unconventional float planes or flying boats

[NARSES2]

The GB I had entered it in, it was selected by my peers as the winner, something I'm immensely proud of.

Understandable mate, terrific build 

[McColm]

Just had a thought, the Boeing B-17 would look good as a floatplane either military or civie colours. Could get away with the same floats as used on the Ju-52.

[zenrat]

Just had a thought, the Boeing B-17 would look good as a floatplane either military or civie colours. Could get away with the same floats as used on the Ju-52.

Hate to tell you but that depends on how much you are willing to suspend reality.
Ju 52 Empty weight 4000 Kg
B 17 Empty weight 16000 Kg

Maybe if you filled the floats with Helium or vacuum?

When the aircraft gets over a certain size I feel that separate floats start to look too "stuck on" and the only real solution is to extend the fuselage down into a hull with either Dornier style sponsons or wing mounted stabilisers.

[Old Wombat]

Not to mention counterproductive!

The added drag from the floats would seriously degrade airspeed & manoeuvrability, extending the fuselage down into a planing hull (probably with outrigger floats, as that was more common on Allied aircraft, possibly raising up into the end of the wing, as per the PBY Catalina) would do the same but to a much smaller degree.

Now, a B-17 based flying boat might be interesting, too!

[zenrat]

I am attracted to the concept of B-17 plus PBY.
Basically remove the wing of the PBY but retain the pylon it sits on, slice the vertical tail off at the relevant height, stretch the hull just after the step and glue the result onto the bottom of the B-17.
Next fill the gap between the fuselage & hull with sheet material & filler losing the ball & chin turrets from the B-17 but retaining the PBY's blisters & nose turret.
Finally reshape the tips of the B-17 wings to match the PBY floats.
Use the right model of PBY and you could even have an amphibian.
If you felt the resulting Fortalina was under gunned then replace the PBY nose turret with a second B-17 dorsal turret and the blisters with a pair of ball turrets mounted upside down.
And of course we're now back to the discussion about where the bombs come out of from a seaplane bomber...

[Old Wombat]

Side chutes?

[zenrat]

Bomb bay doors on top of fuselage and perform a roll as you pass over the dropping point?  

[PR19_Kit]

Sunderlands, Mariners and Seamasters all had solutions to that problem, and all worked quite well too.

[rickshaw]

Side chutes?

Tail chute... 

[PR19_Kit]

Side chutes?

Tail chute... 

Why not? It worked for the Vigilante, for a short while anyway.

[pyro-manic]

Until you end up with a dented nuke on the flight deck!

[McColm]

The P-51 Mustang is another project to ponder. Even the XP-82, Mustang twin. Might try this in 1/48 scale.

[rickshaw]

Until you end up with a dented nuke on the flight deck!

They also tended to suck the nuke along once it was released in flight.   

However, as we're talking about a flying boat, the shock of a catapult launch isn't a real concern.  The drag problem isn't also a concern as the flying boat won't be flying fast enough.   A tail chute has the advantage it's exit can be above the water line and easily sealed.

[jcf]

When the aircraft gets over a certain size I feel that separate floats start to look too "stuck on" and the only real solution is to extend the fuselage down into a hull with either Dornier style sponsons or wing mounted stabilisers.

Really? Personally, I've always found the largest floatplane actualy built, the CANT Z.511, to be rather elegant.





http://www.airwar.ru/enc/sww2/z511.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CANT_Z.511

[Logan Hartke]

I have top agree completely on the CANT Z.511. Gorgeous airplane.



Cheers,

Logan