Guillows sheetwood flying models - the Zip nocals.

[simpleflyer]

Last week we received a pleasant surprise, a package containing these models.

SC-07-19-13aaSm2.JPG

These were the result of a successful bid on Ebay. Though the kits are marked $10 each, we got the lot for $22.30 plus postage.

We introduced the Guillows shelf models earlier at the bottom of the page at:
http://balsamodels.com/phpBB/viewtopic. ... 6&start=75

This Guillows ad shows the complete line of the DC shelf models.

GuDCserDispCr025M2b.JPG

There were a total of 45 models in 3 price levels for these kits:

DC_shlfMod_list-m.JPG

[Scott]

Those 3 kits were a great buy.The boxes look like they're in pretty good shape too.
The Skyraider is one of my favourite piston-engined aircraft.

In the ad that you included,it shows some 50-cent models with "giant wing span".
Would that be around 36"?

[simpleflyer]

In the ad that you included,it shows some 50-cent models with "giant wing span".
Would that be around 36"

The 50-cent series has a wingspan of about 15 inches. We were bidding on one of these on Ebay and were not successful. The seller indicated in his auction text that the kit had a two piece wing with each half of about 7 1/2 inches in length.

A picture of the plan for the B-36 taken from the Ebay listing. The plan sheet is 11 by 17 inches.

B-36_DC_shelf-4sm.JPG

I have a kit of the 25-cent series B-36 and am planning to build an enlarged version as a swinger, at some future date.

Al

[simpleflyer]

BTW, we have the B-47 from the 50-cent series.

B -47_pln_smG.GIF

The B-47 has a two piece wing with a wingspan of a little over 12 inches. The kit box is the limiting factor. In the 50SDC series it is about 13 and a half inches long. So the sheetwood included in these kits is slightly over 13 inches in length.

[Scott]

Thanks for that info,and pics of the B-36 and B-47 plans.The B-47 model
would be sharp looking."Strategic Air Command",with Jimmy Stewart
flying a B-47,is a great movie.

[kittyfritters]

Thanks for that info,and pics of the B-36 and B-47 plans.The B-47 model
would be sharp looking."Strategic Air Command",with Jimmy Stewart
flying a B-47,is a great movie.

Remember in the movie when he went back into the service and they "B-36ed" him as a joke. (Telling him they were just going to show him one take off and one landing without telling him they would be 24 hours apart.) Well, they did that to my father when he was an engineer at Wright Field in the late 1940s. He called my mother and told her that he would be a little late. The next night, was my mom pissed!

[Scott]

It's no wonder that your mom was angry,24 hours is a lot late.

[simpleflyer]

"Strategic Air Command",with Jimmy Stewart
flying a B-47,is a great movie.

Indeed, it is a great movie. One of my favorites. James Stewart did an excellent performance. It is evident that he drew much from his real-life experiences and translated them to film.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Stewart

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsh ... sp?id=1670

The air to air film shots of the B-36 are very impressive. Any time we see a rerun of SAC, we always watch for these scenes. As a youngster in the early 1950's we were rewarded with sights of them flying overhead numerous times. Seeing the aircraft cruising overhead at altitude was a remarkable sight: with the contrails following the aircraft, coupled with the sound of the six R-4360s running in synchronization. An impressive sight and sound.

Later, we were able to get a closer look at these two versions.

At Kelly AFB - 1968

XC99_68-1223_Kelly-6.jpg

SAC Museum - Lincoln, NB - 1990?

b36SAC90.jpg

[Scott]

The B-36 is an impressive looking aircraft.

[kittyfritters]

The B-36 is an impressive looking aircraft.

What's even more impressive is what it took to keep them in the air.

For example, it had four separate, redundant, electrical systems to control the engines. It was discovered, when it entered squadron service, that if all of the electrical systems failed the piston engines could not be shut down after a flight. Someone had to crawl out in the wing and shut them down. A quick examination of the aircraft in service revealed that most of them were flying with two electrical systems inoperative, and some with three. This resulted in an immediate rewriting of the maintenance procedures to make sure that aircraft took off with all the electrical systems operational.

Since the aircraft made routine 24 hour flights changing the spark plugs for 100 hour inspections meant after every fourth flight. The aircraft was capable of 48 hour flights which meant changing the plugs after every second flight. The mechanics had to change 336 spark plugs on each aircraft! (Not counting the 32 igniters in the jet engines.) Unfortunately, these engines were carburetted, not fuel injected, and were prone to icing and in-flight fires.

Most histories of the B-36 say that it was obsolete when it was introduced since jet fighters like the MIG 15 could attack it with impunity. Actually, until aircraft of F-100 class performance entered service the B-36 was a nearly impossible interception task for a fighter above 45,000 feet. The reason, wing area. I have spoken to pilots who actually flew them and what would happen was this. When a fighter was sighted they would get the jet engines lit, increase speed to about 400 mph and turn to force the fighter into a tail chase. At that altitude an F-86 or a MIG was only about 60 to 100 mph faster. When the fighter was almost to gun range the B-36 pilot would reef it into a 3G turn. The fighter pilot would try to pull lead on the bomber by turning in tighter and would be surprised by his high-speed stall. When the fighter stalled, the bomber pilot would resume his original course. The fighter would spin to about 25,000 feet before the air was dense enough for the pilot to recover. At that point he no longer had enough fuel to climb back up to the B-36's altitude and chase it down. The British Canbarra bomber pilots used the same evasive tactics with good effect. Of course all this high altitude high-jinks stopped in the mid 1950s when supersonic fighters entered squadron service and surface to air missiles started to become effective.

As soon as B-52s became available the B-36s were phased out. Not only did the B-52 have better performance than the B-36, but without the piston engines, it was much more reliable (It's still in service!) and much cheaper to fly per mission.

[Scott]

Thanks for that great B-36 info Kittyfritters.

[Scott]

Super pics,David Duckett.

[simpleflyer]

Thank you, David, for posting the pictures of 52-2827. The restoration crew at the Pima museum did an excellent restoration job. This was the last B-36 built. A brief story of the struggle for the survival of this aircraft may be seen at:

http://www.cowtown.net/proweb/last_one.htm

Of the 384 produced, only four complete (and one stored) B-36 type aircraft survive today.

52-2220 - National Museum of the United States Air Force, (formerly The U.S. Air Force Museum) at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base near Dayton Ohio.

52-2827 - Pima Air & Space Museum in Tucson, Arizona.

52-2217 - Strategic Air and Space Museum, formerly located at Offutt Air Force Base, and now just off base near Ashland, Nebraska.

51-13730 - Castle Air Museum at the former Castle Air Force Base in Atwater, California.

42-13571 - in the private collection of the late Walter Soplata in Newbury, Ohio are in pieces the remains of this aircraft which was scrapped when the USAF museum was relocated in 1972.

[Scott]

This link has a great inflight pic of two B-36's.

http://92ndma.org/92bw/92ndBombWing.html

[simpleflyer]

This link has a great inflight pic of two B-36's.

http://92ndma.org/92bw/92ndBombWing.html

Thank you, Scott, for the link to this webpage. The 3 part article(B-36: Six Churning and Four Burning) by Lt Gen Edmundson at the bottom of the page is good reading. Especially, part 3, where he describes leading a group of B-36s and penetrating US airspace and giving ADC an unexpected surprise.

You mentioned on another thread, that you would like to see Guillows to kit the Grumman Tracker. We saw this one several weeks ago at Ellington Airport-Houston TX

S2F_N31957_06-11-13.JPG

It belongs to the Collings Foundation.

http://www.collingsfoundation.org/Houst ... racker.htm

A profile version of the C-1 Trader is on my 'to build list'.