XB-38 remains

ausflyboy · **Posted:** Sun Mar 02, 2008 3:53 am

Does anyone know if the remains of the Xb-38 were ever found or recovered?

Found these pictures of it on the USAF museum flight..sure looks pretty to me

Mgawa · **Posted:** Sun Mar 02, 2008 4:19 am

Excellent images- any more info about this version?

ausflyboy · **Posted:** Sun Mar 02, 2008 6:24 am

From the Miss U.S page http://www.unlimitedexcitement.com/Miss%20US/Allison%20V1710%20Engine.htm

Lockheed Vega XB-38 "Flying Fortress" -- V-1710-89's replaced the Wright R-1820-65 radials on a B-17E bomber airframe. Turbocharging was retained, and the radiators were placed in the leading edge of the wing, with the intercoolers under the engine. While the main motivation for this program was to provide an alternate engine supply in case R-1820 supply was interrupted, there was also considerable interest in the performance of a liquid-cooled bomber. With 1,425 hp to 25,000 ft in each of the four engines, considerably improved performance was established, with speed increasing from 317 mph to 327 mph, and similar gains shown in rate of climb, bomb load, and range. The first flight of the XB-38 was in May 1943, the last occurred nine flights later when an engine fire occurred during a speed run at 25,000 ft. The crew was forced to evacuate their burning airplane, which subsequently crashed. Brief consideration was given to continuing the program with a heavily armed version of the B-17/-38 being developed for the "escort" mission, but when improved supplies of the R-1820 were established, priority was placed on production of the B-17G.

Mgawa · **Posted:** Sun Mar 02, 2008 6:35 am

skymstr02 · **Posted:** Sun Mar 02, 2008 8:33 am

Also looks like a remote controlled belly turret on this aircraft.

Kyleb · **Posted:** Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:02 am

I'd never seen that first photo before. What a beautiful airplane.

DoraNineFan · **Joined:** Fri Aug 12, 2005 3:37 pm **Posts:** 678

The XB-38 has very nice lines visually. It's a pity that it's development was cut short by a test flight accident and the demands for inline engines for fighter production.

I wonder if it's fate would have been different if the Merlin engine had been used instead of Allisons with enclosed exhaust plumbing (presumably the cause of the in-flight fire?)

Garth · **Posted:** Sun Mar 02, 2008 5:37 pm

skymstr02 wrote:

Also looks like a remote controlled belly turret on this aircraft.

More likely its a radome with a couple of broomsticks bolted on (ala Doolittle B-25s) in order to make people viewing it, especially from a distance, think it's a belly/ball turret. Like how many WWII B-29 pics had the underside radome "airbrushed" out ...

lestweforget · **Posted:** Sun Mar 02, 2008 6:30 pm

Quote:

I wonder if it's fate would have been different if the Merlin engine had been used instead of Allisons

Now that would have been interesting. Does anyone have any guesses if performance would have been affected? Would have been an interesting looking aeroplane!

bdk · **Joined:** Sun May 02, 2004 1:16 am **Posts:** 11336

Just adapt Lancaster QECs!

I think using the Merlin they could have dispensed with turbos. Might have simplified the installation a bit.

gregv · **Posted:** Sun Mar 02, 2008 6:58 pm

Great looking plane, always liked that one.

Are the nacelles from the firewall back (mostly) the same as a regular B-17? Kinda looks that way fromt the photos. What supercharger setup & props did they use? The props look similar to the later "paddel blade" B-17G's, not like the skinnier and more pointed P-40 units, at least to me anyways.

very cool!

greg v

Second Air Force · **Posted:** Sun Mar 02, 2008 11:06 pm

Garth,

You're correct, that doesn't look like the standard belly turret and could be a mock up for the later style ball. This airplane does have the periscope blister and side windows for the remote set-up though, and was originally equipped with the Bendix remote belly turret.

Garth · **Posted:** Mon Mar 03, 2008 10:46 am

Second Air Force wrote:

Garth,

You're correct, that doesn't look like the standard belly turret and could be a mock up for the later style ball. This airplane does have the periscope blister and side windows for the remote set-up though, and was originally equipped with the Bendix remote belly turret.

Here's what I'm thinking of (sorry for the link, I don't want to embed the picture):

http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/wwii/photos/gallery_005/B-17%20pathfinder%20with%20H2X%20radar.jpg

Radome is located in the B-17's ballturret location, and extends/retracts while inflight (as with the Stoof and other aircraft).

n5151ts · **Posted:** Mon Mar 03, 2008 2:01 pm

you could probably put it in the back of a pick-up truck

Warbird Information Exchange

XB-38 remains

Who is online