Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Aviation
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-07-2009, 01:09 PM
 
594 posts, read 1,778,374 times
Reputation: 754

Advertisements

In the early 1930s, a Russian aeronautical engineer named Kalinin conceived the design of a gigantic flying fortress that was truly awesome. He sold the idea to
the Russian military and it was finally constructed in 1933. It was an elliptical wing with six main engines plus a pusher engine. On, it's maiden flight, the plane developed uncontrollable "flutter" and crashed near Kharkov with a loss of 14 lives. Later, Kalinin, like so many others, ran afoul of Stalin and he was executed in 1940. The following link shows several photos of the Kalinin K-7:

English Russia » Russian Flying Fortresses

If the link doesn't work, please do a search on the following:

English Russia Russian Flying Fortress
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-07-2009, 01:15 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
48,564 posts, read 24,115,388 times
Reputation: 21239
Thanks, good post, I had read about that monster some years back, but it had slipped my mind since. I enjoyed the pictures.

Given the immense size and multiple engines, I wonder how a fighter plane would have gone about trying to shoot one down? At what would you aim?

It is just as well for the Soviets that the program was a failure. Had the bomber functioned as designed, they might have wasted a lot of resources in building a fleet of them. This would have been useless since strategic bombing played no role at all in the Soviet defeat of the Third Reich.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2009, 01:18 PM
 
Location: Metromess
11,798 posts, read 25,183,065 times
Reputation: 5219
I notice the photos have different engine configurations. The first has eight 'puller' engines. In any case, what a huge flying machine!

If the USSR had successfully developed a big bomber, they might have used strategic bombing against Nazi Germany. They did a little as it was. But I'd say the Western powers did such a thorough job of it that the Russians would have done little more than move the debiris around. (My father was a B-17 copilot.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2009, 01:45 PM
 
Location: On the Chesapeake
45,356 posts, read 60,546,019 times
Reputation: 60938
My God, that would have been a pig to fly. Obviously since it crashed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2009, 04:36 PM
 
23,592 posts, read 70,391,434 times
Reputation: 49232
I see only a couple that might qualify as "photos." The rest are nice computer exercises. My immediate thought is that we need a new Harrison Ford vehicle. "Indiana Jones and the Alien Faberge Eggs?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2009, 06:41 PM
 
2,638 posts, read 6,019,707 times
Reputation: 2378
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
Given the immense size and multiple engines, I wonder how a fighter plane would have gone about trying to shoot one down? At what would you aim?
Just shoot a bunch of birds directly into the propeller engines.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2009, 08:38 PM
 
48,502 posts, read 96,838,702 times
Reputation: 18304
That was about teh time when the theory on war is much like that movie ;Thigns to come. Military believe that all cities in eourope would be quickly destroyed quickly in the first days of a new war. that was waht was behind the accepted theory that'the bombers will always get thru".That was why so many were not ready with defensive fighters until just before WWII.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-07-2009, 11:27 PM
 
Location: Parts Unknown, Northern California
48,564 posts, read 24,115,388 times
Reputation: 21239
catman

Quote:
I notice the photos have different engine configurations. The first has eight 'puller' engines.
Well, the mockups are rather fanciful. For example, look at the 5th, 6th and 7th pictures from the top. Someone has decided that not only can the engines lift this monster into the sky, but they are so powerful that they can also lift ones equipped with as many as 14 heavy artillery pieces attached in batteries of twos and threes. We would also have to add the weight of the large shells which these guns would fire. The plane would have to be incredibly rugged to stay aloft if all ten forward facing guns were discharged at once.

I suppose this was someone's notion of a flying battleship.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2009, 01:11 AM
 
Location: West Los Angeles and Rancho Palos Verdes
13,583 posts, read 15,657,392 times
Reputation: 14049
Are the assault cannons a joke?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-12-2009, 02:13 PM
 
Location: Planet earth
434 posts, read 933,623 times
Reputation: 363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grandstander View Post
Thanks, good post, I had read about that monster some years back, but it had slipped my mind since. I enjoyed the pictures.

Given the immense size and multiple engines, I wonder how a fighter plane would have gone about trying to shoot one down? At what would you aim?

It is just as well for the Soviets that the program was a failure. Had the bomber functioned as designed, they might have wasted a lot of resources in building a fleet of them. This would have been useless since strategic bombing played no role at all in the Soviet defeat of the Third Reich.
One thing smart about Russian weapon design especially during WWII is to keep it simple and reliable! They may not make the most sophisticated weapons compared to Germans. But they certainly made sure ---easy manufacture especially in quantity, easy maintenance etc.

I doubt the flying fortress would be a Soviet choice in the 30's at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Aviation
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top