Pusher props for WW I fighters

Watching the Ultralight tow planes at the Finger Lakes Aerosport Park
(http://www.fingerlakesaerosportpark.com/)
Labor Day Week fly-in, it occurred to me that WWI fighters could have
solved their gun aim/synchronization problems easily by adopting a
pusher prop configuration. Wondering why this solution was never
adopted, I realized:
1) The engine in front provides a modicum of protection for the pilot.
But surely, an engine behind would avoid the more dangerous tail
attack.
2) Cooling of the engine might be more difficult--but now the castor
oil is blown away from the pilot, not into his face.
3) Strength of the fuselage, arranged for a pushed configuration might
be less certain. OTOH, several of the original jennys were pushers.

Picture of a pusher prop ultralight:
http://www.fingerlakesaerosportpark....Rhet-plane.jpg

Any thoughts about this tradeoff?

John Bailey
http://home.rochester.rr.com/jbxroads/mailto.html

"John Bailey" wrote in message
...
Watching the Ultralight tow planes at the Finger Lakes Aerosport Park
(http://www.fingerlakesaerosportpark.com/)
Labor Day Week fly-in, it occurred to me that WWI fighters could have
solved their gun aim/synchronization problems easily by adopting a
pusher prop configuration. Wondering why this solution was never
adopted, I realized:

But it WAS adopted


1) The engine in front provides a modicum of protection for the pilot.
But surely, an engine behind would avoid the more dangerous tail
attack.

Trouble is in a crash the pilot was sandwiched between
the engine and the ground

2) Cooling of the engine might be more difficult--but now the castor
oil is blown away from the pilot, not into his face.
3) Strength of the fuselage, arranged for a pushed configuration might
be less certain. OTOH, several of the original jennys were pushers.


The pusher prop meant you coudnt have an air gunner firing to the rear


Picture of a pusher prop ultralight:
http://www.fingerlakesaerosportpark....Rhet-plane.jpg


Picture of a Vickers Gunbus

http://www.rcaf.com/1914_1938_format...ghters/gunbus/
http://www.ukskies.co.uk/index.htm?h...5%20Gunbus.htm

Keith




----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"John Bailey" wrote in message
...
Watching the Ultralight tow planes at the Finger Lakes Aerosport Park
(http://www.fingerlakesaerosportpark.com/)
Labor Day Week fly-in, it occurred to me that WWI fighters could have
solved their gun aim/synchronization problems easily by adopting a
pusher prop configuration.

In addition to the Vickers Gunbus already mentioned are the Airco DH.1 and
DH.2 and the Royal Aircraft Factory F.E.2 but I'm sure there were more.

Tex

There's a darling Farman at the Owl's Head Museum in Maine. It was a
pusher, but it still didn't have fixed guns. Instead the gunner sat in
front of the pilot; if the plane were attacked from behind, he stood
up and fired over the pilot's head.

Furthermore, he didn't wear (didn't have!) a seat belt.

There's a great book by an American cowboy who became a Canadian truck
driver, then a Farman gunner for the RFC, and finally a pilot. (Well,
that wasn't the end of the story: he returned to the U.S. and joined
the Air Service, but that was a disappointment for him, and also for
the reader.) www.warbirdforum.com/horses.htm


all the best -- Dan Ford
email: (put Cubdriver in subject line)

The Warbird's Forum www.warbirdforum.com
Expedition sailboat charters www.expeditionsail.com