Go-229 & B-2

[alyster]

Go-229 was one of the nazi superplanes, a plane with some stealth abilities(1945 dude!). In April 1945 US occupied the factory building them and got the 3rd test plane fully ready and V-4 and V-6 of the plane under construction. And about 20 more or less ready planes also being built.
Now about 50 years later the US superplane B-2 Spirit came out, which is clearly very similar to Go-229. Now my guession to smart people is: WHY did it take US 50 years to copy a plane if they got 3 prototypes? And even if they didn't copy it why couldn't they learn from Go-229 - cause they ended up with more or less same result. Are americans realy that stupid? Just think what a stealth bomber could of done for the Cold war.


B-2

Go-229/Ho IX


And I've heard that soviets also got 2 models of that plane? Which models were they? V1 & V2??? And what hapened to them?
 

[RecceJet]

Ok, I haven't been visiting much lately, but this is an interesting topic for discussion 

Do a quick search for "Boeing Flying Wing" and you should get something like http://www.globalaircraft.org/planes/yb-49_flying_wing.pl <-- that

The YB-49 was quite likely derived from the Go-229, so to answer your question I don't think it took 50 years to "copy" a plane that you state elsewhere as being "very similar" There is a difference  And as far as stealth is concerned, the Go-229 has really big engine intakes with a large frontal area, which along with the blunt nose would negate any stealth effect that the wings might give it. The Radar Cross Section (RCS) for that aircraft is easily greater than the Me-262 jet. Stealth is not so much an ability as an attribute. Stealth does not mean it cannot be seen on radar, it simply means it is less observable than normal in the electro-magnetic spectrum.

Just by looking at the design I think the Luftwaffe wanted a long-range bomber rather than a stealth bomber. Notice the way the engines are above the wings rather than below as is the case with the Me-262. This layout gives it more lift and less drag. The B-2 is focused on both long-range and low RCS which gives it a stealthy attribute.

My 2 cents

[alyster]

It wasn't a long-range bomber, it was a fighter-bomber plane.
Luftwaffe had to knew something about stealth, otherwhise they wouldn't cover it with scrap wood, would they?
About the engines- it was 1945 the engines had to be bad. Anyway the engine part should of been 20cm smaller if they would of gotten the BMW 003A engine.

[chiggy]

The Go-229 wasn't the first flying wing. Both Horton and Northrop made a series of flying wing aircraft before the war. The Northrop N9M is even still flying today.

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher2/b35.html

Flying wings such as the Go-229 and the Northrop bombers had stability problems. That's the reason that flying wings were not pursued after the war. It wasn't until modern computers became available that a flying wing aircraft could be controled since the computer can adjust far faster than a human can.

The Go-229 had some "stealth" capability but so did the WWII RAF Mosquito bomber by virtue of its wooden construction.

[Webmaster]

Hey Chiggi, welcome to the forum.

Nice discussion and nice points. The flying wing concept was not something that was copied from the Germans, and neither is stealth... to both sides it was pretty easy to figure out that wood doesn't reflect as good as metal, I guess...not sure if it can be called 'stealth technology'. that's why they call planes like the SR-71 first generation stealth...really focus on low RCS and use of new materials (although the massive heat signature blew it for the SR-71).

Besides the mentioned stability/computers. Those 40-50 years were not just "middle-ages"...a radar in 1945 was easier to avoid than the subsequent radars...so there needed quite some steps in stealth technology as well. Radar-absorbing material and paint, reduced heat signature, deflecting shapes, reduced electronic and other emissions, etc.

The arrangement of the engines is perhaps an idea that was new? I am not sure.

[Webmaster]

I guess the massive front wheel is it to land it nose wheel first? or all wheels? Doesn't look it could support, rear gear landing., I guess they were not as innovative on the landing part. With such a huge front gear, and with a door like that, you would get a huge drop in airspeed when putting your gear down, kind of risky don't you think? This layout would have made interesting landings 

[alyster]

Maybe they wanted to lose the airspeed?
On Me262 they needed long streight flight to slow down, maybe in this case the wheel was menth as a brake. 

Edit: I was reading about it. Some say that the wheels gave it a very soft landing.

[alyster]

Acualy, it seems bit weird, that US and Germany built so similar plane in about the same time. I mean in the era, when so many Generals and important dudes had an opinion, that if it isn't shaped like "t" and doesn't have a propeller, then it simply can't take off. But it sure makes things cool.

My opinion of yanks has improved 

[alyster]

I was reading about the flying wings history. Anyway thing that got my intention was the wing laoding(now when I know what it is in english  ). YB-49 has over 4 times bigger wing loading then YB-35 
Also when talking here about german Go-229, then it had only 130kg/m² has so small wing loading, over half time smaller then P-80 or Me262, smaller then Bf109G. Just think how that thing would move with a cool engine and on YB-49 I think the pilot has to go out of the plane and push it if he wants to turn.


YB-35 Wing loading: 220 kg/m²
YB-49 Wing loading: 920.7 kg/m²
&
Go-229 (v2) Wing loading: 130 kg/m²

Anyway where does such a difference come? 

[Gripen]

maybe the wheels on the Ho IX (Go-229) are so big that it stops the door from dragging on the ground

and if you look a picture of it on the ground, its slightly angled towards the back, as in the front points to the sky while the tail dosent. when you compare it to a pic of a B2 on the ground the both have the same angles...

[Raptor]

Never seen THAT before. Yes, they're angles the same way, but who is to say that the Americans didn't steal the design? It's a very basic design, and can probably do miracles if given the chance...

[Gripen]

um.. everyone stole designs from the Germans at the end of the war..

US stole rockets designs and made it into the Saturn rocket, and that German Rocket Scientist.. von Brown?? idk. something like that
USSR designed the AK-47 on a German Rifle.
and others did stuff