Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The first B-36 models were piston-engine only. 6 R4360 Wasp radials. They used 115/145 avgas; the jets used the same.
The first turboprops had a lot of problems with gearboxes and reliability; the radial engines of the day, despite being maintenance nightmares, were accepted as being "safe" technology. (A B-36 had 336 spark plugs which often needed to be changed after a ten-hour mission.) The B-36 radials also generated over 3000-3500 hp each, while early turboprops, like their jet cousins, were inefficient and underpowered, usually limited to less than 2000 hp.
Normally the B-36 took off, when equipped, on radials and jets, and turned off the jets in the air, unless needed for dashes. Cruise range suffered on jet power. In tests the B-36 was found to have insufficient speed to get away from thermonuclear blasts, and suffered damage.
I read somewhere that on one disastrous Thursday over Inchon, North Korea a massive bombing raid of 60+ B-36's were bounced by the NK/PRC MIG-15's. Only about 10 survived long enough for the Sabers to arrive. This was despite the B-36's fancy 20mm anti fighter gun sets. It was not one of the Air Force's finest hours. The B-36 was a WW-2 bomber in a WW-3 war.
One of the sidelights of the B-36 saga was as it was built in Fort Worth Texas in the Consolidated plant and the secretary of the Air Force owned a lot of Consolidated stock, the B-36 was chosen over the far higher performance Northrup B-35 Flying Wing. All the B-35's were destroyed to prevent any comparison tests. This is a fine example of a high level official putting his own wealth above the needs of the country.
If we had followed the Flying Wing designs we would have had "stealthy" bombers a long time ago. The irony of this conflict was the Boeing Company had the time to develop the wing design for the B-47 and the undying B-52.
I read somewhere that on one disastrous Thursday over Inchon, North Korea a massive bombing raid of 60+ B-36's were bounced by the NK/PRC MIG-15's. Only about 10 survived long enough for the Sabers to arrive. This was despite the B-36's fancy 20mm anti fighter gun sets. It was not one of the Air Force's finest hours. The B-36 was a WW-2 bomber in a WW-3 war.
One of the sidelights of the B-36 saga was as it was built in Fort Worth Texas in the Consolidated plant and the secretary of the Air Force owned a lot of Consolidated stock, the B-36 was chosen over the far higher performance Northrup B-35 Flying Wing. All the B-35's were destroyed to prevent any comparison tests. This is a fine example of a high level official putting his own wealth above the needs of the country.
If we had followed the Flying Wing designs we would have had "stealthy" bombers a long time ago. The irony of this conflict was the Boeing Company had the time to develop the wing design for the B-47 and the undying B-52.
I hope that a couple of the regulars here can provide some further enlightenment on this particular incident.
I read somewhere that on one disastrous Thursday over Inchon, North Korea a massive bombing raid of 60+ B-36's were bounced by the NK/PRC MIG-15's. Only about 10 survived long enough for the Sabers to arrive. This was despite the B-36's fancy 20mm anti fighter gun sets. It was not one of the Air Force's finest hours. The B-36 was a WW-2 bomber in a WW-3 war.
One of the sidelights of the B-36 saga was as it was built in Fort Worth Texas in the Consolidated plant and the secretary of the Air Force owned a lot of Consolidated stock, the B-36 was chosen over the far higher performance Northrup B-35 Flying Wing. All the B-35's were destroyed to prevent any comparison tests. This is a fine example of a high level official putting his own wealth above the needs of the country.
If we had followed the Flying Wing designs we would have had "stealthy" bombers a long time ago. The irony of this conflict was the Boeing Company had the time to develop the wing design for the B-47 and the undying B-52.
Not doubting you, but there may have been a few reasons for choosing the B-36 over the B-35. I seem to remember that either the B-35 or B-49 (both flying wings) had some pretty spooky handling characteristics... Keep in mind, no fly-by-wire to assist with stability control back then
I guess you would have to be a "graybeard" to remember the B-36 Peacemaker.
I wonder if it made the ground shake when it flew overhead.
you mean the biggest US bomber ever built, had six piston engines pushing, with a total of four jets also pushing when needed? never heard of it. it does happen to be my best friends favorite plane though.
I read somewhere that on one disastrous Thursday over Inchon, North Korea a massive bombing raid of 60+ B-36's were bounced by the NK/PRC MIG-15's. Only about 10 survived long enough for the Sabers to arrive. This was despite the B-36's fancy 20mm anti fighter gun sets. It was not one of the Air Force's finest hours. The B-36 was a WW-2 bomber in a WW-3 war.
One of the sidelights of the B-36 saga was as it was built in Fort Worth Texas in the Consolidated plant and the secretary of the Air Force owned a lot of Consolidated stock, the B-36 was chosen over the far higher performance Northrup B-35 Flying Wing. All the B-35's were destroyed to prevent any comparison tests. This is a fine example of a high level official putting his own wealth above the needs of the country.
If we had followed the Flying Wing designs we would have had "stealthy" bombers a long time ago. The irony of this conflict was the Boeing Company had the time to develop the wing design for the B-47 and the undying B-52.
sorry greg, but the B36 never saw combat in any theater. by the time it was deployed, it was already obsolete, and the only reason they remained in service until 1959 was that it was the only bomber capable of reaching soviet soil carrying a nuclear payload. once the B52 came into service the B36 was phased out.
you may be thinking of B29s for the raid of which you speak, as they did see service in korea.
The largest bomber used in the Korean war was the B-29, which by then had been reclassified as a medium bomber.
The problem with the B-29 was the turrets could not move fast enough to track the jet powered MiGs.
Must have been nice to have all those "extra" engines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DauntlessDan
Six turning and four burning.
Apparently, there were reliability issues - hence the engineer joke of "two turning, two burning, two smoking, two choking, and two engines unaccounted for".
Engineering-wise, that plane appears to be the definition of a kludge.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
