âGerman Aircraft of World War Twoâ (J.R. Smith & A.L. Kay, Putnam 1990) says it âhandled well and possessed in full measure all the characteristics desirable for its role (but) official conservatism prevailedâŚâÂ
âWarplanes of the Luftwaffeâ (ed. D. Donald, Aerospace Publishing 1994) says the same: âone of aviationâs true odditiesâŚperformed surprisingly well (but) the main stumbling-block was fear of the typeâs unusual configuration.â
âThe Worldâs Worst Airplanesâ (Bill Yenne, Bison Books 1990) states: âThe Bv-141 proved more airworthy than its detractors wanted to believe (but) never shook off the stigma of its disfigured appearance.â
Translation: it was an entirely adequate aircraft (but) it looked too weird.
Blohm & Voss liked asymmetry. Hereâs the Bv P.179âŚ
The Bv P.194 (for extra jollies, a prop in one nacelle and a jet pod under the other)âŚ
The Bv P.204 (now almost conventional, with the prop in the middle, but hey, letâs install a single jet offset under one wing)âŚ
This is happening. Meet the Bv P.111âŚ
Even the B & V take on a symmetrical trimotor was weird.
The forward view on the Bv P.170 must have been pretty minimal. Since it was a tail-dragger, there might have been visibility under the planeâs âarmpitsâ during taxiing, but otherwise thereâs nothing to see but metres of nose, wing and engine nacelles with a runway (and ground-crew!) out there somewhere.
These and many other oddities get trotted out by a certain sort of documentary with the tag âCould these Wonder Weapons have Won the War?â Since they mostly qualified for the term âpaper or plasticâ, the answer to that portentous question is âNOâ.
(What they did do was keep their designers, draughtsmen, engineers etc. looking useful enough to avoid being given rifles and sent to the Eastern Front, so in that respect they were a successâŚ)
titsay
kianamaiart
areudirty
gummygunk
2087
jimmyeatworldofficial
turnnoffyourmind
ellievsbear
