Author Topic: C-46 Commando and other transport aircraft  (Read 8608 times)

Offline raafif

  • Is formally accused of doing nasty things to DC-3s...and officially our first whiffing zombie
  • Whiffing Insane
C-46 Commando and other transport aircraft
« on: July 13, 2014, 04:59:08 PM »
Maritime versions ...
« Last Edit: August 09, 2014, 09:34:16 AM by raafif »

Offline ericr

  • He's like some sort of Dr Frankenstein of modelling...
  • Has something for red, yellow or blue...
Re: C-46 Commando
« Reply #1 on: July 13, 2014, 06:09:41 PM »
beautiful maritime version !

is it a Blenheim nose?
and the fins, where are they from?

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • Holding Pattern
  • *
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding...
Re: C-46 Commando
« Reply #2 on: July 13, 2014, 09:22:45 PM »
I've been looking at putting floats on the C-46 I have but finding a pair is proving difficult.  But looking at your sketch raafif, I would say they'd have to be much bigger than those you've drawn (IMO)

Here's a pic of my C-47C and you can see the floats are quite large, the C-46 is about 1 1/2 times bigger than a C-47.

Online 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: C-46 Commando
« Reply #3 on: July 14, 2014, 02:49:07 AM »
I have a 1/48 one that is going to get either a turbo-Dak style conversion or a AC-47 style conversion one day...
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline raafif

  • Is formally accused of doing nasty things to DC-3s...and officially our first whiffing zombie
  • Whiffing Insane
Re: C-46 Commando
« Reply #4 on: July 14, 2014, 08:29:07 AM »
beautiful maritime version !

is it a Blenheim nose?
and the fins, where are they from?

the nose is Beaufort, the twin-tail fins are drawn from scratch but are similiar in shape to those of a Constellation - don't know about size.
I did enlarge the DC-3 floats but yes, they need to be still bigger - especially if the aircraft is to mount three long-range acoustic torpedoes under the centre-section & depth-charges outboard of the engines.
Am experimenting with a few turrets for top, bottom & tail ....

Got the Williams Bros. kit, Eric ???

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: C-46 Commando
« Reply #5 on: July 14, 2014, 09:32:29 AM »
The original CW-20 prototype had twin fins and a fairing over the join between the upper
and lower fuselage lobes. The engine cowlings also had a different shape. The prototype
was later converted to the single-fin configuration, the twin tails were not effective in yaw,
and was bailed to Britain where it was used by BOAC as G-ADGI.

A twin tailed floatplane version would require the fins to be significantly increased in size.

“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated shit
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: C-46 Commando
« Reply #6 on: July 14, 2014, 12:13:50 PM »
You might have to go with a triple-vertical fin combination similar to that of the Constellation or use the existing vertical fin along with the two fins you've shown at the tips of the horizontal stabilizer.

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: C-46 Commando
« Reply #7 on: July 14, 2014, 12:48:11 PM »
... or use the existing vertical fin along with the two fins you've shown at the tips of the horizontal stabilizer.

Yep, or like the Boeing 314 which started with a single vertical stabilizer/rudder, poor control response,
so they tried a twin vertical stabilizer/rudder layout. Still not right, so finally they went with the twin
vertical stabilzer/rudders and a centre vertical stabilizer (no rudder) with the same shape and area as
the original single stabilizer/rudder.
 ;)

So mebbe keep the standard stabilizer/rudder but fill the line between the fin and rudder and add
the new outboard stabilizer/rudder assemblies.
“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated shit
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • Holding Pattern
  • *
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding...
Re: C-46 Commando
« Reply #8 on: July 14, 2014, 09:14:41 PM »
the C-46 is about 1 1/2 times bigger than a C-47.

I think the more telling thing is that the C-46's empty weight is 5000 lb more the max' takeoff weight of a C-47 where as the C-46's max takeoff weight is double what the C-47's (45,000 lbs). The floats will be huge ---

Offline upnorth

  • Distorting a reality near you.
  • You want maple syrup on that Macchi?
Re: C-46 Commando
« Reply #9 on: July 18, 2014, 02:23:30 PM »
I've often wonder how the C-46 would have adapted to a tricycle landing gear set up with a rear loading ramp door.

I've also wondered if the lower lobe of that double bubble fuselage would make the C-46 adaptable to ELINT and other electronics driven missions in the immediate post war years. How much gear of the era could be stuffed in there?

Pickled Wings, A Blog for Preserved Aircraft:
http://pickledwings.com/

Beyond Prague, Traveling the Rest of the Czech Republic:
http://beyondprague.net/

Offline Jeffry Fontaine

  • Unaffiliated Independent Subversive...and the last person to go for a trip on a Mexicana dH Comet 4
  • Global Moderator
  • His stash is able to be seen from space...
Re: C-46 Commando
« Reply #10 on: July 18, 2014, 02:49:27 PM »
I've often wonder how the C-46 would have adapted to a tricycle landing gear set up with a rear loading ramp door.
 
I would imagine that the loading ramp would more likely be a loading plaftorm that would be raised up into the fuselage in a similar fashion to what was used on the C-54 and C-124 if your C-46 were to be configured with a tricycle landing gear arrangement. 

I've also wondered if the lower lobe of that double bubble fuselage would make the C-46 adaptable to ELINT and other electronics driven missions in the immediate post war years. How much gear of the era could be stuffed in there?

You mean something like this
Platz Models JASDF C-46ECM in 1:144th scale?:


(Image source: dragonmodelsusa.com)
« Last Edit: July 18, 2014, 02:54:24 PM by Jeffry Fontaine »
"Every day we hear about new studies 'revealing' what should have been obvious to sentient beings for generations; 'Research shows wolverines don't like to be teased" -- Jonah Goldberg

Offline upnorth

  • Distorting a reality near you.
  • You want maple syrup on that Macchi?
Re: C-46 Commando
« Reply #11 on: July 18, 2014, 03:53:31 PM »
I've also wondered if the lower lobe of that double bubble fuselage would make the C-46 adaptable to ELINT and other electronics driven missions in the immediate post war years. How much gear of the era could be stuffed in there?

You mean something like this
Platz Models JASDF C-46ECM in 1:144th scale?:


(Image source: dragonmodelsusa.com)
[/quote]


Hmmmm....kinda like that. But I would have imagined a large fuselage mounded radome like the APS-20 rather than anything stuck to the nose
Pickled Wings, A Blog for Preserved Aircraft:
http://pickledwings.com/

Beyond Prague, Traveling the Rest of the Czech Republic:
http://beyondprague.net/

Offline Jeffry Fontaine

  • Unaffiliated Independent Subversive...and the last person to go for a trip on a Mexicana dH Comet 4
  • Global Moderator
  • His stash is able to be seen from space...
Re: C-46 Commando
« Reply #12 on: July 18, 2014, 04:02:03 PM »
Hmmmm....kinda like that. But I would have imagined a large fuselage mounded radome like the APS-20 rather than anything stuck to the nose
There should be ample room for mounting the radome of the A/N APS-20 under the fuselage between the wings.  Not sure what it would to to the flying abilities of the C-46 but it would certainly be an interesting modification. 

Reminds me of that time I was cruising through the fields full of aircraft in storage at Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ and found an OV-1 Mohawk with out wings in a large wood frame shipping rig.  The Mohawk was modified to mount a very large radome under the fuselage that look very similar in size and shape to the radome used on the radar Grumman Avenger, Grumman Guardian, and Douglas Skyraider.  Never saw anything about any kind of AEW Mohawk in print but there is no mistaking a Mohawk with any other aircraft.   
"Every day we hear about new studies 'revealing' what should have been obvious to sentient beings for generations; 'Research shows wolverines don't like to be teased" -- Jonah Goldberg

Offline raafif

  • Is formally accused of doing nasty things to DC-3s...and officially our first whiffing zombie
  • Whiffing Insane
Re: C-46 Commando and other transport aircraft
« Reply #13 on: August 09, 2014, 09:38:02 AM »
in-service Spruce Goose !!  (gee, the tail looks like a BV-222).




Online 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: C-46 Commando and other transport aircraft
« Reply #14 on: August 10, 2014, 03:12:23 AM »
Any specific reason why the last post is in this thread?? ???
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: C-46 Commando and other transport aircraft
« Reply #15 on: August 10, 2014, 09:19:12 AM »
Any specific reason why the last post is in this thread?? ???

::) ... "and other transport aircraft"? ... Perhaps? ... ???
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline The Big Gimper

  • Any model will look better in RCAF, SEAC or FAA markings
  • Global Moderator
  • Cut. Cut. Cut. Measure. Cut. Cut. Crap. Toss.
    • Photobucket Modeling Album
Re: C-46 Commando and other transport aircraft
« Reply #16 on: May 21, 2019, 07:01:53 AM »
Time to give the C-46 some lovin'.

Here are comparison photos of the C-46, B-17 and Lancaster. The B-17 and Lancaster wings are near perfect fits. Maybe someone here is working on a 4 engine C-46?   ;)

C-46-04 by Big Gimper, on Flickr

C-46-01 by Big Gimper, on Flickr
Work in progress ::

I am giving up listing them. They all end up on the shelf of procrastination anyways.

User and abuser of Bothans...

Offline finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
Re: C-46 Commando and other transport aircraft
« Reply #17 on: May 21, 2019, 07:56:00 AM »
Like visual comparison of fuselage and wings.  C-46 is sizeable for its time.  Is four engine C-47H on BTS.  C-46 is due to have four engine derivative.

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: C-46 Commando and other transport aircraft
« Reply #18 on: May 22, 2019, 04:58:27 AM »
Thanks for the comparison shots. I had planned a Lanc-winged C-46 sideview but can't remember if I even finished it. Hmmm, maybe I'll re-do it ... if I can't remember an earlier version, probably no-one else can either  ;D
"It happens sometimes. People just explode. Natural causes." - Agent Rogersz

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: C-46 Commando and other transport aircraft
« Reply #19 on: May 22, 2019, 09:12:52 AM »
Something off the wall - B-17 wing with North Star engines fitted on the C-46 fuselage and tail.