clearly it is there for aesthetics...

Yeah, right! 

Can you use the word 'aesthetics' in conjunction with the D-B Jager?

But the cooling fan hub cover idea could be right, but quite why they'd need one THAT big defeats me.

[RussC]

Ram air effect, venturi. The smoothness of the airflow as important as the quantity, especially where there is no prop there, just the fan. Although the whole nose seems big.

[GTX]

Can you use the word 'aesthetics' in conjunction with the D-B Jager?

I actually find it very attractive.  Would also be interesting to see it as a conventional tractor arrangement.

[NARSES2]

Can you use the word 'aesthetics' in conjunction with the D-B Jager?

I actually find it very attractive.  Would also be interesting to see it as a conventional tractor arrangement.

Got to agree Greg, always liked it myself

[rickshaw]

Can you use the word 'aesthetics' in conjunction with the D-B Jager?

I actually find it very attractive.  Would also be interesting to see it as a conventional tractor arrangement.

Got to agree Greg, always liked it myself

Attractive?  In a lange-nase sort of way perhaps.  I found the idea fascinating though, I have to admit, even if I have to ask myself if it was really a worthwhile design.  I've yet to figure out any advantage from having the props behind the pilot.  It does make for some more attractive aircraft such as those American flying boats but otherwise, why?

[Mr.Creak]

I've yet to figure out any advantage from having the props behind the pilot.  It does make for some more attractive aircraft such as those American flying boats but otherwise, why?

The only thing that springs to mind is that it takes the wing out of the disturbed airflow from the prop. Maybe improves the lift by allowing a more regular flow over the inner portions.
That said, I'd have thought that a pure pusher type would have been preferable from an engineering (structural) point of view.