RB-17

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Here

 

[ReccePhreak]

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

 

[Steve Pace]

What would your RB-17 have in the way of landing gear? -SP

 

[Matej]

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]

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.

 

[Stargazer2006]

And also these:

 

[borovik]

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]

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...

 

[ReccePhreak]

Thank you VERY much, Stargazer.
Larry

 

[borovik]

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.

 

[Zeppelin]

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..

 

[OM]

...So, *is* there any advantage to stacking the engines like that, as opposed to mounting them parallel to the deck?

 

[DACguy]

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