avatar_Tophe

Update for "The end of Forked Ghosts"

Started by Tophe, January 29, 2005, 10:03:56 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Tophe

My friend Paul directed me to a wonderful Web site, with lots of twin-boomers that I did not know, patented, most of them unbuilt.
I will present pictures Monday here, I hope. I just check and prepare a list, a discussion about dates. Soon coming...
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Tophe

#1
Quotea discussion about dates
Before recording/addressing to the new discoveries in US patents (tomorrow?), I have checked the date issue...
DELAY:
- Hughes 139,438 for the D-2 is dated 1944, filed 1943, while historical sources mentioned it as a 1939 design (from a 1937 previous source)... So there could be a 4-years delay between design creation and deposit to the patent office. Thus when I try to gather all the twin-boomers designed between 1939 and 1945, should I count till the files of 1949? Some may be 1949 designs... This year focus was a mistake, it is confirmed. And it is worse for myself, thinking madly the 1940s (like yesterday) may have never existed outside my dreams.
- Many dates occur in the life of a project: first sketch, first good file, final design, official presentation, beginning of manufacturing, cancellation or achievement, eventual first flight and order, acceptance by customer, and all the same steps for each derivative... As I am not realistic at all, I was referring to "project-dates written somewhere", but this is a very large window, that I cannot include all...
VERSION:
- The James Martin Oceanplane that I knew as a 1939 project is linked to the Patent 114,122 dated 1939 but filed in 1937 while having no variable dihedral... Maybe the final version was actually a 1939 design.
- The Lockheed XP-38 was a 1937 project, first flown in January 1939, even if it is 1940 patented as Hibbard 119,714 filed in June 1939. As well the De-Seversky 112,834 and Abrams 113,649 (both dated 1939, filed 1938) were the Super-Clipper and Explorer designed in 1937 or even before...
- The Hammond 102,300 dated & filed 1936 (thus deserving a mention in my 1935-38 appendix?) is connected to the Stearman-Hammond Y/Y-1 mentioned as designed in 1934: this is a 2-fin version with the wing lenghtened below the propeller, aft of the central pod – I knew a "1-fin then 2-fin" path, with a reduced chord connecting the central pod (less wide than the chord at mid-span). This 102,300 is maybe a 1936 addition to the list.
ADDITIONS:
- AGA XCG-9 = Sznycer 136,296; Lockheed XP-58 = Hibbard 143,820; Northrop XP-61 = 144,211; Bell XP-59 = Woods 133,126; North-American XP-82 = Schmued 144,936; Vultee XP-54 = Stoughton 138,795
(and for my personal database, out of the 39-45 subject, the Shelton Crusader is patented Shelton 91,444 filed in 1933).
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Tophe

#2
Here is the list of twin-boom 1939-45 discoveries from http://www.adventurelounge.com/aircraft/full :
As I am not sure I am allowed to post the source pictures/patents, having no Copyright, I show the imaginative box following my angle, produced with my calculations and the software macros I have built to draw oblique view (that I will not do, there would be too much work...). I will present them one by one, there are more than 20 unknown twin-boom patents in this time window...
From http://www.adventurelounge.com/aircraft/fu...design/050.html
& http://www.adventurelounge.com/aircraft/fu...design/057.html ,
the Silverstein Patent 120,187 of 1940 (filed in 1939) :
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Tophe

[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Martin H

QuoteHere is the list of twin-boom 1939-45 discoveries from http://www.adventurelounge.com/aircraft/full :
Hmmm plety to have a look at there tophe  :)  

A few of those ideas could be do able. the brain is already trying to work out how  :wacko:  
I always hope for the best.
Unfortunately,
experience has taught me to expect the worst.

Size (of the stash) matters.

IPMS (UK) What if? SIG Leader.
IPMS (UK) Project Cancelled SIG Member.

Tophe

#5
Very surprising, the Kelly Patent 138,102 seem to be a twin-Liberator. See:
http://www.adventurelounge.com/aircraft/fu...design/069.html
I don't know if A.O.Kelly was a Consolidated engineer or a distant designer - according to my sources, the B-24 was designed by I.M.Laddon (and D.R.Davis for the wing), first.
Anyway, this Twin-B-24 completes the Ju-290Z, almost ordered, and the plastic Twin-Lancaster of our friends The Wooksta (Warrior) and GlennLyn (Grenville)...
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Tophe

#6
Next : Boushey Patent 126,067 filed in November 1939 (designed in 1939?), see :
http://www.adventurelounge.com/aircraft/fu...design/056.html
& http://www.adventurelounge.com/aircraft/de...design/052.html (clicking on the picture there leading to a wrong place, of a different twin-boom project, 1938...)
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Tophe

QuoteADDITIONS:
- AGA XCG-9 = Snycer 139,296; Lockheed XP-58 = Hibbard 143,820; Northrop XP-61 = 144,211; Bell XP-59 = Woods 133,126; North-American XP-82 = Schmued 144,936; Vultee XP-54 = Stoughton 138,795
Addition to the addition...:
Fairchild XC-82 = Thieblot 140,220
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Tophe

Then : Oliver Patent 127,160 of 1941, see at
http://www.adventurelounge.com/aircraft/fu...design/054.html
This 3-engined twin-fuselage came between a 4-engined triplex-fuselage and a 5-engined quadruple-fuselage – see at :
http://www.adventurelounge.com/aircraft/fu...design/053.html
& http://www.adventurelounge.com/aircraft/fu...design/058.html
Nice Oliver collection, our Libelula will appreciate...
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Tophe

QuoteI show the imaginative box following my angle, produced with my calculations and the software macros I have built to draw oblique view
Just to explain (my "Fantômes Fourchus" book being all in French, sorry): I do not only rotate the elements of the 3-view drawing to follow a box sides - that would give the drawings here outwards (below). It is necessary to compact in one direction then skew. Corel Draw 6 software gave me the tool, and I had found the figures to use, I have choosen my favourite angles of view. Of course trigonometrics is not an invention of mine, but what I have discovered came from my own brains, just using the calculation principles I have learnt, in a new way. That is the same for what-if modelling: when you use USAF decals on a Mirage III kit, you are creating, using available tools in your own way... When JHM move tailplanes up the fin, he (usually) uses available fins, ready-to-use glue and putty, and this is creation anyway - I mean: in a good way!
Well, my initial goal was to avoid Copyrights, and I don't feel comfortable about this principle. Historians owning Copyrights have got their drawings from engineers and require money for themselves, this may be stealing also, somehow.
I now there are legal issues, and I don't feel easy about it either. Lending your favourite book to your favourite friend may be forbidden someday: this prevents your friend from buying the book, and the publisher may require money from that, or have you condemned, punished... :(
The World is sad and ugly... I prefer the What-if universe, and Internet sharing planet... :) I just try to mention the sources, to advertise...
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Tophe

#10
Quote
QuoteI show the imaginative box to draw oblique view
Just to explain
Maybe I need to explain further the road from the 3-view oblique box to the oblique drawing, 3-D like...
1- I scanned a 3-view
2- I vectorized it with the software OCR-trace 6 (part of the Canadian Corel Draw 6 suite) for step 5
3- I imported it in Corel Draw 6, un-grouped it, grouped and coloured separately the 3 views (lines only, transparent content)
4- I compacted/skewed each view following the usual calculations for my angle (Corel Draw 6 commands automatized with Corel Script 6) --> box-like
5- I brought them together to see where the lines of the planes would be (that is possible with the lines-coloured, transparent content, thanks to vectorization of step 2)
6- I drew the lines of the plane
7- I removed the skewed 3-view guide, rotated the plane and coloured it
8- I imported a background bitmap from the skies in the pictures of Corel Photo Library, truncated with Corel Photo Paint 6 (Canadian PhotoShop).
This is all... :)
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Tophe

Quote
QuoteJust to explain
the road from the 3-view oblique box to the oblique drawing, 3-D like...
1- I scanned a 3-view
2- I vectorized it
3- I imported it in Corel Draw 6, un-grouped it, grouped and coloured separately the 3 views (lines only, transparent content)
4- I compacted/skewed each view following the usual calculations for my angle --> box-like
5- I brought them together to see where the lines of the plane would be
6- I drew the lines of the plane
7- I removed the skewed 3-view guide, rotated the plane and coloured it
8- I imported a background
For the new simplified box way, not 3D-like, this gives:
1'- I copy the Internet 3-view drawing picture
2'- With Corel Photopaint 6, I truncate and save in 3 separate files the view from above, front, side (having, if necessary, cleaned them from unnecessary axle lines or figures, having doubled the half-sketches like for the Twin-Liberator tail)
3'- I import them in Corel Draw 6
4'=4 - I compact/skew each view following the usual calculations for my angle
5'- I import the box cube from a previous drawing
6'- I export the result into a bitmap file
7'- With Photopaint 6, I reduce the size to match the maximum size of the screen, of the file to send.
8'- I post it
So much more easy, indeed, maybe 20 minutes instead of 4 hours per plane... :)  
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Tophe

Quote6- I drew the lines of the plane
Of course, what I have shown above was not the final drawing - 3 main final things had to be done after this first sketch:
- moving the tailplanes (drawn from the view from above) upwards at their correct location (from the profile)
- removing the axles from the spinner and propeller circles, break the spinner circle to keep only the visible part
- using lines from the cube, apply to the wing tips the dihedral seen on the view from front (I think I have forgotten this step fot the Wyvern then Twin-Wyvern, you know, I am retired-like... :)  )
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Aircav

A triple fuselage DC-3.....................hmmmm................... :)  
"Subvert and convert" By Me  :-)

"Sophistication means complication, then escallation, cancellation and finally ruination."
Sir Sydney Camm

"Men do not stop playing because they grow old, they grow old because they stop playing" - Oliver Wendell Holmes

Vertical Airscrew SIG Leader

Tophe

QuoteA triple fuselage DC-3.....................hmmmm................... :)
I have checked and, well, the Oliver multiple planes are more based on a DC-3-like than on a true DC-3.
Below, the DC-3 comes from http://www.airminded.net/dc3/dc3_3v.jpg
while the Oliver came from http://www.adventurelounge.com/aircraft/fu...design/054.html
A double DC-3 model has been built (Walla-Walla in my Supplement #1 book) and a triple-fuselage (but only double-tail) is in "The end of Forked Ghosts". I may try a different one, still with just 2 tail booms... In 10 minutes maybe. Thanks Aircav, thanks Corel :)  
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]