Martin Baker MB-3 and 4

[Foo Fighter]

Does anyone have or know of decent plans/blueprints for the MB-3 and or MB-4? I am hoping for something that demonstrates wing and fuselage frames if possible.

 

[Schneiderman]

I doubt that any have survived but as a great deal of the structure was shared with the MB5 you should be able to adapt from that. There are several plans and cut-aways of the MB5 that can be found online. A company called Scale Planes did a good one, I wish I had a hires copy. For the engine mounts for the Napier Sabre you can use the construction photos of that aircraft. I cannot find the MB website where they were originally posted but you can find copies here.

http://www.modelarovo.cz/letouny-martin-baker-mb-3-mb-5-fotoreport/

 

[Justo Miranda]

Hi

 

[Justo Miranda]

Hi

 

[Foo Fighter]

Thank you, very much appreciated.

 

[TsrJoe]

missing link ... Martin Baker 'MB.4' design project

 

[Foo Fighter]

Thank you.

 

[Foo Fighter]

OK, I have checked commonality between the 3 and 5 and there are significant differences. I will just have to continue looking.

 

[hesham]

missing link ... Martin Baker 'MB.4' design project

From Aeroplane monthly 2010/12,with caption.

 

[Schneiderman]

Coming back to the original question I believe that a the MB5 shared much with the MB3, the major changes being to the engine mount structure ahead of the cockpit, larger fin and accommodation for the radiator. The rear fuselage panel lines are broadly similar between each aircraft indicating similar underlying framework.

 

[Schneiderman]

This shows the MB3 frame structure

 

[Foo Fighter]

The cockpit is a fair bit further back in the three.

 

[Schneiderman]

Yes, and other changes, but Martin stuck to the same basic structural system he had patented

 

[Justo Miranda]

Martin-Baker M.B.3

 

[Justo Miranda]

Martin-Baker M.B.4

 

[riggerrob]

Looks great with a radial engine!
Which engine?

 

[GTX]

Errr...it says on the picture.

 

[GTX]

Haven't seen the radial engined variant before.

 

[red admiral]

Why on earth did James Martin not make bigger fins?

 

[kitnut617]

He did in the end, the MB5 had one of the biggest fins of all the WWII single seat fighters.
But you have to go back to the earlier models, his concept was just to have a tall flat sided fuselage with a rudder attached to the very rear end, ISTR it was to do with less drag

 

[blackkite]

http://all-aero.com/index.php/53-planes-l-m-n-o/6511-martin-baker-mb4
"Martin-Baker MB.4
The second of the three MB.3 prototypes ordered by MAP, R2496, was intended to be Griffon-powered, and was referred to as the MB.4. At the time of R2492's crash, the necessary drawing amendments for the MB.4 were complete and manufacture had started.
It was intended to enter the competition against Specification F6/42 but the attempt was unsuccessful. However, Martin felt that he could improve on the MB.3/MB.4 concepts. R2496 was left uncompleted and work on the third intended aircraft, R2500, was not begun. Early in 1943, the difficult decision was taken to start afresh, tempered by the knowledge that the firm had received verbal assurances from MAP that if a new fighter design were produced, a contract for one prototype would be awarded, again to Specification F5/39.
With the then hand-built nature of a prototype, in an experimental shop, with design adjustments made on the spot, and drawings brought into line afterwards, made resources available out of all proportion to the effort. By 1943, when work on the MB.5 had begun."
http://www.wardrawings.be/WW2/Files...-Fighters/MartinBaker-MB4/MartinBaker-MB4.htm

 

[GTX]

Flying S Model are working on a 1/48 kit of the Centaurus powered MB.4:

 

[Mugs914]

Wow, it looks like a factory-built Reno racer...

 

[ZacYates]

Wow, it looks like a factory-built Reno racer...

Exactly my thoughts!

 

[Nick Sumner]

That is a purposeful looking aeroplane.

 

[red admiral]

With a tiny fin so is probably directionally unstable like all the other designs

 

[Mugs914]

With a tiny fin so is probably directionally unstable like all the other designs

It did seem that from the 20s through the late 40s many designers/companies harbored some sort of odd animosity toward vertical surfaces. Even a few of the Century series jets had to have the verticals enlarged due to insufficient stability.