A-10 in WWII??

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...

"Eunometic" wrote in message
om...

The Mk103 had 140mm of penetration when firing tungsten cored
amunition from a FW190. From the faster jet it would have been
more.



Of course not having any tungsten to spare this was
rather academic


Tungsten shortage was a serious problem for the Germans as was nickel
(for jet engines and used only for hardening the superior armor of the
Tiger other tanks like Panther didn't get this metal)

Nevertheless the Germans had small amounts of tungsten cored
ammunition available for the 75mm, 88mm for the Tiger and Panther and
AT guns. These rounds were only rarely available but were useful
for dealing with the heaviest soviet tanks. Early in the war, when
tungsten was a little more common, it was the only way they could
penetrate the T34 with their undersized for the task 50mm canon. (It
was called arrow head ammunition)

Tungsten was reserved for use in Anti Tank rounds for the 37mm and
30mm airborne use. The 30mm round having the same penetration as the
37mm round.
This was 110mm but more like 140 with the forward motion of the
aircraft.

The primary and most important use of tungsten was for hardening
machine tools.

In one of your posts you noted that the Germans used uranium as a
substitute for tungsten in hardening machine tools. I wonder if they
might have used it to harden ammunition? It may even have led to the
use of Uranium cores by serendipity. The Germans had their own
indigenous uranium mines.

It IS actually a stolen German design- a nameless Junkers Attack
Project which started in 1941.

Its true when I saw A-10 for the first time it had a look of German design.
Their R and D were looking in to many different designs. That's not to say
that they made it, and we stole it. Those aircraft design "ideas" were
around not only in Germany. And, as you may know "ideas" is not patent
able. One can't own an idea, however one can own specific method of
building things. If you give set of requirements to number of different
contractors, the end result comes up to be very similar.

Emilio.

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
nt (Krztalizer) wrote in message
...
Few people know this, but the A-10 is actually a stolen WWII German
design.
Sabotage at the factory and defeatist whiners kept the project from
flying
before VE Day, but in 20 years the original plans will be released by
the
military, clearly showing the RLM stamp in the upper left corner.

I know its true because I read it on Venik's website.

Gordon

It IS actually a stolen German design- a nameless Junkers Attack
Project which started in 1941.
From "Luftwaffe Secret Projects, Ground Attack & Special-Purpose
Aircraft" page 36:
" In mid-1941 the Development Department of the Junkerswerke in Dessau
commenced work on a project for a low-level and ground attack aircraft
as a replacement for the Hs 129. The project study involved a rather
plump-looking mid-wing aircraft with two wingroot-mounted turbojets.
According to works documentation, the turbojets were to have been two
Daimler-Benz 109-007 ZTL units which allowed a considerable increase
in performance at a reduced fuel consumption. Designed by Prof Dr-Ing
Karl Leist, head of the Abteilung Sondertriedwerk (Special Engines
Department) at the Daimler-Benz AG, the two-circuit or bypass
turbojets had a larger air intake and overall diameter than the
single-circuit BMW 003 and Jumo 004 turbojets.
Besides this new type of turbojet, strong armor plating was to have
been provided for the fuselage and powerplants. As a ground attack
aircraft, it was to have been equipped with four 30mm MK 103 and and
four 20mm MG 151/20 cannon. The undercarriage main wheels were to
retract forwards into the fuselage sides as shown in the three-view
drawing. As litle experience had been gathered with nosewheels which
for a long time had been rejected by the RLM as too " American", a
retractable pneumatically-sprung skid replaced the nosewheel.
The long gestation period of turbojet development at Daimler-Benz that
resulted in the first turbojet test-bed runs only in March 1943, led
to termination of the project. Several decades later, this project
served as the forerunner for the US Fairchild A-10A Thunderbolt (also
known as the Warthog) ground attack and low-level combat aircraft
which cannot deny its resemblence to the nameless Junkers ground
attack aircraft."

On the next page is pictured the A-10, a three-view of the Junkers
project, and both a schematic drawing and actual photo of the DB
109-007 turbojet on its engine test-bed. Accompanying note on the
A-10:

" A Fairchild A-10 Thunderbolt prototype. Its similarity to the
Junkers design scheme is UNMISTAKEABLE. The propulsion units, mounted
in lateral fuselage nacelles were two General Electric TF 34-GE 100
bypass turbojets..."

As for the A-10s revolver cannon- so what? The Germans had a range of
heavy Bordwaffe in development including the Duka 88. Even the A-10 in
WW2 would have been downed if hit in the engines with that baby!

Rob

If you give set of requirements to number of different
contractors, the end result comes up to be very similar.

You mean:
Space Shuttle --Buran
Concorde -- Tu-144
F-15 -- MiG-25
Northrop A-9 -- Szu-25
etc.

Spies 'r' us!

From the list, Buran aero form was an exact copy of Space shuttle, thus they
stole it. But there propulsive design seems different to fit their launch
vehicles. That part is there design.

Going back to A-10, I will list the requirement and probable design.

Requirement:
1) Able to house VW size gun.
2) Ability to loiter
3) Good visibility for ground attack
4) 2 power plant for reliability
5) Large Ordinance capacity
6) Ability to land / take off from damaged runway.

Design to address requirements 1 and 3 may go like this:
The gun is too large to be housed on the wings so it must be located in the
fuselage. Where do you put the pilot; in front, on top or, in the back of
the VW? Pilot needs to be on top or in front to satisfy visibility
requirement. If you put him at the back he may be sitting right by the
wing, which can blocks large area of his view.

Design to address requirements 2 and 5:
The ordinance installation is easiest if it is mounted on the wing. Large
load requires large wing for the given airspeed. Loiter can be accomplished
by attempt to lower drag. High aspect ratio wing can accommodate both
requirements; long and skinny wing.

Design to address requirements 4 and 6:
We can mount the engine on the wing but that will take away ordinance space.
The engine needs some separation so the ground fire can't take them out both
at one time. Engine need to be some distance away from ground debris.
Where do you mount it?

What's you're A-10 design look like?

Emilio.

"Tamas Feher" wrote in message
...
If you give set of requirements to number of different
contractors, the end result comes up to be very similar.

You mean:
Space Shuttle --Buran
Concorde -- Tu-144
F-15 -- MiG-25
Northrop A-9 -- Szu-25
etc.

Spies 'r' us!

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 12:52:53 +0200, "Tamas Feher"
wrote:

If you give set of requirements to number of different
contractors, the end result comes up to be very similar.

You mean:
Space Shuttle --Buran


Actually they admitted they copied the US Shuttle.



Concorde -- Tu-144

ISTR there was a question of espionage there.



F-15 -- MiG-25

About the only similarities there is they both have two vertical
tails, two engines, and ramp intakes. So does the Tomcat, Flanker,
Fulrum. And both the Vigilante and Rapier had ramp intakes and twin
engines before that.



Northrop A-9 -- Szu-25


And A-6 and F-89 and numerous others. I think it falls into the
category of "there's only so many ways to make a plane". It actually
resembles an F-4 more than it does the A-9



etc.

Spies 'r' us!



It seems to be rare that exact copies are ever done but copying
generalities happens all the time. For example LERXs/strakes were in
vogue for a while there.

Tamas Feher wrote:

If you give set of requirements to number of different
contractors, the end result comes up to be very similar.

You mean:
Space Shuttle --Buran
Concorde -- Tu-144
F-15 -- MiG-25
Northrop A-9 -- Szu-25
etc.

Spies 'r' us!

Sepecat Jaguar --- Mitsubishi T-2 / F-1 (explain that one while yer at
it)

the A-10 is actually a stolen WWII German design.

Correction: a hungarian design from 1944.

Except for slightly W-shaped wing, the plane looked just like the A-10.
It was powered by two Jumo or BMW made 8kN turbines. It was 3/4th
completed, when the factory was overrun by the front. Supposedly the
plane's parts and drawings were captured by the USA and hauled overseas.

The three-view drawing of the plane was featured on the back cover of a
1976 copy of the hungarian monthly paper "Repules". It was quite unusual
for a communist state-run paper to feature a nazi plane at that time.

"Tamas Feher" wrote in message ...
the A-10 is actually a stolen WWII German design.

Correction: a hungarian design from 1944.

Except for slightly W-shaped wing, the plane looked just like the A-10.
It was powered by two Jumo or BMW made 8kN turbines. It was 3/4th
completed, when the factory was overrun by the front. Supposedly the
plane's parts and drawings were captured by the USA and hauled overseas.

The three-view drawing of the plane was featured on the back cover of a
1976 copy of the hungarian monthly paper "Repules". It was quite unusual
for a communist state-run paper to feature a nazi plane at that time.

.... when were US troops overrunning Hungary in 1945? The only attack
aircraft 3/4+ finished that was to use either a Jumo 004 or BMW 003
that was captured was the Hs-132. It bears no resemblence to the A-10
and is NOT of hungarian origin.
The only aircraft captured by the Luftwaffe in Hungary were Zlin
aircraft, most of which were gliders and obsolete types. What
Hungarian design are you refering to in the news article? AFAIK, no
German jet engines were destined for any Hungarian project. Only Italy
and Japan were to recieve those. Regianne never got theirs and the
Japanese IIRC only recieved photos and manuals from which they built
indigenous copies.

Rob

(robert arndt) wrote in message . com...
"Tamas Feher" wrote in message ...
the A-10 is actually a stolen WWII German design.

Correction: a hungarian design from 1944.

Except for slightly W-shaped wing, the plane looked just like the A-10.
It was powered by two Jumo or BMW made 8kN turbines. It was 3/4th
completed, when the factory was overrun by the front. Supposedly the
plane's parts and drawings were captured by the USA and hauled overseas.

The three-view drawing of the plane was featured on the back cover of a
1976 copy of the hungarian monthly paper "Repules". It was quite unusual
for a communist state-run paper to feature a nazi plane at that time.

... when were US troops overrunning Hungary in 1945? The only attack
aircraft 3/4+ finished that was to use either a Jumo 004 or BMW 003
that was captured was the Hs-132. It bears no resemblence to the A-10
and is NOT of hungarian origin.
The only aircraft captured by the Luftwaffe in Hungary were Zlin
aircraft, most of which were gliders and obsolete types. What
Hungarian design are you refering to in the news article? AFAIK, no
German jet engines were destined for any Hungarian project. Only Italy
and Japan were to recieve those. Regianne never got theirs and the
Japanese IIRC only recieved photos and manuals from which they built
indigenous copies.

Rob

The Hungarians may have had their own indigneous project. Don't
forget they did have the worlds first turboprop in the 1930s. It
worked but had problems with the combustion chamber burn through.
Someting that could only be solved with hard work on the test stand or
good alloys.

Eunometic wrote:

(robert arndt) wrote in message . com...
"Tamas Feher" wrote in message ...
the A-10 is actually a stolen WWII German design.

Correction: a hungarian design from 1944.

Except for slightly W-shaped wing, the plane looked just like the A-10.
It was powered by two Jumo or BMW made 8kN turbines. It was 3/4th
completed, when the factory was overrun by the front. Supposedly the
plane's parts and drawings were captured by the USA and hauled overseas.

The three-view drawing of the plane was featured on the back cover of a
1976 copy of the hungarian monthly paper "Repules". It was quite unusual
for a communist state-run paper to feature a nazi plane at that time.

... when were US troops overrunning Hungary in 1945? The only attack
aircraft 3/4+ finished that was to use either a Jumo 004 or BMW 003
that was captured was the Hs-132. It bears no resemblence to the A-10
and is NOT of hungarian origin.
The only aircraft captured by the Luftwaffe in Hungary were Zlin
aircraft, most of which were gliders and obsolete types. What
Hungarian design are you refering to in the news article? AFAIK, no
German jet engines were destined for any Hungarian project. Only Italy
and Japan were to recieve those. Regianne never got theirs and the
Japanese IIRC only recieved photos and manuals from which they built
indigenous copies.

Rob

The Hungarians may have had their own indigneous project. Don't
forget they did have the worlds first turboprop in the 1930s. It
worked but had problems with the combustion chamber burn through.
Someting that could only be solved with hard work on the test stand or
good alloys.

And which turboprop would that be? My understanding is the british did it first, and it
was in the 1940s.