Author Topic: LF: NA FJ-1 Cutaway Drawing  (Read 1166 times)

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
LF: NA FJ-1 Cutaway Drawing
« on: May 06, 2016, 02:08:44 AM »
I've done a search for the above but all I can find is one for the later variants.  Anyone know where I can find one, need the FJ-1 specifically.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: LF: NA FJ-1 Cutaway Drawing
« Reply #1 on: May 06, 2016, 03:16:57 AM »
Will do some research this weekend.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: LF: NA FJ-1 Cutaway Drawing
« Reply #2 on: May 06, 2016, 07:56:15 AM »
You might see what the Ginter book on the FJ-1 has.

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Re: LF: NA FJ-1 Cutaway Drawing
« Reply #3 on: May 06, 2016, 08:44:35 AM »
Thanks Greg,

I will look into finding a copy of the Ginter book Evan, thanks for the suggestion

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: LF: NA FJ-1 Cutaway Drawing
« Reply #4 on: May 06, 2016, 09:06:01 AM »
Thanks Greg,

I will look into finding a copy of the Ginter book Evan, thanks for the suggestion
You can order it through Specialty Press, I just checked.

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Re: LF: NA FJ-1 Cutaway Drawing
« Reply #5 on: May 29, 2016, 10:28:44 PM »
I've found a drawing showing where the fuel tanks are in the FJ-1 fuselage which hold 465 gals (top pic). So along with the cutaway drawing of an F-82 which hold 574 gals in the wings only (bottom pic) my story for my Twin Sabre project becomes more plausible and with my thoughts that fuel would be carried in the wing center section as well as in the rear end of the pod plus the two 460 gal drop tanks and 170 gal wingtip tanks, the Twin Sabre would carry lots of fuel.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2016, 10:35:43 PM by kitnut617 »

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Re: LF: NA FJ-1 Cutaway Drawing
« Reply #6 on: May 29, 2016, 11:13:59 PM »
On second thoughts, maybe it doesn't need a fuel tank in the pod,

Fuselage (x2) 930 Gals
Outer Wings   574 Gals
Center Wing   300 Gals (maybe)
Drop Tanks (x2) 920 Gals
Wingtip Tanks (x2) 340 Gals
Total                   3064 Gals

With the FJ-1 having a range of 1500 miles, looks like the Twin Sabre could have a decent endurance even if I say it's powered by early Orenda engines (6000 lbt).
« Last Edit: May 29, 2016, 11:34:32 PM by kitnut617 »

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Re: LF: NA FJ-1 Cutaway Drawing
« Reply #7 on: June 02, 2016, 07:54:29 AM »
After a couple of nights thinking about this I have to revise my figures.

If the drawing of the FJ-1 tanks I found is fairly correct, then it has three fuselage tanks. The front one is 280 Gals and runs from just behind the front wheel bay to the front spar. The middle one is 105 Gals and is in between the front and rear spar which run through the fuselage. While the rear one is 80 Gals and is just behind the rear spar.

Then if the cutaway of the F-82 is correct it carries 287 Gals in each outer wing between the front and rear spars and from mid span of the outer wing to the fuselage and from what I've read, in between where the spars run through the fuselages.

My undercarriage on my model though is just where the middle tank is on the FJ-1 and where the tank in the F-82 fuselage is.

So here's my revision:

Fuselage (x2) 720 Gals  (deleted the two middle tanks )
Outer Wing (x2)  383 Gals   (deleted about a 1/3rd from each outer wing (for fuselage width x2])
Center Wing   300 Gals (maybe)
Drop Tanks (x2) 920 Gals
Wingtip Tanks (x2) 340 Gals
Total                   2663 Gals

That's just a bit over 18000 lbs of fuel.

From what I've read, the FJ-1 had a range of 1500 miles, and I've always thought range means "radius". So two fuselages with fuel and using the wing center section tank as a replacement for the two tanks I deleted from the fuselages, my idea of the Twin Sabre would have the same range as an FJ-1 (possibly). But then we add the drop tanks and wingtip tanks and it could double ---
« Last Edit: June 02, 2016, 08:22:29 AM by kitnut617 »

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: LF: NA FJ-1 Cutaway Drawing
« Reply #8 on: June 03, 2016, 02:16:24 PM »
Range and radius are not the same thing:
i.e. the combat radius of the F-86F-25/-35 (standard 6-3 wing) was 458 miles, the ferry range was 1615 miles, numbers for its FJ-3 Navy sibling with the same wing are 230 miles and 1784 miles respectively. The F-86F internal fuel was 435 gal, the FJ-3 internal capacity was 559 gal, both could also carry two 206 gal droptanks. The empty/maximum weights help to explain the difference in radius; 10,853/17,921 lbs for the USAF bird vs. 12,205/17,189 lbs for the USN version. Lighter empty and heavier loaded gives the F-86F the edge, and is a good demonstration of the cost of navalisation.

- from North American Aircraft 1934-1998: Vol 1, Norm Avery, 1998 Narkiewicz//Thompson.
"Evil our grandsires were, our fathers worse;
And we, till now unmatched in ill,
Must leave successors more corrupted still."
Horace, 65BC - 8BC. Marsh translation.

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Re: LF: NA FJ-1 Cutaway Drawing
« Reply #9 on: June 04, 2016, 09:10:49 AM »
Hmm! food for thought --- thanks Jon