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

Shadow on The Wall - Work in Progress by Jozef Gatial

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
11,763
Reaction score
1,909
The B-32 Dominator was supposed to replace the B-17 in the low to medium altitude bomber role in both the European and Pacific theaters (it had been originally developed as a backup to the B-29 but they could never get the pressurisation system to work properly).
 
Last edited:

PlanesPictures

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
974
Reaction score
437
The B-32 Dominator was supposed to replace the B-1`7 in the low to medium altitude bomber role in both the European and Pacific theaters (it had been originally developed as a backup to the B-29 but they could never get the pressurisation system to work properly).
Yes, in
it is black on white. "The Army Air Forces wanted to begin replacing B-17s and B-24s with B-32s in the summer of 1944".

Long years ago I had detailed blueprint of B-32 but it is lost. Can you help me with it
 
Last edited:

royabulgaf

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
482
Reaction score
52
I felt that the B-29 was not suitable for the European battlefield due to its weak armor of the cabin and the tactics of German fighters. Which project should replace the B-17 and B-24 aircraft in the Luft'46 (47, 48) scenes?
I don't know if the United States would have thought of design and manufacturing another heavy bomber design, other than the B-29, to replace either B-17 or B-24, given that it was the second most expensive American program of the war.
I'm under the impression the B-29 would have added another dimension to the plight of the Luftwaffe come 1944/1945, what with its higher speed, longer range, operational altitude and heavier bombload.

P.S. grated, the Luftwaffe had more capable air defences than the Japanese...


Regards
Pioneer
Consider the second iteration of the Martin XB-33. Slightly smaller than the Superfortress, about the same speed, but could fly at a higher altitude.
 

JohnR

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
609
Reaction score
97
Fantastic job as always, I am still intrigued by the two forward engines. Wasn't there a possibility of some sort of compressor problems?
 

Arjen

It's turtles all the way down
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2010
Messages
2,717
Reaction score
492
A guess on the forward engines: centre of gravity considerations?
 

PlanesPictures

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
974
Reaction score
437
next one from my old archives: Lockheed CL-1000-47
 

Attachments

  • Lockheed CL-1000 front.jpg
    Lockheed CL-1000 front.jpg
    283.5 KB · Views: 63
  • Lockheed CL-1000 side.jpg
    Lockheed CL-1000 side.jpg
    627.3 KB · Views: 60
  • Lockheed CL-1000 top.jpg
    Lockheed CL-1000 top.jpg
    1.5 MB · Views: 59
  • Lockheed CL-1000 view1.jpg
    Lockheed CL-1000 view1.jpg
    947.7 KB · Views: 55
  • Lockheed CL-1000 view2.jpg
    Lockheed CL-1000 view2.jpg
    965.5 KB · Views: 57
  • Lockheed CL-1000 view3.jpg
    Lockheed CL-1000 view3.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 68

PlanesPictures

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
974
Reaction score
437
Lockheed CL-1200. Next one project from archives - quality is as is
 

Attachments

  • Lockheed CL-1200 front.jpg
    Lockheed CL-1200 front.jpg
    431.8 KB · Views: 51
  • Lockheed CL-1200 side.jpg
    Lockheed CL-1200 side.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 51
  • Lockheed CL-1200 top.jpg
    Lockheed CL-1200 top.jpg
    985.1 KB · Views: 52
  • Lockheed CL-1200 view1.jpg
    Lockheed CL-1200 view1.jpg
    901.1 KB · Views: 50
  • Lockheed CL-1200 view2.jpg
    Lockheed CL-1200 view2.jpg
    837.2 KB · Views: 49
  • Lockheed CL-1200 view3.jpg
    Lockheed CL-1200 view3.jpg
    823.3 KB · Views: 61

Similar threads

Top