User:Steelpillow/Aircraft/Archive1

My old notes on Aircraft.

Just in case

 * diff

Wing configurations

 * See also
 * Category:Wing configurations
 * Book:Aircraft wing configurations
 * User:Steelpillow/Books/Aircraft wing configurations


 * Number of wings
 * Monoplane
 * High wing - redirect to Monoplane
 * Low wing - redirect to Monoplane
 * Mid wing - redirect to Monoplane
 * Parasol wing - redirect to Monoplane
 * Shoulder wing - redirect to Monoplane
 * Biplane
 * Sesquiplane - redirect to Biplane
 * Triplane
 * Multiplane (aeronautics)
 * Quadruplane - redirect to Multiplane (aeronautics)
 * Stagger (aeronautics)
 * Support
 * Bracing (aeronautics)
 * Closed wing
 * Annular wing - redirect to Closed wing
 * Box wing - redirect to Closed wing
 * Joined wing - redirect to Closed wing
 * Flexible wing
 * Wing planform
 * Aspect ratio (aerodynamics)
 * Swept wing
 * Forward-swept wing
 * Trapezoidal wing
 * Elliptical wing
 * Crescent wing
 * Delta wing
 * Circular wing
 * Asymmetrical aircraft
 * Oblique wing
 * Tailplanes and foreplanes
 * Canard (aeronautics)
 * Tandem wing
 * Three-surface aircraft
 * Tailless aircraft
 * Dihedral and anhedral
 * Dihedral (aeronautics)
 * Gull wing
 * Inverted gull wing - redirect to Gull wing
 * Channel wing
 * Wings and bodies
 * Flying wing
 * Blended wing body
 * Lifting body
 * Variable geometry
 * Variable-sweep wing
 * Variable camber wing
 * Variable-incidence wing

Early history
History of aviation and Early flying machines subdivide things differently, like this:

Whitehead
FWIW: I think that the No.21 probably took off OK but, like all other flying machines up to that time (including the steam-powered disaster), it was essentially uncontrolled. There is a stronger case that the No. 22 was controllable but a weaker case that it flew as claimed.


 * Wiki pages
 * Gustave Whitehead
 * History by contract

As Gray says, "In 'The Strange Case of Gustave Whitehead' nothing seems to be what it appears to be." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carroll-f-gray/gustave-whitehead-the-cas_b_4125695.html
 * Notes

2012 Brown working at the Smithsonian, where he came across the photo-in-a-photo. http://www.weisskopf.de/mediapool/93/932814/data/DGLR_BROWN_John_English_Why_Gustave_Whitehead_was_Recognized_as_First_in_flig.pdf Brown, Why Gustave Whitehead was Recognized as First in Flight

Mar 8, 2013 Jane's editorial published. http://www.weisskopf.de/mediapool/93/932814/data/DGLR_BROWN_John_English_Why_Gustave_Whitehead_was_Recognized_as_First_in_flig.pdf Brown, Why Gustave Whitehead was Recognized as First in Flight

Mar 19 2013 http://wyso.org/post/newly-found-photo-reignites-debate-over-first-flight-claim

March 22, 2013 Paul Jackson - Excerpt, Response to Journalist, http://www.gustave-whitehead.com/history/paul-jackson-explains-reasoning/ "Too many debates about Whitehead have been kicked into the 'long grass' by diversionary wrangling ... And that entirely spurious "Where's the photograph?" argument."

June 26, 2013 Connecticut lawmakers write Wright Brothers out of history as ‘first in flight’

Oct 22, 2013 Gustave Whitehead and the Case of the Fallacious Photo - Gray http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carroll-f-gray/gustave-whitehead-the-cas_b_4125695.html


 * References
 * Weissenborn, G.K.; "Did Whitehead fly?", Air Enthusiast 35, Pilot Press (1988), Pages 19-21 and 74-75.
 * gustave-whitehead.com: Brown's website
 * Crouch, T.; The Wright-Smithsonian Contract, Smithsonian Institution: acknowledgement of a conflict of interest.
 * Flight Journal (www.flightjournal.com)
 * O'Dwyer, W.; "The “Who Flew First” Debate," Flight Journal, Oct 1998, pp 22-23, 50-55.
 * FlightJournal blog: Who was first the Wrights or Whitehead?. Links to other important resources.
 * Jane's all the world's aircraft, 2013 edition, editorial: copy here
 * Daily Mail commentary.
 * Time commentary.
 * National Geographic commentary.
 * Carroll F. Gray (Ed.); Flying Machines (flyingmachies.org) "Gustave Whitehead" pages
 * "Scientific American on Gustave Whitehead"
 * Charles R. Wittemann's affidavit
 * Col. H. Larry Elman, "Whitehead Hoax"
 * The Court's Decision on Whitehead, Wright Brothers Aeroplane Company (www.wright-brothers.org)

Zanonia
Alsomitra macrocarpa is the name currently accepted by the Royal Horticultural Society.
 * Naming

J. Hutchinson; "Macrozanonia Cogn. and Alsomitra Roem", Annals of Botany Volume 6 Issue 1, 1942, pp. 95-102. First distinguished from Zanonia indica (whose shells contain only two seeds) as Zanonia macrocarpa by Blume, who also introduced a new section Alsomitra for it. later, Roemer called it Alsomitra macrocarpa. Then Cogniaux went for Macrozanonia macrocarpa and Engler followed. Correct name is Alsomitra macrocarpa.

Ahlborn's original Zanonia wing study: find cites:
 * Ahlborn
 * Dunne's RAeS/Flight paper namechecks Ahlborn.
 * Friedrich Christian Georg Ahlborn; Über die Stabilität der Flugapparate, Friederichsen, 1897. [Google Books]
 * Ernst Heinrich Hirschel, Horst Prem, Gero Madelung; Aeronautical Research in Germany: From Lilienthal until Today, 2004 (Springer edn 2012, pp29-30). [Google Books] Ahlborn published Über die Stabilität der Flugapparate in 1897. In it he described his experiments with the Zanonia Macrocarpa seed. Etrich based his Taube on it. (Covers Jatho but no connection with Zanonia mentioned).

Are there more refs for the denials from Dunne and Aero Soc. colleagues, besides these:
 * Dunne
 * Dunne, J.W.; "The theory of the Dunne aeroplane", The aeronautical journal, April 1913, pp83-102 (reproduced in Flight over several issues from 16 August 1913): "Violently opposed to the Zanonia type in most characteristics are the wing forms in ... the division to which I have given most of my attention since 1904."
 * Review of Raleigh's "The War in the Air", Aeronautical Journal, July 1922, p243.

Nope: Weiss did birds - the "crow" type presumably - and Handley Page copied him.
 * Weiss and Handley Page


 * Etrich
 * "The Evolution of the Etrich 'Taube'", Flight 12 February 1915, pages 106-108.

Composites and carriers

 * Reference examples
 * Concept Aircraft:
 * Tupolev-Vakhmistrov Zveno as composite of parasites and mother ship
 * Short-Mayo as composite, mother ship or mother-plane
 * B-36 FICON as composite, mother-ship
 * Hitler's Luftwaffe: Mistel as composite, with upper and lower components.
 * Profile: The Short Empire Flying Boats: composite, with upper and lower components.
 * US Fighters: XF-85 Goblin, F9C Sparrowhawk, Zveno as parasite fighters, B-29 as mother ship.
 * US Naval Fighters: F9C Sparrowhawk, airship as airborne aircraft carrier.
 * The X-Planes: X-15, various kinds of test missile; air launch, carrier aircraft.

Some discussions

 * Talk:Air Registration Board (even though it's a redirect)
 * User talk:Steelpillow
 * Talk:Aircraft_maintenance_engineer_(Canada)
 * Talk:Aircraft_Maintenance_Engineer

Articles

 * Main namespace
 * Aircraft maintenance
 * Aircraft maintenance engineer - disambig page
 * Aircraft engineer - redirect
 * Aircraft Maintenance Engineer
 * Aircraft maintenance engineer (Canada)
 * Aircraft maintenance technician
 * Aircraft technician - redirect
 * Aviation Maintenance Technician
 * Aircraft Ground Engineer
 * Aircraft maintenance checks
 * Flight engineer
 * Civil Aviation Authority (United Kingdom)
 * Air Registration Board - redirect
 * User CanadianAME
 * User:CanadianAME/Aircraft maintenance personnel in Britain
 * Draft:Aircraft maintenance personnel in Britain - redirect
 * User:CanadianAME/AIR Engineer

International
ICAO Personnel Licensing FAQ: "The Type I and Type II Aircraft Maintenance Engineer (AME) licences have been superseded by a single AME licence since November 1998 (see Annex 1, Chapter 4, paragraph 4.2)."
 * ICAO

ICAO; Doc 7300, Convention on International Civil Aviation (also referred to as the Chicago Convention), 9th Edn. (2006), Annex 1, Chapter 4. Licenses and ratings for personnel other than flight crew members, Section 4.2 Aircraft maintenance (technician/engineer/mechanic): "Note.&mdash; The terms in brackets are given as acceptable additions to the title of the license. Each Contracting State is expected to use in its own regulations the one it prefers."

ICAO site search result - clearly, the AME is well accepted.

AMROBA discussion document, 2013: "The vast majority of [Asian] countries have ‘adopted’ the European Aviation Safety Authority (EASA) Part 66/147 aircraft maintenance engineer (AME) licensing and training requirements." http://amroba.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Part66-147Proposal.pdf
 * AMROBA

H Lorenzo Johnson; Working in Aircraft Maintenance, Lulu, 2012. [Self-published so not reliable]
 * Johnson

"An Aircraft Maintenance Engineer is responsible for ensuring an aircraft operates properly and safely. A maintenance engineer may make repairs, troubleshoot problems, conduct inspections and make upgradres to aircraft. Daily duites may include FAA inspections..."

"Aircraft maintenance technician, as used in the United States, refers to an individual who holds a mechanics certificate issued by the FAA. ... Aircraft maintenance Technicians (AMTs) inspect and perform or supervise ... In the US, aircraft maintenance technicians usually refer to themselves as A&Ps, for airframe and powerplant mechanics."

The Canadian "Aircraft Maintenance Engineer" is described by the American FAA as an "Aviation Maintenance Engineer". ICAO refer to the "Aircraft Maintenance Engineer (AME) licence". All these versions are capitalised.
 * Misc

Evolution of Aircraft Maintenance Training: "Traditionally the training of aircraft engineers was through an apprenticeship scheme1, as this is a field that largely relies on skill base. On the early days aircraft maintenance focused on mechanical systems and the engine, as the aircraft was made up of a structure, control mechanism and the engine. The licensing began in 1909 and by the year 1919 the first international licensing standard were established as Annex E of the Paris Convention. The early standards of licensing were mainly for air crew and this licensing was based on medical fitness as well as experience. The first personnel licensing standards were implemented by ICAO in 1948"

Britain/UK
The King's Regulations and Air Council Instructions for the Royal Air Force were first published in 1924, some six years after the Force's formation from the union of the RFC and the RNAS in 1918. It distinguished between the airman, aircraftman and aircrafthand. [ref "The King's Regulations and Air Council Instructions for the Royal Air Force", Flight, 4 December 1924, Page 760]

Association of Licensed Aircraft Engineers (ALAE), News Archive: The Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineer, 2007. Discusses the ICAO attempt to reduce the role of the AME.

Society of Licensed Aircraft Engineers, A Guide to the Aircraft Maintenance Engineer's Licence Examinations, 4th edn, 1957. (Now incorporated in the RAeS).

Australia

 * This blog from 2004 shows that Australia is/was involved in the same controversy over downgrading the LAME.
 * This Australian company offers "L/AME" training.
 * Ref to Licensed ... (LAME) https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=xKP1GgAACAAJ&dq=%22aircraft+maintenance+engineer%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjZq_Ll4ujJAhUG1xoKHTBwDpo4ChDoAQhEMAY

New Zealand
Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand, How to be An- Aircraft Maintenance Engineer, 1999 https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=KVuqtgAACAAJ&dq=%22aircraft+maintenance+engineer%22&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjUwrLD3ejJAhWG2xoKHVmJDf0Q6AEIUTAH

Canada
Transport Canada, [AME Licensing and Training https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/standards/maintenance-aarpb-menu-2534.htm]: Canadian "Aircraft Maintenance Engineer (AME) Licensing"

USA
FAA Aviation Maintenance Technician Handbook - General, Chapter 12: Publications, Forms, and Records, Page 12-20, CFR Part 43 — Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, Rebuilding, and Alteration, §43.17 Maintenance, preventive maintenance, or alterations performed on U.S. aeronautical products by certain Canadian persons: "This section was significantly revised in 2005 as the result of a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA) between the United States and Canada. The two countries have enjoyed a long and professional relationship with respect to reciprocal aviation maintenance activity. This section of part 43 both defines some terms and gives specific limitations as to what an Aviation Maintenance Engineer (AME is the Canadian equivalent to the U.S. A&P) may do to maintain U.S.- registered aircraft located in Canada. It also provides similar limitations for an Approved Maintenance Organization. (AMO is the Canadian equivalent to the U.S.-certified repair stations.)"

CFR 14 Part 43, Section 43.17 — Maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations performed on U.S. aeronautical products by certain Canadian persons.

Outboard tail
NOTE: "Outboard horizontal stabilizer (OHS)" is common nowadays, but is limited in applicability because aerodynamic studies often also implicate outboard vertical fins. It seems to have been plastered everywhere by Kentfield, so present it as such. The original German texts have no clear name for it beyond "pfeilflieger" (swept wing) and the B&V designs are usually described in English as "tailless". "Outboard tail" seems a better description of the overall approach. NASA coined it during their 1950-60s studies and it has appeared sporadically in text since then.

Article creation history
Linked to from Swiss Air Force aircraft squadrons and McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet.

F/A-18C Mock-up was deleted on 21 February 2017 following AfD discussion. A later re-creation of the deleted article at F/A-18C Mock-up MAGO was also AfD'ed and a much shortened version merged on 16 November 2017 into McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet. Reason on both occasions was lack of sufficient notability demonstrated by the sources. F/A-18C Maquette was a short-lived recreation of a deleted version.

Article finally rolled out via format draft review at Draft:Hugo Wolf F/A-18C simulator, following support expressed here.

Nomenclature
There seem to be insufficient English-language sources to determine any established name or designation.

Hugo Wolf use the name "F/A 18 C Mock-up" (sic) in the English version of their brochure, but in aeronautics the term "mock-up" usually refers to a design development construction, not the product itself. Armasuisse note the common use of "maquette" in their German-language registration entries. While "maquette" is obscure in English and "model" does not seem right either (it is also a German word but is not used in this context). Training devices are usually "simulators" and there is also a 2013 Hugo Wolf piece titled "F/A 18 Simulator für Luftwaffe". So F/A-18C simulator would probably be the most correct, with mock-up a possible descriptor for the carcass.

Armasuisse give the type designation, for registration purposes at least, as Boeing F/A-18C Hornet (Hugo Wolf). Note, not even "Hornisse" (the German for "Hornet").

The official German usage of Mobile Ausbildungsanlage Ground Operations, official abbreviation Mob Ausb Anl Ground Ops, is more a programme title than a product name or type designation. Armasuisse use it only in the text description of each registration entry. The "MAGO" acronym was apparently coined by a German-speaking Wikipedian, probably the puppeteer FFA P-16; in fact the official abbreviation would more correctly contract to "MAAGO" with a double A.

F/A 18 Simulator für Luftwaffe

 * via Google Translate

In 2009, we started planning and designing a mobile training facility. Initially, the scope of the project was still manageable, since only a simple "frame" with the right wheel dimensions should be produced.

However, the project soon found an open ear among the participants. Gradually, a full-scale project to replicate an original F / A 18 Hornet of the Swiss Air Force resulted. The plant has ethical functions which serve the accidental patch for training. Prerequisite was the exercises for the recovery of the aircraft, the maneuvering, the rescue of the pilot and certain manipulations that must be carried out during the rescue. Likewise, overheated brakes (hot breaks) with smoke and LED can be simulated, as well as engine fires. Thus, a complete exercise unit for the Luftwaffe has emerged, which is unique in the world. The plant will be used at various locations in Switzerland. Until today, the training no training could be carried out as real as with the current simulator.

We are proud of the work we have done and can only say good things about the cooperation with Armaasuisse, RUAG and the Air Force.

Further texts appear in the Thuner Tagblatt from 18.04.2013 and in the trade magazine Cockpit. [Thuner Tagblatt piece is the original "why a simulator drove through Seftigen"]

Die Hornisse, die nie fliegen wird (The Hornet that won't fly)

 * (Mainly) Google translation from the German. Source: Berner Zeitung as above

The Luftwaffe has a second new F/A-18 simulator. Experience with the first one has proved that the training of rescue teams in dealing with weapons and fuel can be made more realistic.



17 meters long, 11.7 meters wingspan, 4.6 meters high. From the outside only experts or new trainees on X-5099 are likely to recognize that there is no real F/A-18 Hornet on the apron. It is a 1:1 mockup of wood, metal and plastic. Since 2013, it has been used for the training of Swiss Air Force accident teams.

Since a real hornet is delicate and expensive, it can be used for training only to a limited extent. With a stock of today still 31 machines is also rarely available for the training. The training and training needs are still high, so a second revised model is being built in Seftigen near Hugo Wolf AG (X-5098).

The application scenarios

The Hornet of the Swiss Air Force carries sharp weapons in action. The handling is not without danger and is constantly trained. It is not only risky for the pilot, a machine should make an emergency landing.

The operational forces of the accident pigeon must ensure the self-protection of the cannon, the steering weapons, the deceptive bodies against the steering weapons and the squabbling and slinging seat cover before the rescue of the pilot can begin. Andreas Willener, Chief Accident Officer of the Meiringen Military Airfield, explains what the model is used for:


 * Flight accident package: training of the teams in RS and WK as well as the profiorganisations on the airfields. Starting at the Mockup with the fire engines, watering, securing the weapons and pilot rescue.
 * Airplane Tug Driver: Moving the machine in the narrow rock cavern.
 * Aircraft recruitment: A true F / A-18 requires a 100-ton Pneukran for hoisting. This can be trained. The mounting of the Hissgeschirr is like the original, and this time at the Mockup abut, the repair of the damage is not as expensive as with a real Hornet.

Willeers Conclusion: "The experience and the quality of the people increases with the training at the Mockup." With adaptations like new tablet control software, a real skid seat, a hydraulically retractable nose gear for «nose landings» as well as additional smoke generators in the area of ​​the steering weapons, the X- 5098 «fight value increased».

If the planned fire training center on the Payerne airport is still being built, the quality of the training is "massively improved" according to Willener. At the same time, the soldiers in the recruiting school receive one week of special training in a fire training center in Holland, but this is not possible in the refresher courses.

The Mockup under construction

The Mockup is manufactured by Hugo Wolf AG in Seftigen. It has already produced the first. "There are about 10,000 working hours in the project. The construction period is 14 months", says owner and CEO André Sommer.

The substructure - the skeleton - consists of so-called spans, which consist of three layers of spruce. The whole is planked with multiplexed plywood. "These materials are very flexible and pleasant to process. However, the sheathing with fiberglass and carbon fiber is important for durability, longevity and stability. The combination with the materials is the key."

The new Mockup X-5098 is stationed on the Payerne military airfield, the X-5099 is used as a mobile training device on the other airfields. "The delivery of the second Maquette will reduce the road transports of the non-avaricious hornet," says Andreas Willener. He is clearly satisfied, his suggestions for improvement were taken into account in the new building.

(Berner Oberländer)

Created: 20.08.2016, 07:00 hours

Swiss Air Force Registrations list

 * This has been updated since the article was deleted (See ref below to Oct 2017 version). Here are the (Google translated) official descriptions of these craft:
 * Duplicate info common to both entries in brown

X-5098 Boeing F/A-18C Hornet (Hugo Wolf)

A mock-up as lifelike replica made of wood and plastic, produced on behalf of Armasuisse by Hugo Wolf AG in CH-3662 Seftigen (BE), with Georges Sommer jun. as a partner for the construction of the mock-up. The official name is "Mobile Ausbildungsanlage Ground Operations" (Mobile Training Ground Operation) (Mob Ausb Anl Ground Ops), but in everyday language it is called "Maquette". The high load of the first built version (X-5099) showed that it needs a second practice object. The deceptively realistic looking 1:1 dummy of the F/A-18C offers many simulation possibilities. The instructor can enter innumerable scenarios and faults via touchscreen. This second, enhanced mock-up version (X-5098) has an ejection seat. The instrumentation, partly with original instruments, differs in no way from the original, as well as the chassis. Its nose wheel is retractable and retractable on the X-5098. In addition to simulating leaks in the external wing tank, this dummy can also fill the internal wing tanks with water. And at the tail position lights were mounted, make the night exercises possible. This second, more stable wooden hornet was laminated with fiberglass reinforced plastic. The X-5098 is mainly based at the military airfield Payerne.

X-5099 Boeing F/A-18C Hornet (Hugo Wolf)

A mock-up as lifelike replica made of wood and plastic, produced on behalf of Armasuisse by Hugo Wolf AG in CH-3662 Seftigen (BE), with Georges Sommer jun. as a partner for the construction of the mock-up. The official name is "Mobile Ausbildungsanlage Ground Operations" (Mobile Training Ground Operations) (Mob Ausb Anl Ground Ops), in everyday language, however, it is briefly called "Maquette". The deceptively realistic looking 1:1 dummy of the F/A-18C offers many simulation possibilities. The instructor can enter innumerable scenarios and faults via touchscreen. The X-5099 is used at various military airfields with jet flight operation.

=Blohm & Voss/HFB=
 * Book:Wings of Hamburg
 * PediaPress current edition


 * P 198 lacklustre conventional jet fighter: deleted to improve PediaPress ToC layout.
 * P 178 asymmetric jet 'stuka': too little RS to establish real significance, should I have deleted this instead?
 * Consider adding a chapter on associated aircraft:
 * FGP 227: article already exists.
 * Škoda-Kauba SK V-6: needs better sourcing (see below).
 * (Me 155 redirects to BV 155.)
 * Possible articles
 * Hermann Pohlmann: article exists, but Pohlmann's role at B&V is not well documented.
 * Hermann Blohm: see Hermann Blohm: Gründer der Werft Blohm & Voss
 * Walther Blohm: check out the foundation web site
 * Škoda-Kauba SK V-6: including the SK SL-6. Needs better sourcing, these are too minimal and they conflict: [Cowin, Titz & Zazvonil, Saffek & Plocek]
 * Blohm & Voss P 175: single underbelly jet engine. Bordjäger variously translates as shipboard fighter or parasite fighter. Sources uncertain, e.g. Bordjäger jet [Nowarra], shipboard jet fighter [Masters], parasite fighter [Internet]. Dan says it has a nose spike. That appears not to be compatible with shipboard operation. Look out for RS.
 * Masters, p.26: "One of the earliest [B&V] jet designs was the P.175, which is known to have been intended as a shipboard fighter powered by a single Junkers turbojet and with a wign span of 20ft 4in (6.20m)."
 * Blohm & Voss P 214: no known drawings. Sources inconsistent. Tailless jet fighter similar to P. 212 [Masters, Cowin], piloted anti-aircraft flying bomb [Heinz J. Nowarra, Die Deutsche Luftrüstung 1933-1945 (Other sources in the existing article cite Nowarra)]. Internet suggests either a tailless suicide plane or muddles it with Stockel's MGRP. Masters' full-span, 3-cannon spec looks a bit inconsistent with throwaway. Look out for more RS.
 * Cowin, Part I, Oct 1963, p.316: "Intended as a high-altitude day fighter, the P-214 was the first of these ["arrow wing"] projects to have full fins and rudders, and externally was otherwise identical to the P-212."
 * Masters, p.35: "...designed to meet the OKL specification of 1944. ... the P.214 was of tailless layout with wingtip control surfaces.  the wing was swept back at 40°..." also Table of data.
 * Nowarra quoted as; "Offiziell als »Bemannte Fla.-Bombe« bezeichnet, war dies ein Flugzeug, das durch einen Flugzeugführer gesteuert, eine starke Sprengladung an den feindlichen Bomberverband heranbringen sollte. In genügender Nähe des Verbandes sollte der Pilot abspringen und die nunmehr unbemannte Maschine mit ihrer Sprengladung zur Explosion bringen. Da das Abspringen im Anflug zwar theoretisch möglich, aber praktisch wahrscheinlich ausgeschlossen war, konnte man dies als eine »Selbstmordbombe« bezeichnen." ("Officially referred to as "Manned Anti-Aircraft Bomb", this was a piloted aircraft to deliver a large explosive charge to the enemy bomber formation. In close proximity to the formation, the pilot would bale out and the now unmanned machine would explode its charge. Since the escape in the approach was theoretically possible, but almost certainly impractical, this could be described as a "suicide bomb.")


 * See also
 * Hamburger Flugzeugbau
 * Template:Blohm & Voss aircraft
 * Category:Blohm & Voss aircraft
 * Book:Wings of Hamburg
 * List of German aircraft projects, 1939–45


 * Links to HFB: Use the redirect page, as in preference to .

=Škoda-Kauba=

Related pages

 * Otto Kauba
 * List of aircraft (Sk)
 * List of German aircraft projects, 1939–45
 * Template:Skoda-Kauba aircraft
 * Škoda-Kauba SK 257
 * Škoda-Kauba V4 - redirect to SK 257.
 * Škoda-Kauba V5 - redirect to SK 257.
 * Škoda-Kauba SK P14. Ramjet powered interceptor fighter.
 * Škoda-Kauba
 * Škoda-Kauba V1A - redirect to Škoda-Kauba.
 * Škoda-Kauba V1 - redirect to Škoda-Kauba.
 * Škoda-Kauba V2 - redirect to Škoda-Kauba.
 * Škoda-Kauba V3 - redirect to Škoda-Kauba.
 * Škoda-Kauba V4 - redirect to Škoda-Kauba.
 * Škoda-Kauba V5 - redirect to Škoda-Kauba.
 * Škoda-Kauba V6 - redirect to Škoda-Kauba.
 * Škoda-Kauba V7 - redirect to Škoda-Kauba.
 * Škoda-Kauba V8 - redirect to Škoda-Kauba.
 * Škoda-Kauba V9 - redirect to Škoda-Kauba.
 * Škoda-Kauba V10 - redirect to Škoda-Kauba.
 * Škoda-Kauba V11 - redirect to Škoda-Kauba.
 * Škoda-Kauba V12 - redirect to Škoda-Kauba.
 * Škoda-Kauba SL6 - redirect to Škoda-Kauba.