What if

GROUP BUILDS => The Engines - More or Less G.B. => Topic started by: NARSES2 on June 18, 2019, 06:59:19 am

Title: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: NARSES2 on June 18, 2019, 06:59:19 am
Here's the place for your general chit chat, ideas and questions

Chris
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: kitbasher on June 18, 2019, 07:26:21 am
Done a bit of engine maths in the past:

I've three ideas for this GB, looking forward to the start.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: zenrat on June 18, 2019, 04:21:13 pm
A couple from me.
Handley Page Henfield https://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=40136.msg671612#msg671612
GAL 50 Porthus https://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=41513.msg710986#msg710986
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: The Rat on June 18, 2019, 05:45:48 pm
Got the old Matchbox Vickers Wellesley in the stash, and those who know it know that it comes with a choice of two engines. Well that gives me one left over from the other one that's almost finished. One unmade Wellesley, three engines. Hmmm... Shall I go with 2 or 3 engines on this one?
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: kerick on June 18, 2019, 08:03:44 pm
Got the old Matchbox Vickers Wellesley in the stash, and those who know it know that it comes with a choice of two engines. Well that gives me one left over from the other one that's almost finished. One unmade Wellesley, three engines. Hmmm... Shall I go with 2 or 3 engines on this one?

Texas style! Go big or go home!

Copied from the post I made in the rules thread:
Assuming C-130s will be built forever a Federation model with warp drive engines popped into my head.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on June 18, 2019, 11:27:57 pm

Got the old Matchbox Vickers Wellesley in the stash, and those who know it know that it comes with a choice of two engines. Well that gives me one left over from the other one that's almost finished. One unmade Wellesley, three engines. Hmmm... Shall I go with 2 or 3 engines on this one?


Nah, don't use ANY of them! It's got MASSIVE wings already so turn it into a glider!
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 19, 2019, 12:10:34 am
Got the old Matchbox Vickers Wellesley in the stash, and those who know it know that it comes with a choice of two engines. Well that gives me one left over from the other one that's almost finished. One unmade Wellesley, three engines. Hmmm... Shall I go with 2 or 3 engines on this one?

I had a very similar idea, but using Wellington wings & engines (since it obviously needs the extra 10ft of span too...)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Dizzyfugu on June 19, 2019, 12:11:20 am
Already have two or three ideas from my vast idea list that might materialize under the "inspirational push" of this GB. One is a Saab 29 prototype with two axial engines, different wings and other mods - not certain if this actually works, but the idea is there, as well as the parts. Then I hope to make a single engine D.H. 88 Comet - not certain if it will be a military aircraft or something civil. And then I found a surplus Westland Whirlwind in the stash...  :wacko:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Dizzyfugu on June 19, 2019, 12:12:25 am
Got the old Matchbox Vickers Wellesley in the stash, and those who know it know that it comes with a choice of two engines. Well that gives me one left over from the other one that's almost finished. One unmade Wellesley, three engines. Hmmm... Shall I go with 2 or 3 engines on this one?

I had a very similar idea, but using Wellington wings & engines (since it obviously needs the extra 10ft of span too...)

You could also stretch the Wellington's wings and add two more engines. Kit would certainly like that.  ;)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: kitbasher on June 19, 2019, 12:30:59 am
Got the old Matchbox Vickers Wellesley in the stash, and those who know it know that it comes with a choice of two engines. Well that gives me one left over from the other one that's almost finished. One unmade Wellesley, three engines. Hmmm... Shall I go with 2 or 3 engines on this one?

Go with three.  Mine will be getting two.

Cat, bag, out of.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Caveman on June 19, 2019, 01:01:51 am
What if an avro manchester was given a couple more engines? Perhaps just increase the centre span a bit...  ;D
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Gondor on June 19, 2019, 02:26:50 am
I might keep going with my Lansen theme at the moment and build the twin engine F version  ;D

Gondor
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Dizzyfugu on June 19, 2019, 02:43:10 am
That sounds sexy!
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Gondor on June 19, 2019, 05:25:16 am
That sounds sexy!

As long as I don't put too wide a pair of engines into her or end up making it a fat bottomed girl  :-\

Gondor
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 19, 2019, 05:42:35 am
Already have two or three ideas from my vast idea list that might materialize under the "inspirational push" of this GB. One is a Saab 29 prototype with two axial engines, different wings and other mods - not certain if this actually works, but the idea is there, as well as the parts. Then I hope to make a single engine D.H. 88 Comet - not certain if it will be a military aircraft or something civil. And then I found a surplus Westland Whirlwind in the stash...  :wacko:

Now that reminds me: the original plan for the jet bomber that became the Canberra had a single HUGE centrifugal engine in the rear fuselage.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on June 19, 2019, 05:45:39 am

What if an avro manchester was given a couple more engines? Perhaps just increase the centre span a bit...  ;D


Hat? Coat?  ;)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: NARSES2 on June 19, 2019, 06:39:47 am
I've a couple of ideas, one involves a Fairey Battle and the other a Westland Whirlwind.

I have one Battle in the stash so just need another, so you can guess where I'm going there. The other requires an old Airfix Whirlwind but they are stupid prices on E-Bay (IMHO anyway) so I'll look again when I get back from "oop North"
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Old Wombat on June 19, 2019, 07:51:22 am
Got the old Matchbox Vickers Wellesley in the stash, and those who know it know that it comes with a choice of two engines. Well that gives me one left over from the other one that's almost finished. One unmade Wellesley, three engines. Hmmm... Shall I go with 2 or 3 engines on this one?

I had a very similar idea, but using Wellington wings & engines (since it obviously needs the extra 10ft of span too...)

That's one of my ideas! The Welleslington; Wellesley fuselage, Wellington wings & 3 x Pegasus Mark XVIII engines (Wellington).

Don't have any of the required kits, however, so I'm fairly sure I'll never build it.

Mind you, I'm not sure it'd fit into this GB because your not adding engines to the basic Wellesley/Wellington structure, you're combining them.

However, putting the Wellington nacelles onto the Wellesley is a surefire fit!
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Rheged on June 19, 2019, 08:01:13 am
I had a slightly off-piste idea  for three efflux pipes at the blunt end of a Gloster Javelin.  Whether the central exhaust is a rocket engine   (Scorpion, Sprite, Snarler or the like)  , or a third Sapphire with a bifurcated air intake I'm not sure yet but it might make an interesting ultra-high altitude interceptor.   I intend to write this up as a backstory only, so if anyone feels the desire to molest styrene  and create an actual model, I'm happy to give away the modelling rights.

Incidentally, am I allowed to say bifurcated in polite society such as this forum?

Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Old Wombat on June 19, 2019, 08:02:56 am
There are no prudes here! Bifurcate away, sir! :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: kitbasher on June 19, 2019, 09:24:07 am
I've a couple of ideas, one involves a Fairey Battle and the other a Westland Whirlwind.

I have one Battle in the stash so just need another, so you can guess where I'm going there. The other requires an old Airfix Whirlwind but they are stupid prices on E-Bay (IMHO anyway) so I'll look again when I get back from "oop North"

http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,21075.0/highlight,fairey+falcon.html Or a zwilling Battlebattle?
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on June 19, 2019, 09:45:30 am
Go the Alcor route on the Wellseley.  ;D

https://oldmachinepress.com/2013/10/18/alcor-duo-4-duo-6-and-c-6-1-transports/

Pancho Barnes with the Duo-4
(https://oldmachinepress.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/alcor-duo-4-pancho-barnes.jpg)

C-6-1
(http://airwar.ru/image/idop/cw1/c6-1/c6-1-1.gif)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Mossie on June 19, 2019, 11:29:51 pm
Great engine configuration on this one:
(http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i176/Mossie105/Aircraft/AvproRussianBomber2.jpg)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: perttime on June 20, 2019, 02:08:54 am
Polikarpov I-153 augmented with ramjet engines:

(https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/attachments/fafbi-jpg.163877/)
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/jet-powered-biplanes.226771/

Waco biplane with a jet engine added:

(http://historynet.com/wp-content/uploads/image/2012/AVH/jetwaco.jpg)
https://www.historynet.com/screamin-sasquatch.htm

What about Emerson Fittipaldi's double-engined VW racer?

(https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/18j5028l6hbttjpg.jpg)

There's been Bug-looking cars done with front engines, too....
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: perttime on June 20, 2019, 02:17:02 am
VW's double engined Jetta and Scirocco:

(https://www.vwheritage.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Picture-6small.jpg)

(https://www.vwheritage.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Picture-3small1.jpg)

https://www.vwheritage.com/blog/2015/04/09/factory-twin-engined-vw-icons-past/
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: loupgarou on June 20, 2019, 03:53:52 am
The Citroen 2 CV 4x4 Sahara came before, and was series-built.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mod%C3%A8les_et_s%C3%A9ries_limit%C3%A9es_de_la_2_CV#2_CV_4x4_Sahara
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: zenrat on June 20, 2019, 04:25:25 am
Ed Roth's Mysterion.  There is a Revell 1/25 kit pf this which could be part of a kitbash (not the one in my stash though, that's lined up for a RW build).
(https://www.conceptcarz.com/images/Big%20Daddy%20Roth/63-mysterion-replica-dv-18-ai-02-800.jpg)
(https://www.conceptcarz.com/images/Big%20Daddy%20Roth/63-mysterion-replica-dv-18-ai_e01-800.jpg)

Freight Train.
(http://www.bangshift.com/assets/images/news/2009/Mar/15-21/freight%20train%20long.jpg)
(https://bangshift.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/freight-train.jpg)

Howard's Cams Twin Bears.
(http://cacklefest.com/BG2006/IMG_0424.jpg)

TV Tommy Ivo's Showboat (another Revell 1/25 kit)...
(http://www.tommyivo.com/imagesDrag%20FourEngine/RePop%20Showboat/RSB1.jpg)
...which also spent time as the Wagon Master (resin conversion kit is available for the Showboat kit).
(http://speedhunters-wp-production.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/WagonmasterFront34Color.jpg)

Hogslayer (best drag bike name ever).
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/86/15/c3/8615c335080b67cc97ebf979187bfc8d.jpg)

Twin Engined Triton (Triumph engine in Norton frame).
(https://pipeburn.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/14_11_2010_01.jpg)

Twin Hemi Hot Rod.
(http://speednik.com/files/2014/01/twice_blown_2-640x427.jpg)

Invader (Doyusha kitted this in 1/25 styrene - very rare).
(http://s4.photobucket.com/albums/y141/gregwapling/hot-rods-down-under/show-cars/invader006.jpg)

And finally, the Wolfrace Sonic.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/85/23/32/852332483f17df5518398892ec8d8367.jpg)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Caveman on June 20, 2019, 04:40:50 am
Vickers Viastra came in 1, 2 or 3 engined versions

(http://www.airwar.ru/image/idop/cw1/viastra/viastra-14.jpg)

(http://aviadejavu.ru/Images6/FT/FT1933/12/1184-3.jpg)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/24/Vickers_Viastra.jpg)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: zenrat on June 20, 2019, 04:47:56 am
Vickers Viastra came in 1, 2 or 3 engined versions

(http://www.airwar.ru/image/idop/cw1/viastra/viastra-14.jpg)

(http://aviadejavu.ru/Images6/FT/FT1933/12/1184-3.jpg)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/24/Vickers_Viastra.jpg)

So for this GB you need to have four engines or more... ;D
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Caveman on June 20, 2019, 04:54:21 am
Provider came with a variety of engine configurations:

Two piston engines
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/78/315th_Air_Commando_Group_C-123_Providers_in_VNAF_markings_1962.jpg)

Two turning two burning (to misquote)
(https://cdn.airplane-pictures.net/images/uploaded-images/2009/1/20/34529as.jpg)

4 jets
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/55/Chase_XC-123A.jpg)

No engines!
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8d/Chase_XG-20_glider_USAF.jpg)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 20, 2019, 05:13:54 am
Noratlas could have wingtip(?) mounted jet pods.

C-119 could have a dorsal jet pod.

Bronco could have a dorsal jet pod for target-towing.

Shackleton Mk.3s had Viper turbojets in the outer engine pods.

Neptune could have underwing jet pods.


Re the Wellesley/Wellington debate, you could always go the other way and attach the Wellesley kit's spare engine to the front of a Wimpy, then add a gondola for the bomb-aimer.

How about adding a third, pusher engine to the back of the fuselage pod on a twin-boom, twin-engined design? The P-38 is probably a bit too small (maybe a small jet..?) but the P-61 seems ripe for it, as does the Fw-189.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: NARSES2 on June 20, 2019, 06:29:22 am
I've a couple of ideas, one involves a Fairey Battle and the other a Westland Whirlwind.

I have one Battle in the stash so just need another, so you can guess where I'm going there. The other requires an old Airfix Whirlwind but they are stupid prices on E-Bay (IMHO anyway) so I'll look again when I get back from "oop North"

http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,21075.0/highlight,fairey+falcon.html Or a zwilling Battlebattle?

That's nice Dave  :thumbsup:

I was thinking of mine being a product of Avions Fairy in Belgium, perhaps as a torpedo bomber ?

Anyway the Whirlwind idea, which I talked to you about  ;), was my first idea, so providing I can get the kit that's the way I will go.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on June 20, 2019, 07:01:48 am
But NONE of those examples quoted will do for this GB as they've already been built in the RW.

We need more creative thought, like a Beverley assault glider maybe?  :o
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Caveman on June 20, 2019, 07:26:09 am
9 engined b-52?

Peacemaker with more than 10 engines?

An N-1 rocket with more than 43 (yes) engines?
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: TomZ on June 20, 2019, 08:57:32 am
You guys all go for more.
But less is also nice.

What about a B-52 with 1 big engine and 1 big prop in the nose?
Or a B747 glider?

TomZ
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: TallEng on June 20, 2019, 09:19:21 am
But NONE of those examples quoted will do for this GB as they've already been built in the RW.

We need more creative thought, like a Beverley assault glider maybe?  :o

Concorde as a (very fast) Glider?
It'll need a pretty big catapult to get across the Atlantic though ;D
And the 'G' Forces on take off.......

Regards
keith
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on June 20, 2019, 12:20:02 pm
But NONE of those examples quoted will do for this GB as they've already been built in the RW.

We need more creative thought, like a Beverley assault glider maybe?  :o

Concorde as a (very fast) Glider?
It'll need a pretty big catapult to get across the Atlantic though ;D
And the 'G' Forces on take off.......

Regards
keith

Mount it on top of a Boeing 2707 mothership.  ;D
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on June 20, 2019, 12:25:31 pm
Perhaps a White Triplex-like three Liberty LSR layout, one up front - two in the back, if you want to go the
brutal route for a vehicle modification.
 ;D

http://theoldmotor.com/?p=48819

(http://www.bluebird-electric.net/bluebird_images/white-triplex-land-speed-record-car-j-w-daytona.jpg)

Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on June 20, 2019, 01:24:37 pm
A double length Micky Thompson Challenger 1 with eight engines?  ;D

A similarly lengthened Goldenrod too?  ;D
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: 63cpe on June 20, 2019, 01:40:46 pm
Planning to take part in this GB. How about a PB4-Y2 in COD role? was this done before?

David aka 63cpe
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on June 20, 2019, 01:44:17 pm
You'd need a BIG carrier to take that aboard!  :o

So long as it has anything OTHER than 4 engines it'd be a goer for this GB though.  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: 63cpe on June 20, 2019, 01:50:21 pm
Privateer minus two engines for good measure..shortened..otherwise way to large for the average carrier ;-)

David aka 63cpe
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on June 20, 2019, 02:58:13 pm
A double length Micky Thompson Challenger 1 with eight engines?  ;D

A similarly lengthened Goldenrod too?  ;D
Challenger with a single turbine.

Goldenrod with twin V-12s.  ;D
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 20, 2019, 04:49:41 pm
But NONE of those examples quoted will do for this GB as they've already been built in the RW.

We need more creative thought, like a Beverley assault glider maybe?  :o

Can't speak for anybody else, but my point in posting was to give examples of engines added in the real world in order to inspire other people's ideas for their whiffy builds, i.e. if you can add a pair of Vipers to a Shack in the real world, then maybe you can add a pair of Derwents to a Lanc in Whiff World?

I'd have thought a Beverley assault glider wouldn't be so much 'creative' as 'destructive'.... :o ;)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on June 20, 2019, 06:13:48 pm
Privateer minus two engines for good measure..shortened..otherwise way to large for the average carrier ;-)

David aka 63cpe

Convair proposed the XP5Y-1 (Model 38) to the Navy in October 1942,
it was basically a B-24D equipped with two R-3350 in place of the
four R-1830.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Old Wombat on June 20, 2019, 08:02:57 pm
A PBY Catalina with a 3rd engine slotted in above the fuselage?

Obviously there would need to be a widening of the centre section & a stretching of the pylon to fit it.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: TomZ on June 21, 2019, 12:04:19 am
A PBY Catalina with a 3rd engine slotted in above the fuselage?
Obviously there would need to be a widening of the centre section & a stretching of the pylon to fit it.

There was this one:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/07/Bird_Innovator_at_Albuquerque_1995.jpg/1280px-Bird_Innovator_at_Albuquerque_1995.jpg)

Bird Innovator


TomZ
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on June 21, 2019, 12:53:58 am

I'd have thought a Beverley assault glider wouldn't be so much 'creative' as 'destructive'.... :o ;)


Self destructive at that!  ;D ;)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 21, 2019, 03:38:46 am

I'd have thought a Beverley assault glider wouldn't be so much 'creative' as 'destructive'.... :o ;)


Self destructive at that!  ;D ;)

"Did your troops defeat the enemy in combat, Captain?"

"No Sir, we just landed on top of them..."
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Hobbes on June 21, 2019, 04:10:54 am
I'm reading a BAe 146 bookazine at the moment. One of the 146-200s used by Aviacsa (Mexico) had a damaged engine. The engine was removed for a 3-engine ferry flight into the USA for repairs. BAe test pilot Dan Gurney flew the aircraft. He said, 'the first time I saw the aircraft it had a cardboard missile stuck on the empty pylon'  :wacko:

No photo unfortunately.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Hobbes on June 21, 2019, 04:14:03 am
You guys all go for more.
But less is also nice.

What about a B-52 with 1 big engine and 1 big prop in the nose?
Or a B747 glider?

TomZ

a small airliner with 1 RR Trent at the back of the fuselage and an annular intake...

or one that would solve a real-world problem: a Trident with 4 engines - replace the tail engine with 2 side by side...
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: zenrat on June 21, 2019, 04:35:17 am
Did, or do any tanks have multiple engines?
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Old Wombat on June 21, 2019, 04:45:42 am
Did, or do any tanks have multiple engines?

The AC-1 Sentinel had 3 x Cadillac V8's installed in a clover-leaf configuration feeding power to a common gearbox.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: loupgarou on June 21, 2019, 05:04:45 am
If 2 is enough, it was a quite common solution. LVT-3 had twin 148 bhp Cadillac V-8 petrol engines and transmission as the M3 - M-5  light tanks. Also the M-24 had the same solution.
Panhard loved twin engines in its military vehicles.
M-59 APC had Two GMC Model 302 six-cylinder inline petrol engines.

Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: rickshaw on June 21, 2019, 05:42:02 am
If 2 is enough, it was a quite common solution. LVT-3 had twin 148 bhp Cadillac V-8 petrol engines and transmission as the M3 - M-5  light tanks. Also the M-24 had the same solution.
Panhard loved twin engines in its military vehicles.
M-59 APC had Two GMC Model 302 six-cylinder inline petrol engines.

Many vehicles had multiple engines.  Off the top of my head, for the Russians, the BTR60 had twin engines, just as did the SU-76 and the T-60 which it was developed from.  For the Germans, they were more sensible.  The British had the Matilda with twin bus engines.  The already mentioned Cloverleaf V-8 arrangement for the Sentinel which in turn was to be replaced by a twin Gypsy aeroengine arrangement.   The Americans had multiple engines in a variant of their M4 Shermans.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on June 21, 2019, 09:26:34 am
Valentine's also had a twin setup.
Some M4 had the GM twin-diesel setup, some used the Chrysler A57 multibank.
https://oldmachinepress.com/2012/10/05/chrysler-a57-multibank-tank-engine/
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: perttime on June 21, 2019, 09:36:50 am
But NONE of those examples quoted will do for this GB as they've already been built in the RW.

We need more creative thought, like a Beverley assault glider maybe?  :o

Can't speak for anybody else, but my point in posting was to give examples of engines added in the real world in order to inspire other people's ideas ...

Precisely. There's no separate inspiration thread but this thread will do nicely.

We have some coverage for aircraft and land vehicles. What can we do about floaty things? Does a mast on a sail ship count as an engine?   :wacko:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on June 21, 2019, 09:55:44 am

We have some coverage for aircraft and land vehicles. What can we do about floaty things? Does a mast on a sail ship count as an engine?   :wacko:


Good question, but I think it probably does. Whether EACH mast counts as an individual engine I'm not sure, but the mods will deliberate on the matter.

Are you thinking of an America's Cup J class schooner maybe?  ;D
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on June 21, 2019, 10:46:47 am
Boat options could be single engine, single prop converted to multi-engine, multi-prop
or vice versa, i.e. a three engined PT/MTB converted to a twin or a single, with surface
piercing drive(s) or contra-rotating props, of course.
 ;D
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: perttime on June 21, 2019, 11:10:51 am

We have some coverage for aircraft and land vehicles. What can we do about floaty things? Does a mast on a sail ship count as an engine?   :wacko:


Good question, but I think it probably does. Whether EACH mast counts as an individual engine I'm not sure, but the mods will deliberate on the matter.

Are you thinking of an America's Cup J class schooner maybe?  ;D
Just a random thought that popped to my mind while typing - but I guess that was the general idea.
... Or remove engine(s) from something and add sails.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 21, 2019, 01:45:25 pm
I'm reading a BAe 146 bookazine at the moment. One of the 146-200s used by Aviacsa (Mexico) had a damaged engine. The engine was removed for a 3-engine ferry flight into the USA for repairs. BAe test pilot Dan Gurney flew the aircraft. He said, 'the first time I saw the aircraft it had a cardboard missile stuck on the empty pylon'  :wacko:

No photo unfortunately.

The 146 has three flap fairings, the inner two of which blend into the pylons. When I worked at Woodford, I often used to daydream about fitting a third pylon in front of the outboard flap-track fairing and hanging a couple of Sea Skuas on it, with a Seaspray radar in the nose (plenty of room) to guide them.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 21, 2019, 01:52:07 pm
No saying I'm going to do this, but...

There was a scheme put forward to replace the Space Shuttle's Solid Rocket Boosters with liquid fuelled ones, each being equipped with two F1 (Saturn V 1st stage) engines running RP-1 (kerosene) and liquid oxygen. That would raise the total number of engines in the launch stack from five to seven, even though the Shuttle would be unaltered. Am I right in thinking that this would count, even though the change is to the 'strap-on & fall-off' boosters rather than the actual spaceplane? After all, it's not as if the Shuttle could do anything without the boosters, so they were a pretty integral part of the system.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on June 21, 2019, 03:03:41 pm
I think that'd be OK, the boosters were an integral part of the 'spaceframe' after all.

Should I put this forward for joint moderator consideration?
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: rickshaw on June 21, 2019, 06:29:54 pm
I think that'd be OK, the boosters were an integral part of the 'spaceframe' after all.

Should I put this forward for joint moderator consideration?

Sounds fine to me.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 21, 2019, 09:43:52 pm
I think that'd be OK, the boosters were an integral part of the 'spaceframe' after all.

Should I put this forward for joint moderator consideration?

Sounds fine to me.

Cheers Kit and Rickshaw  :thumbsup:

I put this idea up as a hypothetical, but I've just being looking at bits and there might be an easy way to do it IF it's a truly whiffy mod to the original Shuttle, not the actual proposals, which were modifications offered in the late 1980s (post-Challenger) and 2010s (for SLS). I'd need a second Airfix Saturn V Skylab kit though, which is damned annoying since I used to have three, but sold two while I was out of work... :banghead:

The proposed boosters were 18ft in diameter and used F-1B engines, which were a simplified and improved version that would have looked quite different to an original F-1 externally. The Airfix Saturn V Skylab kit has enough third stage parts (Skylab + Apollo) to build a booster of the right length, but it would be 21.7ft in diameter and use original F-1 engines, hence the need to make it a 1970s project.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on June 22, 2019, 01:48:47 am

We have some coverage for aircraft and land vehicles. What can we do about floaty things? Does a mast on a sail ship count as an engine?   :wacko:


Good question, but I think it probably does. Whether EACH mast counts as an individual engine I'm not sure, but the mods will deliberate on the matter.

Are you thinking of an America's Cup J class schooner maybe?  ;D

Just a random thought that popped to my mind while typing - but I guess that was the general idea.
... Or remove engine(s) from something and add sails.


You're good to go with the added or deleted sails idea.  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: zenrat on June 23, 2019, 03:43:40 am
I did a bit of rummaging in my stash today and a twin engined Gazelle would be a fairly simple kitbash using the Airfix 1/72 along with the engines from the Italeri/Tamiya Augusta A129 Mangusta.
It would take power from 450 kw to 1300 kw so would see a slight performance increase.

Going on recent performance I won't get to this during the GB so if anyone else wants to jump in and build one don't stand on ceremony.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on June 23, 2019, 03:05:05 pm
A tri-motor P-38 is a natural, the third mounted as a pusher in an extended
centre nacelle.
Of course, I'm sure Tophe has already drawn it.  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 23, 2019, 10:09:49 pm
A tri-motor P-38 is a natural, the third mounted as a pusher in an extended
centre nacelle.
Of course, I'm sure Tophe has already drawn it.  :thumbsup:

You could do the same with a pusher radial on a P-61 Black Widow, a Fokker G.I.

Fit a large pusher engine to an Fw.189, then remove the original Argus engines and replace them with heavy-calibre cannons.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on June 24, 2019, 10:07:38 am
Fit a large pusher engine to an Fw.189, then remove the original Argus engines and replace them with heavy-calibre cannons.

 :thumbsup:

Use an Fw 189B and you could also have a heavy nose armament, or radar.  :thumbsup:

(http://www.airwar.ru/image/idop/other2/fw189b/fw189b-1.gif)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 24, 2019, 10:24:28 am
Fit a large pusher engine to an Fw.189, then remove the original Argus engines and replace them with heavy-calibre cannons.

 :thumbsup:

Use an Fw 189B and you could also have a heavy nose armament, or radar.  :thumbsup:


MPM did a kit of the -B too...

There were a small number of A-1s actually fitted with FuG-212 Lichtenstein C-1 radar and a single schrage musik-style MG.151 cannon in order to counter slow-flying night-harassment raids by Po-2s and the like on the Eastern Front. You might therefore imagine a B as an improved night-fighter, fitted with centimetric radar in a radome.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on June 24, 2019, 10:56:11 am
Or a ground attack type with a heavy multigun nose along the lines of the US gun-nose B-25 and A-26.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: zenrat on June 26, 2019, 04:53:32 am
I've been doing some rummaging.  I have an AMT 1/25 '65 El Camino and an AMT Parts Pack Pontiac SD421 engine.  Normally i'd swap the Elky's small block for the Poncho.  However, given the rules of this GB...
 ;D

Some research.  This is Blo Bak.  Street Machine Magzine's first Street Machine of the Year in 1988.  Note that i am not planning to build a model of this vehicle (that would not be a whiff) but post these to show it has been done and to give a vague idea of what I am looking at.
(https://d3lp4xedbqa8a5.cloudfront.net/s3/digital-cougar-assets/streetmachine/2017/06/06/Misc/holden-hq-ute.jpg)
(https://d3lp4xedbqa8a5.cloudfront.net/s3/digital-cougar-assets/whichcar-media/15307/blobak-ute-topview.jpg)
(https://d3lp4xedbqa8a5.cloudfront.net/s3/digital-cougar-assets/whichcar-media/15296/blobak-ute-chassis-3.jpg)
(https://d3lp4xedbqa8a5.cloudfront.net/s3/digital-cougar-assets/whichcar-media/15294/blobak-ute-chassis.jpg)

https://www.whichcar.com.au/news/blobak-hq-holden-ute-chasiss-up-for-auction
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on June 26, 2019, 07:33:48 am
There ain't no substitute for cubic inches!  :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: sandiego89 on June 26, 2019, 10:14:58 am
ďNo replacement for DisplacementĒ is how the US hot rodders put it.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: zenrat on June 27, 2019, 03:20:26 am
Or, to put it a third way, you can't beat cubes.


Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 27, 2019, 03:36:21 am
 - as the Harley rider said whilst ignoring the Japanese sports bikes with 1/5th his bike's capacity screaming past him on all sides... :wacko: :wacko: :wacko:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: ChernayaAkula on June 27, 2019, 02:12:01 pm
<...> What can we do about floaty things? Does a mast on a sail ship count as an engine?   :wacko:

How about a BTR-60 with a mast or two?  :wacko:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: rickshaw on June 27, 2019, 05:32:03 pm
<...> What can we do about floaty things? Does a mast on a sail ship count as an engine?   :wacko:

How about a BTR-60 with a mast or two?  :wacko:

Not as strange as you might believe.  The Indian Army used PT-76 light amphibious tanks during its war with Pakistan in 1971 when they invaded East Pakistan and turned it into Bangladesh.   However, the engines of the PT-76s kept overheating in the tropical heat so they rigged sails, towed them, did whatever they could to get the across the rivers/delta where they were going.   :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on June 28, 2019, 06:49:51 am
Which means it won't be allowable in this GB as it wouldn't be a Whiff.  :wacko:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on June 28, 2019, 10:46:10 am
<...> What can we do about floaty things? Does a mast on a sail ship count as an engine?   :wacko:

How about a BTR-60 with a mast or two?  :wacko:

On rails?, with big, very narrow wagon wheels?, or runners on ice?
 ;D ;D ;D

(https://static.carthrottle.com/workspace/uploads/posts/2015/10/9b095dfd-fb06-4cfd-b741-be218751599e.jpg)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: kerick on June 28, 2019, 10:49:03 am
Yeah, this target is way out of sight!  :wacko:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: loupgarou on June 28, 2019, 03:22:26 pm
Just seen the Trislaner in another topic.
It reminded me that originally it had 2 engines, IIRC.
If I get a Trislander kit and remove an engine to make a Bislander, would it be allowed in this GB or not?  ;D
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on June 28, 2019, 03:48:37 pm
Just seen the Trislaner in another topic.
It reminded me that originally it had 2 engines, IIRC.
If I get a Trislander kit and remove an engine to make a Bislander, would it be allowed in this GB or not?  ;D
Then it would just be an Islander. 
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 28, 2019, 08:35:35 pm
Just seen the Trislaner in another topic.
It reminded me that originally it had 2 engines, IIRC.
If I get a Trislander kit and remove an engine to make a Bislander, would it be allowed in this GB or not?  ;D
Then it would just be an Islander.


...and good luck getting an affordable Trislander kit in the first place: Islander kits are hard enough to come by!

EDIT: just noticed in the Stash thread that Eastern Express are doing a 1/144th scale one. :thumbsup:

Now what you could do is make the same modification to some other twin-engined type: if adding an engine to an Otter makes it a Twin Otter or Twotter for short, then adding a third engine to it must make it a Trotter... :wacko:

Alternatively, you could splice the fuselages of two Dornier Do.28s together and add TWO extra engines on either side of the fin... ;D


OR, get a Trislander (somehow), take both wing-mounted engines off it and replace the tail engine with a much bigger one to make a Monoislander (flying boat hull too?)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: rickshaw on June 28, 2019, 10:01:13 pm
Just seen the Trislaner in another topic.
It reminded me that originally it had 2 engines, IIRC.
If I get a Trislander kit and remove an engine to make a Bislander, would it be allowed in this GB or not?  ;D
Then it would just be an Islander.

Except it would be much longer than a standard Islander.  You'd need two much more powerful engines to get it off the ground.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 28, 2019, 10:02:38 pm
Trilandered Do-28:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48149013336_102581bfcb_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2gmLhbm)dornier-do-28-quad (https://flic.kr/p/2gmLhbm) by Harold Smith (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156465715@N04/), on Flickr

An alternative way of doing this would be to get a Do-228 (longer fuselage), take the original engines off it and replace them with four Do-28 engines, two on the nose and two on the tail.

Of course, that then leave you with two butchered Do-28 kit. You could put the Do-228's TPE-331 turboprops on one of them (there was a technology demonstrator like this in real life, but it had other changes from the Do-28 too, including a supercritical wing and tricycle undercarriage), and as for the other, well I've always thought that the Do.28 fuselage would make a good basis for a helicopter. Alternatively, you could put one TPE-331 on the nose of each of them, since it's got more power than both of the original Lycoming flat-sixes put together and weighs less than one of them...
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 28, 2019, 10:51:55 pm
Off-topic (because the number of engines doesn't change), but isn't it time Dornier showed a bit more respect for their heritage?  ;)

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48149300626_8ba7256d10_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2gmMKzC)dornier_do_228_pushpull (https://flic.kr/p/2gmMKzC) by Harold Smith (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156465715@N04/), on Flickr
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 28, 2019, 11:55:48 pm
Trotter:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48149669837_143d9079d5_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2gmPDkk)trotter (https://flic.kr/p/2gmPDkk) by Harold Smith (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156465715@N04/), on Flickr
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Mossie on June 29, 2019, 01:38:23 am
Just seen the Trislaner in another topic.
It reminded me that originally it had 2 engines, IIRC.
If I get a Trislander kit and remove an engine to make a Bislander, would it be allowed in this GB or not?  ;D
Then it would just be an Islander.

If you took the wing mounted engines off and stuck one in the nose, that would make for something different.
.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on June 29, 2019, 02:25:27 am

Just seen the Trislaner in another topic.
It reminded me that originally it had 2 engines, IIRC.
If I get a Trislander kit and remove an engine to make a Bislander, would it be allowed in this GB or not?  ;D


NO!
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: zenrat on June 29, 2019, 02:26:24 am
Trotter:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48149669837_143d9079d5_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2gmPDkk)trotter (https://flic.kr/p/2gmPDkk) by Harold Smith (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156465715@N04/), on Flickr

And a Quotter?
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on June 29, 2019, 03:48:03 am
Dornier 448 Quadrisevant:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48150634611_28c82baaeb_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2gmUA8n)dornier_do_428 fin (https://flic.kr/p/2gmUA8n) by Harold Smith (https://www.flickr.com/photos/156465715@N04/), on Flickr

Thus actually makes a kind of sense: it would keep prop noise well away from the passenger compartment and have better asymetric characteristics than a conventional four-engines-on-the-wings layout. Needs longer nose gear, of course.

Now imagine it with Gannet-style engine pairs: each pair of TPE-331s feed a pair of co-axial counter-rotating props: Centreline thrust and reduced cabin noise. Do it to a standard-length 228 by replacing the TPE-331s with 400-ish hp Allison C250s and you get smaller prop diameters which reduces the size of the extended undercarriage.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on July 01, 2019, 04:29:09 am
In the RW Boeing started on a project to give the B-47 with a bit more poke by swapping the six 5.200 lb thrust J-47 engines for four Allison J-71s, each rated at 10000 lbs each. Sadly the J-71 turned out to be a lemon and the new version of the B-47, to be called the B-56, never got built.

But suppose Boeing had thought a tad laterally, and noticed that the B-52, which they were building at the same time, was a very BIG aeroplane which had eight 10000 lb thrust J-57s. With some sideways thinking they could have shortened a B-52 a bit, halved the number of engines, trimmed the wing span ( :o :o :o) and come up with a much more plausible B-56, and it would have been cheaper too.

I give you the Boeing B-56 Stratocastle.....

(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/4946/Y21sub.jpg)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on July 01, 2019, 04:37:47 am
And yes, I have got a Monogram B-52 up in The Loft.  ;)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: zenrat on July 01, 2019, 04:44:40 am
And yes, I have got a Monogram B-52 up in The Loft.  ;)

Maybe, but you won't be able to bring yourself to shorten the wings...
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on July 01, 2019, 04:51:49 am
And yes, I have got a Monogram B-52 up in The Loft.  ;)

Maybe, but you won't be able to bring yourself to shorten the wings...


Wanna bet?  ;D

Think how much extra wing lengthening scope for other Whiffs that will get me!  ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Weaver on July 01, 2019, 05:01:43 am
Of course that brings up the classic not-supposed-to-be-a-whiff-but-never-actually-happens: re-engining the B-52 with four modern high-bypass turbofans. I've lost count of the number of articles I've read about this eminently sensible idea over the years, but it always gets cancelled for some or other reason.

Off-topic, but thinking about B-52 replacements: the A330 and A340 share the same wing design, which means the A330 has an unused 13,000lb rated hardpoint on each wing. Time to dig out the old VC-10 'bomb pod' drawings maybe? You could put extra fuel tanks and black boxes in the underfloor cargo bays and still leave most of the cabin free for alternative use as a cargo/passenger type. It's not like it needs a ton of sensors or operators to chuck cruise missiles from 100 miles away...
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: zenrat on July 01, 2019, 05:27:30 am
Of course that brings up the classic not-supposed-to-be-a-whiff-but-never-actually-happens: re-engining the B-52 with four modern high-bypass turbofans. I've lost count of the number of articles I've read about this eminently sensible idea over the years, but it always gets cancelled for some or other reason.

That's because they are waiting for someone here to build one in 1/72.  And then the day it's finished...

 :-\
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on July 01, 2019, 07:34:56 am

Off-topic, but thinking about B-52 replacements: the A330 and A340 share the same wing design, which means the A330 has an unused 13,000lb rated hardpoint on each wing. Time to dig out the old VC-10 'bomb pod' drawings maybe? You could put extra fuel tanks and black boxes in the underfloor cargo bays and still leave most of the cabin free for alternative use as a cargo/passenger type. It's not like it needs a ton of sensors or operators to chuck cruise missiles from 100 miles away...


I have 'a few' Revell A330/340 kits in The Loft, eminently suitable for such shenanigans.  ;)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on July 01, 2019, 10:47:12 am
DHC-4 with added engines.

(http://photos.smugmug.com/BTS-2/i-Brv4JTn/0/9dbbb461/O/DHC4_J85_01.png)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on July 01, 2019, 10:54:52 am
The B-56 reminds me of some of the concepts explored in the 707 development process.

(http://photos.smugmug.com/BTS/i-7LVwjkj/0/330bbc42/XL/707_DEV_3-VIEW_02-XL.png)

(http://photos.smugmug.com/BTS/i-NLGT2Tt/0/afabbf60/XL/707_DEV_3-VIEW_05-XL.png)

(http://photos.smugmug.com/BTS/i-PrGzP4F/0/6a7eb599/XL/707_DEV_3-VIEW_09-XL.png)

(http://photos.smugmug.com/BTS/i-DnH3p42/0/d8f4f4cf/XL/707_DEV_3-VIEW_10-XL.png)

(http://photos.smugmug.com/BTS/i-qVBvDDv/0/5c428f7f/XL/707_DEV_3-VIEW_11-XL.png)

Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on July 01, 2019, 11:02:53 am

The B-56 reminds me of some of the concepts explored in the 707 development process.


Looking back at my sketch now reminds me a LOT of the Baade 152 as well. But with a bigger fin.  ;D ;)

(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/img922/9747/BEvJbC.jpg)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: kitnut617 on July 01, 2019, 12:27:16 pm
I've got this idea of putting a pair of GE90's on a re-winged B-52, got a different wing from a 767, just need a couple of 1/72 scale engines --  ;D
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on July 01, 2019, 12:55:37 pm

I give you the Boeing B-56 Stratocastle.....


On which subject, does anyone know if there's a resin engine conversion for the B-52F's J57-P-43WBs with the bulged turbo-alternator housings?
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: kitnut617 on July 01, 2019, 01:45:18 pm

I give you the Boeing B-56 Stratocastle.....


On which subject, does anyone know if there's a resin engine conversion for the B-52F's J57-P-43WBs with the bulged turbo-alternator housings?

Well, yeah there would be,  if I got off my arse and dropped this into some rubber ---   ;D

(http://village.photos/images/user/8f3973c9-3f0e-4b54-80e2-017121c0bf9f/7a6c2ed8-cc31-4c04-a22d-65a0da47b3a5.JPG)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on July 01, 2019, 01:48:16 pm
Yes, those are exactly the ones I'm looking for!  :thumbsup:

Where did they come from originally please Robert, or did you scratch them?

Hannants have some resin engines for B-52Gs, which should be the same ones as the -Fs, but the pics only show the right hand side so I can't see the bulges!  :banghead:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: kitnut617 on July 01, 2019, 02:01:09 pm
I was going to convert one of the Revell/Monogram B-52D's I have into the B-52F. As I had an AMT B-52G I used one of the nacelles as you see. I had to modify the top of the nacelle where the pylon attaches so I could just put them on the Revell pylon. I added the bulge, filled in some of the opening the 'G' had but the 'F' didn't, then I ran out of rubber and resin. It then ended up in the projects box ---

The 'G' doesn't have the bulge though Kit so you would have to do what I've done. I should say it's in 1/72 scale --

Mind you, there are these if you can find a set.

https://www.scalemates.com/kits/golden-dragon-gdpr72005-boeing-b-52f-stratofortress-resin-engine-conversion-set--182428
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on July 01, 2019, 02:50:51 pm
Amazingly I found I have an AMT B-52G kit in The Loft as well! It was hidden under the Monogram B-52D!  ;D

I reckon I could give your idea a try and see what works, and I only have to do two of them of course.

It seems the Golden Dragon conversions were later split off to 'BUFF Models', but all seem to be unobtainable nowadays.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: kitnut617 on July 01, 2019, 03:25:38 pm
Both those outfits had the same owner Kit, seems he was a bit of a Glenn Ashley ---
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on July 02, 2019, 03:51:52 pm
The verdict on the Golden Dragon/BUFF stuff from various sources is that it was utter $hite,
poorly patterned, very badly moulded, overpriced and took forever to receive.

BTW, at Boeing we always referred to them as generators rather than turbo-alternators.
Ditto at Helipro on the Sikorsky S-61s and the various Bell types.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: sandiego89 on July 03, 2019, 08:08:08 am
Well dang, two entries are already too close to ideas I had (one eerily very close) - prefer to have something a bit different. Seems us deviant types have similar ideas in our heads!

Back to the stash for inspiration or a trip to the hobby shop....Mrs Sandiego89 cantít fathom how my 150+ stash canít give me something for inspiration...
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: zenrat on July 04, 2019, 04:50:22 am
Well dang, two entries are already too close to ideas I had (one eerily very close) - prefer to have something a bit different. Seems us deviant types have similar ideas in our heads!

Back to the stash for inspiration or a trip to the hobby shop....Mrs Sandiego89 cantít fathom how my 150+ stash canít give me something for inspiration...

Loathe as I am to suggest anything that might stop you buying more kits you could post you stash list here and let us choose you something to build... ;D ;)

Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: NARSES2 on July 13, 2019, 07:59:27 am
Had a couple of ideas whilst away, both will be RAF 1940's (there's a surprise), one will lose an engine, one will gain one. Just need to find the kits now. E-Bay here I come
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Medjoe on July 15, 2019, 06:51:31 pm
Did a quick photomanip of a Ju 88A trimotor today, to my knowledge there was no proposed configuration of the sort, I think the Germans *mostly* left the trimotor schtick to the Italians. ;) By cutting so much of the extensive glasshouse in the front, it would likely lose a significant amount of forward visibility/defense/space for the bomb sights. Aesthetics-wise the side view looks a bit wonky, if only because the Jumo piston engine and its radiator are so long. 

Also more weight dedicated to an extra engine, new firewall, pumps and whatnot, while keeping the same fuel capacity would hinder significantly its range at the price of a modest increase in cruise speed, perhaps? And to top that the need to reposition the wing to better fit the shift of its CofG forward. A possible purpose that came to my mind would be some sort of dedicated high speed torpedo bomber, skimming just above the waterline and striking fear in the Allied warships and convoys...

For a closer visual familiarity to something like the SM.79, perhaps the Ju 88R with its BMW 801 radials would be a closer candidate.
 
In any case, I only have one Ju 88 in the stash and it's destined to another fate, so I'll gladly throw forth this monstrosity to contribute to our collective imagination.

(https://i.imgur.com/78XEKKe.jpg)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: NARSES2 on July 16, 2019, 06:17:37 am
 :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: kitnut617 on July 16, 2019, 10:11:43 am
Did a quick photomanip of a Ju 88A trimotor today, to my knowledge there was no proposed configuration of the sort, I think the Germans left the trimotor schtick to the Italians. ;)

Umm, Ju.52, Ju.252 -----   ;D
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on July 16, 2019, 11:12:44 am
The Italians were stuck with the tri-motor layout because of their radial engines
had a lower power output compared to other countries/manufacturers.

Three 801 would be unlikely because of weight considerations, it would dramatically
decrease the 88's load size, perhaps three Bramo 323?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bramo_323
The Fw 200 C-3 and on used the 323.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Medjoe on July 16, 2019, 11:14:02 am
Umm, Ju.52, Ju.252 -----   ;D

Duly noted and amended. :angel: I am now reminded that the Ju 252 was not a fever dream and the nose engine is one of the most oddly proportioned with the rest of the fuselage... I was counting on having that erased from memory.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on July 16, 2019, 02:57:07 pm
Twin R-3350 powered B-24 based concepts for the USAAC and USN. Like some other projects
they came to nothing because of the demand for the R-3350 on other programs, primarily the
B-29.

(http://photos.smugmug.com/BTS-2/i-Sj6Xcx5/1/c8471da0/O/LB29_01.png)
LB-29

(http://photos.smugmug.com/BTS-2/i-q8fnL5v/1/106146b9/XL/XP5Y1_01-XL.png)
XP5Y-1
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: zenrat on July 17, 2019, 03:25:29 am
Following on from TomZ's More and Less DC3s it has struck me that if one built an Me321/323 with more than 0 but less then 6 engines it would be both more AND less engines in one aircraft.
 ;)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on July 17, 2019, 05:57:25 am

Following on from TomZ's More and Less DC3s it has struck me that if one built an Me321/323 with more than 0 but less then 6 engines it would be both more AND less engines in one aircraft.
 ;)


 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Raucous laughter here on the west bank.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Rheged on July 17, 2019, 06:26:29 am

Following on from TomZ's More and Less DC3s it has struck me that if one built an Me321/323 with more than 0 but less then 6 engines it would be both more AND less engines in one aircraft.
 ;)


 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Raucous laughter here on the west bank.

And a quiet chuckle from further up the Wye valley.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: loupgarou on July 17, 2019, 08:24:51 am
Another silly idea.  ;D
Should I take a drakkar, I suppose the oars could be considerd as ONE motive unity.
If I add an outboard motor, the combo should be considered valid or this GB.
And those poor vikings would arrive less tired to the villages to plunder.  :wacko:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Rheged on July 17, 2019, 08:43:38 am
Another silly idea.  ;D
Should I take a drakkar, I suppose the oars could be considerd as ONE motive unity.
If I add an outboard motor, the combo should be considered valid or this GB.
And those poor vikings would arrive less tired to the villages to plunder.  :wacko:

As Scandinavians, would Vikings not use Volvo Penta inboard engines?
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on July 17, 2019, 10:04:45 am
Another silly idea.  ;D
Should I take a drakkar, I suppose the oars could be considerd as ONE motive unity.
If I add an outboard motor, the combo should be considered valid or this GB.
And those poor vikings would arrive less tired to the villages to plunder.  :wacko:

As Scandinavians, would Vikings not use Volvo Penta inboard engines?

Not necessarily.

Ole Evinrude was born in Norway, as was Finn T. Irgens who, working with the Johnson brothers,
designed the first Johnson outboards.

AB Pentaverken introduced their first outboard, the U2, in 1923 twelve years before becoming
a Volvo subsidiary.

There is a strong Vikings to outboards connection.  ;D :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Medjoe on July 17, 2019, 08:24:41 pm
Another particularly interesting layout to serve as inspiration can be found in the plans of the quad engined Blohm & Voss P 203, which aimed to use mixed propulsion as a combo of a BMW 801 and a Heinkel HeS 011 on each wing. The radial/jet assembly was installed longitudinally, with the jet engine directly behind the radial. To my understanding, the basic design differed from the motorjets of the era in that there is no shaft connecting the jet to the piston engine.

While the project never took... off... one can imagine a hypothetical scenario where Allied forces, be they Western or Soviet, managed to find drawings of the project and developed evaluation airframes on existing aircraft to test the viability. I was trying to find a way to fit this on a Tupolev Tu-2 as a supposed "testbench" by TsAGI, but the base airframe posed too many issues with the length of the landing gear and the lateral distance needed to clear the engines out of the landing gear. And the H-tail would probably need some thermal reinforcing or a redesign to account for the jet exhaust.

A particular challenge to this specific configuration is that the main gear nacelles typically found behind the engine must be relocated somewhere in the wing and/or the fuselage. In any case, something like this on a quick aircraft like a Mosquito or Hornet could prove quite fun.

(https://i.imgur.com/GbRQb6M.jpg)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: zenrat on July 18, 2019, 04:29:34 am
Asymmetric three engine Liberator Express (if you don't look too closely).
(https://alchetron.com/cdn/consolidated-c-87-liberator-express-6d1152d5-9c1b-4b0d-afaa-48153d240a7-resize-750.jpeg)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on July 18, 2019, 04:52:41 am

Asymmetric three engine Liberator Express (if you don't look too closely).


You'd have even more asymmetry with one fin/rudder larger than the other, which would seem almost essential for pilot workload purposes anyway.  ;) ;D
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: NARSES2 on July 18, 2019, 06:11:47 am
Another silly idea.  ;D
Should I take a drakkar, I suppose the oars could be considerd as ONE motive unity.


Interesting. Now in my view each bank of oars could be considered an "engine". Therefore converting a trireme to a bireme or a simple single banked galley to a bireme would be fine.

Sticking on with ships I'm wondering if adding or subtracting a mast to a sailing ship would count. The removal or addition of a sail wouldn't as you would simply be playing with the "power" of the engine.

 :angel: ;D
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on July 18, 2019, 06:27:51 am

Sticking on with ships I'm wondering if adding or subtracting a mast to a sailing ship would count. The removal or addition of a sail wouldn't as you would simply be playing with the "power" of the engine.

 :angel: ;D


You'd have to ask the mods about that..................  ;)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: NARSES2 on July 18, 2019, 06:30:51 am

Sticking on with ships I'm wondering if adding or subtracting a mast to a sailing ship would count. The removal or addition of a sail wouldn't as you would simply be playing with the "power" of the engine.

 :angel: ;D


You'd have to ask the mods about that..................  ;)

Suppose I would  ;D
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Mossie on July 18, 2019, 07:26:53 am
Asymmetric three engine Liberator Express (if you don't look too closely).
(https://alchetron.com/cdn/consolidated-c-87-liberator-express-6d1152d5-9c1b-4b0d-afaa-48153d240a7-resize-750.jpeg)

Six engine, if you count the one's in the hold, I'm sure they could drive something....
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Mossie on July 20, 2019, 06:36:49 am
Potential for this GB, five engined Nimrod. ;)
http://www.ipmsusa.org/reviews/Kits/Aircraft/airfix_72_nimrod/part_01/nimrod_xv234-01.jpg
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: zenrat on July 20, 2019, 06:43:09 am
 :thumbsup:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on July 20, 2019, 03:11:49 pm

Potential for this GB, five engined Nimrod. ;)
http://www.ipmsusa.org/reviews/Kits/Aircraft/airfix_72_nimrod/part_01/nimrod_xv234-01.jpg


It'd be able to cruise on just the RB-211 I reckon, never mind about shutting down only two of the Speys!  :o
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Dizzyfugu on August 01, 2019, 11:41:24 am
Could we please open the Finished Builds section, please? This condition has been met now.  :mellow:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on August 01, 2019, 01:21:19 pm

Could we please open the Finished Builds section, please? This condition has been met now.  :mellow:


It looks like Chris will have to do that, I tried and I can't.  :banghead:
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on August 01, 2019, 01:50:35 pm
Me 410 with a three BMW 003 added.

(http://photos.smugmug.com/OLDPB/i-5DGR33L/0/5e706a11/O/ME410_BMW003.jpg)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: joncarrfarrelly on August 01, 2019, 01:55:43 pm
"Me 109" trimotor, actually a 109 wind-tunnel model repurposed to test the 110
wing and engine nacelle design.

(http://photos.smugmug.com/BTS-2/i-NJXsxfP/0/4672f3c4/O/bf-109_110TRI.jpg)
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: NARSES2 on August 02, 2019, 06:21:18 am
Could we please open the Finished Builds section, please? This condition has been met now.  :mellow:

Sorry Dizzy, I thought I'd done it. Took my eyes off the ball I'm afraid. It's done now

Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on September 19, 2019, 04:45:27 am
10-11 days to go gents, depending where you are in the world of course.
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: kitbasher on September 19, 2019, 05:22:19 am
10-11 days to go gents, depending where you are in the world of course.

Thatís weird.  When I check the thread on my PC it also says thereís a two-week extension.  Odd 😉
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on September 19, 2019, 11:12:58 am
10-11 days to go gents, depending where you are in the world of course.

Thatís weird.  When I check the thread on my PC it also says thereís a two-week extension.  Odd 😉


Oh no it doesn't, when someone asked a while ago I said it was too soon to ask for an extension yet, but if anyone were to ask now................?  ;) ;D
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: NARSES2 on October 15, 2019, 06:56:15 am
Gents. I've moved a couple of build threads to the appropriate "every day" build threads so if anyone would like me to move their unfinished builds let me know.

Chris
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: PR19_Kit on October 15, 2019, 08:46:12 am
By now it's all done and dusted, even on the far west side of the Pacific, so soon it'll be time for voting.

After the monumental hash I made of the last poll perhaps I'd better let my fellow mod arrange this one...ÖÖÖ.  :-\
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: 63cpe on October 15, 2019, 11:19:37 am
Chris could you move my projects (all four of them) for this GB to the regular/everyday build thread?  :-\
Again, I couldn't finish on time, but will continue anyway. Most of them are almost ready.

Thanks
David aka 63cpe
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: Gondor on October 15, 2019, 10:16:22 pm

Gents. I've moved a couple of build threads to the appropriate "every day" build threads so if anyone would like me to move their unfinished builds let me know.

Chris


Yes please

Gondor
Title: Re: The Engines - More or Less GB : Discussion
Post by: NARSES2 on October 16, 2019, 06:20:43 am
David/Gondor.

I'll move your threads now