 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / Radio Controlled / Air Models / January 2007How well does a B-26 Invader fly?
In the last year I read a magazine review about a B-25 kit currently on the market. As I recall the reviewer built the kit and generally liked the kit, the components and the instructions. Then he installed two 4-strokes and flew the plane. His comments were that it took off smoothly, and he did basically a racetrack circle and landed it. He noted that B-25's are not and never were forgiving and can get out of hand much too easily for his taste. He felt very good about just getting it back on the ground undamaged. This is a noted builder and flier writing for RC Report, Model Airplane News or Fly RC. Then there was a major media item last fall in the newspaper and on TV about a guy in my metropolitan area who builds and flys large models of Boeing jets like the ones he works on. In the media coverage he noted that his models have about the same handling characteristics and problems as the full size ones. So my question is how well does the real B-26 fly? What problems or characteristics should be expected when flying a scale B-26 Invader? Would this be a difficult plane to fly? And last, why does there not seem to be a Viet Nam era B-26K anywhere? > In the last year I read a magazine review about a B-25 kit currently on > the market. As I recall the reviewer built the kit and generally liked [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > this be a difficult plane to fly? And last, why does there not seem to > be a Viet Nam era B-26K anywhere? ------------ Because of an extraordinarily high wing loading of 58 pounds per square foot, the B-26 gained a reputation as being a widow maker. It flew more like a hot fighter than a lumbering bomber. Ed Cregger >> In the last year I read a magazine review about a B-25 kit currently on >> the market. As I recall the reviewer built the kit and generally liked [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > > Ed Cregger And, you can expect any sort of scale model to exhibit the same characteristics. Of course, some wing profile changes could make it substantially more docile. Geezer >>> In the last year I read a magazine review about a B-25 kit currently on >>> the market. As I recall the reviewer built the kit and generally liked [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > Of course, some wing profile changes could make it substantially more > docile. Thats not true..you could build it much lighter..I noted in a recent magazine a scale model of a WWI biplane, Around 45" span. I would power that size biplane with a geared electric motor of about 049 power equivalence to swing a 10" prop. The designer had elected for a .40 4 stroke... > Geezer Are you guys confusing the B 26 with the A 26? In his subject line it says, "Invader," which was the Douglas aircraft. The Martin B 26 "Marauder" is the one with the fierce wingloading. The A 26 was used in Viet Nam. >>>So my question is how well does the real B-26 fly? >>> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >>foot, the B-26 gained a reputation as being a widow maker. It flew more >>like a hot fighter than a lumbering bomber. From what I've read (Smithsonian Air & Space for one) despite its quirks, more Martin B26 crews came home in one piece than did the crews of any other allied bomber, so they weren't ALL bad! Also, nobody says you've got to build a model with scale wing loading. Build it light and you'll probably have a unique, delightful model. (Not one for a beginner, though!) I just looked at the numbers...didn't pay any notice to the name.. And, you're right on both counts. Geezer > Are you guys confusing the B 26 with the A 26? In his subject line it > says, "Invader," which was the Douglas aircraft. The Martin B 26 [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > probably have a unique, delightful model. (Not one for a beginner, > though!) Seem to remember an A-26 met its end at an airshow in the Uk just a few years ago when it was being displayed and just would not pull out of a dive, not quite aure what the pilot was up to but he got a free pair of wings all of his own, regards, Terry Ummmm..not sure... "B-26" and "Invader" don't match... The "Invader"' was an A-26. A-26, flies on rails, keep it fast... Dave >In the last year I read a magazine review about a B-25 kit currently on >the market. As I recall the reviewer built the kit and generally liked [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >Would this be a difficult plane to fly? And last, why does there not >seem to be a Viet Nam era B-26K anywhere? > Ummmm..not sure... > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > A-26, flies on rails, keep it fast... ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ This is confusing enough for anyone to mess it up. To the OP, read this page, and see if it helps the understanding level. <g> https://www.airforcehistory.hq.af.mil/PopTopics/B26.htm There is a picture on the first page that shows both the original Martin B-26, and the A-26. It get confusing, where the A-26 gets the B-26 name, after the Martin B-26 gets retired. Did I get that right? I'm not sure, myself. <g> I recall (didn't read it all from this site) that the original A-26 got part of it's bad reputation early on, and that some aerodynamic changes (added wing area-longer wing? - washout?) were made to make it more manageable. I could be wrong about that one. I could not find anything about what I recalled, or perhaps I was thinking of another plane. It was definitely not a slow lumbering B-17 or B-24. If a pilot treated it like one of those, they would be scraping him off the runway, soon thereafter. So, the question is, do you want to model the Martin B-26, the Douglas A-26, or the Douglas B-26? Humm, so many choices, so little balsa wood! :-)  SignatureJim in NC >Ummmm..not sure... > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Dave I think there is some confusion here concerning the two aircraft. There was a Martin B-26 "Marauder" which was referred to in it's early life as the " Widow Maker". They made some changes to the aircraft and it became a much better flying machine. After the Martin B-26 was retired , the Douglas A-26 Invader which was an attack aircraft, was redesignated to the B-26 "Invader". Lot of information on the aircraft here. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/b-26.htm Ken B26 = Martin = Marauder A26 = Douglas = Invader The Martin Maruader had a fearsome reputation: As production of an improved B-26B began in April 1942, two unrelated events seemed to threaten the Marauder's future. The first was the Doolittle Raid on Tokyo by 16 North American B-25 Mitchells, launched from the deck of the USS Hornet. North American used this notoriety to seek more contracts for its B-25. The second happening was a furor over the Marauder's high accident rate in training, especially at McDill Field in Tampa, Florida. To the cadets assigned to fly the B-26, the Marauder was becoming known as the "Flying Prostitute" and "Widow Maker." A Senate investigating committee arrived in Tampa to be greeted by the sight of two crashed B-26s still burning. "One a day in Tampa Bay" was a horrifying possibility. Douglas Invader hung around as well, through Korea and Viet Nam -- http://www.warbirdalley.com/a26.htm Charlie -- The only model B-26 that I have ever seen was about ten years ago. It was scratch-built by the late Col Art Johnson. It flew quite well (until he lost an engine on one takeoff and wisely went straight ahead. Unfortunately, there was a barbed-wire fence in the way. He rebuilt it and flew it later with no significant problems. Cheers -- \_________Lyman Slack________/ \_______Flying Gators R/C___/ \_____AMA 6430 LM____ / \___Gainesville FL_____/ Visit my Web Site at www.LymanSlack.com > In the last year I read a magazine review about a B-25 kit currently on > the market. As I recall the reviewer built the kit and generally liked [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > this be a difficult plane to fly? And last, why does there not seem to > be a Viet Nam era B-26K anywhere? A friend of mine was and instructor in the MARTIN B26 MARUDER at McDil early in WWII when the motto "A plane a day in Tampa Bay" originated. He was later transfered to the DOUGLAS A26 INVADER and flew it as member of the squadron that briefly flew it in combat late in WWII. was in the Air Force when the A for Attack was deleted and the A2 INVADER became the B26 INVADER. To further amplify the confusion, the for attack designation reappeared during Vietnam and the DOUGLAS B2 again became the A26 invader. Lots of confusion as to wihch was th B26 back then too. My friend said that the probem with the Martin B26 was in th inadequate training given it's pilots, not the airplane -- Chuck Thank you very much to all who posted replies to my inquiry. The A/B-26 Invader has always seemed to me to be a very pretty plane. I have seen several offerings over many years for kits or small flying models of various kinds of A-26 Invaders. In the last few years there was a construction article in one of the magazines of a very-stand-off scale version of the A/B-26 that did look good and reportedly flew well. I have still wondered why no one in the national competitions ever seemed to do a version of the A/B-26, and I would love to see it in the Vietnam era "K" model especially. I love to build, am not a good pilot but get a lot of help, and one of these days intend to create a version to my own satisfaction of the A-26K. There would still seem to be a reason why no one else ever seems to be interested in this design. Lately with good electric engines it would appear to resolve the famous fear of an engine failure on takeoff. With a relatively thin airfoil the jet jocks could have a very fast plane. I am thinking of a NACA 2415 airfoil for myself with slotted flaps if I can figure out a practical and affordable way to rig them. The slower I can make it go with full control the happier I am.############. > Thank you very much to all who posted replies to my inquiry. The A/B-26 > Invader has always seemed to me to be a very pretty plane. I have seen [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > rig them. The slower I can make it go with full control the happier I > am.############. Charlie: Check out rcgroups.com for a video of an A-26 flying. It looks great. You will want to go to that website and check out the forums. You want the video forum for which you need to scroll down toward the bottom. The A-26 video is on page 2. Harlan |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.