Royal Aircraft Factory F.E.2 - a WW1 biplane with the engine behind the pilot, and a pusher prop in the middle of its fuselage

[-]

notxapple@reddit

Eh it’s more between it’s quad booms than between its fuselage

[-]

Kingken130@reddit

Can’t believe plane designers went from this to full metal body monoplanes about decade and a half ish later

[-]

DerekWylde1996@reddit

Try three years later. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_D.I

[-]

The absolute worst aircraft to fly in Rise of Flight. It's slow, it can't climb for shit, and it either turns like a brick or pirouettes and snap rolls. Kind of odd considering its rather good characteristics in real life.

[-]

waldo--pepper@reddit

When we think about the camera that perhaps took the image. Cumbersome likely with a glass plate. The photographer of course did not lean out of his plane with a cell phone and press a button. Photography of the era took effort and skill and good forture. Spectacular picture.

[-]

Laundry_Hamper@reddit (OP)

The dead-squareness to the ground makes me think it was a mounted camera - they were taking aerial photos for reconnaissance from very early in the war, and the description mentions it's right over the trenches - so it's probably not a photo taken for the happy memories. It's part of a really good collection - if you go to its wikimedia source, you'll find the whole thing as one of the categories in which it's included

[-]

OptimusSublime@reddit

For when you absolutely positively wanted your pilots to be deaf at the end of a single flight.

[-]

spakkenkhrist@reddit

How is it different from having the engine in front of you?

[-]

RichBoomer@reddit

A pusher setup allowed the gunner to fire directly forward without risking shooting your own prop. This was before the interupter gear was invented.

[-]

spakkenkhrist@reddit

Yes but I'm aware of all that but I'm asking the user above me why they think this would be any noiser than a conventional layout as they suggested, because I don't believe it would.

[-]

GavoteX@reddit

For what it's worth, the pusher will be noisy because it is operating in "dirty" (turbulent) air. The air currents from the air flowing over the wing and fuselage get chopped up by the propeller and cause additional noise.

[-]

fulltiltboogie1971@reddit

Russia has a lock on that with the TU-95 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-95, deaf as a post in one flight. I heard the old thunderscreech https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_XF-84H_Thunderscreech was pretty loud to.

[-]

Foreign_Athlete_7693@reddit

There's one at a museum local to me, Ive seen it many times......I used to joke that it would've been difficult to shoot down cos the bullets would just go straight through the middle😂

[-]

Idontevenlikecheese@reddit

Calling those tent poles a fuselage is really stretching the word...

Never seen this before, thanks for sharing!

[-]

Rtbrd@reddit

My thought exactly.

[-]

Laundry_Hamper@reddit (OP)

I did google beforehand to make sure it was appropriate, because it's obviously what the fuselage is, but with the prop in there it just feels intuitively wrong to call it that!

[-]

WingCoBob@reddit

Honestly I'd say it feels wrong because it is wrong. A true mid-fuselage prop is something like the SPAD S.A or the Fantrainer. This could be more adequately described as a pusher prop with joined tail struts

[-]

Laundry_Hamper@reddit (OP)

I think struts are technically the bracing members, but regardless, "joined trail struts" just describes how a great many plane bodies which terminate in a tail are constructed. Here's a shot of a replica which shows that it's a mostly normal construction, just with a wider set to accommodate the prop -https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/da/FE2B%2C_Masterton%2C_New_Zealand%2C_25_April_2009_05.jpg

[-]

KokoTheTalkingApe@reddit

Like the Optika's grandfather.

[-]

JasEriAnd_real@reddit

There is a VR Game, Warplanes WWI Fighters where you can fly in these. It seems really odd flying around in a "box kite" with a machine gun on the front that you can sweep left, right, all over that 180 degrees.

[-]

Laundry_Hamper@reddit (OP)

An FE.2b two-seat fighter pictured high above the trenches on the Western Front.

When the RAF was formed on 1 April 1918, there were seven squadrons of F.E.2s serving as night bombers and a further four squadrons of the type used for night flying training.

The last of the type in front-line service served with occupation forces in Germany until March 1919.

The pilot occupied the rear cockpit and the gunner the front, giving his one or two Lewis machine guns an unobstructed field of fire of over 180 degrees.

Used in offensive patrols over enemy lines to escort unarmed reconnaissance aircraft, with a 160hp Beardmore engine giving a maximum speed at sea level of 147km/h/91.5 mph the F.E.2s were generally outperformed by German fighter aircraft by late 1916 which led to their night-time rather than daytime use.

The F.E.2b was specifically designed for large-scale wartime production by companies inexperienced in aircraft production.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:100_years_of_the_RAF_MOD_45163714.jpg