Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I suppose not. There were known cases of structural failure. This was no Boeing 707, where a civilian craft was built to military spec.Doubt that it was stressed for much G, which would restrict its manoeuvrability.
Dear God...what is that thing??This is a good candidate for "most agile 4 engine aircraft."
View attachment 659885
It's minimum level flying speed of around 40mph would certainly mean a very small diameter turning circle.
Ability to loop may be rather suspect
You know, you might have something there. Loop? Maybe in a head wind. Imagine trying to roll the Fleet Shadower. I've always liked its tiny Pobjoy engines.This is a good candidate for "most agile 4 engine aircraft."
View attachment 659885
It's minimum level flying speed of around 40mph would certainly mean a very small diameter turning circle.
Ability to loop may be rather suspect
Dear God...what is that thing??
Airspeed AS.39, the other was the General Aircraft G.A.L.38It was one of two manufacturer's prototypes for the "Fleet Shadower". The two companies aircraft looked similar and I can't remember which this one is.
Now you've got me thinking of the Short S.31. The half scale Stirling with four Pobjoys.Airspeed AS.39, the other was the General Aircraft G.A.L.38
Not many military aircraft had the Pobjoy Niagara engines, so I looked it up!
Or Armstrong Siddeley Cheetahs at 350bhp. Or even Bristol Aquila's at 600 odd bop for a real performer at 2,400bhp……….Now you've got me thinking of the Short S.31. The half scale Stirling with four Pobjoys.
Short S.31 aircraft
Shorts built in 1938 a 1/2-scale prototype at its own expense. Powered by four 90hp Pobjoy Niagara III engines, this Short S.31 was mostly of wooden construction apart from a semi-monocoque fuselage, and seated two in tandem. In overall silver finish and marked M4, the Short S.31 flew on...ww2aircraft.net
With all of 392 hp I can't see this being agile. But swap out the 98 hp Pobjoys with four 300 hp Bristol Neptunes and we have a contender.
I wonder if a credible fighter could be made powered by four Niagaras. Maybe in a twin nacelle, Push-pull configuration, like a four engined De Havilland DH-88 Comet. Or if we drop the four prop requirement, we could couple the four engines to turn two or even one prop.Airspeed AS.39, the other was the General Aircraft G.A.L.38
Not many military aircraft had the Pobjoy Niagara engines, so I looked it up!
Now you've got me thinking of the Short S.31. The half scale Stirling with four Pobjoys.
Short S.31 aircraft
Shorts built in 1938 a 1/2-scale prototype at its own expense. Powered by four 90hp Pobjoy Niagara III engines, this Short S.31 was mostly of wooden construction apart from a semi-monocoque fuselage, and seated two in tandem. In overall silver finish and marked M4, the Short S.31 flew on...ww2aircraft.net
With all of 392 hp I can't see this being agile. But swap out the 98 hp Pobjoys with four 300 hp Bristol Neptunes and we have a contender.
Oh, how French of you. I thought you said you were of English ancestry and yet the French Canadians have influenced your aeronautical design ability.I wonder if a credible fighter could be made powered by four Niagaras. Maybe in a twin nacelle, Push-pull configuration, like a four engined De Havilland DH-88 Comet. Or if we drop the four prop requirement, we could couple the four engines to turn two or even one prop.
Now you've got me thinking of the Dewoitine D.750. Imagine landing that on an aircraft carrier. Maybe add two engines to bring us to spec for this thread.Oh, how French of you. I thought you said you were of English ancestry and yet the French Canadians have influenced your aeronautical design ability.
Having had lunch under the -36 formerly at Chanute, this pic puts into perspective the awe I felt being so near such a huge piece of machinery.
The State Dept (IIRC) shut down the project from ever flying again, classifying it as still Nuclear capable. I remember the work out at Great Southwest airport in late 69, but don't recall much about the actual build as AA also interferred when they took over Great Southwest for their HQ site as DFW completed.Prowling on youtube this afternoon, came across this vid of the restoration of the Carswell B-36 (not the one I picnicked under, that was the Chanute airframe that's now in California.)
I grew up to the thunder of B-36 and C-124 and will never forget the sound or sight of six turning and four burning running up on the active. The last generation will never have a clue.The State Dept (IIRC) shut down the project from ever flying again, classifying it as still Nuclear capable. I remember the work out at Great Southwest airport in late 69, but don't recall much about the actual build as AA also interferred when they took over Great Southwest for their HQ site as DFW completed.