B-29 question

[Ack-Ack]

You also have to remember that it was also due to the high humidity of the pacific theatre of opperations. case in point in nascar, and many other racing events. becuase the cars are running at high speeds for prolonged times. the engines will burst into flames. it wasnt due to poor design the B-29 was a perfect design, its just the engines werent properly and completly tested before the bomber entered service. mostly due to the fact that the US wanted an end to the war quickly. the problems were ironed out after the war, and the B-29s in korea had very few problems with the engines. and when the russians copied it and made the TU-4 they were never able to fix the engine problems.

The Wright R-3350 engines were beset with numerous problems though these problems were eventually ironed out during the production life of the B-29. 

After World War II, the R-3350 was redesigned which means the engines that the B-29 used in Korea were not quite the same engines the B-29 used in the PTO.

Some of the problems of the R-3350s

• excessive clearance between the cylinder baffles and the cowl
• engines had a tendency to swallow their own valves

Other design problems on the B-29 also had a negative impact on the engines such as the cowling being designed too close to the engines, leading to insufficient cooling and engine over heating and the early cowl flaps also had a flutter and vibration when open. 

ack-ack

[fullmetalbullet]

hmm i guess the history channel is wrong again oh well no worries. and yes the high tempetures of the PTO had a part in the overheating of the engines.but yeah. none the less the B-29 was a great design (perfect IMHO it way be becuase im a yank but i will stand to that till i die).

[Warspawn]

... and when the russians copied it and made the TU-4 they were never able to fix the engine problems.

Too funny reading a story about the copy they made of a B29 that landed on their territory.  Evidently, the team that copied it even incorporated the bullet holes in their new aircraft, and the Boeing-stamped control yokes...

[Karnak]

Too funny reading a story about the copy they made of a B29 that landed on their territory.  Evidently, the team that copied it even incorporated the bullet holes in their new aircraft, and the Boeing-stamped control yokes...

Well, if Uncle Joe told you to copy something exactly or else, wouldn't you make sure it was exact?

[B-17]

no.... the B stands for Bomber- B-1, B-2, B-17- B-24, B-25, B-29, and F stands for Fighter- F-4, F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, etc.

[AirFlyer]

Aluminum also burns nicely once you lite it up.  They figured this out after a couple Al armored cans got whacked by sea skimmers...a bit late for the cans, of course.  Everything is a compromise, some work out better than others.

Besides for an oxidizer, take a guess what the main component is in modern rocket solid booster fuels.

[caldera]

This is the incident you have mentioned.  May be the benchmark that the damage model should be based off?

(Image removed from quote.)


(Image removed from quote.)

Doesn't appear that incident was used as the damage model benchmark.  Model seems closer to the 1937 incident at Lakehurst, New Jersey.  Hopefully just a bug though.

[Ack-Ack]

All very true, but at the same instance, one might say.... If "cooler" metals were used, this lack of air would have had a far less impact. 

Some arguments can go back and forth forever, I do think this is one of them.  There is probably 12 different reasons and once they all added to one another, the synergy created is unstoppable. 

 

It would still be an issue as the design of the cowling flaps would still cause the engines to over heat.  Sure, the engines might not have caught on fire but the engines would still have over heated and the bomber's sortie scrapped due to an engine malfunction.

ack-ack

[dstrip2]

Doesn't appear that incident was used as the damage model benchmark.  Model seems closer to the 1937 incident at Lakehurst, New Jersey.  Hopefully just a bug though.

 

     _____________________  /)
   / --- --- --- --- --- ---   V  )
 /  --- --- --- ---  X[][][]-I     >
 \  --- --- --- --- --- --- --/\ )
   \____________________/   \)
           \|/_____\|/
          (=|=|=|=|=)>-I

b29 - its the blimp in the room everyone's talking about

[B-17]

 :xand its already here!! when was the poll submitted? novembr?

[5PointOh]

I said this in another thread, but I think it fits in with this discussion too.  I'm curious if anyone else agrees.

"I actually think many are missing something.  AH does not have engine fires.  It has fuel fires.  That has been no indication from HTC in the update notes that the modeling of AH has changed and that the engines in planes can now catch fire.

So I'll wait for the patches and see if HTC decideds that there is an issue or not.  If they say there is no issue with the hardness of the self sealing fuel tank areas, then so be it."   
 

[Kazaa]

[Kazaa]

New patch.
_________

I just tested the B-29's battle damage sustainability offline, it's a little more "beefy" but it certainly doesn't live up to the artical posted here. Fires will be a thing of the past now.

[donna43]

Re: [B29-Superfortress] Aces High Online Sim B-29
From: Frank Farrell <b29gunner@suddenlink.net>Add to Contacts
To: B29-Superfortress@yahoogroups.com 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

While the pictures in this posting may not be reality, it is interesting to note that the one of the RCT Gun Sight has an "INTERPHONE" activation button...NOT Intercom!   Farrell
 


Please note, re my earlier email, the Gun Sight switch WAS  CORRECT AS "INTERPHONE"...my point was it did NOT say "INTERCOM"