Heavy Metal
- Thread starter amazinblue82
- Start date
67newport
Old Man with a Hat
N&W Railway
| Rolling Stock Indexes | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Type | Road Name | Class | Builder | Other |
| Locomotive | Steam | N&W Rwy | Y6b | Roanoke Shops | 2-8-8-2 |
barnfind
Old Man with a Hat
A new way to remove heavy metal rust
3175375
Senior Member
The XB-46, which first took to the skies on April 2, 1947, was transferred to the newly established US Air Force towards the end of 1947. During its delivery flight to Wright Field in Dayton, Ohio, it achieved an average speed of 858 km/h. Despite this impressive performance, the XB-46 remained a singular prototype, as the USAF opted to put the Boeing B-47 Stratojet into production instead.
Shortly after World War II concluded, Convair initiated the design of a turbojet-powered medium bomber, securing a contract from the US Army Air Force for three XB-46 prototypes. The XB-46 was constructed entirely from metal and featured a high-wing cantilever monoplane design. It had a slender, oval-section fuselage, a standard tail unit, and retractable tricycle landing gear, and was built to house a crew of three. The aircraft was powered by four turbojet engines, arranged in pairs.
The Convair XB-46 is a Forgotten Jet-Age Bomber - PlaneHistoria
Shortly after World War II concluded, Convair initiated the design of a turbojet-powered medium bomber, securing a contract from the US Army Air Force for three XB-46 prototypes. The XB-46 was constructed entirely from metal and featured a high-wing cantilever monoplane design. It had a slender, oval-section fuselage, a standard tail unit, and retractable tricycle landing gear, and was built to house a crew of three. The aircraft was powered by four turbojet engines, arranged in pairs.
The Convair XB-46 is a Forgotten Jet-Age Bomber - PlaneHistoria
Smithsonian Channel has these series "Aerial America" .. documentary show about airplane/drone fights over every US state showing historical locations in that state. Super interesting if one likes that kinda stuff..
I saw an episode today on Maryland .. never heard of this boat before.
Anybody who knows Chesapeake Bay in Maryland, or had/have US Navy affiliations of some sort, know about the "American Mariner.'
It also has the name USS Hannibal, the FIRST ship beached here for the same purpose (obliterated over the years).
Since 1966, used as target practice for the US Navy, the SECOND ship to use the USS Hannibal name, to train jet, helicopter, gun boat crews, etc.. She's riddled with 50 cal. rounds, small bombs, etc.
An original Liberty ship (~450 feet long, ~15,000 ton displacement) that never did Merchant Marine duty, beached in 20 feet of water, showing the hits of almost 60 years serving in this way.
Only ship ever commissioned in Coast Guard, Army, Navy, and Air Force. This one below is, again, the SECOND USS Hannibal used for target practice.
sources: https://bearboat.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/targetship-may08_soundings_sb.pdf, USAS American Mariner - Wikipedia
The white area is NOT land. its underwater shallows. The yellow-ish color is land.
Obviously no streets out there, but I could NOT find the boat with Google Earth or Google Maps. I am sure its still out there, as stated, 7 miles northwest of Smith/Ewell Islands.
I put the red arrow/circle on maps below.
"American Mariner" before retirement, ca. early 1960's.
I saw an episode today on Maryland .. never heard of this boat before.
Anybody who knows Chesapeake Bay in Maryland, or had/have US Navy affiliations of some sort, know about the "American Mariner.'
It also has the name USS Hannibal, the FIRST ship beached here for the same purpose (obliterated over the years).
Since 1966, used as target practice for the US Navy, the SECOND ship to use the USS Hannibal name, to train jet, helicopter, gun boat crews, etc.. She's riddled with 50 cal. rounds, small bombs, etc.
An original Liberty ship (~450 feet long, ~15,000 ton displacement) that never did Merchant Marine duty, beached in 20 feet of water, showing the hits of almost 60 years serving in this way.
Only ship ever commissioned in Coast Guard, Army, Navy, and Air Force. This one below is, again, the SECOND USS Hannibal used for target practice.
sources: https://bearboat.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/targetship-may08_soundings_sb.pdf, USAS American Mariner - Wikipedia
The white area is NOT land. its underwater shallows. The yellow-ish color is land.
Obviously no streets out there, but I could NOT find the boat with Google Earth or Google Maps. I am sure its still out there, as stated, 7 miles northwest of Smith/Ewell Islands.
I put the red arrow/circle on maps below.
"American Mariner" before retirement, ca. early 1960's.
Last edited:
67newport
Old Man with a Hat
Staggered tooth reduction gear, Mesta Machine Company, W. Hempstead, Pennsylvania 1913]
Identified as being a part for a "sheet mill" machine used in steel mills.
first, i don't know squat about steel rolling (I assume, that's what happens to "sheets" in a steel mill). I know a roll of steel is BIG and HEAVY, thereby needing a machine that "rotates" AND is robust (with a big a** gear like this) in the process.
Therefore, it stands to reason, to generate a prescribed rate of motion, handle a slab, apply/multiply enough "torque" to bend a heavy flat sheet into a roll, etc., ... and to think, this was nearly 120 years ago!
Anyway, I found this link :Molded Tooth Staggered Gear and Worker, 1913 - Pittsburgh Quarterly. Identifies this date as 1913,
3175375
Senior Member
I lifted this from Facebook. I have read a lot of controversial things about the F-111B meeting the requirements and not. The F-14 certainly is/was a sexier aircraft. We’ll never know how the F-111B would have turned out.
I worked at Hughes Aircraft Company with several engineers who had worked on the A12 (attack version of the SR-71) and the F-111B. Both used the AWG-9 weapons system that included the AIM-54 Phoenix missile.
————————————————————
A F-111B approaching the aircraft carrier USS Coral Sea (CVA-43) in July of 1968.
The F-111B was the Navy's half of the TFX (Tactical Fighter Experimental) Program. The TFX Program was an effort to reduce costs by adopting standardized aircraft. Despite the Navy and Air Force's reluctance to join the program, it was pushed forward anyway. During development, the requirements by the Navy and Airforce changed, resulting in the need for different aircraft. Most importantly. a greater importance was stressed on lighter, more agile aircraft for dogfighting.
The Navy knew the aircraft would be a flop before it even entered testing. While the aircraft fulfilled its original requirements, those requirements were no longer workable for combat at the time. Despite this, many in government wanted to see it work. During testimony in 1968, the famous Thomas F. Connolly was asked what would be needed to make the F-111B work for naval service. Connolly responded by saying, "There isn't enough power in all Christendom to make that airplane what we want!". Arguments such as this effectively killed the F-111B program.
As fate would have it though, Grumman had been working on a side-project based on data coming out of Vietnam. Development progressed far enough that when the US Navy put out requirements for the VFX Progam, Grumman had an aircraft that could answer. The resulting aircraft would eventually evolve into the F-14. Smaller and vastly more agile than the F-111B, the F-14 would go on to become one of the most famous aircraft to ever operate from an aircraft carrier.
The F-14 would later gain the nickname "Tomcat" in honor of Thomas F. Connolly who had been a major force in adopting an aircraft like the F-14 over the F-111B.
While the F-111 had no career in the US Navy, the Air Force variant did go on to see extensive service. The F-111 "Aardvark", while not able to fulfill its original air-to-air role, would go on to be a successful attack aircraft and later an electronic warfare aircraft. The F-111 would serve until 1998 in the United States and 2010 for the Royal Australian Air Force.
I worked at Hughes Aircraft Company with several engineers who had worked on the A12 (attack version of the SR-71) and the F-111B. Both used the AWG-9 weapons system that included the AIM-54 Phoenix missile.
————————————————————
A F-111B approaching the aircraft carrier USS Coral Sea (CVA-43) in July of 1968.
The F-111B was the Navy's half of the TFX (Tactical Fighter Experimental) Program. The TFX Program was an effort to reduce costs by adopting standardized aircraft. Despite the Navy and Air Force's reluctance to join the program, it was pushed forward anyway. During development, the requirements by the Navy and Airforce changed, resulting in the need for different aircraft. Most importantly. a greater importance was stressed on lighter, more agile aircraft for dogfighting.
The Navy knew the aircraft would be a flop before it even entered testing. While the aircraft fulfilled its original requirements, those requirements were no longer workable for combat at the time. Despite this, many in government wanted to see it work. During testimony in 1968, the famous Thomas F. Connolly was asked what would be needed to make the F-111B work for naval service. Connolly responded by saying, "There isn't enough power in all Christendom to make that airplane what we want!". Arguments such as this effectively killed the F-111B program.
As fate would have it though, Grumman had been working on a side-project based on data coming out of Vietnam. Development progressed far enough that when the US Navy put out requirements for the VFX Progam, Grumman had an aircraft that could answer. The resulting aircraft would eventually evolve into the F-14. Smaller and vastly more agile than the F-111B, the F-14 would go on to become one of the most famous aircraft to ever operate from an aircraft carrier.
The F-14 would later gain the nickname "Tomcat" in honor of Thomas F. Connolly who had been a major force in adopting an aircraft like the F-14 over the F-111B.
While the F-111 had no career in the US Navy, the Air Force variant did go on to see extensive service. The F-111 "Aardvark", while not able to fulfill its original air-to-air role, would go on to be a successful attack aircraft and later an electronic warfare aircraft. The F-111 would serve until 1998 in the United States and 2010 for the Royal Australian Air Force.
You have written "F-111B." I believe the designation is FB-111.
3175375
Senior Member
Last edited:
Wikipedia?? Are you serious? That's third person at best; a lousy site!
How about something from the March Field Air Museum that has one:
March Field Air Museum In Riverside, CA - FB-111A Aardvark, General Dynamics
Or, look in a book like Janes All the Worlds Fighting Aircraft.
Slap Stick
Active Member
A minor correction, if you please.
The A-12 came BEFORE the SR-71, and I dunno how it could be considered an "attack" aircraft, it had no weapons other than cameras (they called them "sensors").
They stretched the fuselage in order to accommodate the "GIB" (guy in back) and to carry more fuel and sensors. It flew slightly lower and slower than the A-12. Yes, there was one two seat A-12, but even it was different than the SR as the rear seat for the instructor was raised so the instructor could take over if needed.
It also used the less powerful original engines (J-57?) while the rest of the A-12 were retrofitted and the other variants (YF-12, M-21 and SR) got the newer, more powerful engines (J-58?).
Nit picking? Maybe, but it's more gooder.
The A-12 came BEFORE the SR-71, and I dunno how it could be considered an "attack" aircraft, it had no weapons other than cameras (they called them "sensors").
They stretched the fuselage in order to accommodate the "GIB" (guy in back) and to carry more fuel and sensors. It flew slightly lower and slower than the A-12. Yes, there was one two seat A-12, but even it was different than the SR as the rear seat for the instructor was raised so the instructor could take over if needed.
It also used the less powerful original engines (J-57?) while the rest of the A-12 were retrofitted and the other variants (YF-12, M-21 and SR) got the newer, more powerful engines (J-58?).
Nit picking? Maybe, but it's more gooder.
LocuMob
Fluid Technician with a hat
There were both the F-111B and th FB-111. The F-111B was the test bed for the Navy, and the FB-111 was the bomber variant of the F-111. I wish I had the book I learned this from.
Smithsonian is a step above Wikipedia, I hope. F-111B
Was the Navy’s F-111 Really That Bad?
The FB-111
FB-111A “Aardvark” – Strategic Air Command & Aerospace Museum
Last edited:
3175375
Senior Member
I worked with people, some are still alive that worked on the F-111B and called it as such.
67newport
Old Man with a Hat
No "dog in the fight" on what this thing was called. @LocuMob beat me to it.
I always learned, as a modeler in my formative years (mid 1960's I think), the Aardvark as the F111 (A, B, C, D, etc.,).
FB-111A seems to be a later (bomber-capable) Air Force variant of the F111A. 159 total 111's planes built, 76 of them FB-111's as shown at the SAC link in the @LocuMob post.
ASIDE: I find Wikipedia credible. It can take a person from zero knowledge to a working knowledge on things with one click.
Yeah, third-party contributions there are NOT always "5 by 5" on their face, but the site is prettty good at requiring source references for stuff people put there. A reader can then, if they want, check those references/attributions to see if the Wikipedia post is hanging together.
Something looks "goofy" on the internet ALL the time - inclusive of Wikipedia. A few things out there, hell, I was personally involved in - contemporaneously - and KNOW what happened. Some later reporting may not be accurate.
But, I can say the same thing about the New York Times, and Detroit Free Press, or anybody writing about stuff AFTER it happened. Even reputable professional organizations don't always get the story right no matter how hard they try.
My point: Like many of us may have come to know ... ya just can't believe everything on the internet at face value. If '"getting it right" is required, we sometime may have to "triangulate" on a thing from multiple sources.
Last edited:
As a student of History, who also holds a degree in the field, we were instructed to avoid second and third person sources for any research material. As I said, Wikipedia is third person AT BEST. Yet so many people want to use it as their only source. Me? Every time I peruse it I find errors. It's a lousy source. Even on the internet one can find better sources.
If people want to use it, fine; I'll avoid it.
groovy chief. Thanks.
The Lancaster is here multiple times. A heavy metal fave for many folks. Came back to my attention when I stumbled across another fave...the Rolls-Royce Merlin engine.
I didn't know the Lancaster had four of these piston marvels -~1,300 HP each. Great mill, one of the best piston engine ever (power, durability, etc.,) . plus she was bristling with machine guns -- Browning .303's snout and amidships, while tail gun used four Nash & Thompson FN.20's.
Born 1941, a great plane for its time .almost 7,600 built, almost 1/2 lost in combat its asserted during WWII. Not biggest, not fastest, but she carried the mail, so to speak.. Buncha variants by the time retired in 1964.
sources: Avro Lancaster - Wikipedia, https://www.baesystems.com/en/heritage/avro-683-lancaster
taxi, takeoff, landing vid. 15 mins, but first 6 min. was the coolest to me. Its loud, so watch the volume.
Its the plane in the top pic above - in a museum and still flying.
below, 90 secs. of a Lancaster 4 Merlins lit up.
I didn't know the Lancaster had four of these piston marvels -~1,300 HP each. Great mill, one of the best piston engine ever (power, durability, etc.,) . plus she was bristling with machine guns -- Browning .303's snout and amidships, while tail gun used four Nash & Thompson FN.20's.
Born 1941, a great plane for its time .almost 7,600 built, almost 1/2 lost in combat its asserted during WWII. Not biggest, not fastest, but she carried the mail, so to speak.. Buncha variants by the time retired in 1964.
sources: Avro Lancaster - Wikipedia, https://www.baesystems.com/en/heritage/avro-683-lancaster
taxi, takeoff, landing vid. 15 mins, but first 6 min. was the coolest to me. Its loud, so watch the volume.
Its the plane in the top pic above - in a museum and still flying.
below, 90 secs. of a Lancaster 4 Merlins lit up.
Last edited:
F-16 jet engine (Pratt & Whitney turbofan w/afterburner, 24,000 lbs. of thrust) test at full after-burner. 2:30 minutes.
Stout piece, loud, powerful ...IMHO not as "stimulating" as a 1940's piston (radials and V's) engines (e.g., Wasps, Merlins, Griffons, Lycoming, etc.,) running -- at idle.
