Profile image

Caproni CA.416 Sperimentale

87.2k Treadmill103  1.2 years ago
Auto Credit Based on MAHADI's WWII Jets Challenge! (CLOSED)

Carproni CA.416 Sperimentale

Take-off

VTOL Down half way to set flaps. Apply full throttle, when speed reaches 180mph TAS, rotate gently (speed will reduce slightly until unstick occurs). Once airborne, VTOL centre to raise flaps. Set throttle and trim as required.

Torpedo Run

Use 30% throttle and full pitch-up trim if desired; drop torpedo from 200ft or below.

Landing

Descend using 15% to 20% throttle. For final approach and landing, use 10% to 15% throttle and VTOL down fully for full flaps. On touchdown, throttle off.

Taxiing

AG5 on to enable differential thrust. Use low throttle and Yaw to steer left and right. AG 5 off before commencing take-off.

AG1 Wing Machine Guns.
AG2 Wing Cannon.
AG3 Torpedo.
AG4 Bombs.

AG5 Enable differential thrust for taxiing.

Background

Little is known about this particular example of early Italian jet aviation. In the chaos of the closing months of the War, most reliable documentation and records were lost or deliberately destroyed, leaving little more than anecdotes passed down verbally, notes in personal diaries, blurry, damaged photographs and the occasional physical souvenirs taken by Allied troops.

The Caproni CA.416 was an ambitious experiment to evaluate the use of jet power for float planes. Caproni were selected to build and test the concept and because of the company's good reputation, the decision was taken to press ahead with a fully armed and combat capable prototype. The resulting aircraft showed some similarities to the CA.316 and it is thought that the craft was built using many common parts.

The craft is understood to have been extensively tested and was said to have good take-off handling and more than favorable handling in the air. Speeds in excess of 340mph were recorded at the low altitudes typically flown by torpedo bombers, but it is not known how the aircraft performed at height.

Early trials suggested that the dorsal turret's effectiveness was reduced by the plane's higher speed so the decision was taken to replace it with a small observation blister to aid the navigator.

The Caproni designers concluded that had the aircraft been fully developed, it would have become a very effective Naval Strike Aircraft but, given the poor reliability of the engines at that time, further development would not be advantageous.

It was thought that no film footage existed of the CA.416 until 2013 when a team of archivists, who were digitally restoring Italian Propaganda films, found a 9 second snippet of film showing a CA.316 in flight being caught, then easily overtaken by the CA.416

Data

Speed

Greater than 340mph at low altitude.

Operating Altitude

Maximum working altitude unknown as most testing was carried out at no more than 3,000ft.

Power Plant Unknown.

Crew

Usually 3 during testing in combat scenarios. Officials and dignitaries were said to have also been aboard for general flight demonstrations.

Armament

It is believed that the test aircraft was fully armed; defensive armament consisted of 2 machine guns in each wing. Offensive armament consisted of 1 torpedo and 4 bombs, along with a cannon mounted on the inboard section of each wing for strafing.

Specification of all weapons unknown.

Footnote

An Italian style jet-bomber-fighter-floatplane. Just to add some more oddness into the mix! Also I tried to dial back the dieselpunkiness a bit.

General Characteristics

  • Predecessor WWII Jets Challenge! (CLOSED)
  • Created On Windows
  • Wingspan 60.2ft (18.3m)
  • Length 50.1ft (15.3m)
  • Height 15.9ft (4.9m)
  • Empty Weight -4,734,385lbs (-2,147,483kg)
  • Loaded Weight 11,970lbs (5,429kg)

Performance

  • Power/Weight Ratio 16.051
  • Wing Loading 23.7lbs/ft2 (115.9kg/m2)
  • Wing Area 504.2ft2 (46.8m2)
  • Drag Points 5485

Parts

  • Number of Parts 459
  • Control Surfaces 5
  • Log in to leave a comment
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thank you!@Kimfri

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    133k MAHADI

    @Treadmill103 yeah. people don't usually make seaplanes these days.

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thank you! Pity there weren’t more seaplanes built for the challenge!@MAHADI

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    133k MAHADI

    As good as always!

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    133k MAHADI

    RATING

    Looks : 8.5/10 pts.
    Performance : 8.75/10 pts.
    Details : 8.25/10 pts.
    Weaponry : 9.5/10 pts.
    Functionality : 8/10 pts.
    Bonus : 9/10 (Torpedo Drop)

    OVERALL RATING : 8.67/10

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    I thought I would put a float-plane into the challenge!@GenrichTitov

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    4,252 Darkmoon

    @Treadmill103 : https://www.simpleplanes.com/a/uZ0DWv/Henschel-Hs-298 (you are not obliged to vote if you do not want to)

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thank you!@ACEPILOT109

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thanks as always!@Avro683Lancaster

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thanks for checking this out!@Carbonfox1

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thank you!@JettStorm

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thanks as always!@Tiseth

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Much appreciated!@Tabris

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    73.7k Mumpsy

    @Treadmill103 459 parts? Not that simple! You are master of the seaplane btw.

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thanks! Simpler than usual build this time!@Mumpsy

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Grazie!@SledDriver

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thank you!@GCPrototypes

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thank you!@Grob0s0VBRa

    +1 1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thank you!@RedDevil57

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Much appreciated!@Tonnkatu500

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thank you!@jselbach

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thanks! Yeah, I think this build fits the challenge a bit better than the last one!@MAHADI

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    133k MAHADI

    phew! Thanks for the weapons!

    1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thanks as always!@ThomasRoderick

    +1 1.2 years ago
  • Profile image
    87.2k Treadmill103

    Thank you!@Sgtk

    +1 1.2 years ago
  • Log in to see more comments