Fisher P-75 Eagle

[jcf]

Jon, that Douglas contraption looks like some sort of American Gannet.

Trip 7, I like the push/pull concept, but that's more prop clearance issues than I'm prepared to deal with on my model. I decided early on that mine would stay a tail dragger though I did replace the main undercarriage completely. I just didn't care for the naval style main gear that it had.

The D-557 project started out as turbo-prop Skyraider and eventually led to the Skyshark.

Naval style landing gear? The P-36/P-40 used a similar style of landing gear.

Jon

[gooberliberation]

They could get back to 1/1 scale kitbashing and get gullwing sections off a corsair.

[B777LR]

Here you go Jon, 12 guns in the nose!




Or you could fit a radar instead, and add missiles!

[NeoConShooter]

I just found this by accident and was so interested that I had to reply.
The idea of a push pull P-75 is interesting in a sort of obscene way. Why bother? You add weight WO any real benefit. It does not need Contra-props, because it all ready had them, so there is no reduction in P-Effect, but there is a reduction in the speed of altering attitude because of the second gyroscopic force at the tail AND larger Polar Moment of Inertia. There is no increase in efficiency by the second prop system un-winding the first's airflow. (It is already a Contra-prop.) So the plane gets slower in every way and removal of the nose guns takes away a very large part of it's firepower. The most effective part of the fire power!
Having said all of this negative BS and it is BS in things like this beautiful model, it IS a beautiful model! Well done in the idea department, just a failure of the reasoning behind the idea. I love the work, but hanging two sets of props on one engine is just not right. However, If you also added a second engine, then it would be a very practical exercise in MORE! More Power, More thrust and more everything! Then, like the Do-335 it does get huge benefits and unlike the Do-335, the dual Contra-props remove a wicked P-Effect that the 335 has at both ends! Big gains all around. Now if you could replace the nose mounted guns?

[KJ_Lesnick]

OK, I know the Fisher Eagle was a prime hunk of Junk and it was mainly put in existence to keep GM out of producing B-29s (I think).

Is that why the Manta was cancelled?

[jcf]

OK, I know the Fisher Eagle was a prime hunk of Junk and it was mainly put in existence to keep GM out of producing B-29s (I think).

Is that why the Manta was cancelled?

There was never anything to cancel. Davis' project was a pipedream.

[KJ_Lesnick]

There was never anything to cancel. Davis' project was a pipedream.

I saw a mockup...

[jcf]

Right a privately built mockup constructed in an attempt to drum up financing.
No government contract, ergo nothing to cancel.

[KJ_Lesnick]

Right a privately built mockup constructed in an attempt to drum up financing. No government contract, ergo nothing to cancel.

I remember reading that the cited reason for its cancellation was the fact that the aircraft carried an engine that was amidships mounted in 1942: The problem was based on issues with the Bell P-39 in that hits from above almost always ended up disabling the engine's cooling systems which killed the engine.

This superficially makes sense, except the fact that the P-75 also had an amidships mounted engine, and the same basic model.

[NARSES2]

Right a privately built mockup constructed in an attempt to drum up financing.

Thanks for that Jon. You've at least cleared something up for me, I was never entirely sure about the state of the project.

[Tophe]

I just found this by accident and was so interested that I had to reply.

Thanks for this topic revival, I had missed it in 2008... And now I am willing to add the best P-75 ever (very-long-range asymmetric 3-engined twin-Eagle):

[NARSES2]

Looks better then the real thing 

[Captain Canada]

Yes it does Chris ! Nice one guys.

[wuzak]

Ford-Fisher?

It was the Fisher Body Division of General Motors.

[PACOPEPE]

I prefer the push-pull version:








Fran