• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Martin Postwar Projects and Prototypes

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,227
Reaction score
703
Not quite an XB-51, but since we don't have a "Postwar Projects" topic on Martin, this is best here for the time being...

Here is the Martin Model 235, from an article by Tony Buttler published in the October 2010 issue of Aviation News (and through the courtesy of lark who sent it to me).

If you've seen the post on the Martin B-10 derived fighter, well... this would be the equivalent, only ten years later: a fighter XB-51 of sorts (always amazing to fathom the progresses of early aviation — only ten years or so between the archaic B-10 design and this advanced streamline jet!).

The Model 235-3 was an unsollicited single-seat twin-engine high performance jet fighter proposed in June 1946. The novel 35° swept-wing design enabled the aircraft to achieve some reasonably high speeds, with a quoted 724 mph at sea level and 600 mph at 30,000 ft. Service ceiling on normal power was 43,700 ft. and range at 540 mph would be 2,110 miles, impressive figures for that time. Four fixed cannons were positioned on either side of the fuselage. Two Westinghouse 24C-4B engines (later known as J34) were to power the aircraft, and power was to be further augmented by reheat.

Main differences from the Model 234 (XB-51) design were a shorter fuselage, a regular empennage (as opposed to T-tail), a tricycle gear and the fact that the engines were located under the wings instead of under the fuselage sides.

Martin were mostly considered a bomber and flying boat producer and never had much luck with their (relatively few) fighter design proposals. This was no exception and seemingly didn't impress the Air Force.
 

Attachments

  • 235 small.jpg
    235 small.jpg
    151.3 KB · Views: 699
  • 235 cockpit.jpg
    235 cockpit.jpg
    149.5 KB · Views: 643
  • 235-3 general arrangement.jpg
    235-3 general arrangement.jpg
    29.6 KB · Views: 553

Jos Heyman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
597
Reaction score
23
Would it be possible to extract the dimensions from the general arrangement diagram?
 

Jemiba

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,302
Reaction score
1,312
Stargazer2006 said:
... but since we don't have a "Postwar Projects" topic on Martin, this is best here for the time being...

Now we have ! ;)

Jos Heyman said:
Would it be possible to extract the dimensions from the general arrangement diagram?

With the given drawing simply : No, apart maybe from attempts to estimate dimensions from,
say, the engine nacelle and the known type of engine. But this would be burdened with an error of
about 10 to 20 %, I think. But maybe that drawing is around somewhere in higher res ?
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,249
Reaction score
1,903
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Jos Heyman said:
Would it be possible to extract the dimensions from the general arrangement diagram?

Span 36' 11"
Length 45' 4"

Note: this info comes from Buttler's new book "Early US Jet Fighters." Has *lots* of such projects in it, with lots of data.
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,227
Reaction score
703
Martin's unbuilt proposal for a military variant of the Model 404 (and the produced civilian model for comparison):
 

Attachments

  • $_57 (18).JPG
    $_57 (18).JPG
    79 KB · Views: 251
  • $_57 (19).JPG
    $_57 (19).JPG
    63.5 KB · Views: 75

famvburg

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 24, 2011
Messages
345
Reaction score
19
Other than the tip tanks, do we know the difference in the unbuilt one pictured as opposed to the one(s) built for the USN(?) or USCG?
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,227
Reaction score
703
Text at the back of the photo:

The U. S. Navy and U. S. Air Force have been given specifications for a new combination twin-engine trainer, staff transport and utility cargo airplane designated the Martin AIRLIFT 4-0-4. Having characteristics, payload and versatility comparable to those formerly assigned to four-engine aircraft, yet retaining the many advantages of twin-engine airplanes, the AIRLIFT 4-0-4's basic mission will be to carry a 15,000-pound payload over a combat range of 1500 miles at 270 miles per hour. Two versions of the AIRLIFT 4-0-4 are envisioned by engineers at the Glenn L. Martin Company who designed the military version of the commercial 4-0-4 airliner now being built for Eastern Air Lines and Trans World Airlines. The first will be powered by conventional piston engines, the second by turboprop engines, which will give additional range, payload and speed. Artist's conception of the wing-tip tanked AIRLIFT 4-0-4 shows the piston engine version.
 

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
27,939
Reaction score
5,210
Hi,

I don't know what was this design,and it belonged to Barish/Vidya/Martin,and they
mentioned Martin Company made a test rotor for it ?.

 

Attachments

  • 10.png
    10.png
    9.1 KB · Views: 32
  • 12.png
    12.png
    55 KB · Views: 40
Last edited:

Similar threads

Top