PDA

View Full Version : Douglas Home Runs



SkyChimp
07-20-2005, 07:46 PM
I was thinking of the US aircraft company that could claim to have been the most successful ever. In terms of the sheer number of success stories, who would it be? Lockheed? Grumman? North American/Rockwell? Boeing? Curtiss? I don't think so. Only one company stood out in my mind as a company that produced superlative designs time and time again. You don't hear the company name much, but names like Dauntless, Dakota, SkyRaider, Phantom are names that stand out like beacons. So, here's my reminder of just how good this company, Douglas, and its subsidiary Northrop, and partner company McDonnell, was:

Douglas DT-2
http://www.oldgloryprints.com/World_Cruisers.jpg

Northrop Gamma
http://www.airminded.net/alpha/gamma_skch_flt.jpg

Douglas B-18 Bolo
http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/modern_flight/b18.jpg

Douglas DC-3
http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Aerospace/DC-3/Aero29G1.jpg

Douglas Dauntless
http://aeroweb.brooklyn.cuny.edu/images/scaled/aec01704.jpg

Douglas Devestator
http://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/Larkins/3529.jpg

Douglas Havoc
http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/modern_flight/a20g.jpg

Douglas DC-4
http://www.shanaberger.com/images/R5D_1.jpg

Douglas DC-5
http://www.navfltsm.addr.com/klm_dc5.jpg

Douglas A-26 Invader
http://www.shanaberger.com/images/A-26_4.jpg

Douglas B-24
http://www.military.cz/usa/air/war/bomber/b42/xb42_m.jpg

Douglas AD Skyraider
http://aeroweb.brooklyn.cuny.edu/images/scaled/aec01228.jpg

Douglas DC-6
http://www.ruudleeuw.com/dc6_n874ta.jpg

Douglas Skyknight
http://www.boeing.com/history/mdc/images/D4C-122744-1.jpg

Douglas Globemaster
http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Air_Power/cargo/AP19G5.jpg

Douglas Skyray
http://www.ccdemo.info/AircraftPix/F4DSide2.jpg

Douglas Skywarrior
http://www.milairpix.com/mil_planes/skyw_2.jpg

Douglas Skyhawk
http://www.skyhawk.org/specials/homepage-va153coralsea65.jpg

Douglas DC-8
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ab/Dryden.dc8.750pix.jpg

Douglas DC-9
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e1/DC-9_UR-CBY.JPG/800px-DC-9_UR-CBY.JPG

McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom
http://www.afnews.af.mil/products/history/f4.jpg

DC-10
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5d/Bangladesh.dc-10.750pix.jpg

McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle
http://www.af.mil/media/photodb/web/web_021105-O-9999G-038.jpg

McDonnell Douglas F-18 Hornet
http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/factfile/aircraft/fa18c.gif

Ironic thing is, these barely scratch the surface. I've skipped lterally dozens of other planes produced by Douglas. And I didn't mention other subsidiaries, like Hughes Aircraft. The list of successful designs just goes on, and on, and on.

Boy, what a company.

wayno7777
07-20-2005, 08:44 PM
I think you left out Cessna and Piper on purpose?...jk... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif

wayno7777
07-20-2005, 08:46 PM
Btw, I'm partial to Lockheed...

Arms1
07-20-2005, 10:26 PM
ill try to get hold of some pics to post; my uncle was a crew member of the team that picked up air canadas first dc8 from them; they then flew it from ottawa to london and back setting flight time record that i believe still stands today. he actually had the mechanics grab the cormemorative plaque from that a/c before it was scrapped and still has it today. it is a pleasure to talk to the gentleman, he has just turned 88 and has forgotten more about civil aviation than most in the business know, regarding civil aviation from the 50's to the 70's

heywooood
07-20-2005, 10:52 PM
Chimp - simply on the basis of the DC-3 and the F4 Phantom is Douglas the all time US winner in my own humble oppinion.

The monumental impact of the DC-3 sets it apart from all others, as a commercial airliner, as a cargo hauler, and lets not forget ol' spooky.

http://www.centercomp.com/dc3/gallery/collections/target/target11.jpg

The best dam airplane ever. (http://www.centercomp.com/dc3/)

Kocur_
07-21-2005, 08:26 AM
Ed Heinemann http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

airdale1960
07-21-2005, 10:09 AM
I've seen AC-47 "Spooky". I was stationed at Gunter AFS, Alabama in 1986. I lived in base housing just across the RR tracks from the Senior NCO Academy, where it was on static display.

wayno7777
07-21-2005, 10:06 PM
I will concede the DC-3\C-47...

woofiedog
07-22-2005, 01:59 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Great Posting SkyChimp... a A-26 Invader to fly in the Game would be Mint!

DaBallz
07-22-2005, 06:40 PM
Originally posted by woofiedog:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Great Posting SkyChimp... a A-26 Invader to fly in the Game would be Mint!

Junkers perhaps, or Dornier?

Boeing for example.....

Curtiss had dozens of early successes.

But for certain, the most important single design
and by far the most important tramsport plane ever built
the Douglas DC-1/2/3.

Da...

WarWolfe_1
07-22-2005, 07:36 PM
The monumental impact of the DC-3 sets it apart from all others, as a commercial airliner, as a cargo hauler

Don't forget that for a plane design Thats somewhere around 70 years old, there are still many flying for airliners ( mostly 3rd world country), SkyDiving, Mapping, Geography, Survey, and on, and on..........

Not bad Huh?

I hate to give it up http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif, but I think the Fighter would have to go the Mig series, There are still Mig19's, and 21's being found buried in the Desert of Iraq. Many more still flying with up start nations. These are fighters that have been passed from nation to nation like a drunk chic at a party also http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

woofiedog
07-23-2005, 12:48 AM
DaBallz... Junkers perhaps, or Dornier? We'll hopefully see these as flyable aircraft with BoB.
But as far as the A-26... just a Wishful thought on my part.
Although this aircraft did see action in WW2 in numbers. I haven't seen any posting about it being added to the Game.

woofiedog
07-23-2005, 12:54 AM
http://www.military.cz/usa/air/war/bomber/a26/a26_sm.jpg

The A-26 was the follow-on design to the A-20 and entered combat in late 1944. The type had early developmental difficulties, and it took 28 months to go from first flight to combat operations. After being redesignated as B-26 in 1948, it was the only attack airplane available when war broke out in Korea. Crews flew their first mission against North Korea on June 29, 1950, when they bombed an airfield at Pyongyang. Air Force B- 26s were credited with the destruction of 38,500 vehicles, 3,700 railway cars, 406 locomotives, and seven enemy aircraft on the ground in Korea. On September 14, 1951, while flying a night intruder mission, Capt. John S. Walmsley, Jr., attacked a North Korean supply train, but after his guns jammed he used his search light to light the way for his wingmen to finish destroying the train. Captain Walmsley was shot down, died, and was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor. On July 27, 1953, 24 minutes before the cease-fire was signed, a B-26 crew from the 3d Bomb Wing dropped the last bombs of the Korean War. Some holdover RB-26s were part of the initial cadre of aircraft sent to Vietnam as part of Operation Farm Gate. In the early 1960s, On-Mark Engineering converted approximately 40 aircraft into the B-26K Counter Invader for counterinsurgency missions in Vietnam. These aircraft were later redesignated A-26A because of an agreement with the Thai government that no bombers would be stationed there. This type was flown by more than a dozen other countries. A number of aircraft were converted into executive transports for the civilian market. The Navy version, designated JD-1, was used into the 1960s for target towing. Most Air National Guard planes were retired by 1957, but the last VB-26 was retired in 1972

http://www.military.cz/usa/air/war/bomber/a26/a26.jpg

General characteristics A-26B
Primary function Attack/bomber aircraft
Contractor Douglas Aircraft Company
Power plant Two Pratt&Whitney R-2800-27 Double Wasp 18-cylinder, twin-row radials engines
Thrust 2x 2,000 HP 2x 1,491 kW
Wingspan 70 ft 21.34 m
Length 50 ft 15.24 m
Height 18.5 ft 5.64 m
Wingarea 540 sq ft 50.17 sq m
Weight empty 22,850 lb 10,365 kg
max. 35,000 lb 15,876 kg
Speed 355 mph 571 km/h
Initial climb rate 2,001 ft/min 610 m/min
Ceiling 2,1200 ft 6,700 m
Range 1,800 miles 2,900 km
Armament 8-16x 12.7mm machine gun, 2725 kg external weapons
Crew Three
First Flight July 10, 1942
Date deployed 1944
Cost $172,000
Number built 2,452
General characteristics B-26K
Primary function Attack/bomber aircraft
Power plant Two Pratt&Whitney R-2800-103W engines
Wingspan 70 ft 21.34 m
Length 51.2 ft 15.60 m
Height 18.4 ft 5.60 m
Wingarea 540 sq ft 50.17 sq m
Weight empty 23,695 lb 10,748 kg
max. 43,380 lb 19,677 kg
Speed 365 mph 587 km/h
Initial climb rate 2,001 ft/min 610 m/min
Ceiling 21,505 ft 6,555 m
Range 1,330 miles 2,140 km
Armament 8x 12.7m machine gun, 5443 kg external weapons
Crew Two
Date deployed 1965
Number built 2,025 (all versions)

DaBallz
07-23-2005, 03:40 PM
A curious observation.
The R5D/DC-4 is just that.
It is in both USAF MATS and USN paint!
I got to note the missing DC-7.
The DC-7 was the ultimate piston airliner.
Powered by Wright R-3350 TCW series radials
it had a faster cruise speed than the top speed
of most prop airliners.
The R-3350 radials also represented the ultimate
in piston aircraft engines being "turbo compounded".
Turbo compounding was good for roughly 25%
in recovered exhaust power sent back to the crankshaft.

My comment suggesting Dornier and Junkers
centers on their inter war masterpieces, and monsterpieces.

Da...

p1ngu666
07-23-2005, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by DaBallz:
A curious observation.
The R5D/DC-4 is just that.
It is in both USAF MATS and USN paint!
I got to note the missing DC-7.
The DC-7 was the ultimate piston airliner.
Powered by Wright R-3350 TCW series radials
it had a faster cruise speed than the top speed
of most prop airliners.
The R-3350 radials also represented the ultimate
in piston aircraft engines being "turbo compounded".
Turbo compounding was good for roughly 25%
in recovered exhaust power sent back to the crankshaft.

My comment suggesting Dornier and Junkers
centers on their inter war masterpieces, and monsterpieces.

Da...

ahh but the napier nomad was better compound engine http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

VW-IceFire
07-23-2005, 06:43 PM
I really like the looks of that A-26. That'd be another nice plane to have...I really like flying the A-20G too.

Feathered_IV
07-23-2005, 06:50 PM
What, no Supermarine? Or are we only talking American companies?

woofiedog
07-23-2005, 11:01 PM
http://www.pilotfriend.com/aircraft%20performance/aero_engines/images/18hist.jpg

The Wright R-3350, completely state-of-the-art at the end of WWII, had been developed for the Boeing B-29 (the aircraft that dropped the atomic bomb on Japan) and was widely used in airline service through the middle sixties.

Near the end of World War II, someone got the idea to harness the wasted energy in engine exhaust by using the exhaust to drive a turbine that was coupled to the engine crankshaft. This process is called turbo-compounding. Although numerous engines had experimental test programs with turbo-compounding, only the Wright R-3350 Turbo Cyclone ever saw wide service. Referring to Figure 18, notice the three large pressure recovery turbines spaced equally around the aft side of the engine. Each of these was fed by the exhaust from six cylinders and contributed nearly 200 additional horsepower (600 total) to the engine output. Another advantage of turbo-compounding is the exceptionally good fuel consumption.
The final area of improvement is that of actual operation of the engine. When the R-3350 entered service in World War II, it often did not run more than 100 hours before having to be overhauled. In airline service, it would sometimes last over 3,000 hours. It is true that the early R-3350s had design problems that were fixed as the engine matured, but another important factor was how the engine was operated. The early engines were run very hard and very hot, often overheated, flown by inexperienced crews, and maintained by poorly trained mechanics. In airline service, engines were treated very well, kept cool, flown and maintained by experienced and competent crew. They were also better instrumented and better data was kept which allowed correlation between operational practice and longevity. One of the most useful instruments introduced during the war was the torquemeter. This device measured the amount of power actually being delivered to the propeller and allowed the crew to select power settings accurately and to lean the engine correctly to prevent overheating.

NonWonderDog
07-24-2005, 03:30 AM
The F-4 is a McDonnell design dating back to 1958, so it actually predates the McDonnell-Douglass merger. It doesn't really matter, though.

But if were talking about the McDonnell part of McDonnell-Douglass, you can't forget the Mercury and Gemini space capsules, Skylab, and the Saturn 1B and Delta rockets. What a company, indeed.

Gibbage1
07-24-2005, 05:04 AM
Douglas Devestator

Calling the Devestator a "hit" is beyond lunacy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif They were more of a hit for the Japanese pilots then they were for the poor airmen that flew them.

FI_Willie
07-24-2005, 06:45 PM
Those A3-D Skywarriors sure made my @ss pucker when I heard the announcement on the flight deck of "whale on final"..

Big b@astards shook the whole boat when they flopped down. Calling what they did on a carrier a landing is a bit of stretch of the imagination. When I saw one turning final to land, I hunted a hole to get into, or got a LOT of steel between me and the angle deck.

It got the nickname of "all 3 dead" ( had 3 crewmembers) because the escape chutes let you out UNDER the silly thing. Hard to get out when the gear was gone, the plane was on its' belly and ON FIRE!