I've looked through here and can't find anything that comes close, except a Sunderland with two engines missing. photogallery
Some clues: Its not a Short, but another well-known British manufacturer. Only one was built. It was painted in standard camo with a yellow 'P' for Prototype, not the Coastal Command colours here. It had 2 x Rolls-Royce Vultures; the artist has assumed these troublesome devices would be replaced by Bristol Hercules on a production model, which seems reasonable to me - sorry if this threw some of you. Look carefully at the horizontal line above the chine.....
B.20 Blackburn. Experimental flying boat. The B.20 tried to make water clearance and take-off wing incidence more compatible with streamlining, by making the planing bottom retractable. The stablilising floats were also retractable. View attachment 180 View attachment 181
Blackburn B20 That's right! A seaplane with separate floats is compromised in weight and drag [the Schneider trophy types were specified as seaplanes by the competition rules]. In the case of a flying boat with boat-hull, keeping the engines away from the water is a problem: it either has to be very large like a Sunderland, or the engines are on drag inducing struts like a Catalina (I imagine something like a Goose works because the engines are relatively low-powered). Whether the extra weight of the retraction gear on the B20 would have negated the advantages I don't know. It crashed early in its career, and was not considered a priority to be pursued. Your turn, Spidge adrian
Well, it looks like a B17 being used as a test-bed for a much larger engine - maybe the Wright R3350 as used in the B29, or even the R4360 "corncobs" used in the Hughes HK1 - or maybe a turboprop? I can't imagine they would have considered it for combat - no room for a nose gun or bombardier.
Well, it looks like a B17 being used as a test-bed for a much larger engine - maybe the Wright R3350 as used in the B29, or even the R4360 "corncobs" used in the Hughes HK1 - or maybe a turboprop? I can't imagine they would have considered it for combat - no room for a nose gun or bombardier. Spot on Adrian. Your question. It is a B-17 with a turbine engine installed in the nose. My guess it they were testing the turbine engine and needed a large airframe like the B-17s. They probably took off and landed using the traditional four engines as the primary power. Once at altitude, they engaged the turbine engine and experimented to determine performance characteristics.
Yes - perhaps a bit too easy! Nice artwork though. Your turn, Spidge I am not in your league when it comes to aircraft....Lucky pick.
