by "ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
Published 09/21/2017 at 12:30
by "ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
Published 09/21/2017 at 12:30
Tags: wingspan
; planelopnik
STARS: 22
With the arrival of the turbojet engine in the years around WWII, it only made sense to attach a propeller to the spinning turbine shaft to make a turboprop. Early turboprop engines such as the Pratt & Whitney T-34 , Wright XT-35 and Allison T-38 were all flight tested on a trio of surplus Flying Fortresses, which received the designation EB-17G or JB-17G.
Somebody had fun with Photoshop and removed the original engines. It looks pretty amazing, and it absolutely would have flown. The single turboprop provided as much or more power as all four Wright Cyclones.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
For more information on these B-17 conversions, click
here
.
(
H/T to
Skyfire77
for finding the link!)
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
If you enjoyed this post, please join in the conversation and let me know. For more posts about aviation history and aircraft oddities, head over to
Wingspan
.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
"Party-vi" (party-vi)
09/21/2017 at 12:34, STARS: 9
I have enjoyed this and am letting you know.
"cmill189 - sans Volvo" (cmill189)
09/21/2017 at 12:36, STARS: 3
Me too.
"Cé hé sin" (michael-m-mouse)
09/21/2017 at 12:37, STARS: 2
Napier did the same when they flight tested the (barking mad!) Nomad:
Like the turboprops it would have powered the plane unaided.
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/21/2017 at 12:39, STARS: 0
I’d love to know what they were testing with that rig out front.
"MonkeePuzzle" (monkeypuzzle)
09/21/2017 at 12:40, STARS: 1
that looks awesome! like the kind of crazy designs you get for air speed records. JUST ADD MORE ENGINES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/21/2017 at 12:40, STARS: 7
Thanks! I’m messing around with yet another series of very short, one paragraph, picture-heavy posts. Because most people on the Internet have very short attention spans and, ooh look pictures!
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/21/2017 at 12:41, STARS: 0
Thanks!
"Cé hé sin" (michael-m-mouse)
09/21/2017 at 12:44, STARS: 0
I’ve just had to change the picture (wrong engine!) but I did read somewhere what the probe was testing. Can’t find it now...
"Spaceball-Two" (spaceball-two)
09/21/2017 at 12:45, STARS: 0
Keep it up! I love these.
"Jcarr" (jcarr)
09/21/2017 at 12:47, STARS: 1
Me three.
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/21/2017 at 12:51, STARS: 0
I will! Thanks for reading.
"user314" (user314)
09/21/2017 at 12:53, STARS: 5
"user314" (user314)
09/21/2017 at 12:56, STARS: 1
I am also noting the four Cyclones are feathered. That T34 is putting out some serious grunt.
"benjrblant" (benjblant)
09/21/2017 at 12:56, STARS: 0
Don’t forget to revamp your titles. Good titles tell absolutely nothing about the subject matter and leave the reader sitting on the edge of their left click button in suspense. Hell, they don’t even have to be relevant. Exhibit A:
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/21/2017 at 12:58, STARS: 1
Here’s an Avro Lincoln with a Rolls-Royce Tyne mounted in the nose. There are LOTS of pictures of similarly equipped Lincolns, but I still can’t find the one picture I wanted to share.
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/21/2017 at 12:59, STARS: 0
Yeah, I’ve gotta up my clickbait game. On second thought, no, I hate titles like that.
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/21/2017 at 13:00, STARS: 1
Yup. Note the rudder deflection too, because massive torque.
"benjrblant" (benjblant)
09/21/2017 at 13:03, STARS: 2
I despise them and that they are usually accompanied by a webpage that’s 75% ads and some words with meaningless/no content.
"user314" (user314)
09/21/2017 at 13:08, STARS: 1
Takes me back to aviation class in high school. “Step on the ball, trim it up!”
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/21/2017 at 13:17, STARS: 0
Welcome to the Internet.
"cbell04" (cbell04)
09/21/2017 at 13:20, STARS: 0
That must have been super sketchy to test initially. Maybe it’s not as big of a deal as I’m thinking but just imagining all that propwash where they’re traditionally was no propeller at all must have given some serious concerns. I would imagine the nose of the plane experiences very different amounts of wind speed and turbulence in the standard configuration. Must have taken some serious effort to make that engine fit and be safe to operate.
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/21/2017 at 13:23, STARS: 2
I looked at a lot of pictures, and my thought was that there was certainly enough room inside the bomber. My question is more about weight balance with that big engine in the nose. I wonder if they had to add any ballast to the rear. I’m sure there is a lengthy article about it somewhere on the Internet.
"cbell04" (cbell04)
09/21/2017 at 13:28, STARS: 1
oh good point. Didn’t even think about that. These tests builds must be truly monumental to be a part of. Not to mention you’re using an old war bird and not some cushy modern jetliner to strap your test equipment to.
"user314" (user314)
09/21/2017 at 13:32, STARS: 0
Not lengthy, but there’s this .
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/21/2017 at 13:34, STARS: 2
Good stuff. Thanks. I wish I had found this before I wrote this piece! But then I would have wanted to give too much information, and I’m trying to keep these as short as possible.
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/21/2017 at 13:57, STARS: 1
I added your link to the post and gave you a shout out. Thanks again!
"user314" (user314)
09/21/2017 at 14:51, STARS: 0
I was going to say KSP, but there’s not enough struts.
"Dave the car guy , still here" (a3dave)
09/21/2017 at 15:03, STARS: 0
Wow, you must have known I just left from a brief trip to Dayton without getting to see the additions at the National Museum of the USAF. What a way to make me feel like crap. Wanted to go so bad but wife and daughter had let me choose places to visit and where to eat earlier in the week.
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/21/2017 at 15:29, STARS: 0
I am so sorry. This past summer, my family went on a trip to the Midwest and we spent some time in Ft. Wayne visiting my brother-in-law. I told my wife that, come hell or high-water, I was going to Dayton. My oldest son and I opened the place up and closed it down. We spent the entire day there and took about 400 pictures (which I’m still trying to get edited), and ate the chili cheese hot dog called “The Afterburner.” The new 4th hangar is jaw-dropping. I had been to Dayton about 20 years ago but didn’t get to see the Valkyrie. At the time, it was in a separate building. Walking into that hangar I was grinning from ear to ear. So many aircraft that I have written about, there in the flesh (or aluminum). Absolutely amazing.
Sorry, I don’t mean to rub it in. But it was practically a religious experience.
"Dave the car guy , still here" (a3dave)
09/21/2017 at 17:19, STARS: 3
The place is absolutely amazing. And being something we can actually enjoy that has been done with our tax dollars is just a bonus.
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
09/21/2017 at 17:21, STARS: 2
I love anything that is free! That’s why air shows on military bases are the best. Well, as you said, we’ve been paying for it for years.
"Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo" (rustyvandura)
09/22/2017 at 00:14, STARS: 1
