Author Topic: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.  (Read 1636 times)

Offline Icefox

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 19
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #15 on: March 24, 2008, 05:21:06 PM »
It's actually the first production B-36. That or very close to it. As you said, no jets. It's also got the huge "runway breaker" tires.
Eleven IS louder than ten!

Offline Simaril

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5149
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #16 on: March 24, 2008, 07:26:19 PM »
In the days before the US Air Force Museum's expansion, the B-36 was kept in the same display hangar as the WW2 aircraft. They all fit underneath it..no extra elevation was needed. In fact, they had to cut a hole in the metal above the hangar door so the tail could get into the hangar at all.

Standing on its own "feet" (standard gear), a six footer can easily walk underneath the fuselage to see the open bomb bay doors. Without ducking. At all. The original gear (that Icefox called "runway breakers") applied so much weight per square inch that only specially designed runways could accommodate it. They eventually changed the gear to a set of 4 tires per gear to distribute the weight better. The plane was designed to fly for 24 hours on a single fuel load, without in flight refueling. When first deployed, it could fly higher than contemporary FIGHTERS could.

You cannot conceive of how big this is until you see it. A B52 is smaller, and sits MUCH closer to the ground.

My favorite project was "FICON" -- Fighter Conveyor. Although the escort version was bit ridiculous (the "Goblin"), they did make a recon carrier version This project would port a specially modified F-84 thunderflash (the recon version of the thunderstreak) all the way to the edge of USSR airspace. Then, the recon plane would be let down by trapeze and send off for a mission. On completion, it would rendezvous with the B-36, snag the trapeze, get retracted (partly) into the bay, and hitch a ride back home.



From what I remember, they may have actually run some of these operations.
Maturity is knowing that I've been an idiot in the past.
Wisdom is realizing I will be an idiot in the future.
Common sense is trying to not be an idiot right now

"Social Fads are for sheeple." - Meatwad

Offline RAIDER14

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2554
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #17 on: March 24, 2008, 07:58:55 PM »
Here is more information about project "FICON"
http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/models_pages/ficon_modl.htm

Here is information about the B-36 and its variants
http://www.air-and-space.com/b-36%20variants.htm


Proposed cargo version to carry parts of the Saturn V rocket


Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #18 on: March 24, 2008, 08:33:37 PM »
Are they going to restore a Goblin too?
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline Simaril

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5149
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #19 on: March 24, 2008, 09:15:57 PM »
There's been a restored, nonflying Goblin at Air Force Museum for 25+ years. Doubt they'd ever try to make it flyable -- the original project assessment felt the Goblin could be handled OK by an excellent pilot, but that it was too unstable for reliable use by the average pilot. (Not that anyone would ever ADMIT to being average...fighter pilots being what they are!) Anyway, making a Goblin flyable sounds like a recipe for an accident.
Maturity is knowing that I've been an idiot in the past.
Wisdom is realizing I will be an idiot in the future.
Common sense is trying to not be an idiot right now

"Social Fads are for sheeple." - Meatwad

Offline RAIDER14

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2554
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #20 on: March 24, 2008, 09:27:11 PM »
Goblin was tested on the B29 before attempted on a B36
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ct_sP1O82k
video of testing

Offline angelsandair

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3126
      • RT Website
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #21 on: March 24, 2008, 10:33:55 PM »
Good lord.That thing was a beast :O

The tremendous bomb load of the Convair B-36 is clearly indicated by the fact that a B-36 can haul 84,000 pounds of bombs - more than the gross weight of a fully loaded WWII B-24 Liberator bomber.

It can carry more than the B-52. The b-52's carrying capacity is about 70,000-77,000 pounds. And the only reason it beat the B-36's jet engined sister the XB-60 was because of speed. Just imagine if the XB-60 was in Iraq today  :D

But yea, It wasnt the exact plane restoration I heard about. I heard they were restoring one for Red Bull. I know Red Bull has like it's own little air force with a B-25, a P-51, and a P-40 or something like that. But yea, this is cool. The hard part about restoring the B-36 is finding someone to fly one.  :D
Quote
Goto Google and type in "French military victories", then hit "I'm feeling lucky".
Here lie these men on this sun scoured atoll,
The wind for their watcher, the wave for their shroud,
Where palm and pandanus shall whisper forever,
A requiem fitting for heroes

Offline Grayeagle

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1488
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #22 on: March 25, 2008, 01:46:22 AM »
I downloaded a B-36 for MSFS that was very well done .. flight model and all.

It took *all* of LAX to get off the ground, and even then, hadda wave hop a bit while I got some speed while milking the flaps up..
..but once she was up to speed, trimmed out, ..man .. what a ride.

And that was just MSFS .. (the Hustler ..with AB flames an all, .. what *fun* in MSFS :)

Takeoff is definitely the event for the Peacemaker .. it really takes awhile to get flight speed.

-GE
'The better I shoot ..the less I have to manuever'
-GE

Offline angelsandair

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3126
      • RT Website
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #23 on: March 25, 2008, 04:54:36 PM »
Yep  :aok

I also heard that in about a year or 2 they will have a flying B-29 superfortress. I know there is only 1 right now that flies. (I've seen it fly, it's a monster  :devil
Quote
Goto Google and type in "French military victories", then hit "I'm feeling lucky".
Here lie these men on this sun scoured atoll,
The wind for their watcher, the wave for their shroud,
Where palm and pandanus shall whisper forever,
A requiem fitting for heroes

Offline angelsandair

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3126
      • RT Website
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #24 on: March 26, 2008, 09:07:18 PM »
oh actually I heard now that the B-29 will be ready in about a year now.  :aok
Quote
Goto Google and type in "French military victories", then hit "I'm feeling lucky".
Here lie these men on this sun scoured atoll,
The wind for their watcher, the wave for their shroud,
Where palm and pandanus shall whisper forever,
A requiem fitting for heroes

Offline Wolfala

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4875
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #25 on: March 26, 2008, 09:20:04 PM »
Only problem with the B-36 is that even with six R4360s, it was still way under powered and those engines were really stretched to their limits. Cooling them was a major pain. The Lycomming XR-7755 - while it never went into production would've been an ideal mate to the B-36. But most likely the R4360 was chosen because of its longer development cycle and fact that it was currently in the inventory. So you had an engine mated to an airframe that needed something twice as powerful - and an overworked engine that suffered cooling problems and frequent failures as a result of thermal runaway.

But the odd thing is, even through the XR-7755 had a higher fuel consumption per engine at MTO power (580 GPH), its BSFC was actually lower then the R-4360 when it would've gotten up to altitude - and range actually increased.
« Last Edit: March 26, 2008, 09:21:53 PM by Wolfala »


the best cure for "wife ack" is to deploy chaff:    $...$$....$....$$$.....$ .....$$$.....$ ....$$

Offline angelsandair

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3126
      • RT Website
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #26 on: March 27, 2008, 07:21:47 PM »
wow i didnt know that. Well that is awesome, if i got a pic of the B-60 and the B-36, you they will look the same almost.
Quote
Goto Google and type in "French military victories", then hit "I'm feeling lucky".
Here lie these men on this sun scoured atoll,
The wind for their watcher, the wave for their shroud,
Where palm and pandanus shall whisper forever,
A requiem fitting for heroes

Offline Gowan

  • Proation 9/22/2016
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 589
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #27 on: March 27, 2008, 07:26:29 PM »
i've actually been inside a b-36's bomb bay, it was HUGE. it was at Nebraska's SAC museum, and it had the 6 props. looks cooler than jets

Offline RAIDER14

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2554
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #28 on: March 27, 2008, 07:44:27 PM »
wow i didnt know that. Well that is awesome, if i got a pic of the B-60 and the B-36, you they will look the same almost.


The B-60 was just a modernized B-36

Offline angelsandair

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3126
      • RT Website
Re: B-36 Peacemaker is this true.
« Reply #29 on: March 27, 2008, 09:49:36 PM »
Is there a picture of the YB-60 & the B-52 together? Just to see the difference in size? Man the B-60 was a monster. Sad it was beaten out just because of speed, when they could've added more engines, or different engines  :confused:

But owell, we got a big bomber doing its thing anyways  :D
Quote
Goto Google and type in "French military victories", then hit "I'm feeling lucky".
Here lie these men on this sun scoured atoll,
The wind for their watcher, the wave for their shroud,
Where palm and pandanus shall whisper forever,
A requiem fitting for heroes