I know that Howard Hughes flew the Spruce Goose for a short hop…just to prove that the thing would actually fly. But did it actually have enough power to carry the anticiapated loads? I’m guessing that the plane was seriously underpowered, and that very likely, it would have been a very dangerous plane to fly in emergency conditions. Plus, I’ve heard that landing seaplanes is quite difficult in anything more than a mild chop-big waves are a problem.
The CL-84 Dynavert seems like it fits the bill nicely too.
A tiltrotor(or tiltwing) turboprop from the 60s. The article’s a little light but it’s said to have been cancelled because even if the Canadian gov’t bought it, the Americans wouldn’t (the “Buy American” attitude was especially present at the time)
Of course, that wasn’t the only reason, like it’s modern decendent the V-22 Osprey, it had teething problems (a couple crashes, fatalities).
Obviously significantly smaller than the Osprey, but I’d bet that if it went in to production we’d have had tiltrotors bigger than the Osprey operational in the 80s.
Oh yeah, and the Avro Jetliner. Almost the first jet transport (lost to the DH Comet by less than 2 weeks)
It was basically the first regional jet… it was designed to be a smaller, shorter range counterpart to the DH Comet.
Nice jet from what I’ve read. A real pilot’s aircraft. Howard Hughes used it as his personal aircraft for a while… Of course many aircraft have had that distinction.
It was cancelled because the Canadian gov’t wanted more CF-100 Canuck inteceptors… Not that I’m complaining, about the CF-100 as it is possibly my favourite aircraft ever (gotta love those straight-wing jets.) I wish there were some left flying, even though I don’t fit in the cockpit (I’ve sat in 2 of them)
The Fireball didn’t have counter-rotating props, if that’s what you were referring to. I grew up within biking distance of the San Diego Aerospace Museum (the old one) and they used to have a Fireball on display. This was back in the day when the museum staff was two or three people for the whole set of displays. Me and my buddy Andy used to go visit and clamber all over the displays and no one cared. Ah, me.
Another San Diego product that I always loved was the Convair XF2Y Sea Dart. I can’t seem to get a link to work to an image but it was a jet-powered sea plane interseptor! Ah, the fifties and those wacky unrestrained budgets…
Man. I miss the cold war …
I think the counter-rotating props thing referrred to the Douglas Mixmaster, in my post. And the Mixmaster reported no significant prop difficulties.
That remark is… :smack: :mad: .
One book on this subject is “World’s Worst Aircraft”, by Bill Yenne, ISBN: 08802-9490-6.
It has articles & photos about many of the planes mentioned here.
Let’s not forget the XB-70 Valkyrie. Here’s a more detailed chronology.
I also liked the XP-55 Ascender, though I’m surpirsed that the link doesn’t mention the intentional pun on “ass-ender.”
What about the ConVairCar? An automobile that one could go to the local airport and rent a wing/prop assembly, bolt it on, and fly to the next airport - put the wing/prop assembly into storage there, and drive to one’s final destination?
Yes. It was intended to be carried by the B-36, not B-52.
Linky-poo for the Sea Dart.
Not a question specifically about planes, but the Pelican brings it up. Since the '60s at least there have been various proposals for intermediate- speed/cost cargo transport: faster than a ship, not as expensive as air freight. To fill that niche have been proposed hydrofoils, air-cushion ships, ground-effect planes, and even the revival of dirigibles. None of these have gotten off the drawing boards. Is it the technology, or is the intermediate speed/cost niche in fact not economically viable?
The Concorde, Tu-144, Lightning and Valkyrie all had supercruise prior to the F-16XL.
In case anyone is wondering …
Also, scroll down this page to see the Flarecraft L-325.
Hit submit too soon.
It makes an interesting point which may answer your question (concerning ground effect planes, anyways).
Great thread! Much better than the typical tripe that gets posted to Threadspotting.
The Blohm & Voss page is truly wonderful. When I first started looking at it, though, I couldn’t help but think of the Monty Python routine with the cross-eyed explorer proposing to scale the twin peaks of Kilimanjaro. The B&V designer seems to have been obsessed with asymmetry! :rolleyes:
The Ekranoplan is the most impressive “aircraft” of the bunch. I’d hate to see that thing coming towards me.
As I said in another thread, I’m surprised someone hasn’t tried doing real-life Pod racing in something like one of these.