« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Biplane heavy bomber  (Read 3311 times)

Offline finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
Biplane heavy bomber
« on: September 10, 2013, 02:27:40 PM »
Having got a 1/72 Ilya Muromets bomber, was pondering whiffs.  Could modify to be a late 1920s tech heavy bomber.
1/48 DH-10 should also modify to 1/72 late 1920s heavy bomber.
Don't recall there being any heavy bombers at that time.  Thinking heavy bomber comtempory of Keystone B-3 thereabouts.
P&W 1340 or 1690 engines - something like that.
Logged

Offline upnorth

  • Distorting a reality near you.
  • You want maple syrup on that Macchi?
Re: Biplane heavy bomber
« Reply #1 on: September 10, 2013, 05:58:40 PM »
Maybe something could come from a Caproni Ca.5:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caproni_Ca.5




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

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

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Biplane heavy bomber
« Reply #2 on: September 10, 2013, 08:39:20 PM »
Evolving along the lines of the Vickers Virginia? (See the recent Datafile in Aeroplane Monthly.
Logged

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: Biplane heavy bomber
« Reply #3 on: September 11, 2013, 03:08:58 AM »
Did not know there was a Caproni Ca.5 or Vickers Virginia.  Appreciate you mentioning them.
Got me thinking 1930 SAC bombers.
Last latest greatest of biplane heavy bombers.  Like B-36 being last latest greatest of prop bombers.
Logged

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • Holding Pattern
  • *
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding...
Re: Biplane heavy bomber
« Reply #4 on: September 11, 2013, 04:02:18 AM »
There was the Tupolev TB-1, TB-3 and TB-4
Logged

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: Biplane heavy bomber
« Reply #5 on: September 11, 2013, 09:40:19 AM »
Try the Handley-Page O/400 and the various Gotha and Zeppelin-Starken heavies.   All were large, biplane bombers which were operational in the last 2 years of WWI.
Logged

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Biplane heavy bomber
« Reply #6 on: September 12, 2013, 01:26:23 AM »
... and who can forget the Tarrant Tabor ...


http://flyingmachines.ru/Site2/Crafts/Craft29784.htm

... and the Barling Bomber?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witteman-Lewis_XNBL-1

 ;D  ;D
Logged
“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 finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
Re: Biplane heavy bomber
« Reply #7 on: September 12, 2013, 04:41:11 PM »
Tabor and Barling are quite the flying machines !
Fuselages appear to have a decent streamline design.  All those struts and wires between wings = Drag.
For a Barling upgrade:
> Wings of modern aluminum construction with struts only near the ends.
> Retractable landing gear.
> Recip or turboprop or fanjet engines
To make it all a modern Barling based triplane bomber can be.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »