Are you blind the B-29 is a very nice looking aircraft
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Are you blind the B-29 is a very nice looking aircraftNo. It's not. B-17 could in in contention. The Lancaster, also. Not the B-29.
You cant look good with so many thoughThe B-36's wingspan is literally the length of a city block, so yeah, it's going to require six engines and four boosters.
The Huges H-4 (Spruce Goose) had eight engines.
The BV238 had six engines.
It looks sexy as hell with it's six turnin', four burnin'You cant look good with so many though
You are blindIt looks sexy as hell with it's six turnin', four burnin'
Which is a shiney B-17G.
I've been aboard her for a flight as well as several photo shoots.
She's a pretty gal, but can't hold a candle to a B-29 or B-36 in the "Dayum!" category.
The YB-60's range was short of 3,000 miles compared to the B-36's range of 10,000 plus it's max. lift was the B-36's standard load of 72,000 (the B-36 max. load was about 87,000 pounds for shorter ranged missions).Or the YB-60.
The YB-60's range was short of 3,000 miles compared to the B-36's range of 10,000 plus it's max. lift was the B-36's standard load of 72,000 (the B-36 max. load was about 87,000 pounds for shorter ranged missions).
It would be interesting to see how turboprops would have enabled the Peacemaker to retain it's piston-powered range/load profile while increasing speed.
The Tu-95 has a range of about 9,300 miles, though it's much smaller.
Interesting memories from someone with first hand experience. It confirms that the base design was promising but implementation suffered from some bad decisions, taken outside of Heinkel's offices.Eric Brown's take on the He 177 is worth examining for perspective. He said that its climb was ponderous and in flight the aircraft was sensitive to turbulence, but he found that stability was positive in all axes, but that control sensitivity was high for such a large aircraft, believing the elevator to be dangerously light. When performing diving trials, at a 400 km/h dive the aircraft handled well, and control responsiveness was good, particularly in the elevator, which might explain its sensitivity, although he remarked that aircraft had suffered structural failure in flight so he was very careful with not over exerting use of the elevator.
As a dive bomber, Brown stated that it was vital to know the exact weight of the aircraft before making diving attacks, with pull-out acceleration of 2.3G and a weight of 27 tonnes, this was extremely important. The aircraft had an automatic pull-out device, but, in his word, "...it really was somewhat nail-biting to have to treat a giant like this immense Heinkel bomber as though it were made of glass", concluding that "...dive bombing in a Junkers Ju 87 was one thing, but in a monster like the He 177 it was little short of ludicrous."
He states that the stalling characteristics were mild with pronounced buffet at 185 km/h (115 mph) and with the undercarriage lowered it buffeted violently at 140 km/h (87 mph), which led Brown to fear the aircraft had suffered structural damage. Landing roll was lengthy and the aircraft showed no desire to want to slow down, heavy braking inducing excessive judder and a tendency for the aircraft to swing as it slowed down. Brown believed the brakes were too inadequate to slow it and with the very real threat of ground looping the aircraft, knowing that it had undercarriage difficulties, plus the delicate handling in flight, led him to thinking it was far too fragile handling-wise for an operational bomber. Retrospectively he stated that during his career he really enjoyed test-flying the numerous German aircraft he flew, but with one exception, the He 177.
It confirms that the base design was promising but implementation suffered from some bad decisions, taken outside of Heinkel's offices.
If I ever get around to buying an Airstream trailer, I swear I will mount a dummy turret on top and paint on a star/bar insignia.
Four-engined beauty contest?