A group of planes that look what-if, but aren't

Joe C-P · February 21, 2008, 08:54:30 AM

The Burnelli Lifting Fuselage:

http://www.airbornegrafix.com/HistoricAircraft/Burnelli/OtherBurnelli.htm

I see the RB-1 or -2 as an early COD aircraft for the USN.

And the UB-14 could have joined the USAAC if not for politics.

JoeP

jcf · February 21, 2008, 09:27:39 AM

Scratchbuilt RB-1:
http://www.internetmodeler.com/2008/february/aviation/burn.php

Also, I wouldn't be in rush to give credence to the UB-14 story. Burnelli and his supporters over the years have made all sorts of claims as to why his designs never came to dominate aeronautics. Paranoia and conspiracy theory are woven throughout their statements, what they lack is independent confirmation of their claims.

Jon

Brian da Basher · February 21, 2008, 01:08:28 PM

I was really impressed with that scratchbuilt Burnelli when I saw it earlier this month! It seems there's been a lot more coverage of scratch-built oddball subjects lately on modelling websites. Great for inspiration!

Brian da Basher

Hobbes · February 22, 2008, 12:17:37 AM

Quotewhy his designs never came to dominate aeronautics.

Well, starting with the F-15, a number of military aircraft derive part of their lift from the fuselage shape.

John Howling Mouse · February 22, 2008, 06:33:29 AM

Clever bugger!

jcf · February 22, 2008, 10:49:52 AM

Quote from: Hobbes on February 22, 2008, 12:17:37 AM
Quotewhy his designs never came to dominate aeronautics.

Well, starting with the F-15, a number of military aircraft derive part of their lift from the fuselage shape.

Actually the same could be said of the Avro Arrow and the Gloster Javelin, or any twin-engined jet aircraft that uses a side-by-side engine layout, so I guess everyone copied Burnelli?

There is a huge difference between gaining additional lift due to fine-tuning a fuselage cross-section that is a result of engine installation choice and Burnelli's lifting fuselage designs, a little research shows that Burnelli was not alone in exploring the concept of fuselage lift during the 20s-30s (contrary to claims by his partisans). Most of which were not suited to high-performance aircraft design.
Look at the proposal and patent drawings for his jet-fighter, the thing would have been a draggy pig. His layout as conceived has advantages at low speeds but translates poorly to high speed flight. The cross-section is far too thick.

Jon

Joe C-P · February 22, 2008, 12:00:35 PM

Sorry, I didn't mean to start an argument!

I simply thought they would be interesting subjects for consideration as what-ifs.

Now, to me, the first two look like Airstream trailers with wings.

Hobbes · February 22, 2008, 01:00:57 PM

QuoteActually the same could be said of the Avro Arrow and the Gloster Javelin, or any twin-engined jet aircraft that uses a side-by-side engine layout, so I guess everyone copied Burnelli?

I seem to recall that one of the defining characteristics of fourth-generation fighters is that their fuselage generates lift. I took that to mean that earlier fighters didn't generate significant fuselage lift.