P-51, A-36, F-82 Mustangs

Started by rickshaw, July 26, 2016, 08:39:27 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

rickshaw

An unusual development of the F-82 Mustang:


Quote
When World War II ended, the venerable wartime North American Aviation P-51 Mustang spawned the twin-fuselage F-82 Twin Mustang. But history almost forgot the way the F-82 was in turn reworked in the form of a twin-boom, high tail attack plane, the A-51 Stallion, sort of a cross between a P-38 Lightning and NAA's later Bronco.

Like the string of other attack prototypes that appeared at the same (see the rest of this gallery) the A-51 program was dropped when the attack mission was abandoned by the newly formed U.S. Air Force, and only three YA-51 aircraft were built.
[Source]
How to reduce carbon emissions - Tip #1 - Walk to the Bar for drinks.

rickshaw

How to reduce carbon emissions - Tip #1 - Walk to the Bar for drinks.

PR19_Kit

IIRC they used the already manufactured centre fuselages from the cancelled Tri-Stang order to build the outer fuselages of the Stallion prototype, together with a new build centre fuselage and a different tail...............  ;)
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

perttime

Stéphane is a member here, but hasn't posted recently. His stuff is at http://bispro.deviantart.com/gallery/24200217/Aviation

I think the main landing gear needs to be more towards the rear.

NARSES2

That's a very attractive looking airplane
Do not condemn the judgement of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong.

Dizzyfugu

Quote from: perttime on July 27, 2016, 03:42:31 AM
I think the main landing gear needs to be more towards the rear.

Second that. The tail booms look oversized, even if the main landing gear was moved (much) further back.  :-\

PR19_Kit

That's because they're pretty standard P-82 fuselages, minus the tailwheels and cockpits.
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

KiwiZac

I think I need to build this. I have a built Monogram F-82 gathering dust...
Zac in NZ
#avgeek, modelbuilder, photographer, writer. Callsign: "HANDBAG"
https://linktr.ee/zacyates

perttime

Tigercat nose for the cockpit pod?

KiwiZac

Someone somewhere suggested a P-80, which may be the route I go down as Airfix ones seem to pop up fairly regularly down here.
Zac in NZ
#avgeek, modelbuilder, photographer, writer. Callsign: "HANDBAG"
https://linktr.ee/zacyates

ysi_maniac

Reengining Mustang with turbocharged Allison, taken from P-38J.

Will die without understanding this world.

Air21

The P-80 nose was actually a P-38 nose.  Lockheed used the same jigs and tooling to save development time.

In case that's useful for sourcing parts, it looks like the P-38 nacelle isn't as long in the back however.

jcf

Yeah, OK Carlos, but where is the turbosupercharger?
Sorry dude, a turboed P-51 would not use the oil-cooler/intercooler
assembly of the P-38J nacelle.

ysi_maniac

^^^^
Why not? Can you explain your proposal.
Will die without understanding this world.

jcf

Quote from: ysi_maniac on October 12, 2018, 10:05:00 PM
^^^^
Why not? Can you explain your proposal.
Because the intercooler on the V1650 Merlin used in the Mustang is located at
the rear of the engine, ditto the Allison used on the F-82. The big question is:
where do you put the turbosupercharger? There is limited room in the airframe
and you have the issue of the exhaust ducting to the turbine side of the
turbosupercharger. The run of the duct should be as straight as possible,
with any required bends as low a radius as possible. Go research
turbosuperchargers and installations and you'll see the issues involved.