Beyond the Rainbow: Republic Turboprop and Jet Airliners

That was exactly what I meant, and here's a different picture of it.
Douglas_VC-118_Independence_in_flight_c1947.jpg


http://www.aiga.org/air-force-one-the-graphic-history/

I just learned a bit about the color scheme for Air Force One by looking it up. I had no idea that it was designed by Raymond Loewy, who also designed the original color scheme for United's jets, and don't get me started about his firm's work for Studebaker, as you'll likely not get me to stop...
 
Actually, when looking for paint schemes for an "Airforce One", I already had seen this.
It looks great and it lends itself perfectly for the DC-6/C-118, due to the shape of the nose
of that type., but I'm not sure about the Jet Rainbow. But I think, I'll have a try ...
 
Hm, the cockpit windows are quite disturbing here, I think. Really not sure, that
Raymond Loewy would have adopted it for this type. Just tell me yor opinion.
 

Attachments

  • eagle.jpg
    eagle.jpg
    258.1 KB · Views: 128
I agree, the profile does not lend itself to this design. Maybe lower the beak below the windows?
 
I think it looks great! It would also be the perfect design for a big bank's business jet...
 
circle-5 said:
...It would also be the perfect design for a big bank's business jet...
Click to expand...

... to represent the hovering vultures ? ;)
 
I thought it looked like a shark. But a vulture works for me too!
 
Jemiba, that was stunning. It seems that part of the trick of the Independence scheme was that the eyes of the bird were actually on the cockpit side windows. Loewy wouldn't have done it this way...he, or more accurately, his firm designed the Kennedy era Air Force One scheme.

As for the scheme being a good one for a bank executive's plane, representing a vulture, I'd buy that, too. Bankers then were no less predatory, just better regulated, I'd guess.
 
MaxLegroom said:
... Loewy wouldn't have done it this way...
Click to expand...

Sorry, my bad.
But yes, the artist, whoever it was, cleverly used the shape of the aircraft's nose. It's more
difficult here, much better suitable for a sharkmouth indeed. I tried it with RAPs advise and
the result is somewhat better, I think, but still far from the original one.
 

Attachments

  • eagle-2.jpg
    eagle-2.jpg
    219.4 KB · Views: 914
As I already threatened to add some colour, here's the V-tailed variant in a scheme similar
to that, used by DHC-4 Caribous in USAF service. And, well, I couldn't resist to add, what to
my opinion is the most suitable nose art for this aircraft. ;)
 

Attachments

  • Republic V-tail Transport CP.jpg
    Republic V-tail Transport CP.jpg
    208.8 KB · Views: 845
Hi,

http://archive.aviationweek.com/issue/19500424#!&pid=22
 

Attachments

  • Rainbow.png
    Rainbow.png
    190.2 KB · Views: 671
boxkite said:
Did we have an artwork of the turboprop Rainbow yet?

SOURCE: aero magazine 1958 (page 127)
Click to expand...

A good view.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    239.2 KB · Views: 490
From Ailes 8/1945,

what was the relationship between this Project and Mr. Michel Wibault ?.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    328.3 KB · Views: 361
Several websites say Marcel Wibault cooperated with Alexander Kartveli in designing the Republic Rainbow.
http://memoireairfrance.canalblog.com/archives/2016/11/04/34522511.html
Michel Wibault est parti aux États-Unis en 1940. Il a participé à l'organisation de la France libre, à la demande de Charles de Gaulle. Il travaille avec son ancien collaborateur et ingénieur en chef de la Republic Aviation Company, Alexander Kartveli, à la création des XF-12 Rainbow et Republic RC-3 Seabee.
Click to expand...
https://hushkit.net/2016/05/08/top-11-cancelled-french-aircraft/
http://www.lavoixdunord.fr/archive/recup%3A%252Fregion%252Fle-douaisien-michel-wibault-pere-spirituel-du-harrier-et-jna16b0n980965#
 
From Aeroplane 1946.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    142 KB · Views: 70

Attachments

  • 10.png
    10.png
    776.7 KB · Views: 42
Jemiba said:
... to represent the hovering vultures ? ;)
Click to expand...
Why does this remind me of a conversation with entrepreneurial computer programmers who made sarcastic comments about “vulture capitalists” who made sure that inventors did not profit from their inventions???
 
Jemiba said:
Still in b/w only, here's the V-tailed jet transport. Principally quite similar to the other one, its rear fuselage
is somewhat wider and taper begins further aft, so the cargo bay would have been bigger. It's not only fitted
with a rear loading ramp, but with an upper hatch, too. Reason may be, that this arrangement allows using the
full height of the cargo bay, whereas in the variant with the conventional tail, loads certainly would have to be
somewhat lower (see first sketch). Those clamshell doors on the other hand would demand a considerable different
structure of the rear fuselage, actually turning it into a kind of twin boom aircraft. ….
Click to expand...
Structurally it would be a twin-boom (ala. F-15 Eagle fighter jet) but aerodynamically it would be single fuselage.
This type of upward-hinged rear fuselage hatch was pioneered on the Gotha 242 assault glider.
Adding an upward-hinging batch to the top of the fuselage eases the problem of trying cram all the fuselage taper into only the bottom half of the rear fuselage (ala. C-130 Hercules).
Meanwhile - in America - Budd pioneered the concept of lower Cato ramps on its short-liver Conestoga cargo plane that competed directly with Douglas’ DC-3, C-47 and Dakota transports.
Note how later versions of C-130 add on strakes or vortex generators to smooth airflow under the sharply tapered lower aft fuselage.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom