David Taylor Model Basin Aircraft and misc. items.

[Batman10]

After the War my father worked at the David Taylor model basin in Wash. D. c. Here sre some photo Graphs of a project he worked on.

Also I was wondering if anyone can identify the biplane or the small plane pictured here.

Batman

 

[Apophenia]

Fascinating stuff. Thanks for posting!

The monoplane is the sole prototype Fletcher FBT-2, a proposed military trainer mostly made of moulded plywood. The FBT-2 was later converted into the YCQ-1 A target drone prototype (41-38984) before becoming a PQ-11.

Looking forward to finding out more about that biplane jet concept!

 

[robunos]

Looking forward to finding out more about that biplane jet concept!

Have to say, the tail fin fin looks very 'Douglas' to me, reminds me of the BTD-1 Destroyer, or the Skypirate.........

and regarding jet power, my absolute first thought was 'twin Allison XT-40 power, like the (again) Douglas A2D-1 Skyshark,
the 'radome' being a simulated propeller spinner...



cheers,
Robin.

 

[royabulgaf]

The Fairey Cuttlefish? ;D

 

[Stargazer]

Have to say, the tail fin fin looks very 'Douglas' to me, reminds me of the BTD-1 Destroyer, or the Skypirate.........

I personally would favor North American... To me the tail evokes the Mustang, and the starboard front view reminds me of the Sabre.

But of course, we could both be wrong...

 

[Whiterabbit72]

What is it? Pics found on FB. Said to have been tested at the David Taylor Model Basin (DTMB) Aerodynamic Laboratory in 1949. Skyshark-ish?

 

[royabulgaf]

Farley Fruitbat.

 

[CiTrus90]

Farley Fruitbat.

What's the point of answering with made up lies?

There is already a thread from 2010 on this model, and you posted the same nonsensical answer back then. Is it funny to lie to people that are looking for answers?

Do you not understand that when people make up stuff on a site like this, which is used as a reputable source for information, you create trouble for people that are seriously looking for answers?
Have at least the decency to say "Farley Fruitbat (it's a joke)" rather than just dropping a fake name and designation. It would still be inappropriate, since this is not the Bar or Speculative and Fake section, but at least it would cause way less issues for people that are interested in researching.

 

[CiTrus90]

What is it? Pics found on FB. Said to have been tested at the David Taylor Model Basin (DTMB) Aerodynamic Laboratory in 1949. Skyshark-ish?

Nobody has yet come up with a confirmed ID, unfortunately.

There is speculation it might be a Douglas project, given the similarities with the Skyshark, or a North American one.
Personally, I see similarities with the Curtiss XF15C (exhausts ducting under the fuselage, high T-tail, wing trailing edge).
Given the fact that it's from the DTMB is very probably a project proposed/investigated by the Navy.

 

[Silencer1]

Thanks for sharing images of this truly exotic model!

Model shown in different configurations:
- with classic horizontal stabilzer
- with T-shaped horizontal stabilzer
- with "struts" between wings and certain fairings on the lower wing.

I presume, that large fairing on the nose is the airscrew/s spinner. So, the aircraft seems to be powered by either powerful piston engine or by turboprop engine.
Any other suggestions?

 

[sienar]

Big nozzles at the bottom on the lower wing TE strongly implies turboprop.

Top wing section was clearly removable from the model, so perhaps this is a slip wing type thing?

 

[Stargazer]

Top wing section was clearly removable from the model, so perhaps this is a slip wing type thing?

I was thinking more along the lines of a model that permits to test different configurations in order to choose which works best (but I could be wrong of course).

 

[Agent A]

Big nozzles at the bottom on the lower wing TE strongly implies turboprop.

Top wing section was clearly removable from the model, so perhaps this is a slip wing type thing?

I was thinking more along the lines of a model that permits to test different configurations in order to choose which works best (but I could be wrong of course).

I was also thinking about a slip wing, but couldn't imagine how the upper wing would release, unless left and right wing were ejected separately.

 

[Silencer1]

I found excellent article about slip-wing concept and its' realization on Hawker Hurricane and small Hillson Bi-Mono prototype. Hope, this could add some new ideas to the discussion.

 

[sienar]

I was also thinking about a slip wing, but couldn't imagine how the upper wing would release, unless left and right wing were ejected separately.

I can't imagine they went with a biplane arrangement for its structural advantages. If they did then why would they make the lower wing with a kinked spar? That would significantly increase the lower spar weight running counter to the advantage of a biplane.

If one wing is electable it looks like it must be the top given the filleting along with the landing gear issue.

Sideways ejection makes the most sense to me and it could have a very elegant structural arrangement; the spars for each side are forked with a bolt or two holding them together. The spar goes through the fuselage. Ejection is done with small rockets.

As to why.... early turboprops were a bit lacking in power so maybe they wanted to get a lot of payload out of a small strip and didn't/couldn't have longer span.

 

[Silencer1]

My guess is that model is a study of possible implementation of biplane configuration for the strike aircraft, that based on small carriers. Top wing isn't jettisonable, but intended to provide better take-off and landing characteristics without implementing the flaps and slats. If the wing is jettisoned, how could aircraft safely land on the same airstrip (or flight deck) from what it started?

Moreover, such compact biplane could be used without necessity to fold wings - or, with wing folding, having smaller overall size, then classic airframes.
And one more thing: why in 1947 such model even built and studied? There were plenty of wartime combat aircraft in US possession, and (if I understand correctly) whole aeronautical industry suffers by decline of orders.

 

[Bazinga]

So, the David Taylor Model Basin is a water basin by origin, in Bethesda Maryland. The models have an inserted 'staggerwing' with both a T-tail and conventional tail variant. Gull wings, chin-mounted small intake. ASW is all over it. Navy. Navy suppliers. Bethesda points to Martin. Gull wings in 1949 would point to Vought. The nose points to Grumman or Douglas. So when I searched for the projects of those vendors around 1949, I ended up with a contender shortlist

Douglas Model 640
Martin Model 246

I'm inclined to point to Douglas but I cannot shake that Grummanesque snout