PDA

View Full Version : Tu-4 Soviet Copy of the B-29...



XyZspineZyX
07-10-2003, 10:52 PM
http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ/Tu-4.html

"World War 2 had been over only for a little over a year when an article appeared in the November 11, 1946 issue of the Berlin newspaper Der Kurier claiming that the Soviet Union was manufacturing a bolt-for-bolt copy of the B-29 in a series of factories located in the Urals."

"This report was widely disbelieved, since the Soviet Union was at the time thought incapable of manufacturing an aircraft as large and sophisticated as the B-29. However, the report was given more credence when it was revealed that some Soviet agents had been attempting to purchase B-29 tires, wheels, and brake assemblies in the USA...The transport version was designated Tu-70, but it was only revealed later that the designation of the bomber was Tu-4."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Oleg, since you have decided to include other post-war planes like the Lockheed P-80A Shooting Star and what-if? planes like the Go-229 / Horten Ho IX, why not consider including the Tu-4/B-29 in FB at some point?

Wouldn't modeling it seem like a logical add-on?

Thank you for your response in advance. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ/rafaq_tu4.jpg

Cheers,

<CENTER>http://home1.gte.net/vze23gyt/files/p51_jaws.jpg</CENTER><CENTER><font size="+1"><div style="width:500;color:#FF2211;fontsize:11pt;filter:shado w Blur[color=red,strength=2)">Coming soon...</div></center></font><FONT color="#59626B">[b]<center>http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/post-2-1057134794.gif</center>

Message Edited on 07/10/03‚ 06:10PM by TaZ_Attack

Message Edited on 07/11/0301:10AM by TaZ_Attack

XyZspineZyX
07-10-2003, 10:52 PM
http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ/Tu-4.html

"World War 2 had been over only for a little over a year when an article appeared in the November 11, 1946 issue of the Berlin newspaper Der Kurier claiming that the Soviet Union was manufacturing a bolt-for-bolt copy of the B-29 in a series of factories located in the Urals."

"This report was widely disbelieved, since the Soviet Union was at the time thought incapable of manufacturing an aircraft as large and sophisticated as the B-29. However, the report was given more credence when it was revealed that some Soviet agents had been attempting to purchase B-29 tires, wheels, and brake assemblies in the USA...The transport version was designated Tu-70, but it was only revealed later that the designation of the bomber was Tu-4."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Oleg, since you have decided to include other post-war planes like the Lockheed P-80A Shooting Star and what-if? planes like the Go-229 / Horten Ho IX, why not consider including the Tu-4/B-29 in FB at some point?

Wouldn't modeling it seem like a logical add-on?

Thank you for your response in advance. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ/rafaq_tu4.jpg

Cheers,

<CENTER>http://home1.gte.net/vze23gyt/files/p51_jaws.jpg</CENTER><CENTER><font size="+1"><div style="width:500;color:#FF2211;fontsize:11pt;filter:shado w Blur[color=red,strength=2)">Coming soon...</div></center></font><FONT color="#59626B">[b]<center>http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/post-2-1057134794.gif</center>

Message Edited on 07/10/03‚ 06:10PM by TaZ_Attack

Message Edited on 07/11/0301:10AM by TaZ_Attack

XyZspineZyX
07-11-2003, 06:54 PM
And then let's ask for an A bomb and Hiroshima map and watch the moralizing start again.

Sorry...I couldn't help myself!

XyZspineZyX
07-11-2003, 06:55 PM
Yeah, good stuff - I'm all for this one being flyable http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
07-11-2003, 08:08 PM
A flyable B-29 (or Tu-4), would be nice. I would elect to have WW2 Russian bombers made flyable first (Il-4, Pe-2, etc).

--------------------------------
Any landing you can walk away from is a good one.

XyZspineZyX
07-11-2003, 08:53 PM
Jim wrote:: (Tu~2 edited in by plagarizer)
- I would elect to have WW2 Russian bombers made flyable first (Il-4, Pe-2, Tu~2,etc)

Agreed. And we can survive without Pe~8, for now.

Lets remember the Great Flood, the Fw190 thread Deluge. Just counted four (4) Russian bomber threads. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif All Russian bomber posts should go in one (1) Russian bomber thread in Oleg's Recovery Room.

Study the ancient Prophecies:: the first sign of the End Times will occur on the day the P~51D is releaced with Soviet gunsight ***(thats if P~51D was under Lend Leace I dunno).




Message Edited on 07/11/0307:54PM by LEXX_Luthor

XyZspineZyX
07-11-2003, 09:13 PM
If enough data has survived to make a historicaly
correct tu-4 then let's bring it on

BUMP

<center>

http://www.moomin.fi/pics/logo.gif </p>
<center>

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Death you die from, me you have to live with/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </p>

XyZspineZyX
07-11-2003, 11:17 PM
The production of Tu-4 lead to improvement in the metal industry, new safety factors, and lots of other stuff.

I remember reading that a few hours after Hiroshima Truman phoned Stalin and informed him that "we just used a very destructive weapon of new kind." Then Stalin phoned a number in Moscow and said only that:"Kurchatov must hurry!"

Kurchatov led the atom bomb programm of Russia.

You have no right of 3+ monitors.
You have no right of Cray Supercomputers.
You have no right of B&Z.
You have no right of whining against Trim on a slider(TOS).
You have the right of Trim on a slider.
You have the right of bat turn.

RBJ "Great Brow" FB Marshal


Ich bin ein Wurgerwhiner

1C Ankanor, Defender Of The Truth

XyZspineZyX
07-11-2003, 11:28 PM
Ankanor wrote:
- The production of Tu-4 lead to improvement in the
- metal industry, new safety factors, and lots of
- other stuff.
-
- I remember reading that a few hours after Hiroshima
- Truman phoned Stalin and informed him that "we just
- used a very destructive weapon of new kind." Then
- Stalin phoned a number in Moscow and said only
- that:"Kurchatov must hurry!"
-
- Kurchatov led the atom bomb programm of Russia.


Of course, Kurchatov did have the help of several spies in Los Alamos. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Anyway, the TU-4/B-29 should be definately a consideration with all of the late-war uber planes that are or will be added - how do you think the "Il-4, Pe-2, Tu~2,etc" would stack-up against the Secret Weapons of the LW or the P-80 for that matter? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

With the speed and altitude of the TU-4/B-29, it would be the only bomber to stand a chance against these WWII fantasy aircraft.

Of course, the B-17 would be nice too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

It would be great to re-create the GREAT bomb-runs from CFS1...with REAL bombs this time, in the 1945-1946 time period.

Anyone remember those Interlaken to Berne spectacles? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Cheers,

<CENTER>http://home1.gte.net/vze23gyt/files/p51_jaws.jpg</CENTER><CENTER><font size="+1"><div style="width:500;color:#FF2211;fontsize:11pt;filter:shado w Blur[color=red,strength=2)">Coming soon...</div></center></font><FONT color="#59626B">[b]<center>http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/post-2-1057134794.gif</center>

Message Edited on 07/11/0306:33PM by TaZ_Attack

XyZspineZyX
07-13-2003, 10:39 PM
8u/\/\|* /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

(|-|33r$,

<CENTER>http://home1.gte.net/vze23gyt/files/p51_jaws.jpg</CENTER><CENTER><font size="+1"><div style="width:500;color:#FF2211;fontsize:11pt;filter:shado w Blur[color=red,strength=2)">73h /\/\u$7@n9 |*wn-/_ j00</div></center></font><FONT color="#59626B">[b]

XyZspineZyX
07-13-2003, 11:19 PM
TaZ_Attack wrote:
- Anyway, the TU-4/B-29 should be definately a
- consideration with all of the late-war uber planes
- that are or will be added - how do you think the
- "Il-4, Pe-2, Tu~2,etc" would stack-up against the
- Secret Weapons of the LW or the P-80 for that
- matter?

I think the Tu-2 would still be OK for then.

And, in fact, I don't like strategic bombers...

Would be better to consider modelling the Mig-9, Yak-15, Yak-17, Su-9, and others, as these are the counterparts to those US and German 1946 planes.

But still, I agree with what was said above, as I'm not a fan of hypothetical 1946 scenarios, I would rather ask to have WWII (tactical) bombers modelled first (A-20s, Il-4s, Pe-2s, Tu-2s, Su-2s,...), and I'm sure it would be easier to make flyable the existing AI planes among these than to start from zero the modelling of new planes...


P.S. : And I don't forget the Il-10 which would be a great 1945 attack plane (even if priority should, in my mind, go to the existing AI planes).

XyZspineZyX
07-14-2003, 04:11 AM
Ernest Rutherford pretty much did the work he created a model of a atom discovered that elements can be changed and split the atom, tho ild be happy if no one managed to turn all that into a bomb.

http://lamppost.mine.nu/ahclan/files/sigs/spitwhiners1.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-14-2003, 04:39 AM
---> http://nuketesting.enviroweb.org/hew/

XyZspineZyX
07-14-2003, 10:34 AM
F86H, F89, F84F that's are Tu 4 real counterpart!

XyZspineZyX
07-14-2003, 11:43 AM
Tu-4 would be great.

I'd prefer that non post war bombers be completed first.

No A-Bomb!!!
Cripes, can you imagine what would happen in the online servers if the A-Bomb was available. I can picture nimrods/team killers detinating the thing while they are still on the runway just for chuckles

XyZspineZyX
07-14-2003, 12:54 PM
The template for the Tu-4's was from an earlier US B-29's based in China for raids on Japan. Landed by mistake in Russian territory and was interned. Russia wasn't at war with Japan, till the last months of WW2. Definitely built after the war and not really available till 1947.

XyZspineZyX
07-14-2003, 04:10 PM
Hank_Himmler wrote:
- The template for the Tu-4's was from an earlier US
- B-29's based in China for raids on Japan. Landed by
- mistake in Russian territory and was interned.
- Russia wasn't at war with Japan, till the last
- months of WW2. Definitely built after the war and
- not really available till 1947.

FireBird77 wrote:
- F86H, F89, F84F that's are Tu 4 real counterpart!

I think you guys are missing the point here. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

First off, the Boeing B-29 was designed in 1940, the first one built made its maiden flight on September 21, 1942 and they became operational in PTO in late 1944...

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/air_power/ap20.htm

The TU-4 is a copy of the B-29, a true WWII a/c, so why wouldn't it be an obvious add-on for the IL-2 series seeing that the P-80 and other never-flown secret weapons of the LW are about to be added.

The TU-4/B-29 is a MUST add-on, IMHO. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

(|-|33r$,

<CENTER>http://home1.gte.net/vze23gyt/files/p51_jaws.jpg</CENTER><CENTER><font size="+1"><div style="width:500;color:#FF2211;fontsize:11pt;filter:shado w Blur[color=red,strength=2)">73h /\/\u$7@n6 |*wn-/_ j00</div></center></font><FONT color="#59626B">[b]

XyZspineZyX
07-14-2003, 04:41 PM
the tu4 is not a 100% copy of B-29

Nikko

XyZspineZyX
07-14-2003, 04:45 PM
Niberto wrote:
- the tu4 is not a 100% copy of B-29


You're right, it was a "bolt-for-bolt copy of the B-29"!

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif



(|-|33r$,

<CENTER>http://home1.gte.net/vze23gyt/files/p51_jaws.jpg</CENTER><CENTER><font size="+1"><div style="width:500;color:#FF2211;fontsize:11pt;filter:shado w Blur[color=red,strength=2)">73h /\/\u$7@n6 |*wn-/_ j00</div></center></font><FONT color="#59626B">[b]

XyZspineZyX
07-15-2003, 02:12 AM
ElektroFredrik wrote:
- If enough data has survived to make a historicaly
- correct tu-4 then let's bring it on
-
- BUMP


Why not just model a B-29 with two differnt names? It's the same aircraft!!!

XyZspineZyX
07-15-2003, 03:21 AM
I agree its a remake of the b29 by the time it was done "couple months" the b29s were quicker, b29s and the tupolev 4 were identical and theres many gunner a cockpit photos out of the b29.

Both named differently is the best bet


http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter



Message Edited on 07/15/0302:21AM by LeadSpitter_

XyZspineZyX
07-15-2003, 08:52 PM
VOL_Jon wrote:
-
- ElektroFredrik wrote:
-- If enough data has survived to make a historicaly
-- correct tu-4 then let's bring it on
--
-- BUMP
-
-
- Why not just model a B-29 with two differnt names?
- It's the same aircraft!!!


Funny, that's exactly what I was thinking. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Cheers,

<CENTER>http://home1.gte.net/vze23gyt/files/p51_jaws.jpg</CENTER><CENTER><font size="+1"><div style="width:500;color:#FF2211;fontsize:11pt;filter:shado w Blur[color=red,strength=2)">73h /\/\u$7@/\/6 |*\/\//\/-/_ j00</div></center></font><FONT color="#59626B">[b]

XyZspineZyX
07-16-2003, 12:27 AM
1948 if I am correct, at the Tushino parade.

by the way, there`s a story from a co-pilot in Tu-4: they had a camera in the cockpit. not some special type, but just an ordinary one. They never had to use it. It turned out that the plane used for reproduction had a camera in it. the american co-pilot must have been a spare-time photographer... LOL

You have no right of 3+ monitors.
You have no right of Cray Supercomputers.
You have no right of B&Z.
You have no right of whining against Trim on a slider(TOS).
You have the right of Trim on a slider.
You have the right of bat turn.

RBJ "Great Brow" FB Marshal


Ich bin ein Wurgerwhiner

1C Ankanor, Defender Of The Truth

XyZspineZyX
07-18-2003, 02:12 AM
the yoke even said "boeing" damn ruskies have to copy things to maike it good

Leutnant Schlageter

KG 54 "Totenlopf Operations Offizer

XyZspineZyX
07-19-2003, 09:38 AM
Ankanor wrote:
- 1948 if I am correct, at the Tushino parade...

Does anyone know what this guy is talking about?



Cheers,

<CENTER>http://home1.gte.net/vze23gyt/files/p51_jaws.jpg</CENTER><CENTER><font size="+1"><div style="width:500;color:#FF2211;fontsize:11pt;filter:shado w Blur[color=red,strength=2)">73h /\/\u$7@/\/6 |*\/\//\/-/_ j00</div></center></font><FONT color="#59626B">[b]

Message Edited on 07/19/0304:49AM by TaZ_Attack

XyZspineZyX
07-19-2003, 05:50 PM
- Does anyone know what this guy is talking about?

I was about to say - why don't you ask him /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Instead I did a google for Tushino

Found this very interesting place:

http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ

They have a page on the Tu-4

http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ/Tu-4.html

Apparently Tushino ia an airfield - and the parade Ankanor talks about is a once a year event where VVS show of their material

Ankanor is off by a year, according to this article - Tu-4 was presented 1947 at the Tushino parade

Nice site - they have a mpg of a cobra /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif The mpgs should be viewed at 8fps - still need to figure out how to do that

BTW. Sdraveii Ankanor - kak si drugar ? (that's it - I used used my entire Bulgarian vocabulary - except for all the dirty ones of course /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif )



Message Edited on 07/19/0304:55PM by Tuposti_Yanev

XyZspineZyX
07-19-2003, 06:34 PM
TaZ_Attack wrote:
-
- Niberto wrote:
-- the tu4 is not a 100% copy of B-29
-
-
- You're right, it was a "bolt-for-bolt copy of the
- B-29"!

"While Tupolev remained attentive to certain external cosmetic flourishes to suggest strict compliance with Stalin's order for an exact copy (a repair patch in the fuselage was included and the interior paint scheme duplicated exactly), he often went his own way on the more critical, less obvious components. Stalin's acquiescence on the matter of using the metric system had been a major concession. Other concessions followed in engines, radar, and armament."

http://www.airspacemag.com/ASM/Mag/Index/2001/FM/TU-4.html

XyZspineZyX
07-20-2003, 11:37 PM
Tuposti_Yanev wrote:
-- Does anyone know what this guy is talking about?
-
- I was about to say - why don't you ask him /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
-
- Instead I did a google for Tushino
-
- Found this very interesting place:
-
- <a href="http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ"
- target=_blank>http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAF
- AQ</a>
-
-
- They have a page on the Tu-4
-
- <a
- href="http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAFAQ/Tu-4.
- html"
- target=_blank>http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/RAF
- AQ/Tu-4.html</a>
-
-
- Apparently Tushino ia an airfield - and the parade
- Ankanor talks about is a once a year event where VVS
- show of their material
-
- Ankanor is off by a year, according to this article
- - Tu-4 was presented 1947 at the Tushino parade
-
- Nice site - they have a mpg of a cobra /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif The mpgs should be
- viewed at 8fps - still need to figure out how to do
- that
-
- BTW. Sdraveii Ankanor - kak si drugar ? (that's it -
- I used used my entire Bulgarian vocabulary - except
- for all the dirty ones of course /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif )
-
-
-
- Message Edited on 07/19/03‚ 04:55PM by
- Tuposti_Yanev

Ok I am not good with the years, used to be/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif maybe it`s 1947, the year when the Tu-4 was first officially shown in public. It happened at the Annual Tushino Air parade.

Yanev, I`m fine buddy! nice to meet you again. the good of bulgarian dirty words is that they cannot ban you for that./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Well, it goes for almost all other languages...

"Ford, how many escape capsules we have?"
"None."
"Did you count them?"
"Twice."

Galaxy Hitchhiker`s guide.

Still being:
1C Ankanor, Defender Of The Truth

XyZspineZyX
07-21-2003, 02:33 AM
I happened to watch a show on about this on the history channel, it was called "stealing the superfortress"

3 b29's landed in russia becuase of dammage or some sort of emergency

the ruskies interned them and thier crew(the crew of them were held for 6months), and repared them and then used one for training, took one completely apart, i think it was some 100,000+ parts, and the other they used for a reference or something

they had trouble making the metal skin for the plane, and they couldnt make the tires and landing gear so they bought that from america's postwar surplus

it took them just about as long to copy it as it took to be designed in the begining

they didnt join the war in japan untill the first atomic bomb was dropped then they joined, but the war was practically over then

all of this is from memory, and it could be slightly wrong, i hope someone else in these forums saw the show and remembers more

but i would like to see a b29 in FB

also, didnt firebombs and regular bombs from b-29s kill bout as many in japan as the atomic bombs?




----------------------------------------

http://www.microworks.net/pacific/aviation/xfl-1.jpg

XyZspineZyX
07-21-2003, 07:26 AM
To copy B-29 was a great mistake of Stalin. Tupolev was developing already better thatn B-29 bomber, but Stalin as always didn't trust and ordered Tupolebv to copy.... However I understand Stalin ... He asked for quickest solution (bomber) for the Soviet nuclear bomb.

Oleg Maddox
1C:Maddox Games

XyZspineZyX
07-21-2003, 08:09 AM
Oleg_Maddox wrote:
- To copy B-29 was a great mistake of Stalin. Tupolev
- was developing already better thatn B-29 bomber, but
- Stalin as always didn't trust and ordered Tupolebv
- to copy.... However I understand Stalin ... He asked
- for quickest solution (bomber) for the Soviet
- nuclear bomb.

Sure./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif The B-29 was a big step ahead in heavy bomber development and the improvements layed new marks on a very high level of preformance, production lines and new materials and some other stuff too. Sorry Oleg, neither Tupolev nor other Soviet engineer bureaus had much experinece on 4-engined buff like the Americans had. The influence of the B-29 layed the starting point for the Soviet bomber program up to the Tu-20/95.

http://www.geocities.com/kimurakai/SIG/262_01011.jpg


"Kimura, tu as une t√¬™te carr√©e comme un sale boche!"

XyZspineZyX
07-21-2003, 08:49 AM
Just one little problem with the Tu-4..

only a single example exists now, in rather poor shape, in pernament storage in the outdoors at Monino, so might be hard to copy.

of course for cockpit shots one just has to look at a B-29 picture, heh.

Spets

<center> -A Proud Member of Sparky's Post Wh0res.- </center> <center> <center><a href="java_script:alert['Oink')"> http://spets.hostmb.com/blitz_anim.gif (java_script:alert['Oink!'))</center><center> http://home-1.concepts.nl/~wbn0066/images/emoticons/grenade.gif </center>

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 12:03 AM
Sadly, I don't think we'll be seeing the Tu-4 or the B-29...seems it might cause a disturbance in the Farce. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

http://www.ttrove.com/images/Standups/427.jpg

Cheers,

<CENTER>http://home1.gte.net/vze23gyt/files/p51_jaws.jpg</CENTER><CENTER><font size="+1"><div style="width:500;color:#FF2211;fontsize:11pt;filter:shado w Blur[color=red,strength=2)">73h /\/\u$7@/\/6 |*\/\//\/-/_ j00</div></center></font><FONT color="#59626B">[b]

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 12:32 AM
Who are they trying to fool? They only want Tu~4 so they can slap white star skins on it and call it B~29. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 01:51 AM
No - we want the B-29 so we can slap a red star on the side of it and call it a Tu-4 ! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-23-2003, 02:32 AM
Yeah, I remember the good ole days of CFS1. It would be great to fly those runs again. Im for a B17 and some ponies to fly against the D9's and Ju88's. All this other stuff is great but I'm hung up on the European theatre. North Africa was a fun add on. That allowed some carrier flights and some other planes people are asking for. I would like to see the planes of the times made flyable and not so much the post war planes.

...and once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward,
for there you have been and there you long to return.
~leonardo de vinci

XyZspineZyX
07-25-2003, 07:55 PM
Rifleman75 wrote:
- I happened to watch a show on about this on the
- history channel, it was called "stealing the
- superfortress"

I remember watching that show. There were some western observers that Stalin had invited to the Tushino Air parade. As the first 3 Tu-4 flew over head the observers just thought that these were the missing B29s. Then a forth "civilian passenger version" of the Tu4 flew overhead, followed by a few more Tu4s...

I'm all for giving the russians Tu4s in a '46 add-on. But the Americans should get B36's.

First flew in late 1946.

The program was started in 1941 but was taken off the fast track when Britian didn't fall.



http://www.zianet.com/tmorris/6BWB-36formationbig.jpg



The B36 also carried the largest bomb ever dropped, the 46,000 lbs. (about 20,900kg) cloudmaker.

XyZspineZyX
07-25-2003, 09:17 PM
August 8, 1946 first flight of the XB-36 prototype.
August 28, 1947 first flight of the serial B-36A

XyZspineZyX
07-25-2003, 10:05 PM
FPS_Stierlitz wrote:
- August 8, 1946 first flight of the XB-36 prototype.
- August 28, 1947 first flight of the serial B-36A

Isn't that what I said?

I just think that in keeping with the "what if" theme of a 1946 war, an AI B-36 would be a cool addition. I could give the germans and thier wonderous flying matchines something to try and intercept at 40,000ft before it clobbered Berlin.

I don't think many people would want it to be flyable. As one pilot said-

"it is like sitting on your front porch and flying your house around."

XyZspineZyX
07-25-2003, 10:13 PM
If during 1941-1945 it looked like the wars in Europe and the Pacific where going to last until 1946, they could have finished the B-36 in time to see action.

So, (to stay on topic) let the Russians have thier Tu4's.


Info I found about the development of the B-36 from airspace mag.

..........................

In the spring of 1941, German troops held most of western Europe and seemed likely to conquer Britain next. The U.S. Army asked airframe builders for an airplane that could take off from American soil, bomb Germany, and fly home.

The most promising design came from Consolidated Aircraft in San Diego, builder of the B-24 Liberator, which was just entering service with U.S. and British air forces. Consolidated proposed a quantum leap over the B-17 and B-24 heavy bombers as well as Boeing's next-generation "very heavy" B-29 Superfortress. The B-36 was to be a mega-bomber, spanning 230 feet from wingtip to wingtip. It would cross the Atlantic, enter German airspace at 300 mph, and drop 10,000 pounds of bombs from 40,000 feet, too high for flak or fighters to trouble it. Impressed, the Army ordered a pair of prototypes on November 15, 1941.

Three weeks later, the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, and the U.S. suddenly found itself fighting a two-ocean war. The B-36 went on the back burner while Consolidated turned out thousands of its proven Liberators. The B-36 suffered another setback when its facilities were moved to Texas, and yet another when the designers were asked to build a transport based on the bomber.

While Europe was pounded from bases in England, Japan was to be targeted by the Boeing Superfortress flying from China. The Japanese set out to capture the Chinese airfields--and thereby moved the B-36 back to the front burner. From Hawaii, it could bomb Tokyo as it had once been expected to bomb Berlin. In June 1943 the Army asked for 100 copies of the mega-bomber, with the first to arrive in the summer of 1945.

The U.S. Marine Corps moved faster than Convair (Consolidated merged with Vultee in 1943, and the new name was coined then). Shortly after Guam, Saipan, and Tinian were in U.S. hands, the Superforts began their terrible punishment of the Japanese home islands. The Pacific war ended six months earlier than expected--and six days before the rollout of the first B-36






Message Edited on 07/25/0302:35PM by Clay.Pigeon

XyZspineZyX
07-25-2003, 10:50 PM
Clay.Pigeon wrote:
-
-
- I don't think many people would want it to be
- flyable. As one pilot said-
-
- "it is like sitting on your front porch and flying
- your house around."
-----------------------------------------------------


But it would be really cool if at least we'll get it as an AI target. Personally, I would really like to fly this "aluminum overcast" monster /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

B-29 (Tu-4) also would be nice



Message Edited on 07/25/0309:51PM by FPS_Stierlitz

XyZspineZyX
07-25-2003, 11:18 PM
FPS_Stierlitz wrote:

- But it would be really cool if at least we'll get it
- as an AI target. Personally, I would really like to
- fly this "aluminum overcast"

hehe... me too.

Also, it wasn't just aluminum, a large part of the B36 structure was made out of magnesium, which unfortunately made for some rather spectacular crashes.

I think this would be perfect for the same group of us who are flying the TB-3 now. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-25-2003, 11:40 PM
- Also, it wasn't just aluminum, a large part of the
- B36 structure was made out of magnesium, which
- unfortunately made for some rather spectacular
- crashes.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Cheers,

<CENTER>http://home1.gte.net/vze23gyt/files/p51_jaws.jpg</CENTER><CENTER><font size="+1"><div style="width:500;color:#FF2211;fontsize:11pt;filter:shado w Blur[color=red,strength=2)">73h /\/\u$7@/\/6 |*\/\//\/-/_ j00</div></center></font><FONT color="#59626B">[b]

XyZspineZyX
07-26-2003, 09:45 PM
i think it would be great to add a b-29 to the game.

XyZspineZyX
07-27-2003, 08:26 PM
Clay.Pigeon wrote:
-
- "it is like sitting on your front porch and flying
- your house around."
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

That sounds like the Mil-24 Hind...

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 08:53 AM
jj8325 wrote:
- i think it would be great to add a b-29 to the game.

Shhhh...we want the Tu-4! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Cheers,

<CENTER>http://home1.gte.net/vze23gyt/files/p51_jaws.jpg</CENTER><CENTER><font size="+1"><div style="width:500;color:#FF2211;fontsize:11pt;filter:shado w Blur[color=red,strength=2)">73h /\/\u$7@/\/6 |*\/\//\/-/_ j00</div></center></font><FONT color="#59626B">[b]

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 07:46 PM
I just bought a book on the B36 called "magnesium overcast" I found if in the 50% off pile at the local Barnes and Nobel... Amazing

I have been thinking of doing the exterior models for the B29 and the B36. The exterior shapes are simular and I don't think it would be to hard to do both meshes at the same time. (i've been working in the game industry for 8 years now and have my own copy of max)

If everyone is cool with that I'll get on it. Although I don't know if I will ever have enough time to make the interiors, but we'll see.

Who do I get in contact with the over at IL-center to volunteer my time?

-Clay

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 07:59 PM
What I ment to say is, I would realy like to model the AI Tu-4 for a 1946 campain. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 10:48 PM
TaZ_Attack wrote:
-
- jj8325 wrote:
-- i think it would be great to add a b-29 to the game.
-
- Shhhh...we want the Tu-4! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
-
- Cheers,
-


arent the tu-4 and b-29 pretty much the same plane? i dont know much about the tu-4 but ive read that the two bombers where nearly the same except for minor modifications. the only thing is that the b-29 was used in WWII where as the tu-4 wasnt. correct me if im wrong






Message Edited on 07/29/0301:51PM by jj8325

XyZspineZyX
07-29-2003, 11:11 PM
They are the same plane, Thats the nice thing about it, add the Tu4 to the game we get a B29 thrown if for free.

XyZspineZyX
07-30-2003, 12:01 AM
jj8325 wrote:

- ive read that
- the two bombers where nearly the same except for
- minor modifications.


As far as game play goes, the only major change between the two is that Stalin replaced the american 50cal machine guns for 23mm cannons.

XyZspineZyX
07-30-2003, 07:40 PM
PUNT!

Cheers,

<CENTER>http://home1.gte.net/vze23gyt/files/p51_jaws.jpg</CENTER><CENTER><font size="+1"><div style="width:500;color:#FF2211;fontsize:11pt;filter:shado w Blur[color=red,strength=2)">73h /\/\u$7@/\/6 |*\/\//\/-/_ j00</div></center></font><FONT color="#59626B">[b]

XyZspineZyX
07-31-2003, 02:08 AM
I thought that someone was working on the B29, but he might have vanished in a flash of purple smoke, which is the only logical explanation for many of the projects announced at Il2center.

Didn't Hitler tell Doenitz (sic) that there would definitely be no war until 1946 at least? And then threw all plans into disarray by invading Poland in 1939 and Britain objecting. How about a 'war didn't start till 1946' scenario? France might have had more decent military stuff, the Kriegsmarine would have lots of U-boats, Britain would have Hurricanes and Spitfires and a successor to the Battle. Might be an interesting scenario.

Philips CDRW

Posting vacuous messages since 2002

XyZspineZyX
07-31-2003, 02:10 AM
Also, for cool American bombers, the B-35!

Gibbage started one, but he might sell it to CFS3.

Philips CDRW

Posting vacuous messages since 2002

XyZspineZyX
07-31-2003, 11:22 PM
Clay.Pigeon wrote:
-
-
- As far as game play goes, the only major change
- between the two is that Stalin replaced the american
- 50cal machine guns for 23mm cannons.
-
-
-
-

was every 50cal replaced? i thought that instead of 10xMachine guns and 1x20mm in the b-29,there were 5x23mm cannons. i would expect the b-29 to have better armament then especially the b-29a with 12 machine guns and 1 20mm.

XyZspineZyX
08-01-2003, 08:39 AM
I looked around and I found one site that said the Tu-4 had 5 cannons. Another site said that the Russians First used 20mm cannons then replaced them with 23mm cannons a few years later.

But every drawing of the Tu-4 I could find looks like it shows 2 guns per turret.

Still, I couldn't find a picture that showed a good view of the turrets. But this Tu-4 has a sign in front of it.

..............

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/bomber/ru_monino_aircraft_tu4_01.jpg


http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/bomber/ru_monino_aircraft_tu4_specs_01.jpg


..............

I believe it says that this 1947 version of the Tu-4 had 10 23mm cannons. Which in a formation, would be much better then the B-29's machine guns, IMHO.

But turrets on bombers where soon to be dropped all together. I think that the Tu-95 BEAR and the B-36 were the last two bombers to have more then the vestigial guns that hung on the tails of bombers for the next few decades.

I am guessing that the first sourse we both found realy ment to say that the Tu4 had 5 turrets with 23mm cannons,

-Clay



Message Edited on 08/01/03‚ 12:41AM by Clay.Pigeon

Message Edited on 08/01/03‚ 12:42AM by Clay.Pigeon

Message Edited on 08/01/03‚ 12:43AM by Clay.Pigeon

Message Edited on 08/01/0312:44AM by Clay.Pigeon