Air Britain did a book on it (The Washington File), albeit only 36 pages - like most AB type books it's a history of the service of each individual airframe, with a selection of photos. It's been OOP since the 80s, but you can pick them up second hand
|
|
I'm pretty sure BoB fighter pilot Geoff Wellum of 'First Light' fame flew RAF B-29s after WW2 - possibly on 192 Sqn...
|
An AEO I flew with on the Vulcan had flown on Washingtons. He said that coming back to base with all 4 engines still working was so rare that they made a certain number of 4-engine landings a BTR (monthly requirement)!
|
No B-29 story would be complete without mentioning Neil Armstrongs single engine landing. he was co-pilot on a trip to drop the D-558-2 research aircraft. Approaching 30,000' the #4 had a prop runaway which came off and sliced through #3, which lost throttle control and instrumentation so was shut down, #2 was also hit. #1 was shut down because of torque, even with just #2 running it required both pilots on the rudder, even at low power. The D-558 pilot asked not to be dropped because of fuel pressure control problems, but was dropped in any event, which was fortunate as the prop on its path to hitting #2 passed through the bomb bay where the 558 had been slung, also severing the command pilots pitch and roll controls. Neil was the only one with a full set of functioning aerodynamic controls.
|
megan,
I seem to recall the pilot who requested not to be dropped was Bill Bridgeman who route to test flying was rather unusual. |
aa62, Jack McKay was the D-558 pilot on the occasion.
|
Megan,
thanks for the correction. My recall from Bridgeman's book was at fault although he did have a 'don't drop' drop ! Can anyone confirm or otherwise that the B29 engines as reverse engineered by the USSR were more reliable than the originals when fitted to the TU4 ? |
Megan,
thanks for the correction. My recall from Bridgeman's book was at fault although he did have a 'don't drop' drop ! Can anyone confirm or otherwise that the B29 engines as reverse engineered by the USSR were more reliable than the originals when fitted to the TU4 ? |
Einar Enevoldson (Nasa test pilot who held various time-to-height records in the rocket assisted F-104 that Yeager wrote off) told me he was once scheduled as the second 'warm body' to occupy the right hand seat of the B-52 dropping a lifting body as he was on that program, on the run -in for the drop the 'real pilot' was operating a variety on switches when a voice said 'OK then, goodbye' - their attached vehicle was no longer attached. Einar still holds the World glider gain-of-height record with Steve Fossett , his passing away last month is a great loss to aviation.
(Apologies for the thread creep). |
Can anyone confirm or otherwise that the B29 engines as reverse engineered by the USSR |
My father told me - wastegate sticks shut, engine overspeeds,
prop departs upward. Engine overspeeds some more. Engine departs. |
Originally Posted by esa-aardvark
(Post 11041016)
My father told me - wastegate sticks shut, engine overspeeds,
prop departs upward. Engine overspeeds some more. Engine departs. |
DH - I have no idea, but he was a crew chief.
|
Bit late into this thread but was a bit confused by the title.
Surely the Washington was the B-50 and the B-29, the Superfortress. It certainly was when I was spotter in the middle 50s. The main differences were increased fuselage length, of course bigger engines and a substantial increase to the size of the rudder. I instructed with a chap who had flown them in the late 50s, who later converted on to Valiants at Gaydon. Can somebody confirm or disprove ? Thanks. |
Originally Posted by Sleeve Wing
(Post 11044561)
Bit late into this thread but was a bit confused by the title.
Surely the Washington was the B-50 and the B-29, the Superfortress. It certainly was when I was spotter in the middle 50s. The main differences were increased fuselage length, of course bigger engines and a substantial increase to the size of the rudder. I instructed with a chap who had flown them in the late 50s, who later converted on to Valiants at Gaydon. Can somebody confirm or disprove ? Thanks. I thought they just had the B-29s as Washingtons. |
Sleeve Wing, here's a photograph of the B-50D Washington, a follow-on to the B-29 Superfortress. Note the nacelle modifications, underwing tanks, and vertical stabilizer height increase:
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....fbe718d5b5.jpg - Ed |
Sleeve Wing, the USA was the only operator of the B-50, they did deploy to the UK though. The Washington was the name given to the B-29 when in service with the RAF. Both the B-29 and B-50 were called the Superfortress by the USA.
|
Originally Posted by megan
(Post 11044881)
Sleeve Wing, the USA was the only operator of the B-50, they did deploy to the UK though. The Washington was the name given to the B-29 when in service with the RAF. Both the B-29 and B-50 were called the Superfortress by the USA.
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 19:04. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.