Twin-Whirlwind & Catalina…

[Tophe]

Thanks to http://www.tgplanes.com/Public/snitz/topic...p?TOPIC_ID=1046 here is the Douglas XB-19Z, designed in 1941.

[Tophe]

From http://www.whatifmodelers.com/forum//index...40&#entry129355 a SAAB J.21/P-82/NA-73-00 mix... both Mustang there and twin-boom here.

[Tophe]

Gull-winged Spitfire....
Zwillings of course...Hurricanes, Spitfires....

Yes!
A Zwilling gull-wing Spitfire...
I may draw it, as a start...

Here is the result:
from the SupermartinH Twin-Spitfire UZ-H, a huge increase in engine power leaded to increase by 73% the propeller diameters (there was room enough for that on this version, without intermeshing propellers nor contraprop). Alas, the blades were hurting the ground and far longer landing gears were necessary, but so fragile... Then, the Supermaradish company proposed the Twin-Spitfire UZ-W . Far above the manufacturing skills of the Supermartophe factory alas...

[Tophe]

The Arado Ar 96 leaded to the well-known Ar 196, 296, 396 but who knows the Ar 496 (Ar 96Z zwilling)?[][]
Nobody among realists, but many ones (? at least one...) among dreamers... And this was a plane for mass-tourism (3 passengers per pilot) over Swiss mountains, not a trainer to make efficient Nazi killers.

(thanks to the Special Hobby 1/48 kit box at http://www.internationalhobby.com/ihs/kpit...temCode=SO48006 )

[Tophe]

I found the code P-38R  on the Web at http://www.kilroywashere.org/003-Pages/Gle...ce/45-06-07.htm
I had never heard of it before (the Navy P-38, that seems concerned by the text, was coded FO as far as I knew)... Well, I have invented missing links :  
- P-38R-1 to -3 with rockets, justifying strongly the twin-boom design (tails free from exhaust fire)
- P-38R-4 (or V-38 VTOLightning or X-38 test-bed?) with 4 rotors, justifying also strongly the twin-boom design (very long lateral supports)

[Archibald]

I just love this thread! Tophe, you're a kind of genius!!!!!

[Tophe]

A pair of Yak-23 fuselages replacing the booms of the P-38 would look cool.
Fair over the canopies- unless of course you want a 3 seater...

Yes, I have been wrong imagining a P-38Jt with brand new turbojet-booms: following Overscan's idea of a P-38 with Yak-23 fuselages as booms, it was very possible in 1945 to have a P-38 with Yak-15 side fuselages: this P-38Y(ak) would have come just after Glenn's P-38X...

[Tophe]

From the genius topic of SimonR about the V-Lancaster ( http://www.whatifmodelers.com/forum//index...?showtopic=9539 ), I am glad to introduce now (with his so nice help, thanks again) the W-Lancaster, the third Twin-Lanc of my collection after the ones from the Wooksta and Glenn...

For dates, this is a 1945 project, even if considered for mass-production in 1949 only, and actually built in 2006...

[SimonR]

From the genius topic of SimonR about the V-Lancaster ( http://www.whatifmodelers.com/forum//index...?showtopic=9539 ), I am glad to introduce now (with his so nice help, thanks again) the W-Lancaster, the third Twin-Lanc of my collection after the ones from the Wooksta and Glenn...

For dates, this is a 1945 project, even if considered for mass-production in 1949 only, and actually built in 2006...

That's incredibly good, Tophe! I need a few more Bear and Lancaster kits...  

[elmayerle]

A pair of Yak-23 fuselages replacing the booms of the P-38 would look cool.
Fair over the canopies- unless of course you want a 3 seater...

Yes, I have been wrong imagining a P-38Jt with brand new turbojet-booms: following Overscan's idea of a P-38 with Yak-23 fuselages as booms, it was very possible in 1945 to have a P-38 with Yak-15 side fuselages: this P-38Y(ak) would have come just after Glenn's P-38X...

*chuckle* Y'know, those booms look a lot like the ones I put together for someone's else's jet-powered P-38 whif a while, actually a fair while, back.  It had some other interesting features like FSW panels outboard of the nacelles.  I'll have to post my tweaking here when I get to my home comp this evening.

[Tophe]

On the TG planes forum, at http://www.tgplanes.com/Public/snitz/topic...p?TOPIC_ID=1062 , the member Lightning required us to imagine what would be a mix of P-38 and P-47. Another member, GregP, suggested several possibilities and I drew them, happily:
- Republheed P-38LightBolt, 1944 : P-38 with booms replaced by P-47 fuselages
- GregPheedic P-38ThunderNing, fist flight 1945 April 1st: the same with a central P-47 nose
- TheGreatPlanes ThunderGregP (P-47TGP) : P-47 fuselage truncated for a push-pull layout, with lateral twin P-47-tails.
- GregPublheed P-47ThunderNolt (triplex-boom) and P-47TN-2 (twin-boom), certified 1945 April 33rd : P-38 with central pod replaced by a P-47 fuselage (triplex-boom layout like the Pond racer) or P-47 truncated fuselage (twin-boom)
Then I counted with combinatory analysis the possibilities remaining : 59... And I drew a single one, the very asymmetric P-3847. Smiling under the dreamer's cap.

[Tophe]

Most of you know that the C-119 Flying Boxcar came from the C-82 Packet, some know that the XC-82 prototype came from the F-78 project, but who knows that the F-78 twin-engined cargo came from the F-77 cargo glider of 1939?
The answer is: only what-ifers... Hey what if the C-82 came from a glider, like the Go 244, Ki105, SAM24, Me323 etc? And without propeller clearance, a low wing would have been okay, providing a very solid very wide landing gear:

[Tophe]

The DC-3 was a nice airliner, but the lack of panoramic view for passengers was a serious drawback. When the Twin-Mustang becomes known, 1944, the idea came quite obviously : between Mustang P-51D fuselages/pilots/tails, let us install a DC-3 cabin with a panoramic rear... The DC-51D was born – DC meaning there the new Douglas-Christophe design way, nick-named Douglophe.
Alas airlines were not ready to order , and most of the aircraft factories had to produce military aircraft. So the DC-51 (commercial failure 1944) was turned into the cargo UC-51, with loading doors front and aft. And the result was... commercial failure 1945...

[Tophe]

And thanks to Gary, desperately looking for a XP-67 Bat model (in another topic), I post here again the (Photopaint improved) picture of the YP-67T Twin-Bat...  

Kurlan Naiskos, new member here, told me about my fragile Mc Donnell YP-67T : "Had you considered it as a triple-engine plane and a connected horizontal stabiliser?".
No, I had not, so here is the Mc Doniskos P-67T, much improved, with USAF immediate approval, ready to be mass-produced, next year, in 1945...

[Kurlan Naiskos]

I did not mean to criticise your design, my apologies it was recieved that way.

it just seemed to me to have a structural weak spot in the center with the two fuselages so far apart.
by eliminating one egine it makes it unique (not that many 3-engine planes in real life--compared with 2 and 4 engined airframes)
and it seems to me to be a stronger airframe.

p.s. thanks for doing some custom photopainting for me.