Bell Airacuda

[jcf]

I've seen references to a Bell Model 9 that was entered into the competition along with the Douglas Model 7 (A-20 Havoc) North American NA-40 (eventually evolved into the B-25), Stearman X-100/XA-21, Martin Model 167F XA-22 (became the Maryland).  Does any one have any details on the Model 9?  On what little I can find, it was based on the Airacuda but the deisgn was pulled out of the competition before any hardware could be produced.  Not even the hallowed Secret Projects can help!

According to COBRA!: Bell Aircraft Corporation 1934 - 1946, Birch Matthews, Schiffer 1996, the Bell entry in the 1938
dual-purpose attack bomber contest was the Model 10, the Model 9 being only a proposal for an earlier Army contest.

In this earlier contest Bell and the other firms were invited to build prototypes, at their own expense, and Bell declined,
probably for financial reasons. No production contracts were ever awarded in this competition, so Bell no doubt saved
a lot of money.

To quote Matthews on the Model 9: "Not much is known about this proposal design. There is some reason to believe
it was a derivative of the YFM-1 Airacuda, but reconfigured to use Allison V-1710 tractor engines."

That is all that is said about the Model 9.

Jon

[Mossie]

Thanks Jon, that's quite useful, especially the part about the V-1710.

[Stargazer]

(edited — had not seen all the above answers and repeated stuff...)

[noxioux]

A few harebrained ideas:

Maybe the revised Airacuda displaces the A-20 Havoc.

Or a navalized version, perhaps in an alternative history line that places them in the Doolittle raid instead of stripped down B-25s?

Used by the USMC instead of the PB-J?

Now back to my coffee. . .

[Mossie]

I've had a rough (& very speculative) go at the Bell Model 9.  I've added tractor Allison V-1710's, extended the nose, (using the same style as 'pods' on the original Airacuda), shortened the gear slightly & that's it.  Definately looks along the lines of Havoc, Mitchell & Maryland.

[jcf]

Definately looks along the lines of Havoc, Mitchell & Maryland.

Well, I'll give ya the Douglas Model 7B, NA-40, Stearman X-100 (XA-21) and Martin 167 (XA-22), but not the production DB-7 (A-20) or B-25. 

BTW Matthews describes the Model 10 as having a fully streamlined nose, without a step or break for the flight deck,
so it is possible that the Model 9 would have had a similar look. It was quite 'en vogue' at the time as demonstrated by
the Stearman X-100 and some of the early B-26 drawings, among others, and of course the B-29 actually made it into production
with that sort of profile.


NA-40

[Mossie]

Here's one with a streamlined nose.  The standard Airacuda is pretty much there already, so I reinstated the original extended cockpit & nose glazing, rounded off the windscreen & added a few extra windows down below.

[Stargazer]

Ooo I like this take on the Bell Model 9! Much more convincing than the previous attempts I think.

[Jschmus]

When I first launched this topic aeons ago, there was no "Hot Research Topics" section on the forum.  Since this has since moved into speculative territory, might it not make sense to migrate the topic into the "Aircraft, Ships, and Whatnot" section?

[Chris707]

And then there was this Bell design for a version where the bulk of the nacelle/pod is underwing, rather than over:


Maybe replace the pods with a pair of jets under each wing, although with the engines of the day it'd probably still be underpowered...

Chris
-------------------------------------------------------------------
P-39N walk-around

[Mossie]

Ooo I like this take on the Bell Model 9! Much more convincing than the previous attempts I think.

Why?  Could you be more constructive, please?

[Stargazer]

Ooo I like this take on the Bell Model 9! Much more convincing than the previous attempts I think.

Why?  Could you be more constructive, please?

Sure. For a start it's a tricycle design, which is more in line with the other contenders of that competition. Then there's the fact that the earlier proposal looked something of a move backwards in terms of design. The Model 9 is supposed to have been elaborated after the Airacobra, and therefore this should be perceptible in the design.

[Mossie]

Thank you.  The tricycle undercarriage I can understand, my bad, I used the only profile I could find which happened to be of the taildragger variant.  The 'move backwards' I'm not sure about.  I assume you mean the removal of the cannon 'turrets'?  I removed these for two reasons. 

Firstly, I think they would have been erroneous for an attack bomber.  You could add defensive turrets in there, although it would add a lot of weight.  An attack bomber would have needed a larger bomb bay, the extra weight this would require would slow it even further.  I don't know the other competitors or details of the competition to the Model 9 so I can only speculate so far, if anyone has any info I'd be very happy to see it.

Second, they proved to be the Airacuda's major achilles heel, causing some serious drag & slowing the aircraft, not really a step forward.  The Model 9 seems to have been tendered before the YFM-1 flew, so this may not have been understood at the time.

[Stargazer]

I realize I'm also getting confused over Models 9 and 10... So until we get proper depiction of these, we can only speculate.

[Just call me Ray]

Personally, I would suggest replacing the gunpods with remote barrettes, perhaps? I think that would make the plane a world-beater, or close to it!