Jump to content

1/32 B-58 soon available from Tigger


Lee White

Recommended Posts

As this thread may attract some Hustler fans, my Monogram Hustler resurfaced which reminded me.

 

I have a single photo of the intake interior of a working Hustler, and it shows three scoop intakes set into the intake outer skin.

I've wondered if all the jet pods were similar, or just the inner engines, or just a single one. Not that you can see much with the shock cone in the way

 

Most preserved examples have intake blanks, or bad angles. Does anybody know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Mike, that's like the one I have too, with another scoop at the 1 o'clock position, also of the port inner pod.

It'd make sense that all the interiors would be the same. Depending of course on the purpose of them.

My guess would be that the 'T's indicate maintenance marking limits of travel for the shock cones, but that's just a complete guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/16/2020 at 7:37 AM, MikeMaben said:

Looks like some sort of intake relief.  Figgers they'd all be the same.

 

 

I just saw a photo of the Fisher Model parts, and Paul has those three interior intakes on all the engines.

While I would prefer first hand evidence, I'd consider Paul's research to be conscientious enough to take his findings as definitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Chek said:

 

I just saw a photo of the Fisher Model parts, and Paul has those three interior intakes on all the engines.

While I would prefer first hand evidence, I'd consider Paul's research to be conscientious enough to take his findings as definitive.

 

I believe those are bypass doors for engine cooling, common to aircraft using the J79. The Phantom II inlet had a bellmouth ring near the front of the engine that performed a similar function. 

 

TBH this is the kind of project only Tom can do justice. For injection heads, Hong Kong Models should seriously consider the Consolidated Vultee Aircraft delta jets: Deuce, Six and Hustler.

 

Tony 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, MikeMaben said:

This one ?

 

10.jpg

 

 

I was looking at that model and idly thinking a foiled 1/32 Hustler on such a stand with watchmaker engineering quality motorised retracting and extending landing gear could very well be the 'executive' toy I'll commission when I inherit a fortune from a hitheto unknown rich relative. Pretty sure I could watch that for hours.

 

49670067912_34b363f043_o.gif49669237763_6051e5bb8b_o.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if you ever noticed this about the B-58, but in addition to funky retraction sequences, America's sexiest '60's bomber rolled around on wheels/ tires that looked like they came off of go-carts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Consequence of the wing 4%  thickness ratio in action. And that's with an added bulged fairing overwing.

Although similar could be said of the Victor and Vulcan undercarriages' multi wheel bogies, which weren't quite so dimensionally constrained

Edited by Chek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To spread the weight and also, I believe, to lighten the undercarriage assembly.

I heard that at maximum (nuclear wartime) takeoff weights the KC-135s would have effectively destroyed the runways they surge sortied from. The original B-36 had h-u-g-e single MLG wheels before a major rethink. 

I never, ever ever, understood why the Horton flying wing possessed that obscenely out of scale large nose landing gear. 

 

Tony 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...