North American XB-28 Dragon

nuuumannn · Nov 8, 2022

GrauGeist said:
I don't see why the AAF did not pursue it unless there was politics involved or that the B-28 entering production might hinder current NAA production types

It'd be interesting to dive into the archives to find out if that was the case. The B-28 gets very little airtime, and it would be good to find out more information.

Snautzer01 · Nov 8, 2022

Nice airplane eBay non type specific

GrauGeist · Nov 8, 2022

nuuumannn said:
It'd be interesting to dive into the archives to find out if that was the case. The B-28 gets very little airtime, and it would be good to find out more information.

Fully agree with you!

Maty12 · Nov 8, 2022

nuuumannn said:
I can't answer what propellers it was fitted with, but likely Hamilton Standard Hydromatic or Curtiss electric props. One thing, though, propeller rotation in different directions is a function of the engine and/or gearbox, not the propeller itself.

Forgot to update it here, but I did find this information thanks to a tech report on ebay. It used Hamilton Standard 24E50 hubs with 6491A-12 and 6492A-12 blades.

GrauGeist said:
The B-28 was a solid medium bomber platform, good speed, good range and good loadout.

I don't see why the AAF did not pursue it unless there was politics involved or that the B-28 entering production might hinder current NAA production types (which was highly unlikely if that was the case).

As far as I can tell, simply because the war continued, though shenanigans are always possible. By 1942/43 the USAAF was using its medium bombers at low and medium altitude and had no need for a high-altitude medium. It was a good airplane, but not one the AAF felt it needed. Same goes for the B-33. If the B-28 had flown a year or a year and a half earlier it might have made it into production.

nuuumannn · Nov 8, 2022

Maty12 said:
As far as I can tell, simply because the war continued, though shenanigans are always possible. By 1942/43 the USAAF was using its medium bombers at low and medium altitude and had no need for a high-altitude medium. It was a good airplane, but not one the AAF felt it needed. Same goes for the B-33. If the B-28 had flown a year or a year and a half earlier it might have made it into production.

Informative, thank you!

GregP · Nov 12, 2022

The standard explanation seems to be that it was a high-altitude platform intended for the ETO, and the weather was so generally miserable during WWII that lower-altitude airplanes were deemed better-suited for the job. I think that is simplifying it a bit, and I'd like to know the real reason myself. Cheers.

GTX · Nov 12, 2022

SaparotRob · Nov 12, 2022

I really like Mr. Nash's channel. If you look at his earlier stuff, there's some interesting first hand views of Third World conflicts. When I watch those, there's a Warren Zevon tune that runs through my mind. Something about a cerebrally challenged Thompson gunner.

North American XB-28 Dragon

More options

nuuumannn

Major

Snautzer01

Honourably banned

GrauGeist

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung

Maty12

Senior Airman

nuuumannn

Major

GregP

Major

GTX

Brigadier General

SaparotRob

Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads