Jump to content


A paper Plane WG SHOULD build.

L-133

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

FreeFOXMIKE #1 Posted 26 December 2019 - 08:53 AM

    G.A.T.P. (Global Alpha Test Pilot)

  • Member
  • 5206 battles
  • 6,744
  • [332ND] 332ND
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

https://en.wikipedia.../Lockheed_L-133

 

The Lockheed L-133 was an exotic design started in 1939 which was proposed to be the first jet fighter of the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) during World War II. The radical design was to be powered by two axial-flow turbojets with an unusual blended wing-body canard design capable of 612 mph (985 km/h) in level flight. The USAAF passed on the 1942 proposal, but the effort speeded the development of the USAAF's first successful operational jet fighter, the P-80 Shooting Star which did see limited service near the end of war. The P-80 was a less radical design with a single British-based Allison J33 engine, with a conventional tail, but it retained a wing which was the same shape as the outer wing sections of the P-38 Lightning

 


           332 Virtual  Fighter  Group

 


blindfoId #2 Posted 26 December 2019 - 09:27 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Administrator
  • 8 battles
  • 1,391
  • Member since:
    07-19-2018
The word "exotic" really suits this warbird. She looks very futuristic, doesn't she? 

BB3_Oregon_Steel #3 Posted 26 December 2019 - 09:57 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1584 battles
  • 645
  • [A-S-S] A-S-S
  • Member since:
    10-26-2015

View PostFreeFOXMIKE, on 26 December 2019 - 12:53 AM, said:

https://en.wikipedia.../Lockheed_L-133

 

The Lockheed L-133 was an exotic design started in 1939 which was proposed to be the first jet fighter of the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF) during World War II. The radical design was to be powered by two axial-flow turbojets with an unusual blended wing-body canard design capable of 612 mph (985 km/h) in level flight. The USAAF passed on the 1942 proposal, but the effort speeded the development of the USAAF's first successful operational jet fighter, the P-80 Shooting Star which did see limited service near the end of war. The P-80 was a less radical design with a single British-based Allison J33 engine, with a conventional tail, but it retained a wing which was the same shape as the outer wing sections of the P-38 Lightning

 

 

Well, it looks cool and it fits the WG philosophy of "Weirder is Better" when it comes to choosing which planes it will develop and this one certainly meets that criteria.  

 

However the first jet fighter of the USAF was this baby ... 

 

 

This is the Bell P-59 Air Comet which first entered service in the Fall of 1944.   Around 50 production models were produce and were used largely for training and familiarization with jet aircraft for pilots and support personnel.  

 

It's performance characteristics were modest and much of the blame for this can be laid at the feet of the underpowered J31 jet engine it was equipped with, which presumably, the L-133 would have been forced to use as well.  As such, its highly doubtful the L-133 would have been able to attain it's proposed speed (as stated above) using any jet engine then in production in the US.    

 

Performance characteristics for the P-59 were

Top Speed:  413 mpg (665 kph)

Armament:  One 37mm cannon, three 50 cal Machine guns. 

Ordinance: Eight Rockets, 2,000 lbs of bombs. 

 


Edited by BB3_Oregon_Steel, 26 December 2019 - 10:03 PM.

"Don't mess with me because I can squish you like a bug, that is If I should decide to notice your existence in the first place".  

 

Yes, it's haughty and its arrogant but you're a battleship with 16 inch guns and Britannia Rules the Waves.  Maybe a bit of arrogance in this case is appropriate.  


wylleEcoyote #4 Posted 27 December 2019 - 01:39 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 6158 battles
  • 1,021
  • [ALAS] ALAS
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

I could see it in tier 7 with all the other prototype "first jets"
It did have its own engine even if its development history was rough.
Which is good because two british centrifugal jet motors would not fit inside the plane.

Good roll for something of its size. good speed and power (first in-body jet engine design with an afterburner!) enough to not be as weak as suspected when flying in the yellow band. Great at the chase.
 Quad 20's is only little below average for tier 7 firepower.
Placing them in a nose mount will allow for some juicy soft stat enhancement that makes up for any perceived damage difference.

Most of the primary control surfaces and engine hit boxes mounted in the rear
Mean in a head on attack. but vulnerable to anything that gets behind it. 

The canard design does a few things.
It avoids the worst of the infamous P-38 high speed air compression issues.
But this comes in exchange for over all sluggishness to its response in the pitch axis compared to a P-38, especially at low speeds.
Yet when those canards finally 'dig in' they could do so with unusual gusto.
How that "muddy" elevator would appear in game, i dont know. Maybe something as simple as an input delay.

That sluggish delay would bleed away at higher speeds.  Only to come back when it redlines near supersonic speed.
If it gets combined with a low optimal altitude like in the meteor; that leaves little room for error.
This thing would get killed by "player error_lawndart.exe" scenarios as often as enemy action dealing with relatively slow tier 6's on the deck.

on the other hand Being classed as a heavy with a better altitude band and a 30 second boost thanks to the multi-altitude rated J37 afterburning engine would make it a rare tier 7 that can do well vs speedy tier 8's by Not loosing what maneuverability it has (until it redlines) at speeds and altitudes that other jet fighters like a meteor would struggle with.

Tier 8 airspeed, Tier 7 manuverability and guns somewhere between tier 6.5 or 5.5 (for balance i suppose the better the agilty the older the guns. in theory)

What makes it special is that it is all on a plane designed when tier 5's were the thing.

[Edit] i did not think about special equipment when i made this. sooo here we go with that  a few options come to mind...
Spoiler

P.S
Not a lot is mentioned about guns on the web other than 4x 20mm cannon. Maybe a brief reference to Hispano's.
But it is (just barely) a pre war design. so throwing in those sweet american M2/M3 navy cannons from a late war corsair on an army air corp plane is a bit ... odd.
What if we grant some old school version 1.x fan service and use ...
Spoiler

Happy Bonus. Using tier five guns could possibly, maybe, no its absolutely not wishful thinking on my part,
justify an optimal turn time approaching the ten second mark.

Edited by wylleEcoyote, 28 December 2019 - 03:02 AM.

Fair warning. My success rate at speculative guesswork is much like my WinRate. Hit or Miss.
Usually I start on the right track and then a make a weird left turn and get lost in the weeds ... 
And yet it doesn't stop me from speculation.

Specialist Planes earned: Japan, USA, UK, Germany, USSR, Europe
Light Fighters:   XP-31, Model 81A-1, P-40, P-51A, P-39N-1, XF15C, DH.100 F1, Spitfire V DB 605,
Fw 56/159, He 51/112, Ar 68/80, Bf 109 B/E/E-3/F, Me 209 v4/A, Me P.1092, I-17
MultiRole Fighters: Type 91, F11C-2, F4F, P-26 /-35 /-43, XP-44, P-47B,
Ar 65, Fw 190 A-1/A-5/D, I- 5 / 15 / 16(e)(l)

Heavy Fighters: P-38 F/J,  XP-58, Beaufighter,  Ao 192, Bf 110 C-6, Me 410, Do 335 A-1, Me 262, Tu-1, SE 100,

Attack Aircraft: Hs 123, Ha 137, Hs 129 A, Ju 87 G, Me 265, Me 1099 B-2
Bombers: Do 17 Z, He 111 H2, Pe-2, Do 217 M
 


FreeFOXMIKE #5 Posted 27 December 2019 - 04:49 AM

    G.A.T.P. (Global Alpha Test Pilot)

  • Member
  • 5206 battles
  • 6,744
  • [332ND] 332ND
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

View PostBB3_Oregon_Steel, on 26 December 2019 - 03:57 PM, said:

 

Well, it looks cool and it fits the WG philosophy of "Weirder is Better" when it comes to choosing which planes it will develop and this one certainly meets that criteria.  

 

However the first jet fighter of the USAF was this baby ... 

 

 

This is the Bell P-59 Air Comet which first entered service in the Fall of 1944.   Around 50 production models were produce and were used largely for training and familiarization with jet aircraft for pilots and support personnel.  

 

It's performance characteristics were modest and much of the blame for this can be laid at the feet of the underpowered J31 jet engine it was equipped with, which presumably, the L-133 would have been forced to use as well.  As such, its highly doubtful the L-133 would have been able to attain it's proposed speed (as stated above) using any jet engine then in production in the US.    

 

Performance characteristics for the P-59 were

Top Speed:  413 mpg (665 kph)

Armament:  One 37mm cannon, three 50 cal Machine guns. 

Ordinance: Eight Rockets, 2,000 lbs of bombs. 

 

Agreed ,and asked for that to be made too ,but the key words , "Supersonic",and proposed .


Edited by FreeFOXMIKE, 27 December 2019 - 04:54 AM.

           332 Virtual  Fighter  Group

 


FreeFOXMIKE #6 Posted 27 December 2019 - 04:52 AM

    G.A.T.P. (Global Alpha Test Pilot)

  • Member
  • 5206 battles
  • 6,744
  • [332ND] 332ND
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

View PostwylleEcoyote, on 26 December 2019 - 07:39 PM, said:


I could see it in tier 7 with all the other prototype "first jets"
It did have its own engine even if its development history was rough.
Which is good because two British centrifugal jet motors would not fit inside the plane.

Good roll for something of its size. good speed and power (first in-body jet engine design with an afterburner!) enough to not be as weak as suspected when flying in the yellow band. Great at the chase.
 Quad 20's is only little below average for tier 7 firepower.
Placing them in a nose mount will allow for some juicy soft stat enhancement that makes up for any perceived damage difference

Most of the primary control surfaces and engine hit boxes mounted in the rear
Mean in a head on attack. but vulnerable to anything that gets behind it. 

The canard design does a few things.
It avoids the worst of the infamous P-38 high speed air compression issues.
But this comes in exchange for over all sluggishness to its response in the pitch axis compared to a P-38, especially at low speeds.
That sluggishness would bleed away at higher speeds.  Only to come back when it red-lines near supersonic speed.
If it gets combined with a low optimal altitude like in the meteor; that leaves little room for error.
This thing would get killed by "player error_lawndart.exe" scenarios as often as enemy action dealing with relatively slow tier 6's on the deck.

on the other hand Being classed as a heavy with a better altitude band and a 30 second boost thanks to the multi-altitude rated J37 after-burning engine would make it a rare tier 7 that can do well vs speedy tier 8's by Not loosing what maneuverability it has (until it red-lines) at speeds and altitudes that other jet fighters like a meteor would struggle with.

Tier 8 airspeed, Tier 7 maneuverability and guns somewhere between tier 6.5 or 5.5 (for balance i suppose the better the agilty the older the guns. in theory)

What makes it special is that it is all on a plane designed when tier 5's were the thing.

 

Excellent Write up <Thanks for the input.  


           332 Virtual  Fighter  Group

 


Perrigrino #7 Posted 16 January 2020 - 09:54 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 6490 battles
  • 380
  • [OWSS] OWSS
  • Member since:
    10-02-2013

very very interesting,

 In the late 50's:

 

Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
Jump to navigation Jump to search
CF-105 Arrow
 
 
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
 
 

The Avro Canada CF-105 Arrow, often known simply as the Avro Arrow, was a delta-winged interceptor aircraft designed and built by Avro Canada. The CF-105 held the promise of Mach 2 speeds at altitudes exceeding 50,000 feet (15,000 m) and was intended to serve as the Royal Canadian Air Force's (RCAF) primary interceptor into the 1960s and beyond.[5]

The Arrow was the culmination of a series of design studies begun in 1953 that examined improved versions of the Avro Canada CF-100 Canuck. After considerable study, the RCAF selected a dramatically more powerful design, and serious development began in March 1955. The aircraft was intended to be built directly from the production line, skipping the traditional hand-built prototype phase. The first Arrow Mk. I, RL-201, was rolled out to the public on 4 October 1957, the same day as the launch of Sputnik I.

Flight testing began with RL-201 on 25 March 1958, and the design quickly demonstrated excellent handling and overall performance, reaching Mach 1.9 in level flight. Powered by the Pratt & Whitney J75, another three Mk. 1s were completed, RL-202, RL-203 and RL-204. The lighter and more powerful Orenda Iroquois engine was soon ready for testing, and the first Mk.II with the Iroquois, RL-206, was ready for taxi testing in preparation for flight and acceptance tests by RCAF pilots by early 1959.

On 20 February 1959, Prime Minister of Canada John Diefenbaker abruptly halted the development of the Arrow (and its Iroquois engines) before the scheduled project review to evaluate the program could be held.[6] Canada tried to sell the Arrow to the US and Britain, but no agreements were concluded.[7] Two months later, the assembly line, tooling, plans and existing airframes and engines were ordered to be destroyed. The cancellation was the topic of considerable political controversy at the time, and the subsequent destruction of the aircraft in production remains a topic for debate among historians and industry pundits. "This action effectively put Avro out of business and its highly skilled engineering and production personnel scattered ..."[8]



Bubba_Zanetti #8 Posted 17 January 2020 - 05:45 AM

    First Lieutenant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 4725 battles
  • 2,463
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

As cool as the Arrow would be, it didn't have any guns, being strictly a missile platform.  A more realistic model for WOWP could be the CF-100, maybe as a multirole.


<-State of current WOWP 2.0 FE (need moar like this oldie)

 

“The sad truth is that the one thing around here is that we can always rely on is broken promises”& WarMagic the Scattering- Ace_BOTlistic_Cosmo █ If a company can't handle the truth based on pixelated facts then they shouldn't be in this industry to begin with. Or stop overreaching at areas where they obviously lack the resources to make a sucess (WOWP)” - ArrowZ_  As it is, this “upgrade” is totally misdirected and completely ignores all player feedback over the past few years.  How this studio continues on with the parent company is a total mystery to me.” - Bobby_Tables  The only thing that will fix this game is for the developers to right click and hit send to trash. - xPALEHORSEx  They've been around a good while and seen a lot of flak so they surely must know what they're doing by now. - Catch21  All wargaming has done in all their games across the board have been stupid and greedy ideas. They are failing as a company so hard. - Veraxu  Maybe Persha should avoid patches with the number 5 in them... - mnbv-fockewulfe  You put the bombsite behind a lock until you get specialist for your bombers? That's just stupid. - comtedumas  claiming victory by fixing your own problems isn't victory, it's low brow chicanery.- TheMadPizzler  Flying games generally don't have broad appeal, and this one has issues and the company tends to pour gasoline those issues, not fix them - _Laserguided_   “I go to RU and (rhymes with git) all over dumb Slavs to express my rage.” - Rando CA  If you want to sell someone a car, you let them take it for a test drive, you don't run them over with it. - Blast_Radius1  My quote + Your signature + Please = Thank You- Prenzlau  Feelings aren't stats, now shut up and go eat tide pods” - Noreaga  “The player online count was removed October 2017 and we don't have plans to return this number to be displayed. That is the decision of the developers team.”- blindfold  After a While it Becomes Tiresome (07.06.15)” - MALICE_AT_BIRTH  “Yes, we can have a place to report all the bugs and then watch as they all get ignored for 6 months” - Gang_Starr █ SonicPariah and blindfold might be listening to us, and sending our ideas along, but Persha sure isn't getting the message.” - CorvusCorvax  They just go on inventing new not-asked-for stuff before fixing what people clearly don't like ...”- GonerNL █ There is a difference between arcade and this roll your face on the keyboard simulator” - Fog_Heavy_Cruiser_Chokai  “The real question of the day: Is there room for one more quote in Bubba‘s signature? I certainly hope so.”- MelBrooks  They had to make some space for your signature” - Marsco  “It's the game.  And your signature is long enough to choke a horse. I thought mine was too large.”- SkyWolf_WM


Perrigrino #9 Posted 17 January 2020 - 01:02 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 6490 battles
  • 380
  • [OWSS] OWSS
  • Member since:
    10-02-2013

Thanks Bubba! Nice Video. 

 

29 rockets in each pod, 58 total. That would pack a whollop!  Lots of opportunities for wowp. 


Edited by Perrigrino, 17 January 2020 - 01:04 PM.


Bubba_Zanetti #10 Posted 17 January 2020 - 08:29 PM

    First Lieutenant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 4725 battles
  • 2,463
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostPerrigrino, on 17 January 2020 - 08:02 AM, said:

Thanks Bubba! Nice Video. 

 

29 rockets in each pod, 58 total. That would pack a whollop!  Lots of opportunities for wowp. 

 

I may have been mistaken.  This video talks of a 4x30mm gun package as an option for the Arrow:

 


<-State of current WOWP 2.0 FE (need moar like this oldie)

 

“The sad truth is that the one thing around here is that we can always rely on is broken promises”& WarMagic the Scattering- Ace_BOTlistic_Cosmo █ If a company can't handle the truth based on pixelated facts then they shouldn't be in this industry to begin with. Or stop overreaching at areas where they obviously lack the resources to make a sucess (WOWP)” - ArrowZ_  As it is, this “upgrade” is totally misdirected and completely ignores all player feedback over the past few years.  How this studio continues on with the parent company is a total mystery to me.” - Bobby_Tables  The only thing that will fix this game is for the developers to right click and hit send to trash. - xPALEHORSEx  They've been around a good while and seen a lot of flak so they surely must know what they're doing by now. - Catch21  All wargaming has done in all their games across the board have been stupid and greedy ideas. They are failing as a company so hard. - Veraxu  Maybe Persha should avoid patches with the number 5 in them... - mnbv-fockewulfe  You put the bombsite behind a lock until you get specialist for your bombers? That's just stupid. - comtedumas  claiming victory by fixing your own problems isn't victory, it's low brow chicanery.- TheMadPizzler  Flying games generally don't have broad appeal, and this one has issues and the company tends to pour gasoline those issues, not fix them - _Laserguided_   “I go to RU and (rhymes with git) all over dumb Slavs to express my rage.” - Rando CA  If you want to sell someone a car, you let them take it for a test drive, you don't run them over with it. - Blast_Radius1  My quote + Your signature + Please = Thank You- Prenzlau  Feelings aren't stats, now shut up and go eat tide pods” - Noreaga  “The player online count was removed October 2017 and we don't have plans to return this number to be displayed. That is the decision of the developers team.”- blindfold  After a While it Becomes Tiresome (07.06.15)” - MALICE_AT_BIRTH  “Yes, we can have a place to report all the bugs and then watch as they all get ignored for 6 months” - Gang_Starr █ SonicPariah and blindfold might be listening to us, and sending our ideas along, but Persha sure isn't getting the message.” - CorvusCorvax  They just go on inventing new not-asked-for stuff before fixing what people clearly don't like ...”- GonerNL █ There is a difference between arcade and this roll your face on the keyboard simulator” - Fog_Heavy_Cruiser_Chokai  “The real question of the day: Is there room for one more quote in Bubba‘s signature? I certainly hope so.”- MelBrooks  They had to make some space for your signature” - Marsco  “It's the game.  And your signature is long enough to choke a horse. I thought mine was too large.”- SkyWolf_WM





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users