Thu Jul 24, 2008 5:31 pm
airnutz wrote:JDK wrote:A really hard question is what's the biggest, oldest surviving tyre? The Science Museum in London has one from that era.dhfan wrote:I have feeling it was either the Tarrant Tabor or the Beardmore Inflexible that had an 8 foot diameter tyre.
I believe the XB-36 has that topped at 9feet 2inches,(110 inches)...
Thu Jul 24, 2008 8:28 pm
Fri Jul 25, 2008 12:09 am
Fri Jul 25, 2008 12:51 am
Fri Jul 25, 2008 2:25 am
Fri Jul 25, 2008 3:23 am
The Inspector wrote:...is boiler stout.
Fri Jul 25, 2008 4:33 am
Robbie Roberts wrote:There was that huge Russian aircraft of the 30s', what was it called? Maxim? something unusual- everything but a swimming pool... Of course, the Russian flying tank was kinda neat...
Robbie
Fri Jul 25, 2008 4:40 am
Oscar Duck wrote:ah - the design to the Pilatus Porter..
Fri Jul 25, 2008 5:19 am
Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:26 pm
A quote of a quote of a quote from this archive:
http://www.wwi-models.org/mail-archive/archive.1998/849
">From the Bowers and McDowell book, "Triplanes":
Mannesmann (Poll) Triplane
This giant triplane seems to have been a dying gasp of the
German Air Force. It was meant to carry leaflets across
the Atlantic Ocean to drop on New York City. While the
designer's name seems to be a bit of a mystery, it is believed
that it was the work of Villehad Forssman who had worked
previously for Siemens-Schuckert. The unfinished aircraft
was discovered in a hanger after the Armistance by the
Allied Control Commissions inspection team.
A section of the plane and a wheel 8 feet in diameter where
sent back to England for study. The span of the center wing
was 165 ft (50.3 m); the top and bottom wing were of equal
span but quite a bit smaller. It was to have tandem mounted
engines - eight on the center wing and a pair on the lower
wing. The fuselage was long and slender, mounted between the
center wing directly above the engines on the lower wing.
The fuselage was 150 ft (45.7 m) long.
An eighty-hour flight endurance was planned (editorial
comment: Wow!), and provision was made to carry such a load
of fuel. The overall structure was heavy but extremely
weak. No interal bracing cable was installed, and while it
was covered with two layers of three-ply wood which made it
as heavy as a boat, these did little to add strength. In
addition, the ailerons were too small, the center of gravity
way aft, and the elevators would have been ineffective. So,
it is doubtful it would have flown if it had been completed.
That's all they wrote:
Cheers and all,
Bill Shatzer"
Sat Jul 26, 2008 6:30 pm
Sat Jul 26, 2008 7:25 pm
that's what i was thinking!!Oscar Duck wrote:ah - the design to the Pilatus Porter..