January 13, 2013 at 9:26 am
A friend has happened upon the framed drawing shown
The writing is
Langsschnitt eines
Großflugzeuges mit 8 Motoren,
davon 2 in Tandemanardnung
and
Mehrzweckeflugzeug
2 motoriger, freitragender Tiefdecker,
Motore in der Fläche, Leitwerksträger mit
geteiltem Seitenleitwerk u. einziehbarem Fahrwerk.

Any ideas on which aircraft?
Moggy
By: Lynx815 - 14th January 2013 at 17:43
I initially thought Arado as the top drawing has the typical Arado fin and rudder shape.
By: steve_p - 14th January 2013 at 16:28
How many aircraft stow their bombs vertically nose up. It seems a strange idea to me.
I think that the Russian Dakotas that were converted into bombers had vertical bomb stowage
By: AlanR - 14th January 2013 at 16:14
I wonder if indeed these ever left the drawing board ?
Some of the design features are reminiscent of a couple of Bloch aircraft, although not a match,
and I doubt drawings would have been in German.
By: nuuumannn - 14th January 2013 at 15:38
The bombs in the lower aircraft resemble RFC 230 lb HE bombs built by Woolwich, characterised by their ‘elephant ear’ fins and the guns look like they are fitted with those peculiar Norman vane sights.
For what its worth, Mehrzweckflugzeug loosely translates as ‘multi-role aircraft’.
By: HP111 - 14th January 2013 at 13:49
I was thinking of the German connection when I asked if further info was available about the drawings, but in its absence I have been content with “looks Tupolev” approach. But why do you mention Arado?
While various details do not match, the top one strongly resembles the ANT-20V / ANT-26 types including the u/c. You are correct about the ANT-21bis. What I meant was that the second one has ANT-21 resemblance but again the details are not quite right and it seems a more developed version.
The interesting challenge here is that we may be looking at project studies that were never formalised or published, and may possibly have originated in a university rather than a company. (At which point we could start asking questions like are there any erased markings on the drawing, is there anything written on the back etc etc, but it is not our drawing to interfere with).
By: Arabella-Cox - 14th January 2013 at 09:48
I must respectfully disagree– I do not think either design are of Russian origin, and certainly not from AN Tupolev.
I would accept that both bear a passing similarity to certain Tupolev designs, but there are a host of details in view which are surely not from his design bureau. The upper aircraft’s landing gear is not of Tupolev design; the large blister window of the fuselage is not; ‘dustbin’ style turrets were exceedingly rare in Russian design; the fin and rudder are certainly not Tupolev-esque. Indeed, the entire machine strikes me as an attempt by designer Arado to copy the ANT-20 prototype.
The lower machine is clearly not the ANT-21. The rear fuselage of the original ANT-21 featured a twin-fin arrangement with a narrow aft fuselage, but nothing like this drawing with a lowered aft fuselage providing an aperture for an aft firing/observation position. The wing is placed far too aft for the ANT-21, and the cockpit and nose details are dissimilar in all respects. The ANT-21bis had a normal aft fuselage with a single fin.
There are many more non-Russian details in view, as well. The carefully drawn bombs are not Russian types; the guns are not, as neither are their mounting apparatuses; various aerodynamic features are not; and so on. Indeed, I suspect that these designs are German in origin, possibly showing some influences from the time of the pre-Nazi Soviet-German military co-operation (1927-33).
By: HP111 - 13th January 2013 at 19:34
Ahaa, that would explain the sort of flip you see on old film when a 111 drops its bombs.
By: Moggy C - 13th January 2013 at 16:30
He111 did as I recall.
Moggy
By: HP111 - 13th January 2013 at 16:16
Looking at the drawing, my attention was taken by the ANT-21 (if indeed that is what it is). How many aircraft stow their bombs vertically nose up. It seems a strange idea to me.
By: Moggy C - 13th January 2013 at 13:27
The very same.
I know Dave through flying – he’s a fellow pilot, indeed we once shared a Yak 52.
Moggy
By: Arabella-Cox - 13th January 2013 at 13:16
I am No Help at all on this sadly.
But, this was shown around our Pub back in, I think, November to all the aviators who frequent it. Lots of scratching of heads and Defuddled sugestions.
Seems I know someone you know then Moggy.
I wandered what he did with the pic.
Regards
Mark
By: Moggy C - 13th January 2013 at 13:11
Nothing more at all I’m afraid.
Moggy
By: HP111 - 13th January 2013 at 12:23
Looking into it more closely.
The first looks like the unbuilt ANT-20V but for the tandem u/c which would make it the unbuilt ANT-26. However, the details I have are not precise enough to conclude any more.
The second looks mose closely the ANT-21bis, but again I don’t have precise enough details to be certain.
Do you have any info on the origins of the drawings?
By: Moggy C - 13th January 2013 at 09:52
That’s certainly close, but the landing gear is wrong. It looks more as if it is from an ANT 3
Moggy
By: HP111 - 13th January 2013 at 09:47
Top one: Tupolev ANT-20
Bottom one: Tupolev ANT-21
By: CIRCUS 6 - 13th January 2013 at 09:47
😉
By: Moggy C - 13th January 2013 at 09:44
:D:D:D
Phew! That was sorted quickly.
Moggy
By: CIRCUS 6 - 13th January 2013 at 09:43
German aircraft.