Horten Ho 229

[richkat]

I read somewhere that when testing the YB-49 Northrop wing they were having trouble picking it up on radar, one time they lost it on screen so one of the techs went out to look around and it was allmost overhead...Rich

[Uyraell]

Somewhere in the mid 1970's I read that the Ho.229 while on flight test gave a radar return of less than 30% of what had been expected of it. That may well have been fortuitous design on the part of the Horten brothers, but I don't believe they were deliberately aiming for that result. Their design aim was, "simple, capable, maintainable, efficient, easily manufactured". They certainly achieved those goals, and the Ho.229 was a very fine aircraft to fly, according to what I have read.

The modern hype regarding stealth is just that: hype.
However: anyone who sees the Ho.229 design most certainly sees the father of the B2 Stealth Bomber: The B2 is simply an Ho.229 built in larger scale, with certain edges such as trailing edge and wingtip made straight line. The vast majority of Northrop Flying Wing designs had vertical surfaces to control yaw, whereas the Ho.229 did not, yet the B2 basically replicates the same means of yaw control as the Ho.229. Combine that fact with the planform of each aircraft, and it is almost beyond all debate that the B2 is the child of the Ho.229, and manifestly not an original Northrop design.

This would also account for why the Ho.229, the only remaining example in the world, has been left rotting in a building for the last 60 years, and listed as "Awaiting Restoration".

I will never believe the B2 is an original Northrop design, for this reason.
Some years ago I was friends with an aeroengineer who had worked on design structure for the F117. My friend quite candidly admitted that much of the planform data for that aircraft came from such projects as the BV Ae.607, just as the B2 had come directly from the Ho.229. If anybody was in a position to know that as fact rather than speculation, that person was my friend, the design aeroengineer.

Kind and Respectful Regards my friends, Uyraell.

[calinous]

Originally Posted by thorst

Yes, the wings could be built seperated from the mid section. The only problem I couldn't find a solution for is: How to make thin rods for the framework? The only way in paper I could think of is to build it at a fairly large scale- at least 1/24, where thin paper can be rolled to appropriate tubes.

Thorsten

I don't know what kind of strength you would get out of it, but you might try rolling paper tissues or something like that. It might become strong enough with application of glue, but then it will become a glue-and-paper ( ) model instead of a paper model

[rickstef]

See if you can find paper lollipop sticks, i have used them for tail lights, axles, and you can easily size them to a smaller diameter if needed

you could even use rolling papers(the cigarette kind)

[thorst]

Well, thanks for the suggestions, but if I can't use the printed parts but had to buy tubes, I'd prefer plastic rod instead. I like to work with it, it can be glued wonderfully and is strong while flexible. But I guess it would become half of a plastic kit then

Another possibility is the kind of trusswork UHU02 used for his Valley Forge from Silent Running, where the struts are either triangular in cross section or flat. But what looks good on a large, long model, could fail on a smaller, more compact one. What do you think?

[hirondelle]

I keep thinking of paper drinking straws. Obviously you can roll your own tubes subject to thickness & strength req'd & build the frame work using some plans.
i.e draw the side views & line up the pipes for assy upon those. Shouldn't be horrendous to do & it would follow the plan/jig method I imagine the original builders used for metal pipe framing.

[hirondelle]

[from T2 doc of 1946]
Seems quite suited to toothpick or straws, with the tricycle under-cart going underneath.