Boeing RB-50F (S/N 47-144, originally B-50B-50-BO) "Macs Effort" with armament. (U.S. Air Force photo)

The evolution of nuclear-armed bombers began with the use of the Boeing B-29 Superfortress, an aircraft designed in World War II to carry conventional weapons. Crews flew this aircraft to drop the 13-kiloton Little Boy atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima on August 6, 1945, and the 23-kilotonyield Fat Man that shattered Nagasaki eight days later. The B-29 and a variant, the B-50, then served as the U.S. Air Force’s only nuclear-capable bombers, under the Strategic Air Command, well into the early 1950s. Despite improvements to the propeller engine aircraft and the refinement of operations such as aerial refueling, they were too slow to avoid jet interceptors and lacked the range to hit targets from bases in the continental United States.

The B-50's development was approved in 1944, when the aircraft was known as the B-29D. Still in the midst of war, the Army Air Forces (AAF) wanted a significantly improved B-29 that could carry heavy loads of conventional weapons faster and farther. As World War II ended, the production of thousands of B-29s was canceled. The B-29D survived, but its purpose was changed. Redesignated as the B-50 in December 1945, the improved bomber was now earmarked for the atomic role. The decision was prompted by the uncertain fate of Convair B-36, the first long-range, heavy bomber produced as an atomic carrier. Of course, some of the B-29s that had been modified to carry the atomic bomb remained available, and surplus B-29s were being reconfigured for the atomic task. Just the same, the B-29s of war vintage were nearly obsolete. Hence, they would have to be replaced by a more efficient, atomic-capable bomber pending availability of the intercontinental B-36 or of another bomber truly suitable for the delivery of atomic weaponry.

While the short-range B-50 was immediately recognized as a stopgap measure, the magnitude of the aircraft's development problems proved unexpected. The B-50's first difficulties stemmed from its bomb bay which, like that of the B-29, was too small to house the new bomb and its required components. The fast development of special weapons created more complications, since the individual components of every single type of bomb had to be relocated within the bomb bay's narrow confines.

In keeping with the usual vicissitudes accompanying the development of any new or improved aircraft, the B-50 soon exhibited engine malfunctions. Then, cracking of the metal skin on the trailing edge of the wings and flaps dictated extensive modifications. And while these problems were being resolved, new requirements were levied on the aircraft. In 1949, as the proposed RB-36 remained a long way off, and because of the older RB-29's deficiencies in speed, range, and altitude, some B-50s had to be fitted for the reconnaissance role. To make matters worse, fuel tank overflows, leaking fuel check valves, failures of the engine turbo-chargers, generator defects, and the like continued to plague every B-50 version.

Meanwhile, contrary to plans, most B-50s came off the production lines without the receiver end of the new air-to-air refueling system being developed by Boeing. Additional, and successful, modifications therefore ensued. Nevertheless, the Strategic Air Command (SAC) had no illusions. The B-50, along with the B-36 (first delivered in June 1948), would be obsolete in 1951. That the B-50 did not start leaving the SAC inventory before 1953 was due to the production problems and many modifications of its replacement: the subsonic B-47.

It began as an outgrowth of the B-29, the B-50 can be traced back to July 1939, when Boeing Airplane Company introduced Model 334A, the B-29's first direct ancestor. Specifically, however, the B-50 bomber stemmed from a B-29 conversion, initiated in 1944.

Requirements for the B-29 Superfortress, from which the B-29D (later known as the B-50) derived, were issued in February 1940, when the Army Air Corps asked the aircraft industry to submit designs for a "Hemisphere Defense Weapon." Boeing Model 345 (a further development of Model 334A) was adjudged best of all proposals for bombers with very-long-range characteristics, and the company was authorized in September 1940 to produce the first very heavy bomber to incorporate pressure-cabin installations and other radical changes in design and armament. Development of an improved version of the famed B-29 began in 1944, as a so-called Phase II evolution of the basic design. No specific requirements ensued, but the main intent was to equip the improved bomber with the new Pratt & Whitney R-4360 Wasps and to do away with existing and often troublesome versions of the Curtiss-Wright R-3350 radial engines. The B-29A assigned to the Phase II development project, once reconfigured with the new Wasp engines, was flown by Boeing as the YB-44 prototype. The AAF approved within a few months a production version of the YB-44, which was then designated as the B-29D, and ordered 200 production models of the improved bomber in July 1945.

Japan's surrender on 14 August 1945, 3 months after the defeat of Nazi Germany, prompted the cancellation of military procurement. In the process, the 200 B-29Ds on order since July 1945 were reduced to 60 in December of the same year.

The B-29D became the B-50 in December 1945. Officially, the aircraft's new designation was justified by the changes separating the B-29D from its predecessors. However, according to Peter M. Bowers, a well-known authority on Boeing aircraft, "the redesignation was an outright military ruse to win appropriations for the procurement of an airplane that by its designation appeared to be merely a later version of an existing model that was being canceled wholesale, with many existing examples being put into dead storage.

In any case, the former B-29D featured many changes. The redesignated aircraft, built with a stronger but lighter grade of aluminum, had larger flaps, a higher vertical tail (that could be folded down to ease storage in standard size hangars), a hydraulic rudder boost, nose wheel steering, a more efficient undercarriage retracting mechanism, and a new electrical device to remove the ice from the pilot's windows. The new aircraft's wings and empennage also could be thermally de-iced. Finally, the 4 higher-thrust Pratt & Whitney R-4360 engines that replaced the standard B-29's R-3350s gave a power increase of 59 percent, and electrically controlled, reversible-pitch propellers allowed the use of engine power as an aid to braking on short or wet runways. There was also some rearrangement of the crew. Yet, no matter what designation, there was no doubt that the piston-powered B-29D/B-50 would seem antiquated in the post-war era of jet bombers.

The AAF began to plan for an atomic strike force in the first few months of peace that followed the end of World War II. It ordered that 19 additional B-29s be reconfigured as atomic carriers in July 1946, six months after the improved B-29D had become the B-50. Most likely, the AAF already planned that the redesignated bombers would first supplement the reconfigured B-29s and then replace them until a better atomic carrier became available. But the AAF at the time was not in a particularly strong position to press for what it believed to be essential. Hence, the true purpose of the B-50 program did not become official until the spring of 1947.

Variants

* XB-44: One B-29A was handed over to Pratt & Whitney to be fitted with the new Wasp Major 28-cylinder engines. Initially designated B-29D, this was eventually changed to B-50A in December 1945. (x1, converted)

* B-50A--First production version of the B-50. It had new wings that were stronger and lighter than the units on the B-29. It also had taller vertical tail than the B-29. (x60)

* B-50B--Increase in gross weight over the A model, from 168,480 lb (76,420 kg) to 170,400 lb (77,290 kg). Also included a new type of lightweight fuel cell. (x45)

* B-50D--Definitive production version of the B-50. The 7-piece nose cone window was replaced by a single plastic cone and a flat bomb-aimer's window. Many included the new boom-type refueling system. (x222)

* DB-50D--Drone director conversion of a B-50D, to be used with the GAM-63 RASCAL missile. (x1, converted)

EB-50B with track-tread undercarriage

* EB-50B--Single conversion of a B-50B to be fitted with a track-tread undercarriage. (x1, converted)

* KB-50--Air to air refueling tanker conversions of the bomber. (x134, converted)

An F-101A Voodoo (top right), B-66 Destroyer (top left) and F-100D Super Sabre refuel from a KB-50J tanker at an RAF open day in England, 1963

* KB-50J--Tanker B-50s with improved performance, via two extra General Electric J47 turbojets under the outer wings. (x112, converted)

* KB-50K--Tanker conversions of the TB-50H trainer aircraft. (x24, converted)

* RB-50B--All but one of the B-50Bs were converted into the recon role. These were fitted with nine cameras in four stations, weather instruments, and a bomb bay capsule holding the extra crew members. (x44, converted)

* RB-50E--Special photographic conversions of the RB-50B, modified at Wichita. (x14, converted)

* RB-50F--Conversions of the RB-50B, fitted with SHORAN navigation radar for special missions. (x14, converted)

* RB-50G--Conversions of the RB-50B, fitted with electronic countermeasures stations along with the SHORAN radar. (x15, converted)

Boeing WB-50D of 53rd Weather Squadron at RAF Burtonwood in May 1957

* TB-50A--Trainer conversion of the B-50A. (x11, converted)

* TB-50D--Trainer conversion of the B-50D. (x11, converted)

* TB-50H--Newly built trainer planes. (x24)

* WB-50 --Weather reconnaissance conversion of the B-50.

* WB-50D--Weather reconnaissance conversions of outdated B-50Ds, fitted with meteorological equipment. (x36, converted). Some of these flew highly classified missions for atmospheric sampling between 1953 and 1955 to detect Soviet detonation of atomic weapons.[3]

* YB-50C--Version to be fitted with the Variable Discharge Turbine version of the R-4360 engine. None were built.

* B-54A--Proposed version of the YB-50C.

* RB-54A--Proposed reconnaissance version of the YB-50C.

Specifications (B-50D)

Boeing B-50D

General characteristics

* Crew: 8: Pilot, co-pilot, flight engineer, radio/electronic countermeasures operator, two side gunners, top gunner and tail gunner

* Length: 99 ft 0 in (30.2 m)

* Wingspan: 141 ft 3 in (43.1 m)

* Height: 32 ft 8 in (10.0 m)

* Wing area: 1736 ft² (161.3 m²)

* Empty weight: 80,610 lb (36,560 kg)

* Loaded weight: 121,850 lb (55,270 kg)

* Max takeoff weight: 173,000 lb (78,470 kg)

* Powerplant: 4× Pratt & Whitney R-4360 radial engines, 3,500 hp (2,600 kW) each

Performance

* Maximum speed: 395 mph (343 kn, 636 km/h)

* Cruise speed: 244 mph (212 kn, 393 km/h)

* Combat radius: 2,100 NM (2,400 mi, 3,860 km)

* Ferry range: 5,000 NM (5,760 mi, 9,270 km)

* Service ceiling: 36,650 ft (11,170 m)

* Rate of climb: 2,225 ft/min (11.3 m/s)

* Wing loading: 70.19 lb/ft² (343 kg/m²)

* Power/mass: 0.115 hp/lb (193 W/kg)

Armament

* Guns:

o 12× .50 in (12.7 mm) M2 Browning machine guns in remote controlled turrets

o 1× 20 mm (0.787 in) cannon in tail

* Bombs:

o 20,000 lb (9,100 kg) internally

o 8,000 lb (3,600 kg) on external hardpoints

Various users!

The Pe 2 was Russia’s outstanding tactical bomber of World War II and distinguished itself throughout that conflict. Even when fully loaded, it flew so fast that escorting fighters were hard-pressed to keep up.

In 1938 a design bureau under Vladimir Petlyakov responded to Soviet specifications for a high-altitude fighter with the VI 100. It was an all-metal, twin-engine machine with two rudders and streamlined engine nacelles. A crew of three sat in a spacious cockpit toward the front of the fuselage. In designing the VI 100, careful consideration was given to weight and drag reduction, so bulky radiators were located along the wings while the fuselage employed the smallest possible cross-section. Flight-testing commenced in 1939 with excellent results, but the government changed the role of the craft to high-level bombing. When this proved impractical due to inaccuracy, dive-bombing was substituted, and the plane was fitted with dive brakes. Petlyakov’s design proved successful in this mode, and in 1940 it entered service as the Pe 2.

When war with Germany commenced in June 1941, Pe 2s distinguished themselves in hard-pressed attacks and flew faster than pursuing Bf 109E fighters. Pe 2s were so speedy that they frequently throttled back to allow Lend-Lease Hawker Hurricane escort fighters to keep up. The Pe 2 was also quite strong and could sustain major damage with few ill effects. Successive modifications and stronger engines improved performance and kept them slightly beyond the reach of the newer Bf 109F/Gs. The biggest modifications occurred in 1943, when the wing profile was modified, oil-cooler intakes were reshaped, and bomb mounts received streamlined fairings. The net result was a 25 percent increase in speed. Features to enhance crew survival were also incorporated, including a novel cold-gas bleeding system to suppress fires in the fuel tanks. No less than 11,400 of these impressive machines were constructed. In concert with the smaller Ilyushin Il 2, they were significant contributors to the final Russian victory.

Type: Medium Bomber; Dive-Bomber

Dimensions: wingspan, 56 feet, 3 inches; length, 41 feet, 6 inches; height, 11 feet, 6 inches

Weights: empty, 12,952 pounds; gross, 18,726 pounds

Power plant: 2 × 1,260–horsepower M-105PF liquid-cooled in-line engines

Performance: maximum speed, 360 miles per hour; ceiling, 28,870 feet; range, 721 miles

Armament: 2 × 7.62mm machine guns; 3 × 12.7mm machine guns; 6,614 pounds of bombs

Service dates: 1940–1945

World War II

Czechoslovakia

* Czechoslovakian Air Force operated some Pe-2FT aircraft in the 1st Czechoslovakian Mixed Air Division in Soviet Union (1. československá smíšená letecká divize v SSSR). Aircraft were used operationally since 14 April 1945.

Finland

* Finnish Air Force operated seven captured aircraft (given the Finnish serial numbers PE-211 to PE-217).

Soviet Union

* Soviet Air Force

Postwar

People's Republic of China

* People's Liberation Army Air Force

Czechoslovakia

* Czechoslovakian Air Force operated 32 Pe-2FT and 3 UPe-2 between May 1946 and mid-1951. First aircraft arrived to Prague-Kbely airfield in April 1946 and formed two squadrons of the 25 Air Regiment in Havlíčkův Brod. Czechoslovakian aircraft were known under designation B-32 (Pe-2FT) and CB-32 (UPe-2).

Hungary

* Hungarian Air Force

Poland

* Air Force of the Polish Army (after 1947 Polish Air Force)

Soviet Union

* Soviet Air Force

Yugoslavia

* SFR Yugoslav Air Force operated 123 Pe-2FT and 9 UPe-2 between 1945 and 1954.

o 41st Bomber Aviation Regiment (1945-1948)

o 42nd Bomber Aviation Regiment (1945-1948)

o 43rd Bomber Aviation Regiment (1947-1948)

o Night Bomber Aviation Regiment (1948)

o 88th Bomber Aviation Regiment (1948-1952)

o 97th Bomber Aviation Regiment (1948-1952)

o 109th Bomber Aviation Regiment (1948-1952)

o 185th Mixed Aviation Regiment (1949-1952)

o 715. Independent Reconnaissance Squadron (1949-1952)

LINK

These are cutaway drawings of an ELINT B-24J, but the location of the SCR-717 is the same as on late Far East SB-24Ls and Ms.

Short History of the use of the R-45/ARR-7.

WWII
Early 1943
B-24 "Ferret" aircraft were developed and tested in the Pacific Theater with the following mission equipment:
SCR-587
SX-28 (to become the R-45/ARR-7)
S-36
Panoramic Indicators
Recording Receivers
Omni-Antennas
Motor driven rotatable Yagi

1945
US Navy Patrol Bomber Squadron VPB-106, flying PB4Y-2 Privateers from Tinian in the Mariana Islands.
The PB4Y-2 Privateer was a specially modified Navy Version of the B-24. Its fuselage was extended 7 feet and the twin tails were changed to a single tail.

Mission equipment included:
APR-1
APR-2
APR-5 Radar Intercept Receivers with Pulse Analyzers and DF Antennas

ARR-5
ARR-7 Communications Intercept Receivers

APT-1
APQ-2
APT-5 Jammers

1945
20th Air Force, 3rd Photo Reconnaissance Squadron
B-24 "Ferrets"
Mission Equipment included:
APR-4
APR-5A Radar Search Receivers
APA-10 Pan Adapter
APA-11 Pulse Analyzer
APA-17 Direction Finder
APA-13 Signal recorder
APA-24 Direction Finder
ARR-5
ARR-7 Communications Search Receivers
ANQ-1 Wire Recorder

During WWII there were many other similar aircraft developed but none specifically listed the R-45/ARR-7 .

B-17 and B-24 Ferrets were also used in Europe and North Africa. B-29's were also used in the Pacific.

RICH WA6KNW

Old Crows never die they just smell that way................

Mario Castoldi had been convinced from the earliest days of MC.200 flight testing that full potential of the design would be achieved only by the installation of an inline engine. This opinion was confirmed during August 1940 when the prototype Macchi MC.202 (MM 445) was tested with an imported Daimler-Benz DB 601A-1 engine. The prototype was first flown on 10 August 1940, and its initial trials were so impressive that it was ordered into production without delay.

Generally similar in overall configuration to the MC.200, the MC.202 Folgore (thunderbolt) introduced a new fuselage structure with an enclosed cockpit, similar wings, but retained the tail unit and landing gear of its predecessor. However, the single MC.202 prototype, which was basically a re-engined MC.200 airframe, was flown with a retractable tailwheel. Because of the degree of commonality there was little delay in starting production, the first deliveries being made in the spring of 1941. Built alongside the MC.200 by Macchi, Breda and SAI-Ambrosini, early series aircraft were powered by imported DB601A-1 engines until such time as Alfa Romeo had a licence-built version in production as the RA.1000 RC.41-1 Monsone (monsoon). However, it was limited manufacture of this engine which restricted the number of MC.202s to a total of about 1,500 when production ended in 1943, and. so the MC.200 continued to be manufactured simultaneously, instead of being supplanted completely by the Folgore. Like its predecessor, the MC.202 was built in generally similar MC.202AS and MC.202CB tropicalised and fighter-bomber variants respectively, plus a single MC.202D experimental aircraft which introduced a revised radiator for the engine cooling system.

Undoubtedly the best wartime fighter to serve in large numbers with the Regia Aeronautica, initial deliveries of production aircraft were made in November 1941 to units operating in Libya. The Folgore also took part in actions against Malta and Allied convoys in the Mediterranean and, in September 1942, was deployed in some numbers on the Eastern Front. They played a significant role in the defence of Sicily and southern Italy against bombing attacks launched by the USAF, but by the time of the Allied invasion of Sicily they were less effective as attrition had reduced the total number available.

Specification

Macchi MC.202

Type: single-seat interceptor fighter

Powerplant: one 1,175-hp (876-kW) Alfa Romeo RA.1000 RC.41-1 Monsone 12-cylinder inverted-Vee piston engine

Performance: maximum speed 370 mph (595 km/h) at 16,405 ft (5000 m); service ceiling 37,730 ft (11500 m); range 475 miles (765 km)

Weight: empty 5,181lb (2350 kg); maximum take-off 6,636 lb (3010 kg)

Dimensions: span 34 ft 8lh in (10.58 m); length 29 ft 0 ½ in (8.85 m); height 9 ft 11 ½ in (3.04 m); wing area 180.84 sq ft (16.80 m2)

Armament: initially two 12.7-mm (0.5-in) Breda-SAFAT machine-guns in upper engine cowling, but later series added two wing-mounted 7.7-mm (0.303-in) Breda-SAFAT guns; one production batch introduced a 20-mm cannon beneath each wing

Operators: Luftwaffe (small number ex-Italian), Italian Regia Aeronautica, Aeronautica Cobelligerante del Sud, and Aeronautica azionale Repubblicana

Variants and production

Like its predecessor C.200, the C.202 had relatively few modifications, with only 116 modifications during its career, most of them practically invisible externally. The total series production ordered was 1,454: 900 to Breda, 150 to SAI Ambrosini, 403 to Aermacchi. The amount produced was actually 1,106 and not 1,220 as previous stated. Breda built 649 (Series XVI deleted, Series XII and XV partially completed caused the difference); Aermacchi made 390 examples, SAI only 67.

One of the differences between prototype and series production was the lack of radio antenna and the retractable tailwheel (these differences caused the slightly advantage in speed); the difference in speed was not so great and so, the series version had the fixed tailwheel and the radio antenna. However, the support for the engine, originally made in steel, was replaced with a lighter aluminium structure.

C.202

Starting with the Serie VII, the fighter had a new wing with a provision for two 7.7 mm (.303 in) Breda-SAFAT machine guns and an armoured windscreen (previously, only the armoured seat and the self-sealing tanks were provided). Serie IX's weight was 2,515/3,069 kg with the 7.7 machine guns seldom installed.[36]

C.202AS

Dust filters for operations in North Africa (AS - Africa Settentrionale, North Africa); they little affected the speed and so, almost all Folgores had them and thus were in C.202AS standard; finally, starting with Serie XI there was a provision for two 50, 100 or 160 kgs bombs, small bombs clusters (10, 15, 20 kg) or 100 l tanks. These underwing pylons were rarely utilized, as Folgores were needed in the interceptor roles.

C.202CB

Underwing hardpoints for bombs or drop tanks (CB - Caccia Bombardiere, Fighter-Bomber)

C.202EC

probably meaning Esperimento Cannoni, it was another linking ring between Veltro and Folgore. One aircraft (Serie III, s/n MM 91974) was fitted with a pair of gondola-mounted 20 mm cannon with 200 rounds each (it flew on 12 May 1943); later it was turned into a C.205V. Another four examples were so equipped, but, despite the good results in the trials (aimed to boost the Folgore's firepower), there was no further production, because the cannons penalized the aircraft's performance. There was, in the Folgore, no room to mount them inside the wings or the nose, so it was developed the MC.205V/Ns.[38] Neverthless, the XII series could have introduced a new wing with MG 151 provisions. This is not well documented, as this series was produced by Breda after the Armistice, and was interrupted with the devastating USAAF bombings, together with many others aircraft; among them, also Macchi 205 production and the 206 prototype (30 April 1944; in five days, the USAAF managed to destroy both Fiat and Macchi facilities, eliminating all of Italy's fighter production).

C.202RF

Equipped with cameras for photo-reconnaissance missions (R - Ricognizione, Reconnaissance), very few produced, later the recce role will be couvered by Veltros.

C.202D

Prototype with a revised radiator, under the nose, similar to the P-40's one (s/n. MM 7768)

C.202 AR.4

at least one was modified as 'drone director' (coupled with S.79s), and it was planned to use Folgores also as 'Mistel', with an AR.4 "radiobomba". (a sort of remote-control kamikaze bomber).

C.202 with DB 605 and other engines

Macchi MC.202 with DB 605 were initially known as MC.202 bis; later as the C.205 Veltro. Macchi C.200, C.202 and C.205 shared many common components. The MC.200A/2 was a MC.200 with Folgore wings (MM.8238). After the Armistice, Aeronautica Sannita or the Co-Belligerant Italian AF began MC.205 modifying C.202s with DB 605s. These aircraft were known also as "Folgeltro". Around two dozen were made. Another Folgore was modified with DB 601E-1 (1,350 hp) in summer 1944, but this hybrid with Bf-109F technology crashed on 21 January 1946. The MC. 204 was a version with a L.121 Asso (1,000 hp); proposed early in the war (28 September 1940), but all the effort continued only with DB-601 engines. Early Folgores had original DB 601s, while from the Serie VII, RC.41s were available. Italian engines had 100 hp less than the German DB 601s.

After the war, 31 C.202 airframes were fitted with license-built Daimler-Benz DB 605 engines and sold to Egypt as C.205 Veltros, with another 11 'real' MC.205s (with MG151 cannons in the wings).

The most important modification Flettner made to the design of the new aircraft was to re-locate the engine behind the pilot's seat, which gave him and the observer a much-enlarged field of view. The drive was taken off the front of the crankshaft through a reduction gearbox and transmitted up and back through a universally jointed drive shaft and a cross-shaft connecting the two rotor shafts, which were set at an inclusive angle of 24 degrees, and inclined forward by 6 degrees. The rotor blades were mounted so that they were parallel when they were at 45 degrees to the aircraft's centreline. The fin and rudder were much larger than in previous Flettner designs, steering being accomplished by a combination of rudder movement and differential collective pitch control.

The 'Kolibri' proved to be very satisfactory indeed, despite a pronounced vibration period as the engine was run-up, with a maximum speed in level flight of 150km/h (93mph), a vertical rate of climb of 91.5m/min (300ft/min), a hover ceiling of 300m (985ft), and a service ceiling of 3290m (10,800ft). Its range, with just the pilot and maximum fuel aboard, was 300km (185 miles). Some 50 pilots were trained to fly it, most of them by Flettner's test pilot, Hans Fuisting. It was extremely manoeuvrable and very stable and at forward speeds in excess of 60km/h (37mph) could be flown hands-off once the controls were balanced.

SEA TRIALS

From 1942, trials at sea aboard the cruiser Köln demonstrated that the aircraft was usable even in very poor weather conditions, and by the following year, 20 were in service with the Kriegsmarine in the Mediterranean and the Aegean. In 1944, an order for 1000 Fl 282s was placed with BMW, which began tooling up for production at its Munich and Eisenach plants, but before manufacture could begin, both they and the Flettner works at Johannisthal were very badly damaged by Allied bombing. Anton Flettner went on to design a 20-seat passenger helicopter, the Fl 339, but never got beyond the development stag

ANTON FLETTNER (*1885 -+1965): In 1905, Anton Flettner started his engineering career

designing control systems for use in Germany’s Zeppelins. Both during and after the

First World War, Flettner continued working on many innovative and successful projects.

In 1922, Flettner built a helicopter which however did not fly (in a tethered flight) until

1933. Flettner was one of the first helicopter designers to use intermeshing rotors. His

designs were superior to the Focke-Achgelis Fa 61 design and they also gave some of the

early efforts of Sikorsky’s a run for his money. Flettner emigrated to the U.S. in 1947,

worked for a while for the U.S. Navy and then started his own company, Flettner Aircraft

Corporation.

Flettner Fl 184: A gyroplane. The only single-rotor helicopter built by Flettner; all others had twin, intermeshing rotors. Single prototype destroyed in a fire; though the Kriegsmarine did have a strong interest in the capabilities of the aircraft.

Flettner Fl 185: Continuation effort of the Fl 184. Built more for design and testing purposes than anything else.

Flettner Fl 201: An enlarged Fl 185. Provisions for carrying 35 +/- passengers. Design only, none built.

Flettner Fl 265: Built for the German Kriegsmarine in 1938, but the program was stopped because the KM found the Fl 282 to be more optimally suited for its needs. Only six were built. In an interesting twist, the Fl 265 was “combat tested” against a Fw 190 and Me 109 in mock battles - both fighters were not able to score a kill against the agile Fl 265 (this was recorded on film).

Bordfliegerstaffel 196 (known codes: T3+**, 6W+** (until July of 1943), 6I+**):

Gruppenstab (established 12.1937)

1/196

2/196

3/196

5/196

Flettner Fl 285: A theoretical design intended to fill the needs of the German Kriegsmarine. None were built.

Flettner Fl 339: The Fl 339 was intended to serve the needs of the Wehrmacht as a communications, liaison and aerial observation platform. Two/four seaters were planned. None were built as the project was canceled.

When the F-16 was born in the early 1970s, much against the will of most U.S. Air Force planners who did not want an inexpensive, "incapable" aircraft, it was envisioned as a small, lightweight, supreme dogfighter. The Fighting Falcon has more than lived up to that design parameter in spite of being given extensive air-to-ground bombing and attack mission capability as well. The official name has never been popular with pilots, who prefer to call it the Viper, Electric Jet (the latter for its computer driven fly-by-wire control systems) or just plain Jet, but that has not stopped them from making the small fighter one of the most lethal in the world.

Climbing aboard the F-16 is like settling into the world's finest sports car...a greater than 1-to-1 thrust-to-weight ratio, incredible visibility out of the bubble canopy, a very comfortable seat reclined 30 degrees and side stick controls at left (throttle) and right (flight) with buttons on both for systems and weapons activation. With a turn rate of 19 degrees per second, an excellent Head Up Display (HUD), proven 20mm gun and Sidewinder heat seeking missiles, the Jet is deadly, particularly since its small size means it is very hard to see in air combat.

Once the aircraft is started, the canopy sill comes down to below shoulder level, leaving one sitting high inside the polycarbonate bubble. My first impression was that of sitting on top of the aircraft, suspended in space. I found the reclining seat left my head at just the right angle for comfort and pulling high G (1G is the force of gravity). After pretake-off checks and lining up on the runway, power is brought up to 80%...any more and the tires will slide. Brake release and into full afterburner...WHAM! The Jet leaps down the runway as if scalded and I am pressed back hard into the seat, but with far less discomfort than most modern fighters due to the couch. At 130 knots a little back pressure on the stick brings the Viper into a nose high attitude and at 145 it lifts off after 2,200 feet of runway.

The stick is connected to a digital complex of four computers which send electrical impulses to the flight controls...there are no cables or tubes. Though the stick grip looks normal, it moves only one tenth of an inch in any direction so gentle inputs only are necessary. A foldable wristrest enables the pilot to rest his hand on the stick and touch it with thumb and forefinger only when needed. At first this lack of motion is intimidating but after a few minutes it becomes so natural and relaxing, with all buttons handy due to HOTAS (Hands On Throttle And Stick) design, one wonders why we haven't done this before. Resting with my arm in a comfortable position is far better than reaching to the center of the cockpit for a conventional "pole." The lasting impression after some time at the controls is supreme precision with no friction or lag, freeing the pilot to fly the mission rather than manage the aircraft.

The radar and weapons systems are very versatile, enabling the pilot to track and fire at multiple targets without putting his head inside the cockpit (this is not always true for bombing or firing air-to-ground missiles like the Maverick). In one of my first mock dogfights I pulled the 9 Gs the Viper is capable of but it really took some getting used to. The machine can truly outperform the human, leading to some serious G-LOC (G induced Loss Of Consciousness) problems where the pilot blacks out. The F-16 community has pioneered this high-performance end of the envelope.

In a dogfight the F-16 is fantastic, able to turn and maneuver against anything in the sky, with the possible exception of the Harrier which can use nozzles to turn instantly. The computer immediately responds to commands but it will not allow a pilot to push the airframe into a stalled or out of control situation. With the exception of G-LOC, I was able to keep my adversary in sight at all times due to the clear bubble and the ability to swivel my head on the reclined couch.

Coming back into the landing pattern, the control system's sensitivity is reduced by 50% when the landing gear is lowered (or when the inflight refueling receptacle is opened). This immediately makes the Jet very easy to handle and landing is easier to perform than in a Cessna. Speed bleeds off nicely and a soft touchdown is made at 142 knots. In spite of the pressure in military circles to downplay the dogfight (something that has been done after every war since World War I), the F-16 Jet jockeys keep air combat maneuvering (ACM) in the forefront of their capability and no doubt they will have to use it in our world's ever changing military threat environment.

The Harrier vertical take-off and landing fixed wing warplane has earned its place in history as the only successful operational "jump jet," as the press likes to call it. Using vectored engine thrust through four rotatable nozzles, the Harrier was born in England from a prototype, the Kestrel, which first flew in October 1960. Before the decade was out the Royal Air Force was flying them operationally, then the U.S. Marine Corps bought them in 1970 as the AV-8A, replaced by the AV-8B which serves the Marines today as one of its primary ground attack aircraft.

Harriers can be based on ships, on small pads at an invasion beach, off roads or just about anywhere artificial planking can be laid down. Both the Royal Navy and the RAF proved the Harrier to be an effective combat aircraft during the 1982 Falklands War. This effectiveness was a hard earned feat since several pilots were killed in the early days trying to master the small, touchy fighter.

Flying the Harrier requires an absolute mastery of vertical flight basics and helicopter experience is usually mandatory, even if a new pilot has to be given several hours in a chopper before flying the jet. The coordination required to transition from vertical to level flight, especially when accelerating away from a hover, is critical. If the aircraft gets turned "out of wind," that is, if it is not pointing into the wind, it begins to roll over and fall out from under you. A little ten cent weathervane in front of the windshield turns out to be the most valuable instrument on board, indicating wind direction in relation to the aircraft. Keep it pointing forward and everything is fine.

Take-off and landing comes in eight possible combinations...the pilot never gets bored. Take-off: conventional, short (STO), rolling vertical (RVTO), vertical (VTO). Landing: conventional, slow, rolling vertical (RVL), vertical (VL).

Since I was looking forward to the jet's vertical capabilities, my first conventional take-off in the AV-8A took me by surprise. With a combat weight of 20,000 pounds and 21,000 pounds of thrust, the Harrier has the same acceleration as the F-16 or F-15...a greater than 1-to-1 thrust-to-weight ratio. As I quickly moved the throttle forward my head was slammed back into the headrest and in seconds the Harrier was airborne, then climbing virtually straight up. The controls are immediately sensitive to the touch, so much so the jet is best flown with fingertip pressures on the stick. Important information such as speed, altitude, angle of attack, heading and thrust vector all read out on the HUD (Head Up Display) glass in front so you don't have to spend much time with eyes inside the cockpit.

My first landing was conventional, though this is actually the more dangerous way to land since four sets of landing gear have to touch down at the same time while traveling very fast. If not done right the aircraft can bounce out of control. The more stable slow landing is flown at 120 to 140 knots with 60 degrees of nozzle deflection.

The short take-off can be made two ways: accelerate to 65 knots and deflect the nozzles to 65 degrees, which makes the machine jump off the ground in a scant 300 feet...one second it's normal linear acceleration, then the thing is clawing vertically into the sky like an elevator. A quick shove on the nozzle lever to full forward and the Harrier jolts ahead immediately to accelerate away. The less intimidating procedure is to accelerate to 110 knots then pull the nozzles to 50 degrees for a longer take-off run.

Bringing the jet around for the first vertical landing can be an unnatural act for a fixed wing jet pilot since you have to ignore the fear of losing airspeed. Power is reduced to 90% and nozzles set at 90 degrees as the nose ever so gently comes up while airspeed falls below 100 knots. Before you know it the Harrier is hovering on a column of jet exhaust just above the pad. The puffer reaction controls on the end of each wing and at nose and tail operate off bleed air from the engine with thrust activated and increased as the nozzles are deflected down. Movements of stick and rudder bring quick response, much like a helicopter but with no vibration and the moment arm being below the fuselage instead of under a rotor head.

With the jet stabilized at an 8-degree angle of attack, the power is brought back slightly until a descent of about five feet per second lowers us to the pad. Here, more than ever, I had to be very light on the controls but immediate with any input. Entering ground effect is unsettling as the exhaust hits the wings and tail plane...the entire machine trembles and shakes and control inputs have to increase to the point it feels as if you are moving the stick all over the cockpit to stay level. The power then has to be increased to avoid being sucked down into the ground. With a last great rumble the jet bounces onto the ground...immediate idle on the power and nozzles full aft to avoid ingestion of any foreign objects into the engine. If there is a great deal of debris on the landing surface the best technique is a rolling vertical landing with nozzles at 70 degrees and a forward speed of 50 knots.

There is really nothing to prepare one for a vertical take-off...nozzles to the hover stop, then slam the throttle forward. The Harrier instantly rockets off the earth straight up. At 50 feet bring the power back to 95% and the aircraft is hovering again. Throttle up to 100%, nozzles gradually to full aft and you accelerate away from a midair start to over 200 knots in a few seconds at that same fabulous rate. Flying the Harrier is a unique experience in military aviation, and certainly one of the most breathtaking.

Walking up to the B-17 is a humbling experience. Though small by today's standards, it still exudes a sense of power and size, not to mention history as America's most famous military aircraft. There are two distinct ways to get into a Fort...go through the right rear door and walk up the fuselage like any normal human, or walk boldly to the left nose hatch and pull yourself up and in with Gregory Peck Twelve O’clock High flair. The older I get, the less of an option the latter becomes.

The B-17's cockpit is very roomy and clearly laid out with a single set of flying instruments and propeller feather buttons in the center of the panel for use by both pilots. Fuel and engine gauges are on the co-pilot's side (right) while electrical and auxiliary gauges are on the pilot's side (left). As the pilots settle into their seats, the engineer or co-pilot begins an extensive check list which eventually results in getting the engines started.

The central control pedestal is dominated by the unique Boeing throttles which sprout up like iron grates, dominating everything else. Propeller pitch levers sit just below the throttles while the turbo boost control knob and engine mixtures are on the left and right front of the pedestal respectively. Starting the Wright R-1820 radial engines is usually effortless...you just have to do everything four times with both pilots working in harmony. Clouds of oil smoke belch from the turbos on the bottom of each nacelle until everything is running smoothly.

For its size, the Fort is delightful to taxi with good brakes and plenty of outboard engine authority...the tail wheel does not steer so it must be unlocked for turns on the ground. Once at the end of the runway the engines are run up and tested, the pretake-off checklist is read through and the beast lined up on the runway as the tail wheel is locked.

With right palm up to grab all four throttles at the center, I slowly work them up toward full power. The synchronized fury and roar of four 1,200 hp engines beats its way through the thin skin of the cockpit and hammers wonderfully at all of us inside. The co-pilot checks the gauges and taps my hand, the signal that he will make the fine adjustments up to full power and leave me free to concentrate on take-off. The bomber tracks very true with that massive fin and rudder with very little need to "jockey" the throttles. Holding a three point (nose high) attitude allows the Boeing to fly off very smoothly when it's ready, without much help from me. I give the co-pilot a thumbs up...he flicks the landing gear switch up...the massive wheels slowly retract into the nacelles, then stop short of disappearing to give that classic B-17 signature of exposed rubber.

After power is reduced to climb settings I glance out the left window and enter a left bank to leave the airfield...the sight of those churning propellers and massive wing lowering to reveal the ground is never old hat. The Fort is so stable that once the controls are set it tends to stay there, a good trait for a bombing platform. By the same token, it doesn't like to change attitude so it takes some muscle to maneuver around...sometimes over 100 pounds of control pressure. No wonder youngsters were the ideal pilots for those long range, tight formation missions.

Believe it or not, this monster is as easy to land as a Piper Cub. Once on final approach the trick is not to let the speed drop below 120 mph until the field is made since, if one or more engines fail, the aircraft becomes uncontrollable. On short final speed is bled down to 100 mph over the runway threshold and the wheel brought back for a three point landing. Usually, if I've managed to judge my height properly, the tires kiss the ground and the '17 tracks straight. Once down to almost walking speed, I call for the co-pilot to unlock the tail wheel and taxi in to the tune of squealing brakes for shutdown. When everything goes quiet I find I am always reluctant to leave, even if I'm tired. The Queen of the Skies really does gain a hold over her willing subjects. Honest, with a legendary ability to survive severe battle damage and bring her crews home, she has rightfully earned her place in history.

The symbol of Britain's refusal to give up during that dark summer of 1940, the Spitfire won the hearts of both pilots and public in World War II. Regardless of the version, with either Rolls-Royce Merlin or Griffon power, all Spitfire cockpits are virtually identical and wonderfully compact. Climbing in really is (to use a very worn turn of phrase) like pulling the machine on. If everything is done correctly, the Spitfire is one of the easiest aircraft to start. The engine usually fires within two blades and runs like a clock.

While the Merlin-engine versions run very smoothly, the larger Griffon-engine machines feel as if they are angry. The sound from the exhaust stacks and the vibration transferred to the seat of the pants communicates visceral power, almost a desire to go kill something. Any hot-rod lover would enjoy this sensation of unbridled horsepower, this impatience to be turned loose and hunt. Every fighter I've been in is great fun to fly but only a very few are brutally straight about why they exist. The Griffon Spitfire is one such machine.

With enough warmth in the coolant and oil, a flip of the parking brake catch releases the brake lever on the spade control grip and the aircraft is taxiing with minimal power. The first time I had the opportunity to fly a British aircraft with this hand operated air brake system I was skeptical about it being very effective compared to hydraulic toe brakes. Within a very few minutes I was completely won over. It is far easier to manage, particularly on run up when one has to really stand on most American fighter rudder pedals. The source of high-pressure air is controlled by the brake lever on the spade control grip, or stick. The rudder pedals modulate the distribution of pressure to the left and right main wheel brakes. If the pedals are even, equal braking is applied to both sides; as one rudder pedal is applied then more brake pressure is fed to that side. Strength of application is delivered by the hand lever on the grip. The major benefit to all this is having one's feet and legs almost completely relaxed most of the time.

Lining up for take-off is intimidating with that Rolls-Royce engine sticking way out in front. There is no sense in thinking too much about it. Throttle up slowly to prevent a lurch to the right (if in a Griffon Spit where the propeller turns the opposite direction from American aircraft)...left foot moves forward almost in concert with the left hand to keep the nose straight. Monster torque shoves the right wing down rapidly, very much like the P-40, until full left aileron and full (give or take a minuscule amount) left rudder is held. The Rolls is a wounded dragon bellowing horrendously.

There is so much raw power and noise, and you are so tightly focused on keeping everything under control, the actual lift-off at around 90 kts goes by almost unnoticed. Switch hands, move the gear lever down to disengage it from the slot, inwards through the gate and then smartly all the way forward, hold momentarily, then let go. If all is well, the lever snaps outwards through the upper gate, then springs back into the upper slot. Its easy to spot a new Spitfire pilot...the aircraft porpoises as the pilot changes hands and works the gear lever.

Sitting behind this demon V-12 churning out so much power is intoxicating...the earth falls away at a rapid rate, at least for something with a propeller. A look around reveals the excellent visibility out of the bubble canopy. This lessens, to a degree, the impression of being buried within a Spitfire, though that feeling of being a part of the machine does not change. The elevator is very light while the rudder is stiff and the ailerons even more so. Every Spitfire I've flown takes a bit more muscle to roll than most fighters. As speed increases both rudder and ailerons get heavier, resulting in a curious mismatch at high speed...one has to handle the almost oversensitive elevators with a light fingertip touch while arm-wrestling the stiff ailerons. Pilots had to keep this in mind during combat, particularly when going against the Fw 190 which had a sterling rate of roll and exceptionally well harmonized controls. That being said, the aircraft is very well balanced and delightful to maneuver. Whipping a Spit around the clouds ranks right up there at the top of aviation's great experiences.

The aircraft stalls like a Piper Cub. Though a wing tends to drop, there isn't the slightest mean streak in it unless you cob the power, which produces a very violent torque roll. Power off, gear and flaps down, main fuel tanks full, it stalls at 65 kts, which is ridiculously slow. Add a slight bit of power and that drops to 60 kts. With that enormous snout, I try to make a curving approach to landing at about 100 kts in order to keep the runway in sight as long as possible. By the time I'm rolling out across the field boundary, if at max landing weight, I should be no faster than 85 kts with power and 95 kts in a glide. At lighter weights these speeds can be reduced by 5 kts.

All Spitfires are exceptionally easy to land with no inherent tendency to swerve or groundloop. Just reduce power to idle, flare to a three point attitude and she sets down on a feather almost every time. This is a great surprise to most considering the narrow track undercarriage and full swivel, non-locking tailwheel. Why doesn't it drop a wing violently or make the pilot stomp on the rudders? I wish I knew. The genius of managing to combine light aircraft characteristics with such high performance is nothing short of miraculous compared to most other wartime tailwheel types. One or two landings in the Spitfire and you are in love for life.

America's most famous fighter, the P-51's beauty of line generates a magic and visceral reaction which has lasted well beyond World War II to the present day. To actually climb aboard and settle in behind that wizard Merlin engine is one of aviation's most coveted experiences.

Alone in the cockpit of a Mustang, I always feel secure. For the 1940s, the cockpit is a marvel of human engineering with everything easily accessible and logically arranged for a left to right sweep around the inside. Pilots could easily master it without a checklist, a real plus in the heat of combat. There are no emergency systems in the '51, other than the canopy quick release handle, so pilot workload is low.

I have never avoided the rush of adrenaline and racing heart as my hands move across the switches to bring the powerful 1650 cubic inch Packard-built Rolls-Royce Merlin to life. When the massive propeller begins to turn, the airframe wiggles slightly from the force of the starter, then the exhaust stacks bark and the V-12 settles down to a loud purr. The smell of burnt oil comes rushing into the cockpit and the hydraulics start to close the large landing gear fairing doors and raise the flaps. Slowly, she comes to life under my hands and I sit there, allowing coolant and oil to warm up. There is no reining her in or forcing her down the taxiway until she's ready.

Each time I fly the Mustang I am acutely aware of my human fragility and the necessity to pay the utmost attention to what is going on. The '51 is delightful and straightforward to fly, but she is a very powerful steed and can easily get away from any pilot. As the throttle moves up to full power, the Merlin screams and my right foot moves down on the rudder pedal to hold the torque and keep it straight...my first impression was that of being dragged down the runway on my back by the heels. The visceral experience is frightening, joyful, fearful and wonderful all at once. Not until the gear is tucked way and the power brought back to climb settings do I recover.

Pointing the nose up into the clouds, I am awed by the amount of power I control. Rarely do I fail to smile, though no one is there to see my expression...it must look idiotic but I can't help it. At 24,000 feet, power back to cruise, alone among the clouds and breathing a self-contained atmosphere, I sense that--as John Gillespie Magee wrote--I have "put out my hand, and touched the face of God." Flying this magnificent, once deadly machine becomes a spiritual experience that remains so personal, so unique, it is difficult to communicate once back down on the ground.

The fighter is so well balanced, with just the right compromise between maneuverability and stability, any pilot can look smooth and capable in only a few hours. The only real drawbacks are ever increasing control pressures as speed increases, particularly over 300 mph, and immense fluctuations in yaw with power or speed changes, requiring a fair amount of fiddling with the trim wheels. It is also incredibly hot (120oF or more under that bubble at low level) and loud (130+ dB) inside...or freezing cold at altitude. Heat, air conditioning and noise proofing were future concerns in World War II. This can make flying the aircraft for any length of time extremely fatiguing. I know why 20-year-old pilots were recruited to fly these fire breathers.

With some experience, the Mustang is quite easy to land three points (all three wheels on at once) and its marvelous tailwheel steering makes it simple to keep straight, though one can tell it would love to ground loop without the slightest provocation, as with all "tail draggers." Once the mixture is pulled to idle cut-off and that great propeller comes to a stop, the experience lingers. Minutes in a Mustang are worth hours in most aircraft.