StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Last one, at least I knew I'd seen it somewhere before, this however. Rings no bells, whatsoever.

I looked around and cant find anything.

Im assuming this is either a transport or a bomber.
Its experimental.
Its 1930's or 1940's.

Any suggestions? Disagreements?

TrailerParkJawa wrote:I looked around and cant find anything.

Im assuming this is either a transport or a bomber.
Its experimental.
Its 1930's or 1940's.

Any suggestions? Disagreements?

With a tail that big, it looks like the Spruce Goose... but it's missing the pontoons and everything else.

I'm thinking late 40's due to the insignia. Here's another shot.

Frank Hipper wrote:I'm thinking late 40's due to the insignia. Here's another shot.

I'm kind of wondering if it's a Boeing craft; the Boeings of that time had a trademark massive tail.

This is the Boeing B-29. Maybe the mystery craft is an immediate predecessor of the B-29?

Crayz9000 wrote:

Frank Hipper wrote:I'm thinking late 40's due to the insignia. Here's another shot.

I'm kind of wondering if it's a Boeing craft; the Boeings of that time had a trademark massive tail.

This is the Boeing B-29. Maybe the mystery craft is an immediate predecessor of the B-29?
(snipped pic)

Nope. All B-29 prototypes and mock-ups are clearly of B-29 heritage. It does resemble some design drawings for the B-29, however, but they were never built. It's a transport prototype of some sort for sure, bombers don't normally have big hunkin' cargo doors on the side. But what it is, I dinnae know!

Please close the BB tags when you quote stuff... ~Crayz9000

It looks like something that'd be more at home in the beginning of the jet era than a prototype for earlier aircraft. Note the small profile of the engine nacels--possibly turboprop engines rather than radials?

I'm kind of wondering if it's a Boeing craft; the Boeings of that time had a trademark massive tail.

I went to Boeing's webpage. They have a historical section of all their aircraft and this one was not in here. The only thing that came close was the Boeing 307 Stratoliner. But I dont think it is the same.

Hipper, do you have any pictures where the tail is a little clearer (particularly the registry numbers)?

Enlightenment wrote:It looks like something that'd be more at home in the beginning of the jet era than a prototype for earlier aircraft. Note the small profile of the engine nacels--possibly turboprop engines rather than radials?

I was thinking along those lines as well. Note how elongated the nacelles are, as well. And unfortunately, those are the only two I can find.
Another thought - it's a fake. But a damned good one if it is.

I'd say it's definitely an early jet age aircraft, with the fuselage the way it is. Pointed, glazed noses are more indicative of late 40s, early 50s (Ilyushin Beagle comes to mind as an example). It's most likely a cargo or transport aircraft, given the side door; possibly a plane for parachutists, but unlikely, as those tended to be converted cargo/transport aircraft. It has 4 4-bladed propellors, and appears to use cowled radial engines (small diameter...Cyclone, possibly?).

Actually, looking again, it may be a bomber. The side door could be the entry hatch for crew. Those engine nacelles look suspiciously long and cylindrical at the rear, as if intended to be replaced with jet engines. It may be a early prototype jet bomber, with props instead of more expensive jet engines to ensure airframe worthiness. I haven't been able to find a plane that looks like that in the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base Museum website, which is making me wonder if it was a captured airplane tested under American colors.

It seems to me to be just a fake, if you look at the top of the fuselage above the wings, it suddenly bumbs up and has a humpback. Dont think any planes had that.

Frank Hipper wrote:I'm thinking late 40's due to the insignia. Here's another shot.

Look at the rear of the warp- uhh, engine nacelles. They're definitely jet exhaust nozzles. It's an early Turboprop ship.

Well... hmm...



In 1947, a study was done as to the feasability of putting turboprop engines on the B-36. However, the fuselage of the B-36 is far longer and straighter than that of the mystery plane; I also don't think anything came of the idea.

I also found this:

In 1946, two B-17Gs were modified as flying testbeds for experimental turboprop engines. The Boeing company number Model 299-Z was assigned to these planes. The military equipment was removed, the pilot's cockpit was moved farther back, and the nose was completely modified to accommodate the experimental engine.

The turboprop was stuck in the nose of the B-17, however, so I don't think that's going anywhere.

There was also the B-50, essentially an extensively modified B-29, so I don't think that would be it. In case anyone's curious:

Are you sure thats a full sized plane. I kinda looks like a model to me.

Hippers plane reminds me of the Bell X-1. The fuselage and tail section look similar (not identical). Stretched along its length. The cockpit is similar too, with the streamlined pointy front.

kojikun wrote:Hippers plane reminds me of the Bell X-1. The fuselage and tail section look similar (not identical). Stretched along its length. The cockpit is similar too, with the streamlined pointy front.

Propulsion's the big difference, though. This has four engines, which are either radials or turboprops fit into nacelles, where the X-1 carried a quartet of rockets in the rear. The weirdest thing is the cockpit. Most late 40s-early 50s bombers/cargo aircraft had cockpits on top or noses sticking out from in front of the cockpit.

[edit]the only four-engine American turboprops I can find any information on are the C-130 and the Electra. That suggests that if it is American built and if it uses turboprops, it is Lockheed built.[/edit]

Doubt it's a bomber...it has portholes in the fuselage, which isn't something usual. In addition, there are no defensive turrets...even the B-52 had a rear turret, so I doubt an earlier bomber design would do away with them..

It's an early 50's cargo craft...

I don't know much about photography but those propellers are not moving or a quite enhanced camera made the picture.

Or the craft is gliding...which is not very likely.

At closer look I rather think it's a model!

I say it's a photo manipulation. There are other fakes on the site where I found this one, but they're obvious, like this one.