WW II Russian BI Rocket Interceptor

Credit

This post is based upon an Internet page of a collaborative effort by contributors from Eastern Europe.

A symposium was held at the facilities of the most important Russian aircraft constructor, after learning that the great Western Allies were developing new fighter aircraft which did not applied jet propulsion. At this symposium papers were presented on the application of new technologies in aviation engines. More specifically presentations on rocket and jet engines were included, with the aim of encouraging the development of a new vision of interceptors, incorporating jet propulsion.

By 12 July 1940 The defense committee (Committee Oborony) of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR (Council Folk Komissarov SSSR), adopted a resolution which paved the way to the creation of the first Soviet jet aircraft. The resolution, among other things, called for the solving of the problems associated with the use of jet engines to achieve supersonic speeds and stratospheric flight.  Also, this resolution of 1940 highlighted the need for a fighter-interceptor rocket engine to achieve the fore mentioned goals .

The idea of ​​creating such a fighter dates back. as far as 1938, when the idea was first proposed by SPKorolev while he worked on the RP-218 shuttle.

It was assumed that the rocket motor, with its massive specific fuel consumption (fuel 4-6 kg per second with the development of 1,000 to 1,500 kg of thrust) can be most effectively used in a fighter-interceptor.

The interceptor would have to be some form of glider which is propelled quickly to take off and flown up to the necessary altitude for target interception. Glided to the target and after fuel is fully consumed, it is glided as a sail plane, back to home base. Normally targets had to be discovered visually which required a lot of patrolling about the sky, so that a stay at high altitude was problematic, because any patrolling had to be at the expense of height. It was not able to patrol and and maintain altitude and there was a need for accurate guidance of the interceptor to the target. The drive was supposed to provide the maximum level flight speed of 800-850 km / h. The speed at this time (1940) was phenomenal for hunters with a conventional piston engine, and thus it could secure dominance in air defense.

The main drawback of such aircraft, according Korolev was the short duration of the flight. Military experts have considered these proposals S. Korolev, and expressed reservations about the implementation of such aircraft. In the spring of 1941, the Design Bureau (OKB) headed by chief designer on the project VFBolhovitinova (V.F.Bolhovitinova) has drawn up a project fighter-interceptor rocket engine LSDushkina (L.S.Duškina), which was supposed to have a speed of 800 km / h or more. Based on this development, on its own initiative, began the development of the project A.Ya.Bereznyak (A.Â.Bereznâk) i AM Isaev (A.M.Isaev). The concept of the aircraft entirely relying on an idea proposed by SP Korolev, once in 1938. 9 June 1941 the chief designer VFBolhovitinov hit the aviation industry People's Commissariat (NKAP) a formal request for approval of a fighter-interceptor missile under ozunakom BI (BI).

The proposal was accepted in its entirety, with the NKAP issued a new deadline for the project documentation of all 35 days, instead of three months as it was in the proposed study. Flights A.Ya.Bereznyaka and AMIsaeva originally designed with a rocket engine thrust from 1,400 Kg / s. The level of technology incorporated in the BI was considerable but implementation of a system for inserting the pressurized fuel in to the combustion chamber presented serious problems. Fuel system installation caused the delay in the implementation of the project. Instead of using a turbo-compressor, it was decided that the fuel in the tank is kept at a pressure of 145-148 ATM. The tank was supposed to provide 115 liters of liquefied compressed gas. This variant of the D-1A engine has become the main direction of development, and the project is verified with "BI". As for the air-frame, it was self-supporting, with flat trapezoidal low-mounted wings. The plane was a wooden structure. The request for high-speed fighter-interceptor came with opposing requirements:  a high speed for enemy interception and for low minimum landing speeds as well as good glide performance. The latter two issues are addressed by the creation of special designed and engineered flaps as well as other aerodynamic design features.

Part of the problem is solved once the first prototype began its flight test program lead by the expert aerodynamicist JF Florov (I. F. Florova).

Fuselage "BI" - the wooden semi-monocoque construction. The cockpit has been shielded from the front panel, and by placing special armored plate on the sides and behind the seats. These are 5.5 mm thick steel plates that were supposed to protect pilots from machine-gun fire. In the front part of the fuselage are the built-in weapons, which consists of two 20 mm  caliber SHVAKE automatic cannons with 45 rounds each. Within the lower forward fuselage are placed two bottles of air and two containers of nitric acid. Behind the pilot seat there were other bottles of fuel and oxidizer. Raktni D-1A-1100 installed in the rear fuselage. Fuel - aviation kerosene, and as the oxidizing agent, 96-98% concentrated nitric acid, which is inserted into the motor under pressure from the air cylinders (for each kg of kerosene there was 4.2 kg oxidizer). The Motor consumed 6 kg of kerosene and oxidizer per second. The total amount of fuel in the plane, was 705 kg, which gave a duration at constant engine operation of about 2 minutes. Estimated all up aircraft weight of the "BI" is 1,650 kg, and a dry weight of around 805 kg. It is interesting that because of "short" development period allowed (35 days), the aircraft maker produced almost no detailed technical drawings, an unfortunate situation directly caused by the rushed development period. The aircraft was made by hand without much in the way lofted drawings at the site where the individual parts where made. This lack of a technical record of the procedures involved proved to be a grave mistake in the end.

September 15 1941: First prototype "BI" was completed, however, the engine was still not ready. At the request of the Deputy Commissioner NKAP Yakovleva (A.S.Âkovleva) the prototype plane was sent for testing in the wind tunnel at TsAGI Institute (CAGI). Success in wind tunnel tests made it possible to continue with the testing without an engine. Using the unit's Pe-2 bombers to carry the engine-less prototype aloft, the test pilot (B.N.Kudrin) was able to performed 15 test flights consisting of power-less flight and landings. The focus of these tests was on the flight characteristic for landing without power and to record and compare parametric responses of the craft with the requirements set out in the basic specifications. At the successful completion of initial test phase the designer waited for a suitable motor to proceed.

In October 1941 rapid advances of German OMJ necessitated a requirement to establish a new safe location for the project. This move also extended the deadline for the elimination of problems associated with the engine. By the spring of 1942 the main difficulties were overcome, and the motor was installed into the air-frame. For the first years of the hunter "BI" (sometimes called the "BI-1") is determined by the term of the State Commission, chaired by a VS Pyshne (V. S. lush).

Pilot selected; The main test pilot to be NII VVS G. Ya.Bahchivandzhi (G.Â.Bahčivandži).
First flight: The "BI" made its first flight on May 15, 1942; its Summer weight is limited to 1.300 kg, a motor is tuned to produce a thrust of 800 kg; the flight lasted 3 min 9 s; recorded a maximum altitude of 840 meters and a maximum speed of 400 km / h; the rate of climb was 23 m / s; test pilot reported that the plane's flight characteristics were comparable with conventional types of aircraft and its feel was extremely comfortable.

According to the State Commission, the first "BI" flight marked a new era in combat aircraft operation, and opened a new direction in the development of aviation. This flight was also the first in the world of a fully operational hunter-interceptor rocket-propelled combat aircraft.

Elsewhere In the world by May 1942, there were other experimental aircraft flying with a rocket engine, but these were without weapon systems (Heinkel 176 and the DFS 194 prototype for future Messerschmitt 163V, Gloster G.40).

The use of nitric acid was influenced by the wear parts of the hull. Takoje's first prototype was very quickly scrapped, but the tests are set to be assigned to prototypes 2 and 3. The main difference of the later from the first one was in the installation of landing "skis", instead of conventional landing gear. 

At the same time, it was decided to begin with the airplane's production series "BI" for military trials. The trials to experiment with:  the use of various firearms with two automatic cannon under the fuselage; the ability to carry bomb and missile weapons; with cluster bombs (10 pieces weight of 2.5 kg per bomb).

This cluster bomb was supposed to be used against formations of enemy bombers. The BI-VS flew over and above the the bomber formations, dumping the cluster bombs, which would be activated as they passed through the middle of the formation. The idea was for the bombers to be destroyed by flying into the dispersed bomb-lets.

Watch it fly in simulated flight against the Arado jet bombers.

You may also like:Secret Nazi Aircraft

British Columbia"s Air Museum In Sydney

Eastman E2 Sea Rover

The E-2 used a wooden hull with aluminum cladding. The aircraft used a parasol wing supported by large V-struts with secondary lower shoulder wings with tip floats at the ends. The single engine was mounted in the center of the wing root of the upper wing with a rear teardrop fairing

SE 5A 7/8 Scale

Nieuport 17 7/8 Scale

 Bristol Bolingbroke bomber.

 Three Quarter Scale Spitfire Replica

Eastman E2 Sea Rover

 Pietenpol Air Camper was powered by a four cylinder Model A Ford car engine.

 New museum project is to build a replica of this early Canadian Sea Plane from scratch using only a few surviving photographs and a rotted wing rib.

The Hoffar brothers, Jimmie and Harry became interested in aviation in about 1915 and by the early summer of 1917 the H 1 was completed. Jimmie then spent several weeks teaching himself to fly and by July 10 was confident enough to take a reporter from the Vancouver Daily Province on a flight over Vancouver. The accident occurred several weeks later. This machine, the only one of its type, made a number of flights before hitting a submerged log while taxiing and sinking. Though later recovered, the damage from the collision and the sinking was considered too great to be repaired. The Hoffars went on to build a flying boat, the H 2, in 1918. The only photo of the H 2 that I have seen, so far, shows it crashed after its second flight. There was another flying boat later in the 20's. The Hoffar operation then became part of the Boeing Company.

 This Canadian Amphibian was crippled by the high certification cost and was cancelled after only three air-frames were completed. The Trigull was designed as an improved and updated Republic RC-3 Seabee. It features a cantilever high-wing, a four to six seat enclosed cabin, retractable tricycle landing gear and a single engine in pusher configuration.[1][3] The aircraft is made from aluminum sheet with the forward cabin made from fibreglass. Its 41.8 ft (12.7 m) span wing employs a NACA 23015 R-4 airfoil, has an area of 245.2 sq ft (22.78 m2) and flaps. Standard engines available were initially intended to be the Continental Tiara 6-285 285 hp (213 kW) and Tiara 6-320 320 hp (239 kW) four-stroke powerplants. Later the 300 hp (224 kW) Lycoming IO-540-M1A5D and turbocharged 340 hp (254 kW) Lycoming TIO-540-J2BD were used.[1][3][4][5] The design incorporates some innovative features, including wing tip floats that retract into the wing tips and provide additional wing area and lift, a nose wheel that retracts into the nose to act as a bumper for mooring on water and drooping ailerons.[1] The Trigull was specifically designed to compete with the Republic RC-3 Seabee, Lake Buccaneer and the SIAI-Marchetti FN.333 Riviera.[1] Trident Aircraft was founded in February 1970 to develop the TR-1. The aircraft first flight was on 5 August 1973, with the second prototype first flying on 2 July 1976. The TR-1 Trigull 285 model's Canadian Transport Canada aircraft certification was completed on 28 October 1976 with US Federal Aviation Administration certification following on 16 December 1976. Series production was to commence in the early 1980s, and orders were received for 43 aircraft, plus 23 options. The project received technical assistance from both Canadair and Grumman Aerospace Corporation. Despite financial assistance from the federal government's Ministry of Industry, Trade and Commerce and the provincial government's British Columbia Development Corporation, the company ran out of capital and ceased operations in 1980.[3][6][7] Although intended for series production, only three prototypes were ever built by Trident. Two were registered and flown, CF-TRI (later C-FTRI) and C-GATE, while the third was an engineering test airframe.[8] The type certificate has been held by Viking Air of Sidney, British Columbia since 2006. Viking Air also owns the two remaining prototype aircraft. In 2003 Viking Air indicated an interest in producing the Trigull as a turbine-powered amphibian, with a price at that time estimated at US$400,000, but since then no further news has been released.

Harvard Trainer

Noordyne Norseman

 Updated Beech Expediter with twin PT-6 Pratt and Whitney Turbo Prop Engines

 Norseman cargo area and flight deck

 Norseman landing gear and wing attachment details.

 Twin Otter production facility

 Austere Army observation aircraft

 Early French Turbo powered helicopter of the Canadian Coast Guard

2000 Pound Bristol Sleeve Twin Row Radial Engine rated at 2000 horse power. The cutaway reveals timing gears for controlling the movement of the moving sleeves for all cylinders.

 Republic Sea Bee sold new for less than 4 thousand dollars when they were in production.

 Lincoln Sport were an early home-builts named for Lincoln Nebraska.

 One of the first semi successful Canadian built aircraft.

Gibson, William Wallace William Wallace Gibson, aircraft inventor (b at Dalmellington, Scot 1876; d at San Francisco, Calif Dec 1965). After making a fortune in mining, Gibson built the first successful Canadian aircraft engine, and then the Twin-Plane aircraft, which first flew Sept 1910 near Victoria, BC, with a 60-horse power gasoline engine. A second aircraft, the Multi-Plane (with 4 narrow sprucewood wings), is reported to have flown successfully the following year near Calgary before being wrecked in a crash*. Broke, Gibson returned to mining and later moved to San Francisco.

 Interior view of Avro Anson used for crew training in the early 1940's

Bristol Bolingbroke bomber was also used for crew training at this base in the early 1940's.

*Gibson Twin-Plane: Fifty-four feet long, with a 20-foot wingspan, the Twin-Plane sat firmly on its four bicycle wheels. Tom Plimley, who was just then advancing from bicycles to automobiles, had built the flimsy looking under carriage which later proved to be the aircraft’s worst failing. Two spruce framed wings were mounted one behind the other, secured to the fuselage with clamps, and covered with pale blue silk from Juene Brothers of Victoria. By loosening the clamps, the wings could be slid up and down the fuselage until the twin-Plane was properly balanced. Among its innovative features, the Gibson Twin-Plane boasted gull wings, now often used for added stability, baffle plates inside the gas tanks to stop fuel from surging back and forth and now found in almost all aircraft, and contra-rotating propellers mounted one behind the other, driven directly from the engine, and still found in use today. When all was ready, Gibson secretly conveyed the Twin-Plane in pieces to its launch site, a farm field that is now the grounds of Lansdowne Middle School. After reassembling the plane, Gibson was ready for a test flight. Gibson and two helpers pushed the twin-Plane onto the grassy meadow. Gibson climbed into the horse saddle that served as a seat and started the engine. He pulled the long lever in front of him and tested the huge triangular elevator at the aircraft’s nose. It tilted up and down at his command and he looked over his shoulder to check the rudders. Pulling on two ropes that lead over his shoulders, he watched the two small rudders wag back and forth. The engine reved up and W.W. Gibson signaled to his helpers. It is now generally considered that Gibson not wanting the embarrassment of a failure, used that day, September 8 as a test flight. He did get off the ground, shutting off his engine as soon as he was airborne Two weeks later after repairing his landing gear, which was damaged in a crash landing after his initial test flight, Gibson made another flight. This time, the press and public came out in full force to witness the spectacle. With undue optimism, Gibson had mounted two 10-gallon gas tanks above the engine, intending to taxi down the field, take off, and land in Vancouver. At Gibson’s signal, the helpers let go and the Twin-Plane bounced across the meadow. Fifty feet later, Gibson Pulled the lever, raised the elevator, and climbed quickly into the air. He watched as the ground dropped away below him and then started to slide sideways under his wings. In an attempt to over come the cross wind, Gibson shifted his body, turning the rudders. The Twin-Plane swung around but Gibson, in his confusion, had turned the wings the wrong way. With the wind at its tail, the Twin-Plane picked up speed and its pilot watched helplessly as as a stand of oak trees rapidly approached across the field. Completely bewildered, Gibson shut off the engine and drifted to the ground. Gibson was thrown clear as the Twin-Plane piled into the trees, escaping without serious injury, but his beloved Twin-Plane was a wreck. He had flown 200 feet, though, a tremendous feet in those days for an airplane of new design.

Will Hobby FW 190 Butcher Bird

Shown below with an Irvine 120 2 stroke installed using the radial mount which was supplied by the manufacturer. The engine is attached to the plywood and oak sandwich spacer by 3 number 10 rubber well nuts providing a measure of vibration isolation to the installation.

With the batteries still to be installed the model balances about an inch behind the recommended center of gravity location which is indicated by the line made with a black felt marking pen. At this point I am estimating that a pound or so nose weight will be required before I will attempt to fly it.

Since writing these words I this model has successfully completed its maiden flight. I took the model to the flying field yesterday together with its forty five year stable mate; another FW 190 A which incidentally is a very good flyer with many flights logged over the years. The plan was to have three or four flights on the trusted 190 then switch out the flight battery and satellite receiver and install them in the new model, then do some serious shake-down testing. It all went so well when she became airborne on a high speed taxi run and rather than abort at 10 feet altitude 

 we decided to do a few circuits of the field and land. The landing was controlled into a 12 kilometer headwind with 15 degrees of flaps, so the touchdown speed was quite low with a gentle sink rate. To my surprise the port landing gear unit separated the wing cleanly and the plane slid to a stop on one wheel. I was prepared for the eventuality that reinforcing would have to be made.  I have already filled the area with gap filling foam to help stabilize the built-up structural members; its a trick that I often perform for high stress areas and the results have usually been quite positive.

   

During what was to be a high speed taxi test the plane became suddenly airborne and the decision was made to do a circuit and land rather than to abort from 10 feet altitude.

The gap filling foam can be seen in the picture below as well as the pathetic glue area for securing the gear retract mounting beams.

The area was hollowed out for full depth (surface to surface) oak beams for mounting the retracts. The beams were then epoxy bonded to the foam filler that was injected and cured place. A set of servo-less electric retracts was installed on the oak beams. The retracts were drilled out to 3/16 (4.45 mm) diameter and 3/16 inch drill rods were inserted as landing legs.

 All my flying buddies are seriously into gas power for their models; they say give up on your big fuel guzzling glow engines and switch to a gasser that runs reliably on pump gas and save your money.  With these arguments in mind I decided to replace the big Irvine 20 cc glow engine with a DLE 20 gas engine. It didn't work out as easy as that for me. I discovered the hard way that this engine will not run at factory needle settings. That fact was learned after 2 years of on and off effort on my part. I must say that I got lots of free advice like: throw away the factory plug, its garbage; the spring under the plug attachment has to go too, its also garbage; you have to have two lines to the tank, get rid of the filler tee in the fuel line; your engine must be inverted it won't run upright like that. In the end none of these suggestions mattered because the engine just wouldn't run..

The one pound nose weight is shown below and the plan is to have it easily removable so that it can be removed when the engine cowl is attached (Center of Gravity location maintained).

The idle adjustment screw is shown below.

The high speed mixture adjustment screw is pointed out below.

The low speed mixture adjustment screw is pointed out below.

The quest to find the secret to good running DLE 20 engine continued for almost two years. I would try something, get frustrated, put it away, then try another approach all to no avail. In the end I decided the engine was flooding, so I set the low needle to 1/2 turn opened and ran a temporary fuel line from the Jerry can to the carburetor. Put the electric starter to the prop nut and the engine ran smoothly; all be it,  with a high rpm idle. Then it was just a matter of switching to the regular fuel line, opening the low speed needle, a degree or two at a time until the idle speed was acceptable. There was nothing wrong with my single fuel line system with the filler tee, or the engine upright configuration; it was just a matter of the low speed needle settling allowing too much fuel to be ingested by the engine and fouling the plug.

The canopy is not correct and I am looking for the least intrusive (minimum work) method to make it look right to my eye at least.