Author Topic: Boeing B-17 Ideas and Inspiration (Read 103768 times)

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #125 on:** July 18, 2012, 04:57:26 PM »

How about an anti-shipping B-17 with a honking big cannon in the nose or belly?

Maverick · « **Reply #126 on:** July 18, 2012, 06:59:01 PM »

Well the RAF did it with a Vickers S Gun mounted on the nose.

Regards,

John

tsrjoe · « **Reply #127 on:** July 19, 2012, 12:41:56 AM »

waw that B.17/Lancaster conversion looks stunning, not one id seen before, brilliant modelling Alvis

now that would be impressive in 48 scale, it would confuse the purists too as noone would make such a thing twice, hehehe !

cheers, Joe

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #128 on:** July 19, 2012, 02:10:52 AM »

Quote from: Maverick on July 18, 2012, 06:59:01 PM

Well the RAF did it with a Vickers S Gun mounted on the nose.

Regards,

John

Nah!!! Bigger!!! I was thinking 75mm+

arc3371 · « **Reply #129 on:** July 19, 2012, 02:57:52 AM »

Well the Italians put a 102mm in yhe P.108

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #130 on:** July 19, 2012, 05:54:03 AM »

Quote from: arc3371 on July 19, 2012, 02:57:52 AM

Well the Italians put a 102mm in yhe P.108

That's what I am talking about!!! :)

Jeffry Fontaine · « **Reply #131 on:** July 19, 2012, 07:18:43 AM »

With all of that real estate dedicated to the wings maybe add a couple dozen rocket launcher stubs under the wings to carry a very large battery of aircraft rockets to shoot up coastal shipping and ground targets.

Maverick · « **Reply #132 on:** July 19, 2012, 09:50:17 AM »

For my mind, a trainable weapon in the nose like the S Gun would be of more use than a fixed weapon of a larger calibre. If the latter was fitted, you'd have to aim the entire aircraft at the target rather than being able to fly at a safer/normal altitude and plink away at the ship. Whilst a B-25 was capable of the whole strafing/wavetop thing, I can't see a Fort being of similar capability.

Regards,

John

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #133 on:** July 19, 2012, 02:55:05 PM »

Bah! Why let practicalities enter this?

arc3371 · « **Reply #134 on:** July 19, 2012, 06:14:30 PM »

Or really go nuts and put a couple of BK 7.5 from the Ju-88P under the wings

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #135 on:** July 19, 2012, 06:19:12 PM »

Staying with the anti shipping theme, what about a B-17 Torpedo bomber?

Maverick · « **Reply #136 on:** July 19, 2012, 10:55:42 PM »

Once again at the risk of being too practical, the B-17's rather small bomb-bay precludes the use of internal torpedoes which would rather defeat the whole purpose of using a heavy bomber in the role.

Regards,

John

ysi_maniac · « **Reply #137 on:** July 20, 2012, 12:26:59 AM »

^^^^^
Torpedoes can be carried as external stores

jcf · « **Reply #138 on:** July 20, 2012, 12:29:07 AM »

As I've stated previously when the B-17 was originally conceived and built, one of its intended roles was anti-shipping,
in effect flying coast artillery. The B-17 could carry large bombs externally, so a torpedo aint' much of as stretch, indeed
it was used to launch glide-torpedoes on test.

http://www.criticalpast.com/video/65675036014_Guided-Torpedo-GT-1_B-17-bomber_United-States-Army-Air-Corps_attaching-bomb-to-a-plane

BTW when the Model 299/B-17 was conceived and built, in 1934-35 as a purely speculative private venture, well before
the specification that eventually led to the Lancaster was even issued, the bomb-bay was not considered small.

Oh yeah, the competition for which Boeing built the B-17 was not for a 'heavy bomber', it was to a May 1934 request for
a 'multi-engine bomber capable of carrying a 2,000lb load at least 1,020 miles (2,200 miles if possible) at at least 200
mph (250 mph if possible), the other competitors were the twin-engined Douglas B-18 and the Martin 146.

The US heavy bomber competition that originated in 1935 was between the Douglas XBLR-2 (XB-19) and Sikorsky XBLR-3.

Anyhow on the IJN 'heavy' torpedo bombers, G3M and G4M, the bomb doors were removed and the weapons were carried exposed when they were on torpedo missions. Indeed it seems that of the large aircraft actually used for torpedo attacks, only the Wellington carried the weapons fully internally.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #139 on:** July 20, 2012, 02:25:07 AM »

Quote from: ysi_maniac on July 20, 2012, 12:26:59 AM

^^^^^
Torpedoes can be carried as external stores

All the better for highlighting the difference to the viewer.

:)

Maverick · « **Reply #140 on:** July 20, 2012, 07:18:20 AM »

Given that the Manchester was conceived in 1937 with a bomb-load of 8000lbs or two torpedoes, I stand by my comment that the B-17's bomb-bay was small. Hell, even a Mosquito could heft more.

Regards,

John

Daryl J. · « **Reply #141 on:** July 20, 2012, 12:05:43 PM »

Sweet. It's reading a bit between the lines, but this further cements my idea as (remotely) plausible and in my whiff-world, that's ample.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #142 on:** July 20, 2012, 03:44:21 PM »

Quote from: Maverick on July 20, 2012, 07:18:20 AM

Given that the Manchester was conceived in 1937 with a bomb-load of 8000lbs or two torpedoes, I stand by my comment that the B-17's bomb-bay was small.

But you don't need to use the Bomb bay. I was thinking of a similar arrangement to the He-111 (another bomber with a limited size/configuration bomb-bay):

Maverick · « **Reply #143 on:** July 20, 2012, 09:12:42 PM »

I realise that externally carried torpedoes can look 'cool' and an obvious pointer to an aircraft's role, but given the physical size of the Fortress, they would (in my opinion) have less impact lookswise than on a smaller aircraft. It's just surprising how small the bomb-bay of the type was in relation to its size/role, in comparison to other aircraft.

Regards,

John

jcf · « **Reply #144 on:** July 20, 2012, 11:44:21 PM »

Mosquito could carry more than B-17? Mmmm, not.
Another myth that refuses to die.

Maverick · « **Reply #145 on:** July 21, 2012, 07:00:34 AM »

I'm sorry Jon. Your 2000lb comment threw me as I expected you to quote something in reality. I should have said similar. Either way, quite a different capability compared to the type of aircraft each is.

Regards,

John

Jeffry Fontaine · « **Reply #146 on:** July 21, 2012, 09:37:48 AM »

Link to a video of B-17s carrying and dropping the 4,500 lb Rocket Boosted Armor Piercing "Disney" Bomb developed by Captain Edward Terrell, Royal Navy

Click on html or image to view the video

(Video source: U.S. Army via Wikipedia)

Wikipedia - Disney Bomb

Cliffy B · « **Reply #147 on:** July 21, 2012, 09:48:03 AM »

Nice find! Never heard of that bomb before. Durandal ancestor

Jeffry Fontaine · « **Reply #148 on:** July 21, 2012, 09:55:23 AM »

Quote from: Cliffy B on July 21, 2012, 09:48:03 AM

Nice find! Never heard of that bomb before. Durandal ancestor

I like big bombs and I can not lie

The first time I had seen anything on that weapon was about thirty years ago in one of the base libraries in Germany when I was TDY to another Kaserne for some training. I was fascinated by the idea of this rocket boosted weapon but did not have much in the way of a reference library or any modeling supplies at the time since it was back in the day when I was a lowly private first class or specialist four at the time. Later as I became more involved in modeling again I discovered that there was very little in the way of documentation on the Disney Bomb and it is only recently that this information has become available on-line. I have been pleased with the abundance of information on the weapon that has provided enough details that I started to model the weapon in SketchUp as a 3D model.

For a B-17 to carry a pair of these weapons under the wings on external bomb racks was quite a feat since they weighed in at 4,500 pounds each and another hundred pounds or more for each of the bomb racks.

kitnut617 · « **Reply #149 on:** July 21, 2012, 11:49:37 PM »

Quote from: jcf on July 20, 2012, 11:44:21 PM

Mosquito could carry more than B-17? Mmmm, not.
Another myth that refuses to die.

Sabre Mosquito could though, 8000 lbs internally, 2000 lbs under the wings (1000 lbs each)


Swords to Plowshares GB Now Open!!

News:

Author Topic: Boeing B-17 Ideas and Inspiration (Read 103768 times)