Warbird Information Exchange

I agree that commercial sense would dictate FW desire to keep the design as close to original as possible, compatibly with a different engine, new prop, new systems, new instruments, removal of weapons and sundry military gear and lack of an unknown percentage of drawings.

All I said, and all I meant to say, is that those unfaired legs "look" mighty long in the head-on flying shot in the September 2004 FANA (and perhaps October FLYPAST, not at hand as I write). And correct me if I am wrong, but I daresay that there would be little load on an extended gear in the air?

They look much more normal in the rear view posted by Ollie.

Perhaps some Luftwaffe expert could point us to (or post) a wartime picture of a "butcher bird" with extended unfaired gear?

Gregory

Hey Gregory,

Those legs looked extra long and spindly when I made my first 1/72 model as a school boy. The lack of gear doors only emphasises the effect.

When airborne or retracted the legs will extend to full length, minus the internal rebound stop, if fitted, which will be just an inch or so.

Revising the leg geometry and articulation would be an horrendous price to pay to accommodate an increase in propeller diameter - and why would you want to do that? Ultimate performance at the edge of the envelope is not an issue here. Surely either a proprietary propeller has been been trimmed or a purpose designed item manufactured to the original spec. diameter commensurate with the characteristics of the fitted engine.

PeterA

You are right Gregory, extended legs when the aircraft is not touching the ground show a lack of supported weight!

_________________
Olivier Lacombe -- Harvard Mk.4 C-GBQB