- Joined
- Jun 25, 2009
- Messages
- 13,227
- Reaction score
- 599
Wow. This is a first! Thanks for this treasure trove! Now from the looks of it I can see no big difference with aircraft #1.
Another thread in Aviation & Space: https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/bell-xp-83-model-40.8271/#post-73187
Merge?
Do you know I tried to link these two sections up but there is massive distortion unfortunatelyHere's the scan from Joe Starns. -SP
They look like Marquardt RJ twenties to me alsosagallacci: are you sure that those aren't the Marquardt 20" diameter ramjets?
Marquardt Aircraft used 44-84990 as a ramjet testbed (complete with a rear fuselage engineer’s station -- visible in the photo above).
Most photos of XJ-33 GE-5 just show a mass of pumps and tubes on the front of the engine. Most early centrifugal compressor engines had few internal fairings. Air flow was so turbulent by the time it reached the compressor face, that fairings would make little difference.I have just started an Anigrand Bell XP-83 and found an error. In the engine nacelle there is a part representing the compressor face. There is no such thing in the a/c as it has a centifrugal compressor. Pictures of the J-33 show a mass of pipes and equipment before the intake. When installed in the a/c was this protected by some sort of bullet fairing or was it left out in the breeze? A cutaway drawing in Steve Pace's 'X Fighters' book suggests the latter.
Can anyone please enlighten me?
John
Yes, but sometimes the screens are painted black or they are not present when the unit is photographed or displayed. Also on those early units the intake area was fairly small. It is easier to see them once you know where to look.Air enters the engine through conical screens that lay between the accessory case and burner cans. If the engine has two centrifugal compressors, then it gets two conical wire mesh screens, back to back.
That looks very similar to the modern F-16 canopy in shape. Was the P-83 a one piece or two piece canopy? The F-16's of course is one piece.The windscreen, meanwhile, was also blown out such that it was pinched in at the bottom when viewed from the front.
So the whole canopy bulged out a bit from the fuselage, which can be clearly seen in this photo:
2-piece.That looks very similar to the modern F-16 canopy in shape. Was the P-83 a one piece or two piece canopy? The F-16's of course is one piece.The windscreen, meanwhile, was also blown out such that it was pinched in at the bottom when viewed from the front.
So the whole canopy bulged out a bit from the fuselage, which can be clearly seen in this photo:
Here is an outline of the original design over the blueprint (which is kind of faint):