- Thread starter
-
- #21
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I agree it's a very interesting aircraft (and quite a looker!). Regarding the bombload and weight... In a way, yes, it is a lot of plane for a small bombload. I don't remember if I have clearer diagrams, but that (admittedly hard to read) bombload diagram does list 24 x 500 lb, 8 x 1000 lb and 6 x 2000 lb loads, which for a plane that size isn't that bad, but is still a bit substandard. iirc the increasing weight of the design (it gradually went from a 94 ft wingspan to a 134 ft wingspan) was a reason in its cancellation. It's the same bomb capacity as a Lib in a time of Superfortresses and Dominators; just really not very necessary. I don't recall if its range rivaled the Lib or not.Very interesting idea for a plane. As a practicality, a lot plane for such a small bomb load.
Nice, I'll take any help I can get! I do plan on sticking to it, the short wing B-26 has been on my to-do list since around 2016. I've gathered a lot of manuals and diagrams, basically anything short of the original manufacturer's blueprints, but that still leaves a lot of guesswork in key areas, such as the actual shape and size of the aircraft's main bulkheads, and location of the attachment points for the landing gear and flap linkages. I do have some pictures of the linkages themselves thanks to Andrew Boehly from the Pima Air museum, and have quite a few useful pictures taken from walk-arounds of Kermit Week's aircraft, and restoration photos of the aircraft in the MAPS museum (I plan on reaching out to them when I can, they are currently closed). I feel I should probably make a separate thread if I am to start documenting/discussing that aircraft, so I might do that later. That being said, my inbox and email are always open!Cool. If you're sticking with the B-26Greg Boeser will be interested in this
Now, the work on the nacelle is not done. For some reason that I cannot remember, I seem to have made the entire nacelle's skin 2 inches thick, which seems rather excessive. I have no way of knowing how thick the sheet metal they used in real life was, but 1/4 to 1" seems to make more sense.
Most likely 0.040 for the skin thickness but possibly 0.050. Many cowls were only 0.032.
I dont have any repair manuals for the B-26 but the B-25 repair manual has these skin thicknesess for the naccelles. They have no cowl thicknesses listed.
Thanks!Beautiful work!