Boeing B-56 - the Stratojet that wasn't!!

[albeback]

The deficiencies of thew original B-47, particularly in the engine dept are well known. Although Boeing proposed a re-engined version (designated B-56) it was not proceeded with.Until now!! Uses the Hasegawa 1/72 B-47

The only illustration I could find showed 4 single Allison J-71 turbojets. Mine however is powered by 4 P & W J-57 engines . An easy decision as I had bits left over from an Italeri B-52! I wanted this to look as much like the original B-47 as possible so, the twin pods were ideal.They are simply tacked on with blu tack for the photos as are the drop tanks.

I've relocated the outriggers to pods on the original outer engine points.No particular reason - I just thought it might look good. I figure the redundant space inside the pods would be useful for stuffing chaff/flare dispensers and/or ECM gear.

I wasn't about to embark on cutting bits out of the wing. The kit plastic is very hard, brittle and not easy to work with. Something I discovered on an earlier B-47 where I snapped a wing in two with little effort!!

Crew safety was another serious issue given the inadequate performance of the Stanley ejection seats - particularly for the navigator in the lower cockpit who had to eject downwards. This model will have Martin Baker Mk 4 seats installed. - the lower seat in this version would eject through a frangible panel in the belly. The 0/90 KIAS minimum height / speed requirements would offer a much better chance of escape - especially in view of the rapid automatic parachute deployment. Clearly a zero height bale out was not an option for the unfortunate navigator but, I'd like to think that ( with enough height) he'd be able to evacuate succesfully.
Just as an aside, does anybody with background knowledge have any idea how much height WOULD be required for a safe downward ejection using the M B seat?

For the purpose of this model, the B-56 has relinquished the nuclear deterrent role to the B-52 and, is employed by Tactical Air Command. I'm undecided as to whether or not to use the SE Asia ( either grey OR black undersides) or, the later SIOP scheme used on the B-52.

Obviously, still a lot of work necessary. I intend to add an additional hardpoint between the wing root & engines . I have in mind a load of either 4 2000lb PAVEWAY series LGBs or, 4 x GBU-8 2000LB HOBOS( 2 under each wing).

[Dizzyfugu]

Nice - SEA with black undersides would IMHO be nice - very different from anything "typical" for the B-47. IIRC, there were also plans to use turboprops on the B-47's airframe, at least tests were made. That would look cool, too!

Personally, I would not hang too much stuff under it. The basic design was for high speed/high altitude, I am not certain if this one "wins" with the wings all stcuk up? But that's just me...

[albeback]

Nice - SEA with black undersides would IMHO be nice - very different from anything "typical" for the B-47. IIRC, there were also plans to use turboprops on the B-47's airframe, at least tests were made. That would look cool, too!

Personally, I would not hang too much stuff under it. The basic design was for high speed/high altitude, I am not certain if this one "wins" with the wings all stcuk up? But that's just me...

Valid point about the wings but, I figure I could get away with it because the B-52 wing was also designed for high speed/high altitude. I just DON'T like seeing wings without (lethal) things hung under them!! Lol! S'pose I could leave the tanks off?
Think I will go for SEA/Black after all!! I've just discovered an old B-52 sheet in my stash.........! It's the old Almark sheet with a HUGE sharkmouth on it!!

[Dizzyfugu]

Where do you plan to put the outrigger wheels? Under the twin engine nacelles? Or the outer tanks/things?

Aynway, concerning underwing ordnance: in that case I'd rather replace a pair of tanks with dropped weapons. Yes, it's subjective, but I would not hang much more under it than now, maybe even using the bomb vault as auxilliary tank (maybe with a sensor device like the Pave Tack under the F-111)?

[craigdwpa]

Looks great so far!!! 

[albeback]

Where do you plan to put the outrigger wheels? Under the twin engine nacelles? Or the outer tanks/things?

Aynway, concerning underwing ordnance: in that case I'd rather replace a pair of tanks with dropped weapons. Yes, it's subjective, but I would not hang much more under it than now, maybe even using the bomb vault as auxilliary tank (maybe with a sensor device like the Pave Tack under the F-111)?

Interesting idea about the Pave Tack. The outrigger wheels will go into the pods mounted on the outer engine  pylons.

[NARSES2]

This is interesting 

[pyro-manic]

Fuel tank in the bomb bay, and a pair of huge bombs/missiles under the wings. Some kind of bunker-buster, or anti-ship missiles?

[chrisonord]

I am liking what you have done with this, I will be watching it for sure as it evolves. will this be a current service version or a Vietnam war era bird. Current service would look good with some modern stand off missiles, or like Pyro says, some BIG anti ship missiles or bunker busters.
Chris.

[RussC]

Impressive concept and build. Might have had 56's right into the 1980's. Then re-engine them with high bypass Turbofans on replacement composite wings.

ALCM's for modern, Hound Dogs for earlier versions, SRAM's for the 1965-80 planes. Maybe two skybolts, tucked in close to the body, between the engines and fuselage.

Topside carries of D-21 or for a NASA mothership, a M2F lifting body.

[albeback]

My thanks for all the kind comments and suggestions. I must confess I hadn't really thought about a current version but, as the good old BUFF has had more leases of life than you could shake a stick at, why not?  I've more or less decided to do a B-56 finished in SEA/Black with an underwing load of Paveway/GBU-8s ( depends on my spares box!). The huge sharks mouth from the old Almark B-52 sheet is just TOO tempting!!

I DO like the idea of a current version though!   I wonder if it would be possible to hang a pair of CFM-56 Turbofans under the wings??  With these engines now rated at up to 30,000lb  (CFM56-5B) , they should be more than enough.Hmmmm.................................!!!!! Anybody got a Hasegawa B-47 they don't need/want?? Lol!!

just out of curiosity, I've blu tacked a CFM-56 engine to see what it would look like. Could be my NEXT project!! Lol!! Despite the size of the engine, there's plenty ground clearance.

[McColm]

Wow!! Great work, I've always thought that the B-47 engine layout was a bit strange.

[Cobra]

Awesome Job This just screams 'Dale Brown' in Concept! Keep up the Great Work Dan

[albeback]

Awesome Job This just screams 'Dale Brown' in Concept! Keep up the Great Work Dan

Flight of The Old Slightly Smaller Dog?? Lol!"??
OK - you've sold me on the idea ( not that I needed it!!)

I'm going to finish this existing model as the the J-57 engined version I started with. However, I'm bidding on another B-47 on evilbay. If I win, the story will continue........!!!
I rather like the concept of a twin engined, V- tailed  tailed B-56

Anyway. Sanding finished & engines now fitted. Despite all the horror stories I heard about this kit, I found the fit of parts surprisingly good. Virtually all of filling required was entirely the result of my ham handed modifications. I don't like the plastic though. Very hard, brittle & difficult to work with. More pics to follow. Need to visit Halfords for new supply of white primer!!!!

[Tophe]

I rather like the concept of a twin engined, V- tailed  tailed B-56

(according to me) it would be even better with the single engine on the starboard side, asymmetrically. Coded B-141... no? (such a turbofan is so powerful, no need of several)