Experimental bombers

lpolpo22

Member since
December 2002

Posted by lpolpo22 on Sunday, August 10, 2003 10:10 AM

I would like to point out that the B-49 was a production aircraft. It stopped being an "X" plane in 1953 when the first production line B-49 took to the air.

Reply

lpolpo22

Member since
December 2002

Posted by lpolpo22 on Sunday, August 10, 2003 9:42 AM

I know a lot of us are going to jump in on the XB-70 and I wanted to think of something a little different but I can't let my admiration for this aircraft go. It had outstanding performance and was a thing of beauty to look at. Even today parked in the hanger at the Air Force Museum it loks like it's in motion.

Reply

Woody

Member since
December 2002
From: Third rock from the sun.

Posted by Woody on Sunday, August 10, 2003 1:35 AM

Hi Gary, The XB-51 was an interesting bird. The two things that always strike me are the engine and landing gear configuration.

" I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way." --John Paul Jones

Reply

Anonymous

Member since
November 2005

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, July 12, 2003 10:45 AM

Hey, you guys are forgetting the Martin XB-51, which lost out to the B-57 Canberra. I can't beleive that Martin actually built the Canberra after losing a design competition to it. Guess they swallowed their pride a little, huh? Anyway, that's my submission.

Gary Mason
garydmason@earthlink.net

Reply
Edit

gregers

Member since
February 2003
From: UK

Posted by gregers on Saturday, July 12, 2003 9:44 AM

Hi Woody Many thanks for looking. i'll have a look at the scalehobby site i would love to have a collection like yours but the missus would have a BIG sense of humor failure. she is under the misguided impression that around 300-400 kits is enough (silly girl) again thanks...Greg

BTW Have you had a look at the cronuswarp site (see link below) the site hasn't been going long and could do with some more members...Greg

Why torture yourself when life will do it for you?

Reply

Woody

Member since
December 2002
From: Third rock from the sun.

Posted by Woody on Saturday, July 12, 2003 12:08 AM

Hi Greg, I have rooted around a couple times but no joy. I did come across a box of 1/72 russian bomber vacs and I though it might be in there, no luck Sad [:(]

My wife has been onto me because I've been dragging kits out to look at (I just like to look at old kits Tongue [:P]

). I have a hundred or so in the dinning room and about that many here by the computer, if looks could kill. I've been on a Contrail vacs kick for the last couple months. My 1/72 Vickers Vincent/Vildebeest arrived the other day. I love all the stuff they put in these kits. Why don't you join http://www.scalehobby.com/forum/index.php it's a great new forum, Blackwolf is one of the moderators. I always enjoy our exchanges on this forum. As for the TSR.2, I know at one time I had several. Finding one will be like winning the lottery I think. When we bought this house I filled the upstairs back bedroom from floor to ceiling, with no walkway. In addition to that room, the other bed room is almost as bad. I'll keep you in mind when one surfaces.

" I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way." --John Paul Jones

Reply

gregers

Member since
February 2003
From: UK

Posted by gregers on Thursday, July 10, 2003 6:58 PM

Hi Woody i don't know if your interested but i found an article on the TSR 2 in scale models international, its in the feb 1985 issue. Did you find that TSR2 kit? i have seen one for £18 on the "net" but havn't bought it yet just in case. Are there any kits that you would like to swop for it if you do still have it ? cheers ...Greg Cool [8D]

Why torture yourself when life will do it for you?

Reply

gregers

Member since
February 2003
From: UK

Posted by gregers on Monday, June 2, 2003 8:52 AM

Hi Woody Thanks for the tip it is very similar to the aircraft on that program only the engines and fuselage width looked slightly different the two sites that came up on the search both need further investigation. Thanks again Gregers

Why torture yourself when life will do it for you?

Reply

Woody

Member since
December 2002
From: Third rock from the sun.

Posted by Woody on Sunday, June 1, 2003 7:57 PM

Gregers try a Yahoo search under Convair NX2. I believe that is the plane you are looking for. Wink [;)]

" I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way." --John Paul Jones

Reply

gregers

Member since
February 2003
From: UK

Posted by gregers on Sunday, June 1, 2003 7:05 PM

Just imagine the crews doing a six month cruise just like the navy guys? pilots with no beer, no women, no cars, no guns, it would send em crazy. The only thing i found so far are 2 sentences on a page about the B one. It only said that it was supposed to replace the B52 but didn't.....Gregers Cool [8D]

Why torture yourself when life will do it for you?

Reply

Woody

Member since
December 2002
From: Third rock from the sun.

Posted by Woody on Sunday, June 1, 2003 6:48 PM

I think they showed a 50's b&w sketch or model. I missed the beginning of the show. The part I did see was the pilots eye view of the low altitude bombing run and the narrator telling of the nuclear bombers mission. That caught my attention and I watched the rest of the program. The engine technology was quite amazing, imagine unbelieveably long flight endurance at mach speeds!!!![:0]

" I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way." --John Paul Jones

Reply

gregers

Member since
February 2003
From: UK

Posted by gregers on Sunday, June 1, 2003 6:17 PM

Hi Woody. will do. Did you see any pics of that plane ? if so what did you think of it...Gregers

Why torture yourself when life will do it for you?

Reply

Woody

Member since
December 2002
From: Third rock from the sun.

Posted by Woody on Sunday, June 1, 2003 6:12 PM

I watched a show on Discovery Wings about the development of the nuclear ram jet that was to be used in that plane and ballistic missles. They did build a successful engine but the project was dropped after they proved it worked. The main drawback was that the aircraft would be hopelessly saturated in radiation and it would leave nuclear fallout in it's wake! They also talked about the bombers attack profile, very low and high mach numbers. Truley a very interesting concept, even if fatally flawed. Let us know what you find on the net. Wink [;)]

" I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way." --John Paul Jones

Reply

gregers

Member since
February 2003
From: UK

Posted by gregers on Sunday, June 1, 2003 5:45 PM

Hiya Woody i know i am digging up an old thread but i have just seen what is one of the best... no i meanTHE best looking American aircraft never to leave the drawing board and better than most that did, it was on a program called planes that never flew it was called the WS125 it was an experimental nuclear powered bomber. It was to be a cannard design with 2 engines that looked like B58 units at the wing roots a high set swept wing with a saw tooth in the leading edge a slightly flat convair looking fuselage and cockpit the fore planes were low set cropped and swept deltas beneath the cockpit and it had swept fins on the wing tips with smal extentions below the wing similar to those on the cutlass and a remote tail gun between the exhausts it would make an awsome kit i am going to look for it on the "net " for some more details on it. Now where did i put those engines from that scrapped Hustler i feel my first complete scratchbuild coming on....Gregers

Why torture yourself when life will do it for you?

Reply

gregers

Member since
February 2003
From: UK

Posted by gregers on Monday, May 26, 2003 7:41 AM

Jeeeez not seen that one for a while too. last time was at a now defunct mail order co about twenty years ago and he wanted £25 for it then and it was a bit beat up with bits loose in the open bag needless to say i didn't buy it. one i have just bought is the airfix P1127 kit that has been re-released i got straight on with it and it got me out of the modeling doldrums. And i too would love to see a decent injection kit of the TSR2. I am sure kit manufacturers keep an eye on these sites for feedback so ARE YOU LISTENING TO US KIT BASHERS GUYS????? make us happy and do one soon...cheers Woody.... Gregers

Why torture yourself when life will do it for you?

Reply

Woody

Member since
December 2002
From: Third rock from the sun.

Posted by Woody on Sunday, May 25, 2003 6:27 PM

I'll keep my eyes peeled for one here or else where. Someone really needs to kit that plane, heck I'd buy a half dozen if they were nice. Guess what I found when I was rooting around up there last week end? An RVF Saunders Roe SR A/1!!! How's that for long lost treasure. Cool [8D]

" I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way." --John Paul Jones

Reply

gregers

Member since
February 2003
From: UK

Posted by gregers on Sunday, May 25, 2003 2:10 PM

Hi Woody I certainly am interested. Please let me know if you find it and how much ect.many thanks ..Gregers

Why torture yourself when life will do it for you?

Reply

Woody

Member since
December 2002
From: Third rock from the sun.

Posted by Woody on Saturday, May 24, 2003 8:24 PM

That's the one gregers. Don't hold me to it but if I find another in the model cave (the second floor of my house where angles fear to tread), would you be interested? It would'nt be any time soon as my 2-3000+(?) kit collection is boxed and tightly packed up there. Best regards Woody Smile [:)]

" I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way." --John Paul Jones

Reply

gregers

Member since
February 2003
From: UK

Posted by gregers on Saturday, May 24, 2003 4:51 PM

Hi WOODY glad to be of help . what TSR2 kit is it that you have? the only one i have seen is a vacform that was (i think) by contrail but i could be wrong and that was at an airshow when i was a kid ..Greg

Why torture yourself when life will do it for you?

Reply

Woody

Member since
December 2002
From: Third rock from the sun.

Posted by Woody on Friday, May 23, 2003 5:14 PM

You struck gold gregers! lots and lots of useful photos. When I get a chance I'm going to look at some of the other British A/C covered on that site. Thanks for the excellent site tip. Big Smile [:D]

" I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way." --John Paul Jones

Reply

gregers

Member since
February 2003
From: UK

Posted by gregers on Friday, May 23, 2003 3:33 PM

Hiya Woody I found a good web site for TSR2 photos. it is www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk I hope there is enough detail on this site to enable you to build your TSR2 kit ....Gregers

Why torture yourself when life will do it for you?

Reply

Woody

Member since
December 2002
From: Third rock from the sun.

Posted by Woody on Sunday, May 18, 2003 7:28 PM

QUOTE: Originally posted by pongpeera_nazi

I like P-1107 bomber

That never got off paper, right? I have seen a lot of pictures of that bomber, but they were all computer generated. Big Smile [:D]

" I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way." --John Paul Jones

Reply

Cobrahistorian

Member since
December 2002
From: Aaaaah.... Alpha Apaches... A beautiful thing!

Posted by Cobrahistorian on Thursday, May 15, 2003 5:56 AM

Wow, experimental bombers, huh?
What about the XB-51? Just kidding, ugly-ass airplane. I've always been partial to the XB/YB-40s of WWII (and Dale Brown's extension of that with the B-52X Megafortress!) Something about a bomber that just screams don't mess with me.... In all seriousness though, I'd go with the YB-49. I LOVE the Valkyrie, but as an adaptable aircraft , it just didn't have it. High and fast, sure. Nuclear strike, you betcha, but as a precision bomber, it just wouldn't cut it. The 49 would be much more mission adaptable. So its got my vote.

"1-6 is in hot"

Reply

Anonymous

Member since
November 2005

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, May 15, 2003 4:59 AM

I like P-1107 bomber

Reply
Edit

Anonymous

Member since
November 2005

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 8:03 AM

QUOTE: Originally posted by rdxpress

deonvdl,
This is a what if? thread, but I meant the 49 would do low and slow
and the 70 high and fast. The 70 with modern avioncs would probably do
low/fast better than a Bone does now! BUT it would be sucking fuel faster than
my kid sucks down a choclate shake!!!!!!! unless there updated engines too!
I have often wondered if with the right powerplants, the 49 could go SS?
Any enginers out here?
Good Hunting,
rdxpress

Sorry about my last "dropped" reply - the boss walked in and I had to exit the forum rather too quickly. I agree that the poor XB-70 never really stood a chance of full-scale production or even to convert to low and fast. But just imagine the sight of one of them passing at a few hundred metres above ground at full tilt. ..! WOW!!!

Reply
Edit

rdxpress

Member since
May 2003

Posted by rdxpress on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 2:19 AM

deonvdl,
This is a what if? thread, but I meant the 49 would do low and slow
and the 70 high and fast. The 70 with modern avioncs would probably do
low/fast better than a Bone does now! BUT it would be sucking fuel faster than
my kid sucks down a choclate shake!!!!!!! unless there updated engines too!
I have often wondered if with the right powerplants, the 49 could go SS?
Any enginers out here?
Good Hunting,
rdxpress

Reply

Anonymous

Member since
November 2005

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, May 14, 2003 1:14 AM

QUOTE: Originally posted by djmodels1999

rdexpress, somehow I have trouble picturing the Valkyrie doing high speed penetration at low level... As much as I like the White Beauty, it was certainly not designed for that role (you'll tell me the B-52 wasn't either), and at a time when missiles were thought to be the answer to everything, when high speed, high altitude bombers were thought to be a thing of the past, the Valkyrie was doomed.

Reply
Edit

djmodels1999

Member since
December 2002
From: United Kingdom / Belgium

Posted by djmodels1999 on Monday, May 12, 2003 7:29 AM

rdexpress, somehow I have trouble picturing the Valkyrie doing high speed penetration at low level... As much as I like the White Beauty, it was certainly not designed for that role (you'll tell me the B-52 wasn't either), and at a time when missiles were thought to be the answer to everything, when high speed, high altitude bombers were thought to be a thing of the past, the Valkyrie was doomed.

Reply

klem

Member since
May 2003
From: Fall River, MA

Posted by klem on Sunday, May 11, 2003 10:07 PM

Once again the XB-70 ! Kinda like a Concord on steroids!

"We the unwilling, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible, for the ungrateful. We've been doing so much for so long with so little we are now capable of doing anything with nothing." Unknown

Reply

THE MAGAZINE

CONTACT US

RECENT ARTICLES

POPULAR TOPICS

RECENT REVIEWS

POPULAR TOPICS

RECENT REVIEWS

POPULAR TOPICS

RECENT VIDEOS

POPULAR TOPICS

RECENT THREADS

CATEGORIES

NEW PRODUCTS

OUR STORE

CURRENT ISSUE

SEARCH FINESCALE.COM