ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags aircraft

Reply
Old 18th June 2019, 07:26 PM   #281
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,890
Originally Posted by jeremyp View Post
This is not true. Both aircraft are long range strategic bombers. They were both designed for the same role.


Nope. The B17 was certainly designed for high altitude attacks but it was thought that the Norden bombsight would allow them to carry out such attacks with a certain amount of precision. As with many military plans, contact with reality put paid to that idea.


It wasn't designed for those raids you mentioned, it was modified for them, and then only the best crews were ever used in those raids.

The Lancaster was always designed as a strategic bomber i.e. an aircraft capable of delivering a large bomb load to targets inside enemy territory. When used in daylight, it proved to be too vulnerable as did the early B17s. The USAAC tried to solve the problem by putting loads of guns on the bomber and the RAF tried to solve the problem by flying at night. The former strategy was a failure because you could never put enough guns on a bomber and keep a reasonable bomb load. The latter strategy was a failure because the crews could not find the target. However, in both cases, technology eventually turned things around, to the detriment of the German people.
I completely disagree with your characterisation of the Lancaster and what its original designed called for.

The Avro Lancaster originated from Air Ministry Specification P13/36. The "P" on the spec designation is for a "Medium" bomber (Heavy Bombers were Specification "B"NN/YY)

Specifically P13/36 stated that, among other requirements, the bomber was to be twin engined, multi-role high-speed medium bomber with a maximum range of 3,000 miles for world-wide use. It was to have a single unobstructed bomb bay to allow for larger bombs when future developments allow bombs exceeding 2000lb to be constructed. Other specifications included "a light removable form of seating for the maximum number of personnel that can be accommodated within the fuselage when the aircraft is being used for reinforcing Overseas Commands", as well as the ability to be catapult launched for overweight take-offs, and the ability to carry torpedoes.

Avro thought these specifications were unworkable so they submitted their own design (designated Avro679) which became the Avro Manchester. There was a problem with this aircraft, however, was that it was powered by two Rolls Royce Vulture engines that were not only grossly underpowered for the job they were expected to do, but they were also not very reliable. In 1940, Roy Chadwick, Avro's Chief Design Engineer, had been working on an updated and uprated version of the Manchester, with a grater wingspan and powered by four Rolls Royce Merlins. They were less powerful than the Vultures, but more reliable. The result was the Type 683 Manchester III, which was later renamed as the Lancaster.

The way I read this, there is no way that the Lancaster was originally designed to similar specification, or for the same role as the B-17.

You claim the the Lancaster was modified to do other roles, and you imply that this was not part of its original design. I disagree entirely. P13/36 called for "multi-role high-speed medium bomber with a maximum range of 3,000 miles with a single unobstructed bomb bay to allow for larger bombs". It is clear from this that the Lancaster was designed, right from the outset, to be able to be modified for other tasks; its airframe was constructed in such a way as to allow for those future modifications. I think even you would agree that the B-17 count not have been modified to carry out the Dambusters or the Tirpitz missions without extensive re-engineering of the airframe (in the case of the Dambusters its moot anyway, because the B-17 would simply not have the necessary handling characteristics to fly at 60 feet over water and drop bouncing bombs).

Sources:

"The RAF and Aircraft Design, 1923-1939: Air Staff Operational Requirements"
by Colin Sinnot pp23, Ch6, Ch7, pp229

Lancaster: The Second World War's Greatest Bomber
by Leo McKinstry

https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2016/0...pecifications/
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 18th June 2019 at 07:43 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th June 2019, 07:44 PM   #282
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 39,522
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
I completely disagree with your characterisation of the Lancaster and what its original designed called for.

The Avro Lancaster originated from Air Ministry Specification P13/36. The "P" on the spec designation is for a "Medium" bomber (Heavy Bombers were Specification "B"NN/YY)

Specifically P13/36 stated that, among other requirements, the bomber was to be twin engined, multi-role high-speed medium bomber with a maximum range of 3,000 miles for world-wide use. It was to have a single unobstructed bomb bay to allow for larger bombs when future developments allow bombs exceeding 2000lb to be constructed. Other specifications included "a light removable form of seating for the maximum number of personnel that can be accommodated within the fuselage when the aircraft is being used for reinforcing Overseas Commands", as well as the ability to be catapult launched for overweight take-offs, and the ability to carry torpedoes.

Avro thought these specifications were unworkable so they submitted their own design (designated Avro679) which became the Avro Manchester. There was a problem with this aircraft, however, was that it was powered by two Rolls Royce Vulture engines that were not only grossly underpowered for the job they were expected to do, but they were also not very reliable. In 1940, Roy Chadwick, Avro's Chief Design Engineer, had been working on an updated and uprated version of the Manchester, with a grater wingspan and powered by four Rolls Royce Merlins. They were less powerful than the Vultures, but more reliable. The result was the Type 683 Manchester III, which was later renamed as the Lancaster.

The way I read this, there is no way that the Lancaster was originally designed to similar specification, or for the same role as the B-17.

You claim the the Lancaster was modified to do other roles, and you imply that this was not part of its original design. I disagree entirely. P13/36 called for "multi-role high-speed medium bomber with a maximum range of 3,000 miles with a single unobstructed bomb bay to allow for larger bombs". It is clear from this that the Lancaster was designed, right from the outset, to be able to be modified for other tasks; its airframe was constructed in such a way as to allow for those future modifications. I think even you would agree that the B-17 count not have been modified to carry out the Dambusters or the Tirpitz missions without extensive re-engineering of the airframe (in the case of the Dambusters its moot anyway, because the B-17 would simply not have the necessary handling characteristics to fly at 60 feet over water and drop bouncing bombs).

Sources:

"The RAF and Aircraft Design, 1923-1939: Air Staff Operational Requirements"
by Colin Sinnot pp23, Ch6, Ch7, pp229

Lancaster: The Second World War's Greatest Bomber
by Leo McKinstry

https://weaponsandwarfare.com/2016/0...pecifications/
Nicely researched and written up! Thanks.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2019, 06:24 PM   #283
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,890
I was scanning some of my Dad's old 35mm slides a while back, and I came across quite a few aircraft ones from various airshows in the UK. Here's one...



There's the unmistakable outlines of an RAF Handley-Page Victor bomber behind and to the left (and the wingtip of a Vickers Valiant on the extreme left), and a "Skyways of London" Hawker-Siddely 748 to the right.

Anyone like to have a go at guessing what the aircraft in the foreground is?
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 19th June 2019 at 06:28 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th June 2019, 11:46 PM   #284
Norman Alexander
Philosopher
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 6,431
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
I was scanning some of my Dad's old 35mm slides a while back, and I came across quite a few aircraft ones from various airshows in the UK. Here's one...

https://www.dropbox.com/s/fyfqdswyme...0120.jpg?raw=1

There's the unmistakable outlines of an RAF Handley-Page Victor bomber behind and to the left (and the wingtip of a Vickers Valiant on the extreme left), and a "Skyways of London" Hawker-Siddely 748 to the right.

Anyone like to have a go at guessing what the aircraft in the foreground is?
Is that a Handley Page symbol on the chock?
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 12:26 AM   #285
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,890
Originally Posted by Norman Alexander View Post
Is that a Handley Page symbol on the chock?
Yup.

This aircraft is quite a bit bigger than it looks in the photo.
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 07:17 AM   #286
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 22,775
HP 115?
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 07:22 AM   #287
ceptimus
puzzler
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 6,045
HP 115





Dammit, if I'd not searched for a photo to attach, I wouldn't have been scooped by the Captain.

Last edited by ceptimus; 20th June 2019 at 07:24 AM.
ceptimus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 07:55 AM   #288
erwinl
Master Poster
 
erwinl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,407
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Yup.

This aircraft is quite a bit bigger than it looks in the photo.
The HP.115 experimental delta aircraft?
It’s a bit of a guess, but the lines seem to work out.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handley_Page_HP.115

Edit: Blast! Ninjas everywhere!
__________________
Bow before your king
Member of the "Zombie Misheard Lyrics Support Group"
erwinl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 10:09 AM   #289
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 23,792
Well, there's one I'd never heard of! Odd looking thing.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 11:56 AM   #290
Elagabalus
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,945
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
Well, there's one I'd never heard of! Odd looking thing.
Fugly.




Just like the Lancaster.
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th June 2019, 01:04 PM   #291
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,890
Captain Swoop gets the prize.

One of the aspects (and disadvantages) of the delta wing shape is a high nose-up attitude on approach to landing, making it difficult for the pilot to see the runway. This experimental aircraft was designed to to try to mitigate this with use of a large cockpit bubble, and low sloping nose cone and a low set cockpit.
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 20th June 2019 at 01:16 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2019, 01:49 AM   #292
Red Baron Farms
Illuminator
 
Red Baron Farms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 4,864
Here are a few I never saw before.
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


Talk about weird, a glider that was a bomber interceptor? It had twin 30 mm cannon?
__________________
Scott
"Permaculture is a philosophy of working with, rather than against nature; of protracted & thoughtful observation rather than protracted & thoughtless labour; & of looking at plants & animals in all their functions, rather than treating any area as a single-product system." Bill Mollison
Biome Carbon Cycle Management
Red Baron Farms is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2019, 02:19 AM   #293
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 22,775
How did the film maker know that the planes were nazis?
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2019, 05:58 AM   #294
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,524
Until recently, I had never heard of Aircraft One.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2019, 11:05 AM   #295
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 22,377
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Until recently, I had never heard of Aircraft One.
Oh? It's this one.

Hans
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2019, 11:57 AM   #296
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 21,524
If I'm not mistaken that's Flyer 1
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2019, 08:42 PM   #297
Mikemcc
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1,799
It totally blew me away when I was stood in the Smithsonian in front of what I thought was a replica and found out it was original!
Mikemcc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th July 2019, 09:00 PM   #298
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 23,792
Sort of original, I think. The Wrights didn't exactly preserve it in original condition, tinkerers that they were. They were also (quite rightly) on the outs with the Smithsonian for a long time. I believe the Flyer spent some years in Europe.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2019, 12:16 AM   #299
Cheetah
Graduate Poster
 
Cheetah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,985
Came across this the other day. I'm sure you airplane people must have heard of the Starr Bumble Bee II.
It just looks impossible.






30 years later someone should be able to make something even smaller and more ridiculous and dangerous looking. Why haven't they?
__________________
"... when you dig my grave, could you make it shallow so that I can feel the rain" - DMB

Last edited by Cheetah; 6th July 2019 at 12:38 AM.
Cheetah is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2019, 01:04 AM   #300
Red Baron Farms
Illuminator
 
Red Baron Farms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 4,864
Originally Posted by Cheetah View Post


30 years later someone should be able to make something even smaller and more ridiculous and dangerous looking. Why haven't they?
They have.
YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
Scott
"Permaculture is a philosophy of working with, rather than against nature; of protracted & thoughtful observation rather than protracted & thoughtless labour; & of looking at plants & animals in all their functions, rather than treating any area as a single-product system." Bill Mollison
Biome Carbon Cycle Management
Red Baron Farms is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2019, 07:34 AM   #301
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 23,792
Yesterday YouTube recommended a video about the Brewster Buccaneer, which was apparently thought to be WWII's worst airplane. I hadn't heard of it but it makes the hapless Buffalo sound good.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2019, 07:44 AM   #302
Mike!
Official Ponylandistanian National Treasure. Respect it!
 
Mike!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Ponylandistan! Where the bacon grows on trees! Can it get any better than that? I submit it can not!
Posts: 32,895
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
Yesterday YouTube recommended a video about the Brewster Buccaneer, which was apparently thought to be WWII's worst airplane. I hadn't heard of it but it makes the hapless Buffalo sound good.
Everything you want in a fighter/bomber...

Originally Posted by wikipedia
The Buccaneer was under-powered and poorly constructed
A design model copied by Detroit in the 70's and 80's.
__________________
"Never judge a man until you’ve walked a mile in his shoes...
Because then it won't really matter, you’ll be a mile away and have his shoes."
Mike! is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2019, 10:03 AM   #303
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 22,377
Originally Posted by Cheetah View Post
Came across this the other day. I'm sure you airplane people must have heard of the Starr Bumble Bee II.
It just looks impossible.






30 years later someone should be able to make something even smaller and more ridiculous and dangerous looking. Why haven't they?
AH, the Bumble Bee. Back in my flight sim days, I worked a bit with that. Seems only marginally possible to fly in the real world.

Hans
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2019, 01:33 PM   #304
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,894
Long thread but I don't think anyone has posted the McDonnell XF-85 Goblin yet. A "parasitic" fighter meant to be carried long range in the bay of a bomber, dropped, and provide defense over target only to be recovered after:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_XF-85_Goblin

The FICON project had a similar goal of extending fighter range but used more conventional fighters externally attached wingtip to wingtip of the bomber.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FICON_project

Both were very tricky in practice and both were terminated with the successful development of air to air refueling.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th July 2019, 03:41 PM   #305
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 23,792
Originally Posted by Mike! View Post
Everything you want in a fighter/bomber...



A design model copied by Detroit in the 70's and 80's.
Ah, yes. My Dad had a Vega. In fact, he had two of them! I've long believed that Detroit in that era intentionally built bad small cars, so they wouldn't take sales from the more profitable big ones. The sales, of course, went to Japan anyhow.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:19 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.