B-47 9th Scale, Boeing Stratojet...In The Middle
04-22-2011, 02:32 AM
#27
"Look Of The Real Thing"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,171
Well, I got my notebook back from the Geek Squad who did an excellent job getting rid of the MS Removal Tool 2.20. Didn't
find any ill effects from its visit. You do not want to have it slink into your computer... Now, I can get on with this...
find any ill effects from its visit. You do not want to have it slink into your computer... Now, I can get on with this...
Last edited by Flite-Metal; 02-29-2012 at 05:30 PM.
05-19-2011, 06:23 AM
#30
New Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 16
I have been following this (incredibly long) thread with considerable interest since I am quite enamored of Boeings, having flown a few.
I particularly like the B-47; one I dearly wish I could have flown. Living as I do in Seattle and being a member of the Museum of Flight, I often go out and stand under the B-47 parked on the lawn outside the museum and find details I missed on the last visit.
I have been wanting to do just the sort of thing the author is iterating here with the B-47 but am presently bogged down in my own quest for accuracy in a (believe it or not) stand-off RC scale model. Those of us who have attempted such a project as this can appreciate just how excruciatingly slow the process is, although the one presented here is an order of magnitude (or five) more complex than anything I've attempted.
I did manage to teach myself AutoSketch and come up with some very accurate 1/5th scale drawings of the 1930s Wright Cyclone 1820 F-2 radial engine and build an 11" diameter model of one for my Goshawk over 2 years. But I digress and this is not about me after all. Well, not completely anyway.
In the interest of full disclosure, I once did this sort of thing for a living at 4223 Glencoe Ave., Venice, CA (Marina Del Rey) before I went back to living in full 1:1 scale and flying 1:1 jets.
I was, long ago and far away, for 5 1/2 years the Research Analyst/ Designer (resident maven) for everything not a car or bike at Revell, Inc. This was long before they ever packed up and moved to Illinois and joined up with the dark side, i.e., our former biggest competitor, Monogram.
My predecessor, Lloyd Jones, was there for the 9 years up to 1972 and is/was far better at the job than I could ever be.
I mention this history because in slogging through this saga I was struck by how very similar this entire project is to how we used to bring a design from an idea to cutting molds for the models...and how very different at the same time.
Similar because the data had to be gathered and as more info became available a lot of the early info often ended discredited and discarded.
Also similar in the way published flawed data often gains credibility through the mere fact that it gets published and remains the accepted standard until someone who actually knows what they are doing and what they're looking at comes along and does it right.
Different in that the amount and sheer quality of data now available is literally staggering compared to what was available at the time I was doing this. I believe that some of this stuff, like manuals, etc., might actually have been still classified at the time of my tenure.
Also different in that the ability to translate pictures and suspect drawings into hardware, a gift which was once entirely dependent on the skill, inspiration, talent, and how much interest in the project a draftsman might have, is now vastly simplified and made infinitely easier to render by the computers and CAD apps that were not even conceived of at that earlier time.
In that vein, do you have any idea how hard it can be to get enthusiastic about and motivated and make good models out of subjects you don't choose and in which you may have little or no interest?
That was the major reason why I left Revell. When what you love to do becomes what you have to do, it's work. That's why we call this a hobby.
So forge ahead Metal Man, by all means, this is wonderful. And when a flyable model is finally on the ramp, please make the info available to all so that any of us with the will and patience to build one can at least vicariously be B-47 pilots for a while.
For those who might question your sanity in doing this, I am of the firm belief that, if it were not for those who are rabidly obsessive/compulsive about this stuff, nothing so excruciatingly cool would ever get done.
Yeah, you/we might be nuts, but it's a good kind of nuts.
Press on.
Dave Galvin, Revell, Inc. Feb 1973 to August, 1978.
I particularly like the B-47; one I dearly wish I could have flown. Living as I do in Seattle and being a member of the Museum of Flight, I often go out and stand under the B-47 parked on the lawn outside the museum and find details I missed on the last visit.
I have been wanting to do just the sort of thing the author is iterating here with the B-47 but am presently bogged down in my own quest for accuracy in a (believe it or not) stand-off RC scale model. Those of us who have attempted such a project as this can appreciate just how excruciatingly slow the process is, although the one presented here is an order of magnitude (or five) more complex than anything I've attempted.
I did manage to teach myself AutoSketch and come up with some very accurate 1/5th scale drawings of the 1930s Wright Cyclone 1820 F-2 radial engine and build an 11" diameter model of one for my Goshawk over 2 years. But I digress and this is not about me after all. Well, not completely anyway.
In the interest of full disclosure, I once did this sort of thing for a living at 4223 Glencoe Ave., Venice, CA (Marina Del Rey) before I went back to living in full 1:1 scale and flying 1:1 jets.
I was, long ago and far away, for 5 1/2 years the Research Analyst/ Designer (resident maven) for everything not a car or bike at Revell, Inc. This was long before they ever packed up and moved to Illinois and joined up with the dark side, i.e., our former biggest competitor, Monogram.
My predecessor, Lloyd Jones, was there for the 9 years up to 1972 and is/was far better at the job than I could ever be.
I mention this history because in slogging through this saga I was struck by how very similar this entire project is to how we used to bring a design from an idea to cutting molds for the models...and how very different at the same time.
Similar because the data had to be gathered and as more info became available a lot of the early info often ended discredited and discarded.
Also similar in the way published flawed data often gains credibility through the mere fact that it gets published and remains the accepted standard until someone who actually knows what they are doing and what they're looking at comes along and does it right.
Different in that the amount and sheer quality of data now available is literally staggering compared to what was available at the time I was doing this. I believe that some of this stuff, like manuals, etc., might actually have been still classified at the time of my tenure.
Also different in that the ability to translate pictures and suspect drawings into hardware, a gift which was once entirely dependent on the skill, inspiration, talent, and how much interest in the project a draftsman might have, is now vastly simplified and made infinitely easier to render by the computers and CAD apps that were not even conceived of at that earlier time.
In that vein, do you have any idea how hard it can be to get enthusiastic about and motivated and make good models out of subjects you don't choose and in which you may have little or no interest?
That was the major reason why I left Revell. When what you love to do becomes what you have to do, it's work. That's why we call this a hobby.
So forge ahead Metal Man, by all means, this is wonderful. And when a flyable model is finally on the ramp, please make the info available to all so that any of us with the will and patience to build one can at least vicariously be B-47 pilots for a while.
For those who might question your sanity in doing this, I am of the firm belief that, if it were not for those who are rabidly obsessive/compulsive about this stuff, nothing so excruciatingly cool would ever get done.
Yeah, you/we might be nuts, but it's a good kind of nuts.
Press on.
Dave Galvin, Revell, Inc. Feb 1973 to August, 1978.
Last edited by GALVDA; 05-19-2011 at 07:05 AM. Reason: Obsessive compusive disorder
05-19-2011, 03:10 PM
#31
"Look Of The Real Thing"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,171
Thanks, I Needed That... d;^)
Dave
I appreciate your kind words...that is like a pat on the back or as is seen often on CBS's NCIS...a slap on the back of the head ;^)
You recognize this for what it really is...a "passing it along" routine.
As you have recongized, I have tippy-toed into sharing about a quarter of this process, while disclosing alternatives along the way
which reduce the effort and expedite the result.
"In The Middle" is not 1/3 of this project. In reality I estimate it to be less than 10% as will be "In The End"...when it begins. Yes,
that will be the beginning of the end... ;^)
I appreciate your kind words...that is like a pat on the back or as is seen often on CBS's NCIS...a slap on the back of the head ;^)
You recognize this for what it really is...a "passing it along" routine.
As you have recongized, I have tippy-toed into sharing about a quarter of this process, while disclosing alternatives along the way
which reduce the effort and expedite the result.
"In The Middle" is not 1/3 of this project. In reality I estimate it to be less than 10% as will be "In The End"...when it begins. Yes,
that will be the beginning of the end... ;^)
Last edited by Flite-Metal; 03-09-2012 at 02:18 AM.
05-22-2011, 07:55 AM
#32
New Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 16
Ed, I am only too well aware that what you are posting is the result of many, many false starts and dead ends as well as a lot of on the job training. Something new is always learned in these journeys.
Captain Midnight, I am not ignoring you it is just that this website doesn't allow people like myself to answer or post personal messages until that person has at least 5 posts here. After this one I'll still be three short.
But to answer your question: No, the stand-off model I am building started out as the Great Planes ARF of the Curtiss Army Hawk P6E 5 years ago. It has now magically morphed into a Curtiss Navy BFC-2 Goshawk and the end of this project is in sight, albeit a rather dim and indistinct sight.
I am not yet building a B-47. However, if you see some old guy with gray hair and a darker mustache standing under the museum's B-47 and drooling on his shoes some weekend, introduce yourself.
Captain Midnight, I am not ignoring you it is just that this website doesn't allow people like myself to answer or post personal messages until that person has at least 5 posts here. After this one I'll still be three short.
But to answer your question: No, the stand-off model I am building started out as the Great Planes ARF of the Curtiss Army Hawk P6E 5 years ago. It has now magically morphed into a Curtiss Navy BFC-2 Goshawk and the end of this project is in sight, albeit a rather dim and indistinct sight.
I am not yet building a B-47. However, if you see some old guy with gray hair and a darker mustache standing under the museum's B-47 and drooling on his shoes some weekend, introduce yourself.
Last edited by GALVDA; 05-22-2011 at 07:56 AM. Reason: Inability to leave well enough alone.
05-22-2011, 04:40 PM
#33
"Look Of The Real Thing"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,171
Behind The Scenes
Steve,
Last week was very productive as the CAD audit moved forward. Many are bound to be anxiously
awaiting flight of our two B-47's. Dave, looks interesting! It would appear we have another comp
scale modeler within WatterFlyer. I see Steve appears a wee anxious...
Last week was very productive as the CAD audit moved forward. Many are bound to be anxiously
awaiting flight of our two B-47's. Dave, looks interesting! It would appear we have another comp
scale modeler within WatterFlyer. I see Steve appears a wee anxious...
Last edited by Flite-Metal; 02-29-2012 at 05:31 PM. Reason: Getting Back On Track...
05-23-2011, 05:05 AM
#37
New Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 16
I can't believe this. Now it tels me to wait 30 seconds between posts. I feel like I'm being told to sit in the back of the bus...
Ed, I don't need any more info on this airplane. In fact if YOU need any...
This is just a fun project with the objective of putting an otherwise blah ARF in a clean shirt. I learned a lot from it. Here is the present state of build with the airplane's pieces just stuck together for the photos. The last photos are of the interior and there is a teaser at the end; another ARF I will finish after this one.
http://www3.eboard.com/boards/2/74/81/Galvin/att-3810088/003.JPG
http://www3.eboard.com/boards/2/74/81/Galvin/att-3810097/005.JPG
http://www3.eboard.com/boards/2/74/81/Galvin/att-3810099/006.JPG
http://www3.eboard.com/boards/2/74/81/Galvin/att-3810102/008.JPG
http://www3.eboard.com/boards/2/74/81/Galvin/att-3810104/010.JPG
http://www3.eboard.com/boards/2/74/81/Galvin/att-3810105/013.JPG
Ed, I don't need any more info on this airplane. In fact if YOU need any...
This is just a fun project with the objective of putting an otherwise blah ARF in a clean shirt. I learned a lot from it. Here is the present state of build with the airplane's pieces just stuck together for the photos. The last photos are of the interior and there is a teaser at the end; another ARF I will finish after this one.
http://www3.eboard.com/boards/2/74/81/Galvin/att-3810088/003.JPG
http://www3.eboard.com/boards/2/74/81/Galvin/att-3810097/005.JPG
http://www3.eboard.com/boards/2/74/81/Galvin/att-3810099/006.JPG
http://www3.eboard.com/boards/2/74/81/Galvin/att-3810102/008.JPG
http://www3.eboard.com/boards/2/74/81/Galvin/att-3810104/010.JPG
http://www3.eboard.com/boards/2/74/81/Galvin/att-3810105/013.JPG
05-23-2011, 08:04 AM
#38
Super Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 6,120
Flite,
After reading your introduction to this 'in the middle' thread I excitedly scanned through the subsequent posts expecting to see some build photos of the model coming together... But all i see is more design sketches/drawings which to be honest make it look like just more of the 18 month long 'in the beginning' thread.
Have you started building?
Sorry if I'm being impatient...
Steve
After reading your introduction to this 'in the middle' thread I excitedly scanned through the subsequent posts expecting to see some build photos of the model coming together... But all i see is more design sketches/drawings which to be honest make it look like just more of the 18 month long 'in the beginning' thread.
Have you started building?
Sorry if I'm being impatient...
Steve
05-25-2011, 07:34 PM
#39
"Look Of The Real Thing"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,171
Reasoning With Resi-nonce
Steve,
Other than a simple answer of "the plane", what specifically would you suggest could be constructed at this point? Did you see
and understand our assembly/construction method?
I decided I needed to add a broader response here:
We are working in composite materials, some of which an observer might consider to be simple XPS with little consideration for
the differences in XPS much less XPS compared to EPS. This is not to speak down to anyone, just the opposite as I intended
my project to share and enable anyone reading this to duplicate the entire project following the simple "assembly" instructions
which will appear in the (3rd) section of this thread.
If I have actually bored readers, sorry we were really wanting to share some of the processes utilized in scratch building scale.
The end result is a higher score. You might ask yourself how do you know what yields a higher score... ;^) To those I say you
can learn a lot when helping, working, conducting, judging, timing, feeding, etc. competitive flying scale contests...get involved!
Other than a simple answer of "the plane", what specifically would you suggest could be constructed at this point? Did you see
and understand our assembly/construction method?
I decided I needed to add a broader response here:
We are working in composite materials, some of which an observer might consider to be simple XPS with little consideration for
the differences in XPS much less XPS compared to EPS. This is not to speak down to anyone, just the opposite as I intended
my project to share and enable anyone reading this to duplicate the entire project following the simple "assembly" instructions
which will appear in the (3rd) section of this thread.
If I have actually bored readers, sorry we were really wanting to share some of the processes utilized in scratch building scale.
The end result is a higher score. You might ask yourself how do you know what yields a higher score... ;^) To those I say you
can learn a lot when helping, working, conducting, judging, timing, feeding, etc. competitive flying scale contests...get involved!
Last edited by Flite-Metal; 07-06-2014 at 03:58 PM.
05-27-2011, 05:40 PM
#40
"Look Of The Real Thing"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,171
Former Audit
Mike Wilson sent these last night to help with the parting point locations. As it turns out I was one former too close to the window up front,
the others were right on.
Note...if you click on this link you will be taken to one of my web serves so you can save this image in its full size for use by those building
along with us. http://004edc4.netsolhost.com/B47/B4...ral Index2.jpg Structural Index2.jpg This image also serves as
another validator of the airfoil at the root. The tip and root are the same.
This is what is known as an erection drawing based on the structural elements of the 1:1.
Last edited by Flite-Metal; 07-06-2014 at 04:01 PM.
05-27-2011, 07:36 PM
#41
Super Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 6,120
Originally Posted by Flite-Metal
Steve, what do you suggest could be constructed at this point?
My point is that in the first post in this thread you said:
"In The Middle" follows "In The Beginning" to separate the project design phase from construction and assembly."
Steve
05-27-2011, 08:01 PM
#42
"Look Of The Real Thing"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,171
Taking the time to read this project thread up to this point discloses how little remains. We are knee deep in auditing everything we
have done thus far. So much changes as you move forward in a project. If you do not audit and literally "discard" the old, it will
find its way back into the project....definately something you do now want.
A good example is how I am now going to use a removable aluminum spar blade instead of the vested hardwood blade shown earlier.
This permits a much better maintenance and living with process. Though the root will rarely be taken apart, it can be inspected and
tightened. Our transport parting points remain the same.
Our aluminum spar blade has inboard and outboard brass screw seats top and bottom to permit removal of an entire wing if it ever
becomes necessary. This construction method enables easier replacement of a wing component with less to be replaced when there
is an opps. Otherwise an opps could force replacement of the fuselage center section when the damage was isolated in the inboard
section of the wing.
have done thus far. So much changes as you move forward in a project. If you do not audit and literally "discard" the old, it will
find its way back into the project....definately something you do now want.
A good example is how I am now going to use a removable aluminum spar blade instead of the vested hardwood blade shown earlier.
This permits a much better maintenance and living with process. Though the root will rarely be taken apart, it can be inspected and
tightened. Our transport parting points remain the same.
Our aluminum spar blade has inboard and outboard brass screw seats top and bottom to permit removal of an entire wing if it ever
becomes necessary. This construction method enables easier replacement of a wing component with less to be replaced when there
is an opps. Otherwise an opps could force replacement of the fuselage center section when the damage was isolated in the inboard
section of the wing.
Last edited by Flite-Metal; 02-29-2012 at 05:31 PM.
06-09-2011, 07:55 PM
#43
"Look Of The Real Thing"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,171
Final Dim Audit Results = 1:8.7669
Final dim audit results. Aileron and flap final dims will post after they are cut from wing.
More later
More later
Last edited by Flite-Metal; 03-09-2012 at 02:20 AM.
06-10-2011, 02:58 PM
#44
"Look Of The Real Thing"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,171
1/8.7th aka 1/9th Scale
As we arrive at our final dims I thought I would revisit the wind tunnel model photos to see if I could tell how close we are to its dims... :^)
Yep we be there...or where we are is where they were. We often make comments...the further downstream this project goes it gets back to
where it was in these photos. We hope to be as close as possible to them. As you see, we have swollen a bit to 1/8.7 or as I am declaring it
1/9th instead of 10.2 declared before. This is our final % of scale declaration.
Yep we be there...or where we are is where they were. We often make comments...the further downstream this project goes it gets back to
where it was in these photos. We hope to be as close as possible to them. As you see, we have swollen a bit to 1/8.7 or as I am declaring it
1/9th instead of 10.2 declared before. This is our final % of scale declaration.
Last edited by Flite-Metal; 02-29-2012 at 05:32 PM.
06-10-2011, 04:18 PM
#45
"Look Of The Real Thing"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,171
Wing Root, Horiz Stab, & Backbone Incidences
For those building along...or who plan to build this project these incidences are from the B-47E erection/maintenance manual,
courtesy of Mike Wilson.
Note the backbone incidence and horiz. stab incidence intersect at STA 112". Sway-back in illustration should be ignored.
I have drawn three incidence lines for your convenience.
A). Red (Wing Incidence)
B). Blue (Horiz Stab Incidence)
C). Green (Fuselage Backbone)
Full size image...click here: http://004edc4.netsolhost.com/B47/B47Lines/B47EFuseDim&IncidenceCom.jpg
courtesy of Mike Wilson.
Note the backbone incidence and horiz. stab incidence intersect at STA 112". Sway-back in illustration should be ignored.
I have drawn three incidence lines for your convenience.
A). Red (Wing Incidence)
B). Blue (Horiz Stab Incidence)
C). Green (Fuselage Backbone)
Full size image...click here: http://004edc4.netsolhost.com/B47/B47Lines/B47EFuseDim&IncidenceCom.jpg
Last edited by Flite-Metal; 02-29-2012 at 05:32 PM.
06-18-2011, 05:42 PM
#46
"Look Of The Real Thing"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,171
Third And Final Audit Results
To some...
this phase may appear to be duplication. I must admit...it would look to be that very thing.....but this is in fact
the third audit and series of changes since this project began. Why
?? That's easy, you are viewing "completed" work and
very little of work across time. This is the most important aspect of every scratch build. Airframe doesn't simply come out of
your rear...pocket.
Remember this is neither kit nor plan build. If you change one major element it changes everything. This time around literally
started at the nacelle/engine pylon and worked outward to the wing tips and nose to tail with final dims.
There is a new former...aka fuselage parting point STA704.25 hot wired shape change. I went back to the B-47D to extract this
former to achieve proper shape.
It will be joined with the forward center hot wired section as one piece "aka glued" with the parting point at 861.00 and 1221.60.
The proper belly swag is now within the bomb bay doors to prevent having to hot wire a new section beneath wing.
Now, parting point and new formers become 3D CAD via Solid Works and I move to mounting recesses for the mains at the
parting points. Down & Locked needs to give me the length and angle of the dangle on their electric conversion of the
pnumatics.
this phase may appear to be duplication. I must admit...it would look to be that very thing.....but this is in factthe third audit and series of changes since this project began. Why
?? That's easy, you are viewing "completed" work and very little of work across time. This is the most important aspect of every scratch build. Airframe doesn't simply come out of
your rear...pocket.
Remember this is neither kit nor plan build. If you change one major element it changes everything. This time around literally
started at the nacelle/engine pylon and worked outward to the wing tips and nose to tail with final dims.
There is a new former...aka fuselage parting point STA704.25 hot wired shape change. I went back to the B-47D to extract this
former to achieve proper shape.
It will be joined with the forward center hot wired section as one piece "aka glued" with the parting point at 861.00 and 1221.60.
The proper belly swag is now within the bomb bay doors to prevent having to hot wire a new section beneath wing.
Now, parting point and new formers become 3D CAD via Solid Works and I move to mounting recesses for the mains at the
parting points. Down & Locked needs to give me the length and angle of the dangle on their electric conversion of the
pnumatics.
Last edited by Flite-Metal; 03-09-2012 at 02:23 AM.
06-18-2011, 07:10 PM
#47
Super Contributor
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Central South Carolina
Posts: 1,201
Take your time, do it right the first time. Like the carpenter's rule of thumb, "Measure twice, cut once!" Don't follow the current American business model of "We don't have time to do it right the first time, but we'll have plenty of time to correct our mistakes later!"
A large part of my last job in product development was customer visits to correct problems that shouldn't have been released into production, and since I was near the bottom of the food chain, explain to sometimes irate customers what I was doing and come up with some kind of explanation why I was there to fix something that shouldn't have been broke in the first place -without making asperssions on upper level management.
You have a goal to have a first class model ready for a particular show or contest. Let that be your guide to the timing of your progress, not other peoples' desire to see it finished. Please keep us informed of your progress. It's a great instructional course on how to do things right. And keep up the good work! Thanks!!
A large part of my last job in product development was customer visits to correct problems that shouldn't have been released into production, and since I was near the bottom of the food chain, explain to sometimes irate customers what I was doing and come up with some kind of explanation why I was there to fix something that shouldn't have been broke in the first place -without making asperssions on upper level management.
You have a goal to have a first class model ready for a particular show or contest. Let that be your guide to the timing of your progress, not other peoples' desire to see it finished. Please keep us informed of your progress. It's a great instructional course on how to do things right. And keep up the good work! Thanks!!
06-18-2011, 07:33 PM
#48
"Look Of The Real Thing"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,171
Functional Specifications @ Root Of Successful Projects
I may appear a wee OCD relative to functional specs, however as stated above, if it was intended to look and function as an X then
anything less is not an X. Not that this has to be obsessive or compulsive... its right or wrong...within the rules.
There are tons of gimme's in these projects. Otherwise they never end...or as Uncle Dave says...they never get finished...they reach
an acceptable point for presentation purposes...for a while. These can be money pits...we'll see...
anything less is not an X. Not that this has to be obsessive or compulsive... its right or wrong...within the rules.
There are tons of gimme's in these projects. Otherwise they never end...or as Uncle Dave says...they never get finished...they reach
an acceptable point for presentation purposes...for a while. These can be money pits...we'll see...
Last edited by Flite-Metal; 02-29-2012 at 05:32 PM.
06-22-2011, 05:27 PM
#49
"Look Of The Real Thing"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,171
Chaff Dispensor On Both Sides Or Only On One???
I need your help....
I have a question relative to the chaff dispensor on the right hand side
of the fuselage. I have close-up images in support of that unit.
However there is a six exit port on the opposite side. Anyone know if
this is another chaff dispensor or the air exit from air conditioning for
the electronics? I am inclide to think it is a warm air exhaust.
I have a question relative to the chaff dispensor on the right hand side
of the fuselage. I have close-up images in support of that unit.
However there is a six exit port on the opposite side. Anyone know if
this is another chaff dispensor or the air exit from air conditioning for
the electronics? I am inclide to think it is a warm air exhaust.
Last edited by Flite-Metal; 02-29-2012 at 05:32 PM.
07-01-2011, 05:08 AM
#50
New Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 16
A couple of more pebbles to add to the pile...
Went over to the Museum of Flight the other day to photgraph the B-47. If I can ever find the bloody firewire to connect the camera to the computer I may even put up some pictures too.
The 6 ports on the side of the fuselage approximately even with the TE of the wing are duplicated on both sides of this aircraft. They do not appear to have any inner structure or apparatus behind them inside the fuselage, save a heavy wire mesh, and I would judge them to be hot air vents. The mesh is obviously to keep small birds out but I cannot verify if these are original equipment or merely added on for the display.
This example is a WB-47 and not a first line combat aircraft per se so it is just possible, if not probable, it was not equipped with chaff dispensers. The one B-47 you show with these 6 vents probably has them on the opposite side as well.
I can't say that the bomber version only had them on one side but it makes sense that it probably had them on both sides. Why have so few chaff dispensers when everything coming at you at that time from any direction was basically radar guided?
One B-47 in the photos is also shown on display with the ailerons faired neatly with the rest of the wing. The ailerons on the B-47 we have here show an equal amount of "up" aileron on both sides when at rest. I suspect this is a result of the control cables being pulled out of rig by the wing drooping while there are no air loads on it. I also suspect that the airplane with the neatly faired ailerons was disassembled for transport to where it now sits and did not have the controls re-attached and rigged, just nailed in position.
Our B-47 was flown in here years ago and, to my knowledge was never disassembled. It sits about 100 feet from the taxiway of the runway it came in on.
The overhead picture of the 1000th B-47 rollout on page 79 of Mark Natola's book clearly shows that this misalignment was so. Several end-on shots of the wings of production aircraft at rest on the ramp in the Japanese book show this as well. Oddly, the pictures of the XB-47s do not seem to show this. Perhaps the rigging was changed in development.
Why did I notice this? The 727s I flew, when fully fuelled up, would deploy the speed boards on the top of one wing , I forget which side, (left?) a couple of inches due to the wings drooping from the increased weight and the unequal geometry of the spoiler actuating cables.
The 6 ports on the side of the fuselage approximately even with the TE of the wing are duplicated on both sides of this aircraft. They do not appear to have any inner structure or apparatus behind them inside the fuselage, save a heavy wire mesh, and I would judge them to be hot air vents. The mesh is obviously to keep small birds out but I cannot verify if these are original equipment or merely added on for the display.
This example is a WB-47 and not a first line combat aircraft per se so it is just possible, if not probable, it was not equipped with chaff dispensers. The one B-47 you show with these 6 vents probably has them on the opposite side as well.
I can't say that the bomber version only had them on one side but it makes sense that it probably had them on both sides. Why have so few chaff dispensers when everything coming at you at that time from any direction was basically radar guided?
One B-47 in the photos is also shown on display with the ailerons faired neatly with the rest of the wing. The ailerons on the B-47 we have here show an equal amount of "up" aileron on both sides when at rest. I suspect this is a result of the control cables being pulled out of rig by the wing drooping while there are no air loads on it. I also suspect that the airplane with the neatly faired ailerons was disassembled for transport to where it now sits and did not have the controls re-attached and rigged, just nailed in position.
Our B-47 was flown in here years ago and, to my knowledge was never disassembled. It sits about 100 feet from the taxiway of the runway it came in on.
The overhead picture of the 1000th B-47 rollout on page 79 of Mark Natola's book clearly shows that this misalignment was so. Several end-on shots of the wings of production aircraft at rest on the ramp in the Japanese book show this as well. Oddly, the pictures of the XB-47s do not seem to show this. Perhaps the rigging was changed in development.
Why did I notice this? The 727s I flew, when fully fuelled up, would deploy the speed boards on the top of one wing , I forget which side, (left?) a couple of inches due to the wings drooping from the increased weight and the unequal geometry of the spoiler actuating cables.
Linear Mode
