Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Exactly!So, I am again assuming the wings were jigged and had a very specific fabrication sequence.
Exactly!
Hi Joe,
We're in the middle of restoring a North American O-47 wing right now and must replace some skins. The problems is ... the assembly sequence has been lost and we're having a very difficult time deciding how to sequence the work so we cna get solid rivets in all the holes. It wouldn't be so bad is we were completely disassembling teh wings, but we need to replace a skin roughly in the ecenter of the wing ... and no matter which way you go ... you lose access at some point unless ALL the skins are removed. It's gonna' be interesting to see how iot finally works out. I think complete disasembly is the only practical solution, but ... I'll wait for some of Steve Hinton's guys to weigh in with their thoughts before diving in without a wing jig. A few Cherry Maxes are better than a crooked wing ... maybe ... depends on how many would be required.
They built jigs for the F-86 right and left wings and slats ... I doubt they're too interested in building 2 more ...
Stretch forming was not unknown in the industry at the beginning of WW2. The 150 ton stretch press at Castle Browmwich is surely for sheet stock. The 20 or so cylindrical sized caps I believe are the hydraulic cylinder heads, probably for the clamping jaws to hold the sheet but possibly to raise the forming die.
The Pe 2 also didn't have stringers in the fuselage and was regarded as rather week, possibly because it was made differently to Magruder's Marauder.
The Pe-2 was weak? Really?
The Petlyakov Pe-2 (Russian: Петляков Пе-2) was regarded as one of the best ground attack aircraft of the war and it was extremely successful in the roles of heavy fighter, reconnaissance and night fighter. It was one of the most important aircraft of World War II, similar in many respects to the British de Havilland Mosquito. Pe-2s were manufactured in greater numbers (11,427 built) during the war than any other twin-engined combat aircraft except for the German Junkers Ju 88 and British Vickers Wellington. The Pe-2 was fast, maneuverable and durable. Several Communist nations flew the type after the war, known by the NATO reporting name Buck. Six captured Pe-2s were also transferred from the Germans to the Finnish Air Force during the Continuation War, with the serial code PE- and the unofficial nickname Pekka-Eemeli.
The Pe 2 also didn't have stringers in the fuselage and was regarded as rather week, possibly because it was made differently to Magruder's Marauder.
FUSELAGE — Its construction around a very strong keel made for almost perfect streamlining, and extra strength in crash landings. B-26 crews nearly, always walk away from a forced landing. This same keel was also excellent as an anchor for the external torpedo rack. There are no stringers, just skin and forming frames — five compartments in three major sections.[/I]"
The Pe 2 also didn't have stringers in the fuselage and was regarded as rather week, possibly because it was made differently to Magruder's Marauder.
What does it mean "fragile" by a techical point of view?
A6M was certainly not fragile structurally, but was extramely fragile in a combat environment, were it is possible to receive a shower of bullets...
Sure LOOKS like it has stringers:
Look at all the little stringer-type-thingies in the fuselage around the tailwheel area.
I immediately wonder how applied loads to the empennage in all three axes were taken to withstand bending - A 'shell' without fore and aft longerons, to intersect with bulkheads and connect all with shear panels will not work - except in case of Mosquito type construction where the 'shell' acts a cylindrical Plate with inherent bending load absorption capability.
Stringers are nothing more or less than smaller (than Longerons) beams upon which thin sheet metal shear panels are riveted fore and aft, and vertically at the bulkheads.