Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Wing struts above the wing have to be big - they're in compression rather than tension and have to be beefy enough to not buckle. Wings struts below the wing are in tension and the load-bearing elemen

But can it lay an egg?   I've seen photos of that one before but don't know what it is or where it's based.  Such poor taste in flying objects is more commonly seen in the hot air balloon ge

What a cock up.

Posted Images

I wonder if the Russians got hold of this drawing, the TU95 looks almost identical apart from those wing tanks and the cockpit layout.   Though THAT aircraft was apparently an evolution of the B29/TU4 airframe.........But then they would say that if they were protecting a scource of espionage wouldn't they! makes you wonder! ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so the winner was the Convair B-36 'Peacemaker'.....making the other aircraft the Boeing xxx.....?

I can only find a reference to Boeing being the only other manufacturer to submit a design. As this had been a protracted development, it started as the Consolidated B-36 before the merger with Vultee to become Convair in 1943.

Still looking!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"two turning, two burning, two smoking, two joking, and two more unaccounted for."

 

 

Now that's pretty funny, and mostly true for the B-36.  The radials in particular were hugely unreliable and suffered from cooling problems. 

 

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

The winner of the competition was indeed the B-36, but it beat a Douglas project. A interesting snippit from www.airspacemag.com , which has a lot of detail on the aircraft:

 

In place of the parasite fighters, large underwing drop tanks and special-purpose pods could be substituted to provide, according to the Douglas proposal, "extreme versatility in operations." Douglas engineers imagined pods—"droppable or not as desired," the proposal states—that could carry reconnaissance or radar equipment, countermeasures, even personnel to supplement the bomber's nine-man crew. One drawing shows the pods in a photo-reconnaissance configuration, complete with cameras and even a small film-processing lab.

Without the parasites, the Douglas bomber could defend itself with a choice of radar-controlled 20-mm cannon or Hughes MX-904 self-guided missiles, stored in an internal rotary launcher like an oversized Colt six-shooter.

The Douglas team had also proposed droppable takeoff gear positioned under the outer section of the aircraft's enormous wings. "Using droppable gear is always a last resort," says Boyne. "The B-52 had retractable tip gear, which was a heavier but more sensible solution."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Douglas 1211-J...hmmm...the "Do Everything" bomber. A difficult one to research and certainly when there is conflicting data (not that that's your fault Kieran). A great challenge.

Cheers

Andrew

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kieran,

A great challenge mate, probably the best one yet. The added challenge was trying to source reliable and credible research data to match your clues. Douglas weren't known for designing heavy or strategic bombers, with the exception of the XB-19, so that confused things a tad.

Cheers

Andrew

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kieran,

A great challenge mate, probably the best one yet. The added challenge was trying to source reliable and credible research data to match your clues. Douglas weren't known for designing heavy or strategic bombers, with the exception of the XB-19, so that confused things a tad.

Cheers

Andrew

The XB-19 was the only big Douglas project I could find as well. Boeing did propose a turboprop aircraft when designing the B-52 but it was felt a pure jet would be the preferred way to go. Nice challenge mate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a de Havilland or German design of any type, and the engines are not de Havilland Gipsy engines of any variant either.  However, the engines are a "minor" by name and were manufactured in a different country to the aircraft.

 

The aircraft came in six very different variants, all using the same basic model number.  Two variants broke world airspeed records in 1957 and 1960 in their respective classes.

 

Cheers

Andrew

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry John, not the AE 45. However, it uses the same engine on one of the variants, as far as my research indicates. Whilst the engines were manufactured in Czechoslovakia, the aircraft wasn't.

In its heyday, and among other designs, the company built a well known British fighter of the 1930's and a British light bomber of the early WWII period under licence. The company still exists today, but no longer produces aircraft.

Cheers

Andrew

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Alan, not the RWD-11, but like John's guess, we are getting closer, geographically speaking. The RWD-11 had a Walter Major engine, whereas this aircraft variant used a Walter Minor engine (or two to be exact).

There are a few more clues I can give that should really focus everyone's research. However, I will give it another day to see what the others can come up with.

Cheers

Andrew

Link to post
Share on other sites

So much for the extra day and clues, Alan. :D

The Ikarus 451 it is and odd in that the pilot lay prone in the cockpit. I'm on my iPad so I can't post the other shots, but I'll do that tomorrow. How did you finally work it out?

Cheers

Andrew

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...