Lockheed XP-49

Justo Miranda

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
2 December 2007
Messages
6,721
Reaction score
8,473
Website
www.amazon.com
Lockheed XP-49 info
 

Attachments

  • Escanear0001.jpg
    Escanear0001.jpg
    179.3 KB · Views: 792
  • Escanear0002.jpg
    Escanear0002.jpg
    106.3 KB · Views: 684
  • Escanear0003.jpg
    Escanear0003.jpg
    74.4 KB · Views: 596
  • Escanear0004.jpg
    Escanear0004.jpg
    130.5 KB · Views: 609
  • Escanear0005.jpg
    Escanear0005.jpg
    113.5 KB · Views: 606
  • Escanear0006.jpg
    Escanear0006.jpg
    222.1 KB · Views: 194
Lockheed XP-49 info -post-2
 

Attachments

  • Escanear0009.jpg
    Escanear0009.jpg
    183.2 KB · Views: 160
  • Escanear0008.jpg
    Escanear0008.jpg
    217.2 KB · Views: 159
  • Escanear0007.jpg
    Escanear0007.jpg
    215 KB · Views: 148
Carl Haddon was chief project engineer on the XP-49 program but search as I have using his name and the names Hibbard, Johnson and Hawkins I've yet to find the patent on this aircraft. Has anybody out there discovered the patent on the XP-49? Thanks in advance. -SP
 
Steve Pace said:
Carl Haddon was chief project engineer on the XP-49 program but search as I have using his name and the names Hibbard, Johnson and Hawkins I've yet to find the patent on this aircraft. Has anybody out there discovered the patent on the XP-49? Thanks in advance. -SP

What makes you think the XP-49 would have required a separate patent from that of the XP-38? It's not like it was radically different in configuration, design or technology, right?
 
Skyblazer said:
Steve Pace said:
Carl Haddon was chief project engineer on the XP-49 program but search as I have using his name and the names Hibbard, Johnson and Hawkins I've yet to find the patent on this aircraft. Has anybody out there discovered the patent on the XP-49? Thanks in advance. -SP

What makes you think the XP-49 would have required a separate patent from that of the XP-38? It's not like it was radically different in configuration, design or technology, right?
Right - but I was thinking that a patent might have been applied for. If so, I would like to see it. That's all there was to my request. -SP
 
I know the XP-49 was three and a half feet longer than the standard P-38. But that does not help me, if the photo does not show them next to each other? How do you tell a P-38 from an XP-49, from an XP-58 VISUALLY? Are there different cowl openings or other Obvious features? Of course the are so many diffent models of P-38s, which does not help the situation.
As Skyblazer has noted, the company istself, describes the XP-49 as "a modified P-38"with supercharged Continental engines that gave it 230hp more hp than the contemporary Allisons, and the most powerful Lightining. and with pressurized cabin.
 
memaerobilia said:
I know the XP-49 was three and a half feet longer than the standard P-38. But that does not help me, if the photo does not show them next to each other? How do you tell a P-38 from an XP-49, from an XP-58 VISUALLY? Are there different cowl openings or other Obvious features? Of course the are so many diffent models of P-38s, which does not help the situation.
As Skyblazer has noted, the company istself, describes the XP-49 as "a modified P-38"with supercharged Continental engines that gave it 230hp more hp than the contemporary Allisons, and the most powerful Lightining. and with pressurized cabin.
The XP-58 looked very different indeed. -SP
 

Attachments

  • LAH14A.jpg
    LAH14A.jpg
    478.4 KB · Views: 98
memaerobilia said:
How do you tell a P-38 from an XP-49, from an XP-58 VISUALLY?

Ooooohhh!! The XP-58 looked completely different!

As you can see in these compared views, the P-49 was merely a variant of the P-38 (with a few differences of course, but still a variant of Basic Model 22), while the P-58 was something else. This is especially apparent in front view.
I'm also adding the compared patents for the P-38 and P-58. Clearly, since these are Design Patents, not technical ones, the P-49 falls under the same general design as the P-38 in my opinion.
(NOTE: these images were prepared for design comparison purposes — all views are not exactly to scale with one another)
 

Attachments

  • comparison4.gif
    comparison4.gif
    115.8 KB · Views: 158
  • comparison3.gif
    comparison3.gif
    100.6 KB · Views: 172
  • comparison2.gif
    comparison2.gif
    80.9 KB · Views: 195
  • comparison1.gif
    comparison1.gif
    50.7 KB · Views: 167
memaerobilia said:
I know the XP-49 was three and a half feet longer than the standard P-38. But that does not help me, if the photo does not show them next to each other? How do you tell a P-38 from an XP-49, from an XP-58 VISUALLY? Are there different cowl openings or other Obvious features? Of course the are so many diffent models of P-38s, which does not help the situation.
As Skyblazer has noted, the company istself, describes the XP-49 as "a modified P-38"with supercharged Continental engines that gave it 230hp more hp than the contemporary Allisons, and the most powerful Lightining. and with pressurized cabin.
If you compare a a view of the P-38 with the P-49 drawings in this thread, the P-49's canopy lines, the rake of the nacelle chin intakes, the length of the tail boom,s and the larger radiator ducts on the booms are all fairly distinctive.
 
memaerobilia said:
I know the XP-49 was three and a half feet longer than the standard P-38. But that does not help me, if the photo does not show them next to each other?

Several versions of the Lightning from almost exactly the same angle.
 

Attachments

  • comparison5.jpg
    comparison5.jpg
    508.7 KB · Views: 155
Well I thank you ALL, very much for the hard work to put up so many comparable illustrations. yes the XP-58 MAY look VERY different from SOME angles, but a 3/4 front view, with the extended center fuselage & cockpit mostly blocked out by the wings, is still going to challenge my own ID. A lot of the photos have such a pose, and after looking at them all, for hours, they certainly start to look more alike, than Different.

I think I need to put them aside and start fresh, again, tomorrow. There are PR Text sheets that came loose, for Each of the XP-49 and the XP-58, but I have not been able to positively link those loose sheets to any specific photo....yet. I Have been able to eliminate a fair number, where I can see military numbers on nose or tail, or specific info as to ID that is on the back with company stamps and dates. Will let you know when I get them sorted out.
Some of the photos are not as good as others. For example, I know this is not the 49 or 58

And, again, Thank you. :)
 

Attachments

  • 38035s.jpg
    38035s.jpg
    30.3 KB · Views: 85
  • 38033i.jpg
    38033i.jpg
    32.3 KB · Views: 95
One obvious difference between P-38 and P-49 (if seen from the angle in reply #12) is the windscreen's shape. The P-38's sort of follows the top contour of the central nacelle, the P-49's is a deeper cut.
 
It appears to me that it's vertical stabilizers/rudders are shaped different as well. -SP
 

Attachments

  • XP-49.jpg
    XP-49.jpg
    7.7 KB · Views: 426
  • XP-58.jpg
    XP-58.jpg
    99.1 KB · Views: 434
  • P-38J.jpg
    P-38J.jpg
    46.4 KB · Views: 439
Steve Pace said:
It appears to me that it's vertical stabilizers/rudders are shaped different as well. -SP

Well, yeah. Longer tails means also enlarged fins, I guess.
 

Attachments

  • Lockheed XP-49 left side view.jpg
    Lockheed XP-49 left side view.jpg
    241.1 KB · Views: 403
  • XP_49_01SM_1267828237_3168.jpg
    XP_49_01SM_1267828237_3168.jpg
    242.2 KB · Views: 396
I'd venture to say the P-49's fin/rudder was a P-38 unit with a parallel-section spacer, maybe ten inches high, inserted right above the boom. A quick way to increase area without a redesign.
 
Apteryx said:
I'd venture to say the P-49's fin/rudder was a P-38 unit with a parallel-section spacer, maybe ten inches high, inserted right above the boom. A quick way to increase area without a redesign.

You are almost certainly right. I never noticed before, but the resulting discontinuity in the curvature of the fin's leading edge is clear in the side view.
 
There's a fairly easy tell-tale so long as the nacelle isn't just a silhouette. The P-38s all have a small intake just aft of the spinner, roughly level with the wing leading edge, the XP-49 has a smooth nacelle with no intake.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom