avatar_kitnut617

B-35 and B-49 Northrop's Flying Wings

Started by kitnut617, March 08, 2008, 05:51:46 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Jschmus

I don't know if anybody has seen these before, but I thought I'd share.  From the "x planes" blog on Tumblr:











"Life isn't divided into genres. It's a horrifying, romantic, tragic, comical, science-fiction cowboy detective novel. You know, with a bit of pornography if you're lucky."-Alan Moore

NARSES2

That top photo with the B.17 is fantastic  :wub: Thanks for posting
Do not condemn the judgement of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong.

Taiidantomcat

Quote from: NARSES2 on March 24, 2011, 03:13:00 AM
That top photo with the B.17 is fantastic  :wub: Thanks for posting

seconded! Love that blog too!
"Imagination is the one weapon in the war against reality." -Jules de Gaultier

"My model is right! It's the real world that's wrong!" -global warming scientist

An armor guy, who builds airplanes almost exclusively, that he converts to space fighters-- all while admiring ship models.

Jschmus

Something I missed on the last pass:

Pilot's Handbook for the XB-35 Heavy Bombardment Airplane
http://avaxhome.ws/ebooks/history_military/xb35_pilots_handbook.html
"Life isn't divided into genres. It's a horrifying, romantic, tragic, comical, science-fiction cowboy detective novel. You know, with a bit of pornography if you're lucky."-Alan Moore

jcf

#34
Northrop Flying Wing drawing from the January, 1942 Air Trails:



A nice bit of period conjecture based on the layout of the N1M, two photos of which appear on page 32
of the same issue.

Did a bit of off-the-cuff scaling using a prop diameter of 12 feet (3.6576 m) as the starting point, all measures are approximate  ;):
Span: 72 ft 9 in (22.174 m)
OAL: 29 ft 3 in (8.915 m)

;D

raafif

love the N1m, yet to start my 48th Sword kit -- will do it with both maximum sweep and dihedral (both setable on the ground only).

Are those remote gun-turrets shown on the wing ??? might have to add those !  ;D
you may as well all give up -- the truth is much stranger than fiction.

I'm not sick ... just a little unwell.

GTX

Modelling that N1M based design as a bomber and then putting that drawing alongside would through some JMNs off. ;D
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Tuck

This is my whiffy of Jack Northrop's flying wing fighter-bomber that was up on the old What-if site many moons ago....

"Upon commencement of flight testing of the small scale flying wing, the handling qualities warranted the operational testing of the small wing as a fighter-bomber.   Sent to participate in fighter-sweeps and ground attack shortly after D-Day, the small wing racked up an impressive set of kills.  Armed with 4x20mm cannon and 8xAP rockets, the little wing performed well until Allied gunners accidentally shot it down, thinking it was a Luftwaffe Wunder-Weapon......"







"I do this hobby for fun not to be nitpicked, and that's one reason i love this place (What-If) so much, its not necessarily the quality, its the 'spirit' of the build or idea that's important..."-Beowulf

raafif

you may as well all give up -- the truth is much stranger than fiction.

I'm not sick ... just a little unwell.

Patron Zero

Just my unsolicited two pence but I've always thought the (X)B-35/47 would have been an excellent in-flight refueling tanker or serve in some other supportive role such as command-control or perhaps even AWAC.

KJ_Lesnick

I remember Jack Northrop had a proposal of a B-49 design with a partial fuselage formed over the baseline fuselage with a few modifications here and there to allow it to carry a nuclear bomb in a centralized bomb-bay.  Anybody have any drawings of that assuming it's not classified?
That being said, I'd like to remind everybody in a manner reminiscent of the SNL bit on Julian Assange, that no matter how I die: It was murder (even if there was a suicide note or a video of me peacefully dying in my sleep); should I be framed for a criminal offense or disappear, you know to blame.

dragon

Quote from: sequoiaranger on July 22, 2008, 10:40:18 AM
Whether prop (B-35) or jet-powered (B-49), the issue with the all-wing aircraft was stability. In 1950 the technology just wasn't there to correct the instabilitites as they happened, and the all-wing projects were abandoned for more "traditional" aircraft. Nowadays, with "fly-by-wire" and instant feedback systems, it would be no sweat.
Which is the main reason why the base in California's High Desert is called "Edwards AFB" and not "Muroc AFB".  Captain Glen Edwards (Canadian-American) was killed testing the YB-49. 
"As long as people are going to call you a lunatic anyway, why not get the benefits of it?  It liberates you from convention."- from the novel WICKED by Gregory Maguire.
  
"I must really be crazy to be in a looney bin like this" - Jack Nicholson in the movie ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST

Stargazer

Quote from: joncarrfarrelly on July 14, 2011, 12:43:20 PM
A nice bit of period conjecture based on the layout of the N1M, two photos of which appear on page 32
of the same issue.

Quote from: GTX on July 15, 2011, 01:20:31 PM
Modelling that N1M based design as a bomber and then putting that drawing alongside would through some JMNs off. ;D

I believe you guys actually mean "N9M", as the N1M was a whole different bird called the "Flying Jeep".

Stargazer

A few images of the XB-35's cockpit arrangement taken from Northrop official maintenance manuals:












Stargazer

Also, a modeller calling himself Thlaylie has posted these beautiful shots of his XB-35 cockpit on the Secret Projects Forum: