<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A sister to assist &#8216;er</title>
	<atom:link href="http://airminded.org/2007/04/18/a-sister-to-assist-er/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://airminded.org/2007/04/18/a-sister-to-assist-er/</link>
	<description>Airpower and British society, 1908-1941</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 11 Oct 2008 19:44:27 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Brett Holman</title>
		<link>http://airminded.org/2007/04/18/a-sister-to-assist-er/#comment-46837</link>
		<dc:creator>Brett Holman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2007 04:22:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://airminded.org/2007/04/18/a-sister-to-assist-er/#comment-46837</guid>
		<description>Ah yes, &lt;a href="http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/mistral.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;Mistel&lt;/a&gt; -- good call! It's pretty close to a slip-wing in that it would be a biplane in aerodynamic terms, and the payload aircraft is slung underneath, not on top. I guess the main difference is in purpose -- the point of the pairing is not to boost the performance of one of the components but to act as a guidance/delivery system for a very big bomb.

There's a list of parasite aircraft concepts at &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasite_aircraft" rel="nofollow"&gt;Wikipedia&lt;/a&gt; and another at &lt;a href="http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurflugel/n_o_d/weird_05.htm" rel="nofollow"&gt;Nest of Dragons&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah yes, <a href="http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/LRG/mistral.html" rel="nofollow">Mistel</a> &#8212; good call! It&#8217;s pretty close to a slip-wing in that it would be a biplane in aerodynamic terms, and the payload aircraft is slung underneath, not on top. I guess the main difference is in purpose &#8212; the point of the pairing is not to boost the performance of one of the components but to act as a guidance/delivery system for a very big bomb.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s a list of parasite aircraft concepts at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasite_aircraft" rel="nofollow">Wikipedia</a> and another at <a href="http://www.nurflugel.com/Nurflugel/n_o_d/weird_05.htm" rel="nofollow">Nest of Dragons</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Gilster</title>
		<link>http://airminded.org/2007/04/18/a-sister-to-assist-er/#comment-46781</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Gilster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2007 19:48:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://airminded.org/2007/04/18/a-sister-to-assist-er/#comment-46781</guid>
		<description>Brett, not the same concept, I realize, but didn't Focke-Wulf do some experiments with FW-190s and JU-88's in which the fighter was mounted above the bomber, the latter used as an unmanned flying bomb? I'm unaware, though, of any German efforts toward the slip-wing concepts the British were interested in. The Pemberton-Billing article was a real find!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brett, not the same concept, I realize, but didn&#8217;t Focke-Wulf do some experiments with FW-190s and JU-88&#8217;s in which the fighter was mounted above the bomber, the latter used as an unmanned flying bomb? I&#8217;m unaware, though, of any German efforts toward the slip-wing concepts the British were interested in. The Pemberton-Billing article was a real find!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
