Enfield-Rifles.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Off Topic > Re-enacting
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - UK P-40 Battledress Jackets and Trousers
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


UK P-40 Battledress Jackets and Trousers

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Message
hoadie View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 16 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote hoadie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 17 2012 at 10:38pm
I thought the B-57 was named the HUSTLER.(I believe that would've been the world's 1st supersonic bomber)
Hoadie

P.S: During the un-civil war they referred to lice as "greybacks", among other things.
Loose wimmen tightened here
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
LE Owner View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: December 04 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1047
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LE Owner Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 19 2012 at 2:35am
Originally posted by hoadie hoadie wrote:

I thought the B-57 was named the HUSTLER.(I believe that would've been the world's 1st supersonic bomber)
Hoadie

P.S: During the un-civil war they referred to lice as "greybacks", among other things.
 
The Hustler was the B-58.
Back to Top
hoadie View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 16 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote hoadie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 19 2012 at 2:50am
ah!well there you go..memory gets less as years get more!
Hoadie
Loose wimmen tightened here
Back to Top
Cookie Monster View Drop Down
Special Member
Special Member
Avatar

Joined: January 22 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7500
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cookie Monster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 19 2012 at 12:07pm
Convair B-58 Hustler, delta wing 4 engine bomber. Around Mach 2 was the  top speed. she was powered by 4 General Electric J79's sweet plane, seen one up close when I was at Wright-Paterson AFB doing so training.
Back to Top
Shamu View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Logo Designer / Donating Member

Joined: April 25 2007
Location: MD, USA.
Status: Offline
Points: 7249
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Shamu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2012 at 6:51am
Yup the 57 was the Canberra, the 58 was the Hustler & the 47 was the one we used to mess with in our 57's.Tongue
Think Jimmy Stewart in SAC, with the long greenhouse canopy.
PitBull, spawn of Rottie!
Back to Top
hoadie View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 16 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote hoadie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2012 at 4:30pm
Originally posted by Cookie Monster Cookie Monster wrote:



Convair B-58 Hustler, delta wing 4 engine bomber. Around Mach 2 was the  top speed. she was powered by 4 General Electric J79's sweet plane, seen one up close when I was at Wright-Paterson AFB doing so training.


Are you SURE about that, Cookie? I find that hard to believe.They weren't reaching Mach 2 in any tactical aircraft @ that time-far as I know(although the CF-105 arrow did better than Mach 2,it came a few years after).
I'd be interested to see just what her actual performance stats were.Like I said-I've never seen one in person-but always figered it was a cool kite.
I don't believe there is any left flying, is there?
Hoadie
Loose wimmen tightened here
Back to Top
Shamu View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Logo Designer / Donating Member

Joined: April 25 2007
Location: MD, USA.
Status: Offline
Points: 7249
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Shamu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 20 2012 at 9:15pm
B58 was built for pure speed, so I don't think M2 is out of the question. There was a theory going the rounds at the time that if you were fast enough nothing could get at you so speed was a defense in & of itself.
Link here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_B-58_Hustler
Mach 2 indeed, that thing was all engines & fuel!
PitBull, spawn of Rottie!
Back to Top
Smokey View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 11 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 790
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Smokey Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2012 at 6:37am
There were discussions at one time of making them into interceptors for mainland defense.  High speed and a large weapons load were some of the reasons why. I don't know how manueverable they would have been. Cost to convert and operate them were probably why it never happened.
Back to Top
hoadie View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 16 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote hoadie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 21 2012 at 1:26pm
Originally posted by Shamu Shamu wrote:

B58 was built for pure speed, so I don't think M2 is out of the question. There was a theory going the rounds at the time that if you were fast enough nothing could get at you so speed was a defense in & of itself.
Link here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_B-58_Hustler
Mach 2 indeed, that thing was all engines & fuel!




True enough about that.From what I've read, the "speed is armour" theory was adapted by the major navies looking to speed up their DREADNAUGHTS & BATTLESHIPS.These craft were mightily armed-but so weighed down with 15" - 20" or more of armour plating, that they were pathetically slow & fuel hungry.Hence..less armour more speed.
How that would have worked for the Hustler I can't imagine.
I DO know that the delta wing CF-105 was far faster than any tactical aircraft up to that time.(& she only had 2 engines).But she too was a big kite.
As I was informed - Uncle Sam designed the SPARROW missle system for the Arrow.(Wow-what a weapons system.Look where that led...sparrow-sea sparrow..aim1 thru 9 etc)

Hoadie
Loose wimmen tightened here
Back to Top
LE Owner View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: December 04 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1047
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LE Owner Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2012 at 3:58pm
Check out the Hustler's contemporary, the XB70 Valkerie
Top speed Mach 3+
 
PS
Quote
I DO know that the delta wing CF-105 was far faster than any tactical aircraft up to that time.(& she only had 2 engines).But she too was a big kite.
The Arrow and the F-106 were neck and neck, but the F-102B which became the F-106 flew earlier.
The F-102B was a two seater version of the F-102 and while lengthening the airframe they incorporated the wasp waisted figure of the area rule principle into the modification.
The increase in top speed due to decreased drag suprized everyone. The area rule principle then became the way to go for supersonic aircraft.
 
A Movie about the Arrow wrongly attributes the area rule principle to the designer of the Arrow.
 
The arrow had many great characteristics, but due to placement of its weapons bay they couldn't use the sturdy fuselage mounted landing gear of other high wing designs, and the roller skate gear they used had ridulously long slim legs that collapsed at the least bump on the runway. This design flaw helped kill the production of the aircraft.
Back to Top
hoadie View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 16 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote hoadie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2012 at 5:56pm
Long legs, to be sure.But they never had a "failure" with them.(They had one that didn't rotate completley-which left alot of tire on the runway when landing).
What eventually killed her-was the COST.A V Roe Canada was the builder.They killed her on "BLACK FRIDAY" & everyone was immediatly put out of work.(except her top engineers-which went to work for NASA).
Ex wife's uncle worked on her.We used to have a display @ CFB Rockcliff in te museum.I worked the ARROW display when I was a Cadet.Didn't have much there:Nose/pedo tube, Clamshell canopy,joystick,nosewheel & tire.
Gov't put all of them through the gulliotine immediatly & destroyed the plans.
Hoadie
Loose wimmen tightened here
Back to Top
LE Owner View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: December 04 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1047
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LE Owner Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 30 2012 at 6:15am
Originally posted by hoadie hoadie wrote:

Long legs, to be sure.But they never had a "failure" with them.(They had one that didn't rotate completley-which left alot of tire on the runway when landing).
 
 
Quote
 Disaster struck on its 11th flight, on 11 June, the left landing gear leg failed during landing, because it had not aligned itself properly with the axis of the aircraft. The landing gear broke off completely, and RL-201 skidded of the runway on its belly.
I've seen the series of still pictures of this accident, probably taken from a film clip. There was a lot more than rubber left on the tarmac.
 
PS
Just found there was a second accident due to the multiple small diameter wheels of the main gear locking up when the pilot used too much brake to correct for a sudden uplift of the rear of the aircraft caused by a droopy elevator.
That one left a lot of rubber on the tarmac.
 
To be clear I think the Arrow had great potential. If they had ditched the internal weapons bay and gone with fuselage mounted main gear as more successful high wing jets did the Arrow would have really gone places.
 
The fairly narrow track of body mounted gear has its own drawbacks, but those of the Corsair are extremely tough and suited to carrier landings.
 
A thicker wing would have allowed storage of more robust landing gear, but would have added drag and reduced high speed performance.
Back to Top
hoadie View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 16 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote hoadie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2012 at 3:41am
I wasn't aware of the 2nd accident.
I understood that the internal weapon storage was just to increase speed.
Eventually, it was the unbelievable cost over=runs that ultimatly killed her.
I read somewhere that the engines were sold to the Aussies.They apparently used some in a beefed up version of the Sabre.(But I dont know for SURE if thats the case)
Hoadie
Loose wimmen tightened here
Back to Top
LE Owner View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: December 04 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 1047
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote LE Owner Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2012 at 7:57am
Originally posted by hoadie hoadie wrote:

I read somewhere that the engines were sold to the Aussies.They apparently used some in a beefed up version of the Sabre.(But I dont know for SURE if thats the case)
Hoadie
Australia did use a stretched Sabre jet with more powerful engine, and it may be the engine the Arrow used, but I've seen the engine described as an airliner engine.
Back to Top
Smokey View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 11 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 790
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Smokey Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2012 at 5:56am
From:
Powerplant: 1 × Rolls-Royce Avon turbojet, 7,500 lbf (33.4 kN)
Maximum speed: 700 mph (1,100 km/h) (605 knots)
Powerplant: 1 × General Electric J47-GE-27 turbojet, 5,910 lbf (maximum thrust at 7.950 rpm for five min) (26.3 kN)
Maximum speed:
687 mph (1,106 km/h) at sea level at 14,212 lb (6,447 kg) combat weight (also reported 678 mph (1,091 km/h))
599 at 35,000 feet (11,000 m) at 15,352 pounds (6,960 kg). (597 knots (1,106 km/h) at 6446 m, 1,091 and 964 km/h at 6,960 m.)
Back to Top
hoadie View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 16 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 6075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote hoadie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 01 2012 at 6:48am
Thats nice info,smokey.But I didn't see where they may have fit the ORENDA(or was it IROQUOIS?) engine into any of the Aussie frames.
In Canada-they flew alot of sabres..none with the Arrow's powerplant tho.
Hoadie
Loose wimmen tightened here
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.05
Copyright ©2001-2016 Web Wiz Ltd.