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

RB-17

ReccePhreak

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
When I saw RB-17, I was thinking of a reconnaissance version of the Boeing B-17. What's the story on this one? Who designed it, and what was its purpose?
BTW, ALL of your artwork is absolutely FANTASTIC!
Larry
 

Matej

Multiuniversal creator
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
2,614
Reaction score
174
Website
www.hitechweb.genezis.eu
A bit OT question but what is the advantage to have the engines underneath under the wing compared to first next to second in horizontal line?
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,227
Reaction score
661
ReccePhreak said:
When I saw RB-17, I was thinking of a reconnaissance version of the Boeing B-17. What's the story on this one? Who designed it, and what was its purpose?

Since no-one ever answered the question... The Sukhoi RB-17 (also found as the IDD-17 or DSB-17) was a 1945-46 tactical bomber project with four Jumo 004 or Derwent-V turbojets. It was designed by Myasishchev and carried the VM-24 model number.
 

Attachments

  • RB-17_02.jpg
    RB-17_02.jpg
    144.8 KB · Views: 56
  • RB-17_05.jpg
    RB-17_05.jpg
    136.1 KB · Views: 54
  • RB-17_04.jpg
    RB-17_04.jpg
    167 KB · Views: 63
  • DSB-17 (VM-24).png
    DSB-17 (VM-24).png
    239.9 KB · Views: 59
  • RB-17_03.jpg
    RB-17_03.jpg
    54.3 KB · Views: 165
  • DSB-17 (Jumo-004).jpg
    DSB-17 (Jumo-004).jpg
    21.1 KB · Views: 160
  • DSB-17 (Derwent-V).jpg
    DSB-17 (Derwent-V).jpg
    22.3 KB · Views: 169
  • rb17-1.jpg
    rb17-1.jpg
    51.8 KB · Views: 214

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,227
Reaction score
661
And also these:
 

Attachments

  • RB-17_01.jpg
    RB-17_01.jpg
    222.5 KB · Views: 51
  • RB-17_05.jpg
    RB-17_05.jpg
    136.1 KB · Views: 52
  • rb17-c1.jpg
    rb17-c1.jpg
    37.8 KB · Views: 86
  • rb17-3.jpg
    rb17-3.jpg
    64.7 KB · Views: 122
  • rb17-2.jpg
    rb17-2.jpg
    55.7 KB · Views: 131

borovik

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
792
Reaction score
140
Matej said:
A bit OT question but what is the advantage to have the engines underneath under the wing compared to first next to second in horizontal line?
Placing the engines in the vertical plane, one above the other, allowed in the future is almost painless to move to two more powerful - like 'Derwent-V'.
More information see: http://www.airwar.ru/enc/bomber/rb17.html

oops, Thanks Stargazer2006
 

Matej

Multiuniversal creator
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
2,614
Reaction score
174
Website
www.hitechweb.genezis.eu
I mean compared to the for example B-52 arrangement: two engines side by side in the horizontal line in one pod. I can see only advantages: better of the groud clearance, more access places, easier maintenance, simplier replacement of the damaged engine...
 

borovik

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
792
Reaction score
140
Matej said:
I mean compared to the for example B-52 arrangement: two engines side by side in the horizontal line in one pod. I can see only advantages: better of the groud clearance, more access places, easier maintenance, simplier replacement of the damaged engine...
Probably due to the lack of practical work in 1945 with jet engines. First built in the Soviet aircraft with engines on pylons was an airplane, "150" in 1950 (first flight on Oct. 5, 1952). The first project with a similar layout, on the pylons was a prototype of "one hundred and fiftieth" - RB-2 (1948).
more: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,5943.0
And only in 1954, two engines side by side on the pylon had been arranged on the project "152". Later built in the GDR.
 

Attachments

  • '152'.jpg
    '152'.jpg
    28.4 KB · Views: 39

Zeppelin

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
84
Reaction score
11
I wonder which came first? the RB-17 or the Short S.A.4 Sperrin. A case of espionage either way, or just using the same confiscated post war German aircraft design resources..
 

Attachments

  • short_sperrin.jpg
    short_sperrin.jpg
    24.3 KB · Views: 31

OM

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Messages
752
Reaction score
21
Website
www.io.com
...So, *is* there any advantage to stacking the engines like that, as opposed to mounting them parallel to the deck?
 

DACguy

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
The advantage is that you eliminate the weight of the pylon. The downside is that if the upper engine has a fuel (or other fluid) leak, it drains down into the lower engine so both can burn evenly... From a practical stand point, the stacked engine design makes maintenance very difficult because the upper engine is hard to reach and worse to change-out (must use a crane). When both engines hang side-by-side on a pylon, they are equal heights from the ground and are closer to it making maintenance easier and both will use the same lifting device for change-out. No special tools required unlike those needed for the upper engine in this case (the Sperrin design is even worse in this regard because the upper engine is not only high but over the wing as well).

Phil
 

Similar threads

Top