Inspiration for Burt Rutan's Creations

[SASless]

http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/images/burt_ruttan_b17.jpg

[station workshops]

Okay, I'll nibble. It's a photoshop job surely?

[brickhistory]

Nope, that extra dorsal turret was a modification for self-escort B-17s....:}

[BEagle]

So-called 'B-17X'....

....indeed a well-known photoshop!

[threepointonefour]

Looks like someone's been snooping around Warton for pics of the new 2-seat Typhoon ...

[Onan the Clumsy]

That photograph is just sacrilige. Like my spelling of the word, it's just plain wrong :*

[Mike Reheat]

Saw this photoshop many moons ago...., however, from a basics standpoint at least three problems with the design...

Firstly..., given the config, the Cof G would be so far back that it would have to be carry even more concrete up front than the early F3's!

Secondly...., landing gear..., again a CofG issue. The design would demand a nosewheel..., and looking at the layout, the main undercarriage would be far to far behind the CogG to work..., mind you..., forward protuding skids (again with the right amount of ballast in the font) might do the job!!!

Thirdly..., airflow from front canards would disrupt airlow to the props, and performance would be severely affected.....,

and anyway, why would anyone want to spoil what was a great aircraft in the first place? :ok:

Anyone else like to discuss why this example would not fly?

[Time Flies]

Anyone else like to discuss why this example would not fly?

:rolleyes: Nope...............I thought not!

It is only a bit of fun Mike......chill out. :cool:

[station workshops]

Thanks Beags. After Brickhistory's reply I actually googled 'self escorting B-17' and got precisely nothing.

[brickhistory]

From Wikipedia:

The Boeing YB-40 Flying Fortress was a modification of the B-17 Flying Fortress bomber aircraft, converted to act as a heavily-armed escort for other bombers during World War II. At the time of its development, long-range fighter aircraft such as the P-51 Mustang were not yet available to accompany bombers all the way from England to Germany and back.

The aircraft differed from the standard B-17 in that a second dorsal turret was installed between the top turret and the waist guns; and the single 0.50-calibre (12.7 mm) machine gun at each waist station was replaced by a pair of 0.5-calibre (12.7 mm) guns. In addition, the bombardier's equipment was replaced with two 0.50-calibre (12.7 mm) machine guns in a 'chin' turret to augment the existing 'cheek' machine guns, and the bomb bay itself was converted to a magazine.

The concept was twofold. First, the YB-40 would provide a heavily-gunned escort capable of accompanying the bombers all the way to the target and back. Second, they were used as decoys; a YB-40 would leave the bomber stream with one engine feathered, apparently in distress. Enemy fighters would close for the kill and discover that the 'cripple' was nothing of the kind. The aircraft was used with some success in the Mediterranean Theater of Operations, but was overall a failure because it could not keep up with standard B-17Fs once they had dropped bombs. It was withdrawn from service after fewer than ten missions. Some 25 were built. Operational units were stationed with the 92nd Bomb Group (H) at their base in Poddington, England.

The first mission flown by a YB-40 took place on May 29 1943, against Saint Nazaire. In the nine missions flown by the planes, five kills and two likely kills were claimed, and one YB-40 was lost. Despite the failure of the project as an operational aircraft, it did provide insight that led to the addition of a chin turret on the B-17G variant of the original Flying Fortress.

[station workshops]

Okay, BH, you're almost there. Below image and text taken from the National Museum of the United States Air Force, http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/index.htm

I would submit a more authoritative source than wikipedia, and still no sign of the extravagant mods in sasless's post.

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/bombers/b40-5.jpg

The XB-40 was developed to test the bomber escort concept. Early in World War II, before long range fighters like the P-51D (http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/air_power/ap9.htm) became available, the Air Corps developed plans to modify bombers with additional defensive armament. These aircraft would accompany regular bomber formations and provide protection from attacking fighters. Unfortunately, the modified escort bombers were not maneuverable enough to protect large formations. They were also excessively tail heavy and overweight. A standard B-17F (http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/bombers/b2-20.htm) formation returning from a mission (after bomb release) outpaced the escort bombers. The YB-40 participated in only a few operational missions in mid-1943 before being withdrawn from service.
The prototype XB-40 was modified by Lockheed Vega (Project V-139) by converting the second production B-17F-1-BO (S/N 41-24341). Defensive armament consisted of fourteen .50-cal. machine guns in seven gun positions: chin turret, two dorsal turrets, ball turret, two waist positions and the tail. The first flight of the XB-40 was on 10 November 1942. Twenty service test aircraft were ordered (Vega Project V-140) as YB-40 along with four crew trainers designated TB-40. Because Vega had higher priority production projects, the YB-40/TB-40 assembly job was transferred to Douglas.
In the spring of 1943, the 327th Bomb Squadron of the 92nd Bomb Group, RAF Alconbury was assigned twelve YB-40s for operational combat tests. The first mission was flown on 29 May 1943 and after less than ten missions the aircraft were withdrawn from service. Most were converted back to the standard B-17F configuration.

[brickhistory]

SW,
Wasn't trying to turn an aerial oddity into any sort of competition. Thread digress from the original post.
However,
How about this?
http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c342/beauhistory/b7a9dc0f.jpg

Think this thread is headed to the Nostalgia forum....

[station workshops]

BH,

looks loaded for bear, wouldn't fancy running up against it in a 109, six streams of lead 'comin attcha'. Respect for the sources as well.

No point in thrashing an old argument. Unescorted they were deathtraps, then along came the P51 with drop tanks and a Merlin Powerplant. End of.

[SASless]

The favored attack by fighters against the B-17 was from head on....at best the top turret could have a whack at them or the ball turret as the fighter passed under or the waist, ball, and/or top turret gunners if they passed alongside. The deflection required as the fighters passed alongside exceeded the ability of the power turrets to track them.

The later models of the B-17 added the remotely controlled nose turret and sometimes a .50 cal on either side of the nose.

Formations were modified to bring the aircraft into what was known as a "combat box" wherein the basic group was four aircraft flown in tight formation giving the formation considerable defensive fire power.

Stragglers or damaged aircraft that fell out of formation were at much greater risk than those in a very tight cohesive formation.

[teeteringhead]

Or as my elderly relatives used to sing:

"The Yanks were Flying Fortresses at 40 farsend feet (x 3)
With loads of ammunition and a teeny-weeny bomb"

which was always followed by:

"And we were flying Lancasters at zero zero feet (x3)
With f:mad: all ammunition but a bl:mad:in' great bomb"

..all the above (of course) to the tune of the Battle Hymn of the Republic .....

[brickhistory]

Or as my elderly relatives used to sing:
"The Yanks were Flying Fortresses at 40 farsend feet (x 3)
With loads of ammunition and a teeny-weeny bomb"
To, hopefully, beat the crowd, no, this can't be inferred to today's generation...(or anatomy!)
But, teeteringhead's post was a pretty fair summation of the bombers! Salute to both Air Forces' crews who flew them.