Jump to content

I saw the newly launched Mosquito external model redo these days, and it didn’t feel particularly good.


Recommended Posts

 

I saw the newly launched Mosquito external model redo these days, and it didn’t feel particularly good. I don’t know why ed have to redo it?
In my opinion, Mosquito is an aircraft developed and launched in the United Kingdom to respond to urgent needs during World War II. Therefore, many materials are still made of wood.Wood has a short durability, Mosquito is regarded as a consumable for short-term use in wartime, so it is required to be as good-looking as the American p-47 p-51. Seems impractical


Edited by huchanronaa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rockrend said:

I suppose it could be as simple as, “when the boss says do it again”, you just gotta go with it…

The entire mosquito bomber only has 130 kg of metal, and the others are all wood, which means that the appearance is completely different from other all-metal fighters. How to make the appearance of the model becomes a problem, which leads to catastrophic delays: At the beginning of this year, it was delayed until July and it was still difficult to give birth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure I follow this idea / thread???


The Mossie may be wood (and I’m sure ED had that figured from the start…!), but it is still a camo paint finish the same as the other RAF aircraft (only really USAAF which routinely used bare metal skin??)

 

From what I recall the wood structure was coated / finished in a way that gave a smooth aero finish anyway?

 

Re weight of metal … no idea what weight was in the main airframe parts - fuselage, tail, wings etc, but would be interested to know the source for the 130kg… certainly wouldn’t apply to the finished aircraft… the engines alone would have been 750ish kg each

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What also interests me is where did the OP see the new external model?


Edited by bart
  • Like 3

System :-

i7-7820X, ASUS ROG Strix X229, 32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4 3600MHz, 11GB Nvidia Geforce 1080Ti, 1x 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1x 1TB Samsung 850 EVO, 1x 500GB Samsung 960 EVO M.2, Windows 10. VPC WarBRD Base with HOTAS Warthog Stick and Throttle, Saitek combat rudder pedals, Oculus Rift S.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, rkk01 said:

Not sure I follow this idea / thread???


The Mossie may be wood (and I’m sure ED had that figured from the start…!), but it is still a camo paint finish the same as the other RAF aircraft (only really USAAF which routinely used bare metal skin??)

 

From what I recall the wood structure was coated / finished in a way that gave a smooth aero finish anyway?

 

Re weight of metal … no idea what weight was in the main airframe parts - fuselage, tail, wings etc, but would be interested to know the source for the 130kg… certainly wouldn’t apply to the finished aircraft… the engines alone would have been 750ish kg each

The metal weight of the mosquito body is only 130 kg, of course not including the weight of the engine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bart said:

What also I interests me where did the OP see the new external model?

Me as well 🙂

  • Like 1

I9 9900KF Stock, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, T.Flight Rudder Pedals, 4K 49" screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following picture shows the mosquito-type wing and the fuselage wood structure, only the fixed hinge part is made of metal. The advantage of this design is that the fuselage is very light and can fly very fast. The disadvantage is that the fuselage has a short durability. If it is hit by a machine gun Poor protection

蚊式86fcd_1440w.jpg

蚊式機身14888_1440w.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The "mosquito" aircraft on the production line of an outsourcing factory in Canada during World War II can clearly see the wooden structure of the nose  and wings, body

蚊式加拿大v2-ba73ba21e9310116e775b956b46188c9_1440w.jpg

v2-64aea6b35a311db513752897b62c1968_1440w.jpg

v2-51994c9348712d647f581ebfa719acb3_1440w.jpg

v2-e61d77f4aeff83a8b5c2605f689128e7_1440w.jpg


Edited by huchanronaa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, huchanronaa said:

The advantage of this design is that the fuselage is very light and can fly very fast. 

 

 

I disagree here. Metal build fuselage isn't  much heavier then wooden type.

Being light does not mean that you can fly fast. You can climb fast. Flying fast require very strong fuselage and control surfaces. Able to fly fast depends mostly on power and aerodynamic design, not much on the weight.

ether metal or wooden based fuselage does not provide any protection from fire arms like mgs or infantry rifle. In planes things which provide protection are engines, metal plate armor, armor glass, fuel tanks.

I9 9900KF Stock, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, T.Flight Rudder Pedals, 4K 49" screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, huchanronaa said:

The following picture shows the mosquito-type wing and the fuselage wood structure, only the fixed hinge part is made of metal. The advantage of this design is that the fuselage is very light and can fly very fast. The disadvantage is that the fuselage has a short durability. If it is hit by a machine gun Poor protection

蚊式86fcd_1440w.jpg

蚊式機身14888_1440w.jpg


I guess if we are browsing / commenting in this sub then we’ll be well versed in the Mossie’s unique concept and construction…

 

Short durability was no issue - most aircraft weren’t expected to survive long enough for investment in durability to be worthwhile… I did see a stat on Lancaster flight hours and it was scarily low

 

Regarding wood construction vs protection, I’m not sure a few mm of aluminium would be any more useful than a wood laminate.  Most references cite the ease of repair of Mosquitos using simple and well known carpentry skills

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I already think, about how difficulty will be to take off this bird.  I think dual throttle on my hotas will come handy in keeping this bird straight on take off 🙂


Edited by grafspee

I9 9900KF Stock, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, T.Flight Rudder Pedals, 4K 49" screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, rkk01 said:


Regarding wood construction vs protection, I’m not sure a few mm of aluminium would be any more useful than a wood laminate. 


Yes.
 

And of course aluminium was in short supply.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to add to the discussion, I got the impression that the choice of wood over aluminium was a result of:

 - Severe restrictions on the availability of aluminium during the war

 - That De Havilland was highly experienced in making aircraft in wood, and less so in their knowledge of making them of metal, which was fairly new in the late 30s

The implications being that the design "played safe" by avoiding both of the above risks.

 

As already stated, speed of an aircraft is mainly down to thrust/power vs aero drag.  Weight mostly affects climbs/descent.

I think the key point about the design of the Mosquito was less about the use of wood in it's build, and more about throwing out and not using lots of heavy and un-aerodynamic things like turrets, self defence weapons and gunners.

 

A point rarely commented in is how that core premise continued post ww2.  There were very few bombers/strike aircraft fitted with self defence weaponry and turrets afterwards.  Quite the contrary, most of the follow on bomber designs went with the similar high speed as a defence, examples being the Canberra, F111, TSR2, B1, Tu22, Tu166 etc.  So in many ways, the Mossie paved the way for a lot of follow on designs.

System: 9700, 64GB DDR4, 2070S, NVME2, Rift S, Jetseat, Thrustmaster F18 grip, VPC T50 stick base and throttle, CH Throttle, MFG crosswinds, custom button box, Logitech G502 and Marble mouse.

Server: i5 2500@3.9Ghz, 1080, 24GB DDR3, SSD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed - was the first modern strike / MRCA…

 

Also, could carry similar payload as a B-17, but with 8 fewer lives on the line, and was also the type with the “safest” reputation in Bomber Command (ie, postings to Mossies greatly increased chances of survival)

 

ETA - wrt OPs comments on external model images… were these uploaded to EDs “in dev” screenshots a day early and we have some news to look forward to tomorrow??


Edited by rkk01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The wood construction was not “lighter” than metal by any significant amount. To achieve the same strength as a metal beam, you need about the same mass of wood, but the wooden beam will be of much more volume. 
 

Wood behaves differently from metal when it comes to structure - wood has fibers that make it behaves differently to different directions of stress. So, to achieve strength in a specific direction you need to orient the fibers correctly. Also, the required thickness of the wood makes it more resilient to compression - the implication was that the wood “skin” on the wings and fuselage contributed significantly to overall structure strength - like a rigid exoskeleton. Stretched aluminum skin on planes also provides some strength, but that thin skin only helps vs. stretch and provides nothing against compression.

 

The strength provided by the thick skin allowed de Havilland to reduce the number of ribs inside the wings and free more volume inside.

 

Against battle damage, the wood construction proved to be very resistant. An armor piercing bullet that hits a metal rod/spar will usually dent it an compromise its strength - these were usually made like hollow tubes to achieve higher strength, but that only works as long as the shape is not damaged - a kink may lead to a critical collapse. With a thicker wood spar, the bullet will pierce and come out the other side - some of the fibers will be damaged, but others will spread and close again after the bullet. The overall size of the bullet hole is small relative to the thickness of the beam. The result is that the beam is slightly damaged and lose only a little of its strength, and in no danger of a critical collapse.


Oh and about the drag - the mosquito skin has no rivets. This means less drag, where other planes tried to reduce this rivets issue by flushing them, or filling the spaces around them with wax.


Edited by Bozon
  • Like 1

“Mosquitoes fly, but flies don’t Mosquito” :pilotfly:

- Geoffrey de Havilland.

 

... well, he could have said it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ap bullet when hit metal plane's construction will cut it like hot knife butter. God dammed bb gun wil dent aluminium.

 


Edited by grafspee

I9 9900KF Stock, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, T.Flight Rudder Pedals, 4K 49" screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.


Edited by Bozon

“Mosquitoes fly, but flies don’t Mosquito” :pilotfly:

- Geoffrey de Havilland.

 

... well, he could have said it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bozon said:

About drag, the wooden skin reduced drag by not having any riveting and no cracks between metal sheets.

What about wooden skin deformations at high speeds?

Any way no point arguing about this metal construction are better


Edited by grafspee

I9 9900KF Stock, Gigabyte Z390 Aorus PRO, Ram 32 GB G.skill, Palit Gamerock OC 3090, Hotas Warthog, T.Flight Rudder Pedals, 4K 49" screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, grafspee said:

What about wooden skin deformations at high speeds?

Not an issue, the wood skin is very thick and rigid. Fabric skins had issues at high speeds.

“Mosquitoes fly, but flies don’t Mosquito” :pilotfly:

- Geoffrey de Havilland.

 

... well, he could have said it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • huchanronaa changed the title to 這幾天看到新推出的Mosquito外模重做,感覺不是特別好。
  • huchanronaa changed the title to I saw the newly launched Mosquito external model redo these days, and it didn’t feel particularly good.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...