Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

Aerospace Pictures and Art Thread


LostCosmonaut

Recommended Posts

tumblr_ocefpefZgw1rqpszmo2_540.jpg

 

tumblr_ocefpefZgw1rqpszmo3_540.jpg

 

tumblr_ocefpefZgw1rqpszmo4_540.jpg

 

tumblr_ocefpefZgw1rqpszmo5_540.jpg

 

tumblr_ocefpefZgw1rqpszmo1_540.jpg

 

 

Hey neat! Never seen this before. a 6 gun experimental remote chin turret for the B-17G.

 

"Experimental 6-barrel tower remotely-controlled turret on b-17G, tail number 42-31435 SU-S, “WEST END” , flying in the composition of the 384 bomb group, U.S. air force, 1944."

A little more on this, from http://forum.armyairforces.com/threads/b-17g-42-31435.181/ :

 

Didn't think to check the Freeman/Osborne collaboration, thanks for the idea. On page 44 and 45 of The B-17 Flying Fortress Story is a photo of the 6 gun nose turret. Caption says: "Another in-the-field generated gun arrangement was the 384th BG's fixed battery of .50 calibre weapons under the nose of B-17G 42-31435. This battery, fired by the pilot, was devised to meet mass head-on attack. It was installed when this aircraft had to have major nose repairs following an accident. It was flown operationally for a few sorties in early July 1944, but there was no opportunity to use the guns prior to a crash landing in the UK." The caption is credited to a George Sheehan. According to the 384th web site Sheehan was a Sergeant in the 544th SQ. The mission list for this a/c shows a gap from May 11 to June 6 which possibly could be when this conversion took place.

 

http://photos.384thbombgroup.com/index.php?/category/G42-31435

 

"This B-17G was fitted with an experimental chin turret armed with 6 fixed .50 cal. machine guns, designed by Armaments Officer Mike Mazer. It crashed returning from a bombing mission on July 6, 1944."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me-262Shootdown.JPG

 

 

An ME-262 goes down to the .50 caliber guns of a USAAC P-51.

 

This particular view of the schwalbe dispels one of the persistent myths about the aircraft.  The ME-262 did not have swept wings; at least, not swept enough to produce a meaningful reduction in transonic drag.  Under ideal circumstances the increase in Mcrit will be proportional to the inverse cosine of the angle of the wing's sweep.  At a mere 18.5 degrees of sweep, the wings of the ME-262 would have around a 5% increase in Mcrit, and in reality the effect would be less than that due to the fact that wings are not infinitely long.  So the reduction of transonic drag due to the sweep of the ME-262's wings was negligible.  In practice, wing sweep angles of less than 30 degrees have no significant impact on transonic drag effects.

 

The wings of the ME-262 were swept in order to move the center of lift of the plane back behind the center of gravity.  Because the ME-262 was jet powered and lacked a heavy piston engine in the nose, its center of gravity was further back than usual.  It was easier for the designers to sweep the wings to move the center of lift than it was for them to completely re-design the wing root structure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...