These gentlefolk do such a well made presentation. Confident , informed down to the finest detail, they could teach many college lecturers and TV companies just how to make a session work well. Congratulations .
Hap Arnold was right, the bugeye cockpits were a bad idea for every one of these planes except the P-82. I doubt it reduced drag any more than a properly designed single cockpit would have.
The "C-47" was the famed Douglas C-47 "Skytrain" USAAF Cargo Transport, the Army's version of the renowned DC-3. The U.S. Navy had designated them the R4D. A later version of the DC-3, built as a passenger plane, became the VC-54 Officers' Transport.
Surely had the XB-42 went into production it would have been on the front lines during the early years of the Cold War. I doubt if XB-42s would have been sent to Korea though unless needed to hit targets the B-29s couldn’t.
❤😊 Those are interesting unique aircraft airplanes. That's very historical in the 20th Century what it was like then. Nice airplanes US NAVY bomber escorts. 👍🤗😁😀🇺🇲🇺🇲
Communication is key to a two pilot configuration. Imagine being not in control and the PIC make an evasive maneuver. Holy cow talk about a surprise and being thrown around. You will always checking each other and not focusing on navigating or what have you. Crazy bad idea.
I never did understand why they made the Twin Mustang when Lockheed had produced the P-38, the XP-58, and the XP-49. Lockheed's last xp aircraft of the twin-boom airplanes were ideas at the last minute before the end of the war--they led to the 13 XP-80 prototypes before the end of WWII.
It's probably because it's the mustang. The allies had a few fighter planes in WW2 but everyone says once the mustang came on the scene it was a game changer. I know the big difference between the spitfire and mustang was range or else the spitfire would've been top dog, it was only top dog in short periods of time. The mustang could travel to Europe, fight it out woth German fighters, then fly back to England so I'm assuming the range on the twin mustang was probably unmatched compared to Lockheeds planes.
The P-38 was long out of production when the F-82 Twin Mustang was built. The Twin Mustang was designed from the ground up as a two pilot fighter to escort B-29 strikes at ranges beyond the endurance of the single seat P-38. The second pilot was also the navigator and in the night fighter version, the radar operator. The XP-49 had a dog of an experimental engine, a problem which the XP-58 shared. The F-80 used the well proven Merlin engine (a Griffin variant would have been interesting but Packard didn’t have a license for those and the US government had rather crapped on the relationship with the British at the time). Lockheed were also flat out building P-80’s at the time as the USAAF’s second jet interceptor.
There is a lot more to this design than having two engines, which is its main similarity to the P-38. The P-82 was to be much more efficient with much less drag and would outperform even a single seat P-38 on the same power, let alone a two seat P-38. Not just in speed but in range.
@@gort8203 The P-38 was declared obsolete in 1946. The F/P-82 was introduced into service in 1946 with a first flight on 15 June 1945. The Lightning had a much lower critical mach number than the F-82 and a number of P-38’s disintegrated in dives as a result.
How do you switch control from one cockpit to the other? I also missed the wether this plane is Merlin or Allison powered. What is the power output regardless of type? What supercharger configuration does it have? What is the top speed and do or would you push to that speed? Always wondered how hard these pieces of history are pushed.. I lived close to Hamilton warplane heritage and watched them fly for years. I’ve always wondered what a full power pass would look like.. you all obviously do this work for everyone to save this history and technology! Amazing passion amazing work.
@@mpetersen6 I am not familiar with this engine and will definitely look into it! I assumed it was a v12 Allison witch makes an ass out of me! The hp must have been north of 2000? Twice ! That should’ve given it performance above even a Hornet? Range is incredible and without armament untouchable. I’ve always wondered why they would fly the aircraft?? I know why actually but the anxiety must be astounding flying in a irreplaceable piece of history. Not this type but the masses from the war were simply useless after the war, their significance to history wasn’t considered and most were scrapped. My father relayed a story of ferrying aircraft to an airfield with every type you could imagine that were parked tight together then flown over and doused with fuel and burned until nothing burned and scrapped. This was in early 46 in England. He flew Halifax mkVII RCAF 432 squadron 44-46. Should they have saved more? Would it have lessened our appreciation of them? Idk. Cheers and thanks
Click the link to watch more aircraft, heroes and their stories, missions: www.youtube.com/@Dronescapes
These gentlefolk do such a well made presentation. Confident , informed down to the finest detail, they could teach many college lecturers and TV companies just how to make a session work well. Congratulations .
Wow, thank you!
I've always loved this aircraft. Thanks for sharing this documentary about it.
😎🇺🇸
Glad you enjoyed it
Amazjng work Many thanks
Thank you God for giving us people like these
I was not familiar with this design, thanks for uploading. Great channel👍🏻
Thanks for watching!
I think you mixed up some of the info on the c-74 globemaster in your discription with the c-47/dc3. Thanks for the upload!
Hap Arnold was right, the bugeye cockpits were a bad idea for every one of these planes except the P-82. I doubt it reduced drag any more than a properly designed single cockpit would have.
Nicely presented and scripted. Good work.
Thank you
The "C-47" was the famed Douglas C-47 "Skytrain" USAAF Cargo Transport, the Army's version of the renowned DC-3. The U.S. Navy had designated them the R4D. A later version of the DC-3, built as a passenger plane, became the VC-54 Officers' Transport.
Mixmaster inspired by Claude Dornier's DO-335 Pfeil....
How can you clear the opposite side?
nice!
Thanks!
Surely had the XB-42 went into production it would have been on the front lines during the early years of the Cold War. I doubt if XB-42s would have been sent to Korea though unless needed to hit targets the B-29s couldn’t.
❤😊 Those are interesting unique aircraft airplanes. That's very historical in the 20th Century what it was like then. Nice airplanes US NAVY bomber escorts. 👍🤗😁😀🇺🇲🇺🇲
👍
Huh???
I want one!
Communication is key to a two pilot configuration. Imagine being not in control and the PIC make an evasive maneuver. Holy cow talk about a surprise and being thrown around. You will always checking each other and not focusing on navigating or what have you. Crazy bad idea.
I never did understand why they made the Twin Mustang when Lockheed had produced the P-38, the XP-58, and the XP-49. Lockheed's last xp aircraft of the twin-boom airplanes were ideas at the last minute before the end of the war--they led to the 13 XP-80 prototypes before the end of WWII.
It's probably because it's the mustang. The allies had a few fighter planes in WW2 but everyone says once the mustang came on the scene it was a game changer. I know the big difference between the spitfire and mustang was range or else the spitfire would've been top dog, it was only top dog in short periods of time. The mustang could travel to Europe, fight it out woth German fighters, then fly back to England so I'm assuming the range on the twin mustang was probably unmatched compared to Lockheeds planes.
The P-38 was long out of production when the F-82 Twin Mustang was built.
The Twin Mustang was designed from the ground up as a two pilot fighter to escort B-29 strikes at ranges beyond the endurance of the single seat P-38.
The second pilot was also the navigator and in the night fighter version, the radar operator.
The XP-49 had a dog of an experimental engine, a problem which the XP-58 shared. The F-80 used the well proven Merlin engine (a Griffin variant would have been interesting but Packard didn’t have a license for those and the US government had rather crapped on the relationship with the British at the time).
Lockheed were also flat out building P-80’s at the time as the USAAF’s second jet interceptor.
@@allangibson8494 The P-38 was in continuous production until the end of the war and the P-82 flew before the end of the war.
There is a lot more to this design than having two engines, which is its main similarity to the P-38. The P-82 was to be much more efficient with much less drag and would outperform even a single seat P-38 on the same power, let alone a two seat P-38. Not just in speed but in range.
@@gort8203 The P-38 was declared obsolete in 1946.
The F/P-82 was introduced into service in 1946 with a first flight on 15 June 1945.
The Lightning had a much lower critical mach number than the F-82 and a number of P-38’s disintegrated in dives as a result.
Nada se cria, só se cópia.
How do you switch control from one cockpit to the other? I also missed the wether this plane is Merlin or Allison powered. What is the power output regardless of type? What supercharger configuration does it have? What is the top speed and do or would you push to that speed? Always wondered how hard these pieces of history are pushed.. I lived close to Hamilton warplane heritage and watched them fly for years. I’ve always wondered what a full power pass would look like.. you all obviously do this work for everyone to save this history and technology! Amazing passion amazing work.
Allison 3420 W-24. With long extension shafts. Douglas actually looked at building a commercial airliner with the powerplant set-up.
@@mpetersen6 I am not familiar with this engine and will definitely look into it! I assumed it was a v12 Allison witch makes an ass out of me! The hp must have been north of 2000? Twice ! That should’ve given it performance above even a Hornet? Range is incredible and without armament untouchable. I’ve always wondered why they would fly the aircraft?? I know why actually but the anxiety must be astounding flying in a irreplaceable piece of history. Not this type but the masses from the war were simply useless after the war, their significance to history wasn’t considered and most were scrapped. My father relayed a story of ferrying aircraft to an airfield with every type you could imagine that were parked tight together then flown over and doused with fuel and burned until nothing burned and scrapped. This was in early 46 in England. He flew Halifax mkVII RCAF 432 squadron 44-46. Should they have saved more? Would it have lessened our appreciation of them? Idk.
Cheers and thanks
I didn't catch what it is currently powered by, but it was originally a merlin powered aircraft
It’s Merlin powered.
@@drstrangelove4998 Thank you. I’m pretty sure it was mentioned but there was so much info being delivered I must have missed it.
F82 with starboard/port engines rotating clockwise / anti clockwise?
I thought Allisons had that. Not Merlins.
I'm still learning.
Both Merlin’s and Allison’s had a choice of rotation. Sometimes the designers ordered the right engines and sometimes they didn’t…
The early P-82s had Merlins but the later ones had Allisons.
Baseado num avião alemão da segunda guerra!
The b-42 evolved into the a-3 skywarrior