avatar_Daryl J.

Trimotors of all eras

Started by Daryl J., October 26, 2011, 09:51:25 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

RussC

Quote from: rickshaw on October 27, 2011, 07:37:06 PM
Quote from: RussC on October 27, 2011, 06:59:22 PM
The B-26 was a fast machine with two engines, it would be a screamer with three. Another fast nosewheel design that might work with three is the P-61 Black Widow, although the SCR-720 radar is a bit fat to live near the wingtips. How about the XF-11 with the tiny nose bubble swapped for a third engine?
 
   Mosquito?

Why put the third engine in the nose on the P-61?  ;)

I wonder about those cheek machineguns on the B-26, though. 

They better be synchronized...
"Build what YOU want, the way YOU want to"  - Al Superczynski

NARSES2

Quote from: simmie on October 27, 2011, 03:29:54 PM
I remember that Greg did a Tri-motor Wellington and a Dakota (Maybe!??)

I knew someone had done a tri-motor Wellington and Martin ? has done a tri-Dakota

With the B-26 what about burying the third engine in the fusalage aft of the bomb bay and having the prop at the rear as a pusher ? You'd lose the tail gunner, but the extra speed might help
Do not condemn the judgement of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong.

Rheged

At the risk of introducing further complications and thread drift, how about the  FIVE engined Lancaster test beds in the late 1940's.   Both  the prop at the front and the  jet pipe at the back are represented.
"If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you....."
It  means that you read  the instruction sheet

PR19_Kit

Quote from: Rheged on October 28, 2011, 01:14:58 AM
At the risk of introducing further complications and thread drift, how about the  FIVE engined Lancaster test beds in the late 1940's.   Both  the prop at the front and the  jet pipe at the back are represented.

You could make it six engined with a prop at the front and a jet at the back......
Kit's Rule 1 ) Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage
Kit's Rule 2) The backstory can always be changed to suit the model

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Rheged

#19
Quote from: PR19_Kit on October 28, 2011, 01:35:40 AM
Quote from: Rheged on October 28, 2011, 01:14:58 AM
At the risk of introducing further complications and thread drift, how about the  FIVE engined Lancaster test beds in the late 1940's.   Both  the prop at the front and the  jet pipe at the back are represented.

You could make it six engined with a prop at the front and a jet at the back......

You would get through a fair few flight engineers  trying to synchronise that lot.............but when I next acquire a cheap Lancaster kit, I can feel a  4 Merlin  piston , 1 Tweed  turbo prop ,  1 Nene jet   aircraft coming on..............
"If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you....."
It  means that you read  the instruction sheet

Weaver

#20
Pilot: "We've lost an engine!"

Flight Engineer: "Can you be more specific please?"  


OR

Flight Engineer: "I've lost an engine...."

Pilot: "Eh? We havn't slowed down...."

Flight Engineer: "No, I mean I've lost it: I'm sure there was another one around here someplace....."
"Things need not have happened to be true. Tales and dreams are the shadow-truths that will endure when mere facts are dust and ashes, and forgot."
 - Sandman: A Midsummer Night's Dream, by Neil Gaiman

"I dunno, I'm making this up as I go."
 - Indiana Jones

The Wooksta!

#21
I did a five engined Lancaster some time ago - the Type 684 Alston, with a buried Merlin 45 driving a blower for the other four.

I did toy with re-engineing an SM79 with 3 BMW 801s.
"It's basically a cure -  for not being an axe-wielding homicidal maniac. The potential market's enormous!"

"Visit Scarfolk today!"
https://scarfolk.blogspot.com/

"Dance, dance, dance, dance, dance to the radio!"

The Plan:
www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic

RussC

  A local Arizona company does some testing of jet engine designs and uses a C-119 with the jet mounted in a pod on top of a short fairing above the center spar and fuselage center. The spooky thing is that they like to do touch and go's at the local airport with both props feathered and just the turbofan running. Its a real traffic stopper on the nearby streets seeing that bulky cargo box climbing out of the airport with stilled propellers and at the right angles, you can't even see the jet, or hear it very much.
"Build what YOU want, the way YOU want to"  - Al Superczynski

Rheged

Quote from: RussC on October 28, 2011, 06:39:54 AM
  A local Arizona company does some testing of jet engine designs and uses a C-119 with the jet mounted in a pod on top of a short fairing above the center spar and fuselage center. The spooky thing is that they like to do touch and go's at the local airport with both props feathered and just the turbofan running. Its a real traffic stopper on the nearby streets seeing that bulky cargo box climbing out of the airport with stilled propellers and at the right angles, you can't even see the jet, or hear it very much.

Late model Avro Shackletons  with the Bristol Siddeley Viper jets in the inboard  engine housings had a party trick of stooging along and then climbing gently away with all 4 Griffons feathered. Much nausea was caused amongst  the unbriefed when  they did this over a  an unsuspecting airfield.
"If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you....."
It  means that you read  the instruction sheet

Dork the kit slayer

Quote from: RussC on October 28, 2011, 06:39:54 AM
  A local Arizona company does some testing of jet engine designs and uses a C-119 with the jet mounted in a pod on top of a short fairing above the center spar and fuselage center.

The fire bomber version is here ,hiding behind the Grumman.
Im pink therefore Im Spam...and not allowed out without an adult    

       http://plasticnostalgia.blogspot.co.uk/

GTX

Quote from: Daryl J. on October 26, 2011, 09:51:25 AM
How about a slightly enlarged Northrop Gamma sporting 3?

I like your thinking!
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

raafif

Quote from: RussC on October 27, 2011, 06:59:22 PM
Another that might work with three is the P-61 Black Widow, although the SCR-720 radar is a bit fat to live near the wingtips.

stick the third engine at the back between the booms a'la Cessna 337 !
you may as well all give up -- the truth is much stranger than fiction.

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

GTX

Quote from: Weaver on October 28, 2011, 04:32:44 AM
Pilot: "We've lost an engine!"

Flight Engineer: "Can you be more specific please?"  


OR

Flight Engineer: "I've lost an engine...."

Pilot: "Eh? We havn't slowed down...."

Flight Engineer: "No, I mean I've lost it: I'm sure there was another one around here someplace....."

:thumbsup:
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

GTX

Real world tri-motor Wellington...of a sort:





Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

GTX

Quote from: simmie on October 27, 2011, 03:29:54 PM
I remember that Greg did a Tri-motor Wellington and a Dakota (Maybe!??)

Indeed I did:

Hump Buster C-47 with extra power:



Up-powered Wellington:



Plus...

3 motor Ju88?



and old style He-111:



Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!