MiG 8
Mon Jan 31, 2005 2:31 am
Just was watching a show on the History Channel about US and Russian secret project aircraft during WW2. One, the MiG 8 really piqued my interest. Anyone seen any decent info on it anywhere? Based on the film they had and the interviews it was a real charm to fly and the test pilots regularly used it as a hack.
From the basic design, it would be an easy aircraft to build and quite usefull to. Appeared to be a 4 or 6 seater with a 5 or 7 cylinder pusher engine, fixed tricycle gear and a decent sized door.
From the basic design, it would be an easy aircraft to build and quite usefull to. Appeared to be a 4 or 6 seater with a 5 or 7 cylinder pusher engine, fixed tricycle gear and a decent sized door.
Mon Jan 31, 2005 12:11 pm
Those free Russians flying aircrafts is a load of radial waste oil.
They never had any planes, no pictures were even taken, etc.
BTW, it ws Bf 109s, not 262s.
They never had any planes, no pictures were even taken, etc.
BTW, it ws Bf 109s, not 262s.
Mon Jan 31, 2005 6:54 pm
Rob: Did you notice that they debunked the myth that the MiG-15 was a copy of the German P-101? ? Seems that a couple of the young bucks with one of the design bureaus did all the preliminary work on the -15 back in the early to mid thirties and it wasn't until the late late forties that they were able to actually put the design into production.
I gathered from some of the stuff they presented that it's only by the grace of Stalins's stupidity and dislike of aircraft designers that we are not speaking Russian today instead of English as our primary language. Makes you wonder how far advanced flight technology would be today if Stalin hadn't been so busy killing off all the aircraft designers.
I gathered from some of the stuff they presented that it's only by the grace of Stalins's stupidity and dislike of aircraft designers that we are not speaking Russian today instead of English as our primary language. Makes you wonder how far advanced flight technology would be today if Stalin hadn't been so busy killing off all the aircraft designers.
Mon Jan 31, 2005 7:22 pm
A very interesting book is 'The German Imprint on the History of Russian Aviation' by D.A. Sobolev and D.B. Khazanov.
I seriously doubt any 262s were operated by any Free Russian Sqdn. They were reserved for experienced and in many cases, ace Luftwaffe pilots. There is no mention of such a thing in any 262 histories or records I have seen, but I will put it to the stormbird mailing list and get back on it.
Dave
I seriously doubt any 262s were operated by any Free Russian Sqdn. They were reserved for experienced and in many cases, ace Luftwaffe pilots. There is no mention of such a thing in any 262 histories or records I have seen, but I will put it to the stormbird mailing list and get back on it.
Dave
mig 8
Mon Jan 31, 2005 8:14 pm
missed the show, but rather shocking that the basics of the mig 15 date back to the 1930's!! can somebody briefly elaborate on the details?? regards, tom
Mon Jan 31, 2005 10:03 pm
The MiG-15 was heavily based on the Focke-Wulf Ta 183 Huckebein.
Simple.
So was the Argentinian Pulqui fighter.
Ta 183 :
MiG 15 :
Full Ta 183 story : http://www.luft46.com/fw/ta183-i.html
Simple.
So was the Argentinian Pulqui fighter.
Ta 183 :
MiG 15 :
Full Ta 183 story : http://www.luft46.com/fw/ta183-i.html
Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:01 pm
Answer from Stormbirds ML
"No way was any one going to give Vlassov 262s.............KG(J) 6, also in same area, Prague, couldn't get enough for them selves."
No idea about MiG 8s, but can find out.
Dave
"No way was any one going to give Vlassov 262s.............KG(J) 6, also in same area, Prague, couldn't get enough for them selves."
No idea about MiG 8s, but can find out.
Dave
Mon Jan 31, 2005 11:40 pm
Actually not Ollie. The two guys that had been working on the design had pretty much completed it well before WW2 even started. Where their stumbling block was the jet technology and getting someone just to commit to build the aircraft. If I remember correctly, the show stated that they had the basic design work and layouts completed in early 1934.... A long time before the TA-183 was even concieved.
Rob: That little twin rocket/pulse jet interceptor that they showed would have been nearly unbeatable if they had managed to get some of the rocket engine technology breakthroughs right after the war instead of later. Good ole Stalin saved the day by knocking off a couple of his best rocket guys.... It's pretty interesting that they had design studies and working designs using a heck of a lot of advanced aero dynamic and aero acoustic theories that were barely even known in the West until the late 50's and early 60's.
I did catch parts of the proceding show on Allied stuff and was pretty interested in the piecrete? and it's use as componets for a floating island. Can you imagine combining that technology with a nuke powerplant?
Rob: That little twin rocket/pulse jet interceptor that they showed would have been nearly unbeatable if they had managed to get some of the rocket engine technology breakthroughs right after the war instead of later. Good ole Stalin saved the day by knocking off a couple of his best rocket guys.... It's pretty interesting that they had design studies and working designs using a heck of a lot of advanced aero dynamic and aero acoustic theories that were barely even known in the West until the late 50's and early 60's.
I did catch parts of the proceding show on Allied stuff and was pretty interested in the piecrete? and it's use as componets for a floating island. Can you imagine combining that technology with a nuke powerplant?
Tue Feb 01, 2005 1:31 am
The russians are well documented aircraft design thiefs. The B-29 ,dc-3 copies they produced, the wright 1820 copy that was used on the an-2, the engine in the mig-15 is a copy of the ROLLS ROYCE nene 10. So much so that some parts will actualy interchange.Lets not forget the concorde. So ,oh ya sure it was, I would also like to buy that bridge you have for sale Mr.STALIN.
Tue Feb 01, 2005 2:01 am
No surviving MiG 8s in Russia.
Dave
Dave
Tue Feb 01, 2005 5:14 pm
RMB: You might just want to cool your jets for a moment and do a little research. The B-29 is the only design that you mention that was not PURCHASED by the Russians.
Wright was selling them engines and designs and production rights to numerous engine designs in the mid 1930's, including what became the 1820.
Pratt sold them designs and rights to numerous models including the Hornet and Wasp series engines.
Rolls sold the Russians 25 Nenes and 25 Derwents for various programs along with production rights to both engines in 1946.
Vultee sold numerous designs and products with production rights to Russia all the way up to the early part of the war.
Douglas sold rights as well as all the tooling and manufacturing aids for both the DC-2 and DC-3 to Russia in 1935, with a full delivery of 1 flying DC-3, one in major subassemblies and 50 more in kit parts along with tons of raw extrusions to build piece parts from 1936 to 1939.
Martin helped build and bring to production several Russian designs prior to the war.
Consolidated was working with the Russians on building PBY's in Russia prior to the war.
These were just a few of the technology and design sales from the US and Brittian that I found in a five minuet internet search.
Granted they did and continue to pursue technology by any means, but give them credit for doing things the legal method when they did.
If you think that I'm an apologist for or a Russia lover, you've got another thing coming. I'm simply an aero engineer that appreciates good design work and design philosophies that make sense. In addition I daily work with the most advanced aircraft in US production as well as having had some experience working on one of their most advanced fighters too.
Wright was selling them engines and designs and production rights to numerous engine designs in the mid 1930's, including what became the 1820.
Pratt sold them designs and rights to numerous models including the Hornet and Wasp series engines.
Rolls sold the Russians 25 Nenes and 25 Derwents for various programs along with production rights to both engines in 1946.
Vultee sold numerous designs and products with production rights to Russia all the way up to the early part of the war.
Douglas sold rights as well as all the tooling and manufacturing aids for both the DC-2 and DC-3 to Russia in 1935, with a full delivery of 1 flying DC-3, one in major subassemblies and 50 more in kit parts along with tons of raw extrusions to build piece parts from 1936 to 1939.
Martin helped build and bring to production several Russian designs prior to the war.
Consolidated was working with the Russians on building PBY's in Russia prior to the war.
These were just a few of the technology and design sales from the US and Brittian that I found in a five minuet internet search.
Granted they did and continue to pursue technology by any means, but give them credit for doing things the legal method when they did.
If you think that I'm an apologist for or a Russia lover, you've got another thing coming. I'm simply an aero engineer that appreciates good design work and design philosophies that make sense. In addition I daily work with the most advanced aircraft in US production as well as having had some experience working on one of their most advanced fighters too.
Nene
Tue Feb 01, 2005 5:33 pm
cvairworks, I agree with most of your post. But I thought the Soviets
never paid for the production rights to the Nene.
As for that History Channel "Secrets" video series(4)...I thought they took
some rather large leaps of "artistic license" with some of the facts. But
they did give a good show for some obscure types, and I agree with Rob
the animation was nice!
never paid for the production rights to the Nene.
As for that History Channel "Secrets" video series(4)...I thought they took
some rather large leaps of "artistic license" with some of the facts. But
they did give a good show for some obscure types, and I agree with Rob
the animation was nice!
Tue Feb 01, 2005 5:49 pm
I could be wrong on the Nene production rights. One source that I was reading says they bought engines only, but another source says they bought designs too. I'm not that up on Russian designs, but I do have a contact that has had complete access to several of the design bureau's archives. If I can ever get over to talk to him, I can quiz him a little. I do need to get his books and go through them too.
As to the license with the facts....I'll reserve judgement until I get a chance to see the credits and source listing. The series is only being shown the one time for now it appears so I'm going to have to order the DVD's. IF they used some of the people that I know of, and respect, then I would say that all the data is very accurate and could be independently verified.
As to the license with the facts....I'll reserve judgement until I get a chance to see the credits and source listing. The series is only being shown the one time for now it appears so I'm going to have to order the DVD's. IF they used some of the people that I know of, and respect, then I would say that all the data is very accurate and could be independently verified.
Tue Feb 01, 2005 7:06 pm
I would thrust anything from the History Channel.
The only time I watched it, I spent more time yelling at it than listening to the rubbish they were showing.
But you're right about the B-29 and the other planes and engines.
I think we would have seen the bit about the two engineers and the MiG-15 before it aired on TV in a book or a magazine.
The only time I watched it, I spent more time yelling at it than listening to the rubbish they were showing.
But you're right about the B-29 and the other planes and engines.
I think we would have seen the bit about the two engineers and the MiG-15 before it aired on TV in a book or a magazine.
History Channel
Tue Feb 01, 2005 7:28 pm
Ollie...As to History Channel "sore throat"...yes we get 'em too. Some
times the facts are OK..but it's how the producers often "cobble" them
together to form the stories. A key detail..like the Mig engineers..
"breaking" on the HC..I suspect the claim. Like cvairworks says.."let's see
what the credits say".
times the facts are OK..but it's how the producers often "cobble" them
together to form the stories. A key detail..like the Mig engineers..
"breaking" on the HC..I suspect the claim. Like cvairworks says.."let's see
what the credits say".