March 3, 2008 at 5:07 pm
Is this real or a fake?

By: mike currill - 10th March 2008 at 18:22
Somone’s got to so it might as well be me. Will it be at Legends? Sorry, I’ll get my coat.
By: Fleet Shadower - 10th March 2008 at 12:08
Captions
“I think even you have bitten off more than you can chew, Mr. Hughes”.
“What Geoffrey de Havilland’s earlier designs lacked in elegance, was made up for by sheer scale”.
“It’s got 25 Rolls-Royce engines. How many oil refineries to the mile does it do”?
“Zeeze Eenglish are Ingenious. Zey have made ze Crystal Palace fly”!!!
By: mike currill - 6th March 2008 at 10:51
Oh what the heck? It’s too early in the day for me to be able to count properly-I am only on my fourth cup of tea for goodness sake.
By: Pete Truman - 6th March 2008 at 09:41
Don’t forget the overwing units are double ended so we’re probably talking 18 rather than16.
Flankerman, I was just being logical (I think:D )
Latest news on the project is that the undercarriage is retractable and it’s actually amphibious.:D
I make that 24!!!! Plus or minus the recoil affect from the artillery.
By: mike currill - 6th March 2008 at 09:40
I reckon a Bristol Fighter or SE-5 might suit the occasion.:)
By: Pete Truman - 6th March 2008 at 09:37
Isn’t it a coincidence that this should appear following Putins departure, presumably the new president is quite happy to take the wraps off Russia’s rumoured new ‘Stealth’ bomber. I shall look forward to seeing it off the East Coast being shadowed by Typhoons, if they can fly slow enough that is, the RAF might have to borrow something more appropriate from the Shuttleworth Collection to do the job.
By: mike currill - 6th March 2008 at 09:31
PS – There are another FOUR engines on the trailing edge – that makes SIXTEEN so far……
http://www.haluze.cz/show/kalinin-k7—letajici-monstrum/158/
Ken
PS – Love the tailwheels on the booms – in case of over rotation…..
Don’t forget the overwing units are double ended so we’re probably talking 18 rather than16.
Flankerman, I was just being logical (I think:D )
Latest news on the project is that the undercarriage is retractable and it’s actually amphibious.:D
By: Flanker_man - 6th March 2008 at 09:21
The sheer weight of the upper and lower turrets would almost preclude any chance of it ever leaving the ground as they appear to be 11″ turrets off a warship and the armour plate alone must weigh in the region of 100 tons each. That is without even considering the weight of guns in the ‘undercarriage legs’ and their associated armour which still seems to be present.
Spoilsport !!! 😀
Ken
By: Flanker_man - 6th March 2008 at 09:20
PS – There are another FOUR engines on the trailing edge – that makes SIXTEEN so far……
http://www.haluze.cz/show/kalinin-k7—letajici-monstrum/158/
Ken
PS – Love the tailwheels on the booms – in case of over rotation…..
By: mike currill - 6th March 2008 at 09:07
The sheer weight of the upper and lower turrets would almost preclude any chance of it ever leaving the ground as they appear to be 11″ turrets off a warship and the armour plate alone must weigh in the region of 100 tons each. That is without even considering the weight of guns in the ‘undercarriage legs’ and their associated armour which still seems to be present.
By: Flanker_man - 6th March 2008 at 08:58
My guess is twelve engines, any advance on that?
Any guesses on the two planes in the background?:D
It is clearly CGI.
It is clearly based on the ‘real’ Soviet Kalinin K-7 of the 1930’s – it had 7 x M-34F engines…..

A Google for ‘Kalinin K-7’ turned up another image……
It’s on this site :- http://www.nashgorod.ru/forum/ …… but you need to be a User.
I would suspect that it is someones attempt at extrapolating the K-7 into a true ‘flying battleship’ – which is what the K-7 was intended to be – but failed.
Ken
By: mike currill - 6th March 2008 at 07:26
😀 😀 😀 Of course I do 1cm=2.54 inches, oh s*** it’s the other way round isn’t it?
By: hopefully1 - 6th March 2008 at 07:15
caption
“tell me , you do know the difference between metric and imperial measurments don`t you?”
By: mike currill - 6th March 2008 at 06:53
‘If it looks right it flys right’………..oh b*@cks!!
😀 All we need to do now is flatten the country from London to Manchester and we’ve got a runway.
By: stangman - 5th March 2008 at 20:52
‘If it looks right it flys right’………..oh b*@cks!!
By: Carpetbagger - 5th March 2008 at 16:49
“Fly? My Ar$e”
By: Scorpion89 - 5th March 2008 at 16:42
My guess is twelve engines, any advance on that?
Any guesses on the two planes in the background?:D
Yea the Biplane looks to be a PO-2 while the Monoplane looks to be I-16
By: mike currill - 5th March 2008 at 16:15
😀 😀 I was thinking along the lines of ‘I still say we should stick a couiple more engines on the back’. Or ” I tell you the take off run is less than 100 metres with a 5 knot headwind”.
By: Paul F - 5th March 2008 at 16:01
I’d say the aircraft is ripe to give rise to a caption competition. Any takers?
“Chinese Stirling – Rumours finally debunked!”
Oh, and “Will it be at Legends?”
– Runs for the nearest door
By: mike currill - 5th March 2008 at 14:58
I’d say the aircraft is ripe to give rise to a caption competition. Any takers?