well... if the tank was T60 without the Antonov part, and Antonov was still Antonov even without the T60...

I suspect a problem with the power/weight ratio.

When Aerospatial, as it was called then, developed the S330 Puma they had this idea whereas it would be able to conceal itself in a forward location by taxiing into cover. Whirling rotor blades make this quite difficult but if the helicopter could propel itself without the rotor any gap in the trees would do.

So they dreamt up the tracked self propelled undercarriage,

For those that don't know the Puma's system there is a means where one can disconnect No1 engine input from the rotors yet leaving them connected to the No1 alternator and hydraulics. This was the source of energy for the tracked undercarriage.
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....d04f94e7e7.jpg
The procedure would have been: Land and shut down, fold the rotor blades, disengage No1 drive, restart No1 and then taxy the aircraft into its hide. There was a ski on the nosewheel to traverse rough ground.

They never tried to operate it on the aircraft but there was a mobile test rig to assess it. Rumour had it that when it passed the hanger doors on yet another test run somebody would start a stop watch. When the inevitable bang and clouds of smoke materialised in the distance the watch would be stopped; a list of times/names checked and the winner scooped the pool.

Cheating a little but wasnt there a 1950s jet design -Vampire??? which the famous Eric Brown test flew that didn't have any undercarriage at all and was deigned to be propelled off a ramp and land on a rubberised carpet kind of thing. Carrier Ops??

See posts #69 & #70
Great idea, but it kinda obstructs the runway after landing. Also there is the problem of taking off again. I don't think this idea was fully thought through.:=

Click Here
(click again in video to run)

The Vampire and Winkle's already been mentioned - posts 69 and 70 on page 4.

French...


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....659bb23abf.jpg

Like a lot of gliders

or a U2.............

This will use the wheels for takeoff only, drop them and land on the skid after not too long.

I used to fly a glider like that - a Kranich II, I think.

Do I win a prize for the XF- (there you go, I added the hyphen) 85 Goblin?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonn...-85_Goblin.svg

Not so much an undercarriage as it is an overcarriage

The reworked BN-3 Nymph prototype, the NAC-1 Freelance had a "ready for anything" U/C configuration...
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....87749ea4f7.jpg
Photo: Adrian Pingstone

(Assume the tailwheel was utilised when stored with the wings folded)

A touch overenthusiastic on the round out, Hoskins.

Have we had this on the list.........??

Orličan L-40 Meta Sokol - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Orličan_L-40_Meta_S...

Though the tail is rather...erm 'abrupt',I quite like the look of that.

What about the Mistel?