^^^^^^^^^^^^Too kewl^^^^^^^^

home sweet home
 

six turning, four burning

Horrible design. Someone got paid off.

Heavy hauler
 

Saw this going by the house last week. Transportation company had a crew lifting lower cable TV and telephone cables so it would clear. Crew said it was a generator - I had just told my son it was either a diesel generator or an air compressor!


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435286847.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435286790.jpg
The next day I see another while I was out walking.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435286920.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435286950.jpg

I owned one of these back in the 80s. Great driving car but lots of rust issues. In the end I was lucky to get rid of it.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435305808.jpg

I don't know, ten years of active service in a time period of great turmoil and aircraft design turn over seems like some sort of accomplishment. However the maintenance of two engine types on the same aircraft does seem impracticable by today's standards.


Latest aviation images | Aviation Spectator - Airplanes, airliners, jets, videos, photos - RC to ballooning, civil and military aircraft, aerospace
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435323929.jpg
http://www.aviationspectator.com/image/latest-aviation-images?page=489
http://www.aviationspectator.com/fil...rtress-099.jpg

They went into service AFTER WWII and had no capability for nukes. They never fired a shot in anger and were relegated to reconnaissance roles. They burned 100 gallons of oil every flight, ate spark plugs and mechanics either froze or wilted in hi/lo temps as there were no shelters big enough to cover them. Bassackwards engines that froze up because of the carb configurations.

Infrastructure is a part of design work. Just sayin.....

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435349064.jpg
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435349093.jpg

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-G93y2aUsnw?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

sounded awesome.
max load was 410k but did it have undersized landing gear that over stressed most runways?

They gave up on Northrop's flying wing for that?

Now that just make me sad.

Northrop YB-49
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YB-49
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435372264.jpg

I'm still trying to wrap my engineering head around that generator carrier. Too many axles.

WW2 German Jets
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435381941.jpghttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435381958.jpghttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435381978.jpghttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435381992.jpghttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435382003.jpghttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435382015.jpghttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435382029.jpghttp://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435382052.jpg

I'm no expert (perhaps the aviation guys can clarify) but I believe the avionics technology was not up to stabilizing the flying wing at the time?

Random:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435415949.jpg

Land on beach (below high tide line) to pick up rafters......stuck to the axles...float with rafts to high tide line... fly it home 5 days later.




http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1435419208.jpg

^very lucky. Any more pics?

here you go: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_wing
i knew the Cessna 208 is a sturdy platform but thats just crazy