April 18, 2007 at 1:03 pm
WARBIRD MB5 • AVAILABLE FOR SALE • replica Martin Baker MB5. counter rotating props. simlar to WW ll Spitfire. For info. 775-624-2585. • Contact John L. Marlin – JOHN L MARLIN located Reno, NV USA • Telephone: 775-624-2585 • Posted April 14, 2007 • Show all Ads posted by this Advertiser • Recommend This Ad to a Friend • Email Advertiser • Report This Ad
maybe someone can ‘stretch’ it!
From Barnstormers…
TT
By: DazDaMan - 25th September 2015 at 19:40
And wasn’t there a video of the engine running?
By: David Burke - 25th September 2015 at 19:33
Using a P-51D wing and spending a lot of money on it seems an odd way to go about things if you don’t wish it to fly!
By: HP111 - 25th September 2015 at 19:21
Whatever the reason for the shortened fuselage, I think we can conclude it was never seriously intended to be a flyer.
By: David Burke - 25th September 2015 at 18:55
I seem to recall the owner expressing that he wished it to be shorter due more to the look of the machine. It did end up looking a little ‘Disney’!
By: Beermat - 25th September 2015 at 18:19
That’s what I thought.
By: Zodiacchris - 25th September 2015 at 18:11
The shorter the fuselage, the more sensitive the aircraft will be in pitch. For example Zenair CH601 Zodiacs have short rear fuselages, and they are very sensitive…
By: Beermat - 25th September 2015 at 17:57
That makes more sense. Still baffled by what happened back there.. what did I miss?
By: HP111 - 25th September 2015 at 15:00
He built it shorter because the original was too sensitive in pitch
My understanding is that he made the fuselage shorter so that it would fit in his hangar.
By: Beermat - 25th September 2015 at 14:42
or anyone?
By: Beermat - 25th September 2015 at 13:34
Sorry for being dim. But don’t mock, you tell me, Sabrejet.
By: Sabrejet - 25th September 2015 at 13:03
Thanks Oxcart. That’s very interesting, I don’t understand enough about aerodynamics to understand the difference it makes – a shorter moment arm means less inertia to overcome in changing pitch – but I guess there is a leverage principle at work with regard to the action of the elevators? Was this oversensitivity in pitch a feature of the original?
errr… Shall I tell him or you?
By: Beermat - 25th September 2015 at 12:39
Thanks Oxcart. That’s very interesting, I don’t understand enough about aerodynamics to understand the difference it makes – a shorter moment arm means less inertia to overcome in changing pitch – but I guess there is a leverage principle at work with regard to the action of the elevators? Was this oversensitivity in pitch a feature of the original?
By: Oxcart - 24th September 2015 at 11:46
He built it shorter because the original was too sensitive in pitch
By: Mike J - 24th September 2015 at 07:52
It hasn’t, and as it has sat for a decade in that state now I think it is unlikely that it will fly, at least under present ownership.
By: DazDaMan - 24th September 2015 at 07:49
I take it that it still hasn’t flown, or did I miss that?
By: G-ASEA - 24th September 2015 at 00:22
It sat in the hangar most of race week. Still I got to take a few more photos.
Dave
By: Beermat - 19th September 2015 at 22:10
Why was this aircraft so inaccurate -I guess there must have been constraints, I am sure one wouldn’t be that far off by choice if one was spending that much money, without external factors playing a part?
By: Sabrejet - 19th September 2015 at 06:36
Sad to see, but I have mixed feelings: my hat is off to Mr. Marlin, but his replica was a caricature rather than a homage. I hope someone can finish it off and maybe get a few of the shapes right?
By: G-ASEA - 19th September 2015 at 03:44
The MB-5 was outside its hangar at Stead airfield Reno today. We saw it as we came out from the races. Its in the pit area, will have a look at it tomorrow when we go around the pits. Have seen it for a few years.
Dave
By: topspeed - 18th September 2015 at 12:33
I find it an fashinating aircraft.