While Blohm & Voss (or "Blohm und Voss") aircraft firm will forever be linked to their many successful floatplanes and flying boats used by the German Luftwaffe throughout World War 2, it is the Bv 141 that will forever be remembered as their most unique aircraft project. The Bv 141 made use of a wholly unorthodox asymmetrical design layout in which the crew was set within a nacelle offset to the starboard side of the aircraft while a portside boom held the powerplant and tail unit. Both sides were joined todgether at the forward portion of the boom by the wing element making for a truly unique and identifiable plane. Despite proving to have excellent handling, the aircraft saw much working against it and was only produced in prototype and pre-series forms by the end of her run. Read more: http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=781
I remember making a 1/72 plastic Airfix kit of this strange aircraft when I was about 11. Very much one of those intriguing 'Luftwaffe '46'-type designs.
What possible advantage could be foreseen by the aeronautical engineers that designed this truly intriguing plane. ? There has to be some rational for it. Gaines
If recalling- it was to be an observation craft. Gave excellent views directly below, although vision to its left would have been hampered...Couldn't find my book that 'splained it. I also built a model of it as a kidlet...recall the pieces being a light baby blue. It met an unfortunate end, filled with lady fingers (FLAK).
yes, huge blind spot left...no radar...appears you need 4 wing roots instead of 2,<> meaning more parts/ more difficult/different engineering and manufacturing........ and drag would be non-symetrical...possibly more fuel stored in middle, instead of cockpit taking up that room....?. big difference in views from standard cockpit and this might make the difference in critically needed recon and information more pics and information http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=781 above says better vantage point for crew....? and talks about air flow http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/models/aircraft/Blohm-Voss-BV141.html Poppy correct
In the end they preferred the FW 189 that had a very similar crew layout but two engines, IMO the visibility on the engine side will not be that much worse, the area to be observed was down not level with the plane. Possibly a parasol design with the engine above the wing might have worked bur would have been impossible to defend from attacks from above unless you put the gunner in the engine nacelle like they did with the B&V 138 and from there he would be of little use as a ground observer.
The designer was obsessed by asymmetric designs. He wanted to build an asymmetric ground-attack plane too as a replacement of the Ju 87 with no logical reasons whatsoever. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blohm_%26_Voss_P.194 Generally Blohm&Voss effort for the Luftwaffe wasn't very helpful. It was a ship-building company with very little experience in building aircrafts. A typical design of the late interwar/early war - period when german engineers often wanted to achieve something completely new and usually were trying to kill two birds with one stone. The BV 141 has to combine excellent visiblity with a single engined layout. Even the later FW 189 was favoured because it could use the low-powered and otherwise obsolete french engines. The He 177 has to be a a 4 engined bomber with only two propellers and a dive-plane too. A reliable, fast and working heavy bomber seemed to be not challenging enough. Other examples: The Graf Zeppelin has to be an aircraft carrier and a cruiser too. The Engelmann submarine tried to replace the submarine and the speed-boat. The Walther U-Boots should be faster and get rid of the batteries with their limitations. Even the german assault guns/tank killers were designed to use bigger guns in smaller tank chassis, were faster to produce an had a lower profile. The MG 34 replaces the light and the heavy machine gun. And not to forget: The StG 44 replaces the Kar98K and the MP40.
Nice bit Triton. Often good ideas are made average by trying to do too much with a design. "The He 177 has to be a 4 engined bomber with only two propellers and a dive-plane too. A reliable, fast and working heavy bomber seemed to be not challenging enough."...good point and funny as well - if i caught your meaning. Just thinking out loud- did B&V make some OK sea launched planes for the navy in WW1?
Der Adler article from 1942 announcing the type's introduction into service http://falkeeins.blogspot.co.uk/2010/07/der-adler-26-may-1942-issue-11-bv-141.html