WesWorld

The Dornier firm has released preliminary details regarding its Do330 design under development to meet the requirements of the Marineflieger.

General characteristics

Two Bramo 328F eighteen-cylinder radial engines each rated for 3,200 hp at takeoff. Crew – 8 (pilot, observer, navigator, flight engineer, two wireless air gunners, two electronic equipment operators). Length 26.0 metres; wingspan 34.7 metres; height 8.0 metres; wing area 122 square metres; Empty weight 15,900 kg; Maximum takeoff weight 29,000 kg. Maximum speed 515 kph; maximum cruising speed 286 kph. Range 4,800 kilometres on internal fuel. Armament: two flexible 15mm MG151 in the nose position, two flexible 15mm MG151 in the tail position. Internal weapons cells for 4,000 kg of free-fall bombs, depth charges, torpedoes or other ordnance. External mounts for additional ordnance or auxiliary fuel tanks.

I like the sturdy look of that plane.
There are a few things I have to criticise though. First the engine-gondulas look pretty small compared to the rest of the plane, especially if the power output is considered.
I am not shure about the scaling....the plane in the drawing does not look as big as the plane your stats are indicating.
Moreover I think the wings could be moved foreward just a bit....
Are those bulbs on the bottom side of the fuselage glassbulbs for the spotter? Or some kind of radoms?
If the latter is the case, I would consider to increase the amount of glass surface on the nose to improve the visibility to the ground.

Anyway, very nice drawing...

Quoted

Originally posted by Daidalos
Are those bulbs on the bottom side of the fuselage glassbulbs for the spotter? Or some kind of radoms?
If the latter is the case, I would consider to increase the amount of glass surface on the nose to improve the visibility to the ground.

They are in fact radomes.

Quoted

Originally posted by Daidalos
There are a few things I have to criticise though. First the engine-gondulas look pretty small compared to the rest of the plane, especially if the power output is considered.

The lines of the engine nacelles are pretty much correct per the original drawing, which is the Martin P4M Mercator (my thanks to TheCanadian for his permission). They are a bit on the chunky side.

Quoted

I am not shure about the scaling....the plane in the drawing does not look as big as the plane your stats are indicating.
Moreover I think the wings could be moved foreward just a bit....

I went back and checked - I think the dimensions are pretty spot on, as is the wing placement - this aircraft has tricycle landing gear, rather than being a tail-dragger. The weights and performance are different due to a different powerplant arrangement.

Hi Bruce,

nice aircraft, but i have some questions. If i compare it with the OTL P4M Mercator (and you have said, it was your submission) ...

a) why is your empty weight nearly 7 tons less than the OTL ?? You have nearly the same dimensions
OTL: empty weight 22tons
Do330: 16tons

b) why could your aircraft nearly use the double bombload than the OTL ??
OTL: 2700kg
Do330: 4000kg

c) why is there a need for a landbased long range (5000km) maritime aircraft, if germany only have to watch about the north sea ???? Suspicious ....


But a nice aircraft

Quoted

Originally posted by parador
a) why is your empty weight nearly 7 tons less than the OTL ?? You have nearly the same dimensions
OTL: empty weight 22tons
Do330: 16tons

Because it only has one set of powerplants and not two - the P4M's jet engines have been omitted.

Quoted

b) why could your aircraft nearly use the double bombload than the OTL ??
OTL: 2700kg
Do330: 4000kg

Because it's only carrying one set of powerplants and fuel load rather than two.

Quoted

c) why is there a need for a landbased long range (5000km) maritime aircraft, if germany only have to watch about the north sea ???? Suspicious ....

Who says Germany has only to watch the North Sea?

Thanks Bruce for answering my questions. That make things clear for me.

As said .... suspicious ....

Quoted

Originally posted by BruceDuncan

Quoted

Originally posted by Daidalos
There are a few things I have to criticise though. First the engine-gondulas look pretty small compared to the rest of the plane, especially if the power output is considered.

The lines of the engine nacelles are pretty much correct per the original drawing, which is the Martin P4M Mercator (my thanks to TheCanadian for his permission). They are a bit on the chunky side.

Quoted

I am not shure about the scaling....the plane in the drawing does not look as big as the plane your stats are indicating.
Moreover I think the wings could be moved foreward just a bit....

I went back and checked - I think the dimensions are pretty spot on, as is the wing placement - this aircraft has tricycle landing gear, rather than being a tail-dragger. The weights and performance are different due to a different powerplant arrangement.

Yeah, just forget what I have said, I didn't realize that the drawing shows a real plane, so my suggestions were merely made from an aesthetical point of view.