Niice model! The full sized jet powered Horten IX V2 also flew well -and up to close on 600mph with very good handling characteristics , enough for the RLM to commit to production. As this was at the end of 15 years of development of a series of tailless glider and powered aircraft by the brothers Horten , perhaps it wasn’t surprising.
Like the Hortens , Northrop dispensed successfully with vertical surfaces ( see N1M and N 9M) in his designs.
The fins on the YB 49 were evidently to compensate aerodynamically for the removal of the prop drive fairings from the XB-35 design,from which the jet bomber was of course directly derived.
I don’t think the is any evidence for the Hortens actively seeking a stealthy design. Their work ( and Jack Northrop’s ) started well before much was known about Radar. In addition, the Horten designs were mainly for fighters, fighter/bombers ( e.g. the Go229 ) and transports. I am unaware of any serious study for a large bomber. Certainly they started construction of a large transport, which eventually emerged much later (and smaller) in Argentina as the IA 38 .
I think this a very pertinent point.
Over the years , I have experienced acute and helpless discomfort in watching the way families have disposed of seriously significant individual archives. Ignorance, theft, greed and bonfires at the bottom of the garden have taken toll of many collections of material of historical value.
In my case I have already donated my and , more significantly, my late father’s unique and rare material ( Blue prints , Tech docs, manuals and photos) to two formal U.K. collections. One of these, at least, has already properly catalogued and accommodated the material delivered into their safekeeping.
I’ve kept most of my widely published books ( Putnams , Harboroughs, Macdonalds etc. plus mags) as with the additional use of the Internet these suffice to keep me with plenty to reread and to assist with small scale modelling projects.
When these are thrown on the fire in a few years time, there will then be no great loss to the wider community.
I have them from 1949 ( NEW EDITION) to endex with the 40th in 92/93.
The November 52 edition being the “first edition”, which I remember paging through as a small child.
In the early years there were many revised “impressions” settling down to only annual editions with the fifth (1957) edition in Jan 57.
I discovered some time ago that my number of copies did not tie up with the number of editions , being one short. This was traced, as others have also found, to the 1960 Edition ( the last showing full publishing history) being the eighth. The 1961 edition is however,for some reason, the 10th and from then on the series runs unbroken up to the 40th.
I dimly recall stories of Frederick Warne retrospectively reassigning “revised impressions” to be “editions” in order to get the records straight with years and numbers. I did wonder though if it was merely an oversight.The third possibility was that there was, in fact, a mysterious “Ninth edition” which somebody might have.
All this was resurrrected in my mind by the passing of Bill Green.
It was an old joke when I joined but others may recall it.
“Bader’s flying this Hurricane today, Corporal”
” Oh Sh*t , could we get him out early for another compass swing , Sir?”
Krupp-Germania Ks.Ib
Can’t think of anything with a greater wing span. π
Oh, for goodness sake!
TSR 2 had grown into a monster at the time of its fully justified cancellation.
It was the price of a destroyer and hardly able to be considered as a “Tactical “asset. Guys, it was the length of a Vulcan!
If Labour wouldn’t have cancelled it, the incoming Conservative Government would have had to. It was based on supporting an Empire that had dissolved and was a nonsense in a NATO environment.
There were a lot af sighs of relief all round from many in Industry when the thing was finally put out of its misery.
New Oxford Dictionary of English
folly– noun
“2. a costly ornamental building with no practical purpose, especially a tower or mock-Gothic ruin built in a large garden or park. “
Agreed totally pagen01. The sun’s within a few degrees of being overhead with its nadir slightly towards the bottom left of the image as displayed. The fin fillet’s shadow also shows this to good effect.
The dark triangular mark on the starboard flap is also now clearly evident.
Beermat
Agreed.100% π
Do try this , because I just have.
Run off a couple of prints of the image.
Take one and cut out out the shape of Superfortress.
Lay this over the other image shadow area in question.
All lines up pretty well I would say , including the rear fuselage over the area on the tailplane.
Then presumably it was also manipulated to make the fuselage shadow much darker than where the shadow of the wing crosses the fuselage ahead of the dorsal turret.
I wonder why?
This is largely a good example of a brightness contrast optical illusion, due to the greater luminance contrast between the grey of the shadow on the brightly reflecting flattish surface of the wing than that of the same shadow on the fuselage. The more curved surface of the upper fuselage is reflecting far more of the incident (sun)light away from the camera and therefore is less ” bright” than the upper wing.
The shadow of the B-29 carrying the camera however gives actually a similar general reflectance from the lower aircraft’s skin. However this “grey” area merely appears darker against the brighter background of the wing than it does on the fuselage.
To show that this is indeed the case,try blanking out with a piece of card – or a couple of fingers, the area between that portion of shadow on the wing inboard of the nacelle and the shadow on the top of the fuselage aft of the wing.
Having said all that ,there is indeed some oil or soot on the nacelle. The dark shadow on the tailplane (which is , in fact, more narrow than that on the wing) is further tapering aft. This would be in accordance with that of being of the tapering rear fuselage of the casting B-29.
One point for consideration during any restoration .
I went in the RAFM Wellington in 1967 at Biggin Hill. IIRC the navigator training stations were still all in place down the fuselage.
Looks like the Wellington thread has drifted into common ground here.
Although one could mutilate the 110, 88 and 111, the Ju 87 in the video presentation is meant to be a “B”, so I think we can presume that the graphics team were just uninformed ( or considered it irrrelevant) as to the implications.
Or perhaps the aircraft in the cooling tower charade will be plastic models after all.