Eddie Miller has inspired me to make a “What If” aircraft. The Us Navy had a few A-26s that they called AD2s.They were used as target tugs and hacks. I have decided to make another vresion. I’ll call it the “N” model.It will have Pratt and Whitney R-4360-63A engines, yes the “corn cobs”. 3500 hp each. It will have a reinforced larger main wing spar.( something Mr. McNamara’s wizz kids did not think of when they made the A-26K’s.) It will have a 78 nfoot wing span vice the 70 ft of the K.It will have wing fold and a tail hook.I have made the fuselage 2 feet taller and 2 feet wider.Why you ask,this air craft will be a dual mission A/C. Ground Attack/SAR and Command and Control air search and ground search radar.I will put in a belley ground search radar aft of the bomb bay.The air search radar will be a dish in the nose.It will be of an eariler type ie: 1960s era.I have to reconfigure the air intakes and engine cowls for the R-4360s.I also am toying with the wing hard points. For the SAR mission I am looking at the type of ordanance that the AD-1/Spads carried.Just more of it.I will also make the wings two feet wider,more lift for the engine power.I will also have to “beef up” the landing gear,make it “carrier” capable.To include stearable front nose gear with the required catapult shoe.
I have started the A/C but I do not know how to post picture on FS Forum. I want to do a 1960’s era paint scheme,Grey/White paint high vis markings.I will have to make up a "make believe " squadron.VMA/SR-###
If any one has ideas for how to make such a "What If " A/C look feasiable let me know. I plan on loading her out for a SAR mission.Thanks for reading this post. Thanks for the idea Eddie.
I’m pretty sure that On-Mark made significant changes to the wing as part of the A-26A / B-26K program. I’m also sure that they got beat to heck on those missions with all that fuel and ordnance hanging out there. What scale are you going to do it in? I thought about doing this too, but couldn’t bear to cut up my R/M A-26 kit I had such a hard time getting (and then had it arrive sans 1 wing! - Thanks again Jaypack for the spare) That’s why I’m going for a Super Mauarder instead. Vista, huh? I grew up in Fallbrook.
Great idea. Navy and USMC A-26s were JD-2s, J for use as Utility. B-25s used by them were classed as PB, as in PBJ, but the B was dropped before Korea, and since there was already a PD, P2D, and P3D, why not call yours a P4D-1N. Now that’s a designation that’ll turn heads, of course that dates it to pre-1962. As to squadron, why not make them the VMA-214 Black Sheep, they converted from fighters to attack in 1958, instead of Furies give them Invaders.
Also, if you want to post photos, which we all want to see, go get yourself a free account from photobucket.com and you can go from there. I’m glad you’ve decided to do this and am looking forward to seeing your work.[:D]
I am going to try to post WIP Pics today.I have made the cuts and additions for the 2 ft. increase in fulesage hieght. It now looks like a Navy large prop A/C.The Greyhound COD comes to mind.I have a few questions for all of you,1) has any one bulit the 1/48 scale F-82 twin Mustang?.The reason I ask is that the real F-82 had four blade paddel blade propellers.They were “Right and Left Hand”,clockwise and counterclock wise turning.I would like to do the same on my What if USMS A-26.It would help cancell the torque effect of two P&W R-4360-63A engines.2) is there an after market company that I can order such 1/48 propellers.Question #2the R/M Pro Modeler comes with the P&W R-2800 engines,single face at that.I have an AMT P-70 in 1/48 it has the correct 7 cylinder twin row engines,but I do not really want to cann from my AMT P-70.Again is there an after market outfit were I can get a 7 cylinder P&W engine.I will need 4 to make two R-4360-63As.Last question,does any know what is the best or better website or publication for internal pics of a A-26.I have LOTS of books on USMC/US Navy A/C but I do not have a single book on the A-26.Wait one last question when an A/C had counter rotating propllers ie: right hand and left hand was it better to have them rotating toward the fukesage or away from the fukesage or did/does it matter.
Engines & Things has 1/48 R-4360s. The usual Pratt was 9 cylinder, Wrights were usually 7 cylinder, but the ‘corncob’ had the banks very closely spaced with the cylinders really nestled up tight. I used to think that the engine was just 2 2800’s stuck together, but then it would be 36 cylinders and R-5600! You could probably modify a R-2600 to look like one from the front, but not sure. Counter-rotating props should turn in-board. (Unless it’s a P-38 which had 2 critical engines, vs 1 on most twins, or none with counter-rotating props) What about using contra-rotating props? On my imaginary Martin B-26 modified with 4360’s I’m realizing there isn’t a lot of room for larger diameter props – thinking going with a 5-blade.
Mr. Devil’s Advocate here. First, most USMC SAR assets are of the rotary-winged variety. Serious search and rescue is usually left to the Marines big sister, the US Navy. Next, a real consideration for any fixed-wing SAR platform is loiter. Feeding a couple of big thirsty corncobs would cut into mission time in a monumental fashion.
If you are steadfast on the SAR configuration, a Navy JD-1 with the glass nose and R-2800 engines would be pretty believable. If, on the other hand, you really like the monster-engine program, how about a Marine Korean War nightfighter done up in the black with red codes scheme of VMF(N)-513. Possibly a Navy VX bird (engine gray fuselage/yellow wing/dayglo trim scheme) used for missle tracking? Something to justify using such preposterous motivators. Of course, as a civilian warbird or unlimited racer, anything goes.
BTW, I really like a well thought-out wiffer. Even an outlandish freak show can work if you have the right back story. Keep us posted
With the USCG C-130’s, don’t they routinely shut down 2 engines to extend loiter time? “The design was fitted with counter rotating props, so that it could be flown easily with one of the powerful engines feathered, reducing fuel consumption on long range SAR missions. When needed they would use both engines and have high cruising speeds.” Just a thought . . .
How about a “Project Magnet” aircraft? You know(even though no one is supposed to know), where the Navy went chasing UFOs? That would surely justify using the hottest aircraft available, pre jet, of course. The beauty of this is that you could use just about any scheme, and those beefed-up wings would be ideal for all sorts of exotic sensors or “UFO-getters”.
I’m stoked to see you plan this whole project out. Me, I fly by the seat of my pants. One thing I’d like to mention. If you can’t find the parts you’re looking for, you can always make them yourself. I did a lot of that with my KC-135/B-17( link below if you haven’t seen it). It’s cool that you’ve taken a cue from some of my work, because my KC/B-17 was inspired by our very own OldHooker’s Rutan B-17.
As you have noticed I did not get the pictures posted.To be honest the whole thing kicked my butt.I will have to sweet talk the Mrs. into doing it.She is the computer expert here.I really am not a fan.I will try it again today.As for the SAR aspect to my AD-2N.Yes helo’s do the R in SAR but the SAR helo needs air cover it self in some cases.During the Vitenam era it was AD-1s/SPADS,good A/C but moderate load outs and fuel status was always a factor.A O1-E or OV-10 would be SAR command and control if possiable.A AD-2N could do both,and still have the AD-1’s on station with them.As for the P&W R-4360-63A’s I choose them for the horse power /power available .The A/C would fly to a designated area near a strike package site at high alt to get speed out of the engines,but once involved in SAR work the A/C would be at low alts opening its large can of whoop ass hanging from both wings.As for fuel consumption ,wing tip tanks,two 300 gal P-38 type drop tanks inborad of the engines.A-26s in Korea actually used these tanks.Also an internal drop tank could be carried in the bomb bay.The wing will be two feet wider and have 4 to 6 foot longer wing span,there will more internal fuel in the wings.But you did make me think…in flight refueling probe.The Tracker was a refueler with the “buddy pac” system.A/C could refuel just before “feet dry”,and could refuel after mission complete.This A/C will also do trail interdiction missions as in Ho Chi Mhin trail.That is the reason for ground search Radar.The trail had sensors dropped from A/C that were susposed to detect truck and bicycle traffic.It could deliver a large hurt locker on a convoy.As for the search for the UFOs I saw that episode on the History channel,F-4s from the Midway could not catch the UFO,a AD-2N would not have a chance.Any way if I was the pilot of a AD-2N and CIC told me to vector toward a UFO with a span of 80 to 120 feet I would call the Air Boss and suddenly have fuel flow problems.As in Bingo fuel,request to return to home plate.I have thought alot about a Navalised A-26.There were a lot of great piston bangers from right after WWII and early 50s that were thrown to the curb,they had a lot of undeveloped potienal(sp?).Jets are nice but piston banging,prop spinning A/C are things of beauty.The sound of a P&W says it all.
I would be inclined to go with Garys suggestion for the desinator, P4D-1N, as the AD-2N was a Skyraider variant. But, as I stated. This is gonna be interesting.
Also, I thought you might be interested in this. They kinda had your idea, just not quite the same.
I have been busy these last few days,I took pictures but I have not posted yet,will try again tonight.( Mrs.is out Christmas shopping ,she will post pics later.I have found the wing tip tanks I am using set one of three drop tank sets that came with a 1/48 Monogram P-80.I will have to lenghten them.US Navy A/C that had wing tip tanks had shorter /fatter tanks then stsndard USAF A/C .The foward portion did not extend very far from the wing leading edge.With wing fold that swept aft and had the wing fold along the fueslage side a long foward extending tip tank could scrape the flight deck.Not a good way to indear ones self with the Air Boss.( speaking from exsperiance,1985 I upset the Air Boss on the USS Midway,I was a bad day…for me.)I will use 1/48 drop tanks from a Monogram P-38.I have also tanken one of the bomb bay tanks from a 1/48 B-29 for the AD-2’s bomb bay tank I will have to cut it down.I have searched threw my spares boxes,I am looking at a four blade prop from the 1/48 Monogram Skyraider.I should be easy to change one into a clockwise rotating prop.I have done some compairsing math between the Tracker and Greyhound to get such things dementions.(sp?)Questions…does any know where I can see pictures of the nose radars early 1960’stype airborne style.Also the radar station in a Tracker?I plan on having a hatchway on my AD-2 open to show a scratch built "ground search radar station.Last question…I have been thinking about hanging one CBU off each wing…when did the CBU (Cluster Bomb Unit) start being used in Vietnam. I still have not made a final call one what stores will hang from the wings.Also I have not figured out where to put a in flight refueling probe…I want it to look believable…like the old punch line… What…? it could happen or in my case could’ve happened.One last thing…Eddie you were not kidding…you would not believe the amount of putty and sanding…putty and sanding.But it will MAKE me have to rescribe the Monogram rasied panel lines. I will post these pics ASAP.I hope you all do not mind my open questions.Thanks
I was on the Midway from 87-89. Small world. I, too, upset the Boss once. Spitting on the flight deck. No.No. Don’t do it unless you want to scrub it with a toothbrush.[;)] Here I am next to a brand new, shiny F/A-18 and one of the Boss who got in my[censored][:D]
I have 10 pictures of the work I have done so far.I tried to put them on a public album on Photobucket.No Joy.I even had the Mrs.Look at it.No Joy.She will try to fix what ever I did not do right later.She has a Christmas Party to go to.I am not going.I do have the pictures in a J-Peg file I can e mail to any one who would like to see them.As I have said I am not a computer fan.
I like the upengined idea on the Invader. I always like the Tim the Toolman Taylor approach=more power!
Take a look at the Martin Mercator for inspiration-a rare Navy twin, with two R4360s, and two turbojets, as well as look at the p2v Neptune for inspiration.
I also like the idea of “Super Marauders” B-26s with R3350 or r4360 engines-maybe some P47N paddle blade props to absorb the power, or a “Super B-17” with R2800s. I don’t think any radial engines had Left and Right handed turning direction for prop blades in real life, though It is a neat concept. Other what if ideas might include the P-61C models turbosupercharged R2800s on a B-26 or A-26. I’d also like to see these planes with some serious turboprop power-like the engines off a C-130, with 3 or 4 blade C-130 props-probably have to cut those props down!
I volunteered to post Ferg’s pix for the time being and WOW! I love what I’m seeing. The beefy props are enough to grab my attention. Looking forward to progress Ferg![8D]
Eddie
P.S. Let me know if some of the photos are not showing up. I just downloaded IE7 and I’m getting red Xs for the 1,4,5,6th photos.[banghead]
