By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more
Forum sponsored by:
Forum sponsored by CML

6 Turning 4 Burning

A scratch built project,

All Topics | Latest Posts

Search for:  in Thread Title in  
Gary Manuel22/01/2020 11:48:40
2294 forum posts
1558 photos

I'm unfamiliar with this aeroplane and couldn't make out where the "4 burning" are from the photograph - although it's impressive enough with just the "6 turning"!

I googled it and immediately found this video - wow! .... and look how many of them there are on the ground!

This will be a hell of a project.

Andy Meade22/01/2020 12:00:27
2784 forum posts
717 photos

The flight engineer could walk into the wing root I seem to remember blush

Manish Chandrayan22/01/2020 12:23:26
649 forum posts
74 photos

The four burning are in the under wing pods (2 in each pod) that have the red and white stripes

Gary Manuel22/01/2020 12:48:50
2294 forum posts
1558 photos
Posted by Manish Chandrayan on 22/01/2020 12:23:26:

The four burning are in the under wing pods (2 in each pod) that have the red and white stripes

Yes, they appear in the very first frame of the video.

Anyone know whether the burners and turners used the same fuel?

Nigel R22/01/2020 13:12:19
4082 forum posts
694 photos

Answered here


which states the same fuel used for both. Would make a lot of sense to run a common fuel pool.

The wikipedia entry suggests the jets were for improving takeoff performance, and for high altitude cruise / dash, and with all 10 going it was more maneuverable at height than most contemporary fighter aircraft!

Jon - Laser Engines22/01/2020 13:22:41
5621 forum posts
271 photos
Posted by Denis Watkins on 22/01/2020 11:06:19:

I dismissed the SC30 4stroke motors, thinking them to be too powerful

Maybe I a wrong

As looking at my notebook, running 2 of these as singles

Give or take fuel at 0% to 5%, and props 9 x 5/ 10 x 5

These little motors can give out 300W based on 0.5hp achievable with prop/fuel

Therefore could 1800W = 18lb AUW ?

I had an ASM Hercules with 4 30's in it running 10x5's as you suggested. It was 100 inch but i never weighed it. The 4 engines flew it fine, but takeoff was long and only occurred due to curvature of the earth.

If the 36' is somewhere in the order of 100-120 inch and 20 or so lbs i think it will be well set. Some power could also be sacrificed in favour of 3 blade scale props, which may be required to prevent ground strikes.

SR 7122/01/2020 13:25:16
463 forum posts
140 photos

Yes they all used the same fuel, 36,000 gallons of it when she was full, it could fly for 40 hours without refuelling,a lot of the missions were 32 hours,

Simon Chaddock22/01/2020 14:20:08
5776 forum posts
3055 photos

Not often realised that the B36 jet pod and pylon was 'lifted' directly from the B47 inner pods. It even included the bulge between the jets that housed the retractable 'stabiliser' wheel used on the B47. wink 2


The only addition was the retractable aerodynamic 'shields' to stop the turbine blades rotating when not in use. With these in place it would still be scale to do without actually putting EDFs inside.

Edited By Simon Chaddock on 22/01/2020 14:20:36

Erfolg22/01/2020 14:35:05
11801 forum posts
1346 photos

I have seen a number of models of the B36 (in Mags).

One had a stringered fuz, it being essentially a tube, an easy solution. The other was a polystyrene foam version (shows how long ago it was). The first I think was in the 100" size the second, I do not remember seeing. Both were in the USA.

Both were electrics.

As for performance, I think the original was not fast. Loosing out to the B52, when the all jet versions came along. The B36 remained slow. Having previously beat the Northrop YB 49 in the piston engined era.

I have a book, Convair B36 Peacemaker, by Meyers K Jacobsen, Published Schiffer Military Press. In the book, it shows the B36 being loaded (Bell X1 style) with a RepublicThunstreak, as part of the FICON programme. Apparently seeking more speed ever more powerful engines were fitted, still a max airspeed of 441 mph and a ceiling of 44,000 feet. The aircrafts forte was bomb load and distance.

There is a (few) photos of the XC 99 passenger (two tier) aircraft.

IMO power, is not a must have for this model, its proportions are eminently glider like. You just need moderate power, a standard type build, no need for looking for significant weight saving. I guess you would have a viable model with two powerful (relatively), inboard motors and  mostly show 4 low powered outboard. I am also guessing that 2*4s parallel batteries of moderate capacity (relative to watts in) would do the job. No need to build a lightweight model, that can only be flown on a calm day, liable to casual damage.

As a model it seems a goer at almost any size, with a bit of thought. I must confess, when I switched from gliders, this was on my to build list, as a powered gliderblush I have also thought along the same lines with the U2, for DF. As with many modelers, my list of, I must build models just lengthens.




Edited By Erfolg on 22/01/2020 14:35:29

Edited By Erfolg on 22/01/2020 14:39:59

Don Fry22/01/2020 14:52:02
4557 forum posts
54 photos

I know it's a very long shot, but John Wagg has a post going yesterday, titled "New old stock - SC30FS - just purchased", yesterday. May there be more old stock?

Erfolg22/01/2020 16:33:07
11801 forum posts
1346 photos

In the case of the B36, I personally never ever considered the complication of EDFs. Having only built one twin, a Bf110, I was unpleasantly surprised how much weight the cabling added to an otherwise light model. I have resolved that in future I will compromise on cabling size, to save weight, living with a higher resistance. The thought of six sets of cables is daunting. I personally would down rate both the motors and cables on the outer 4 motors. I probably toy with having the outer 4 capable of capable of being switched out, with braked propellors.

There would be no thought of a scale aerofoil section, instead E205, or similar Possibly a foam veneer wing if obtainable at acceptable price. If not a convention spared wing, built lightly, not as if it were to be tow line or winch launched.

The whole emphasis on being a model that can be safely flown in 15 mph winds, and strong enough to fly every day, when thrown in the car, landing on winter pasture (or what passes for a mown field where I now fly.

At one time I considered PVC drain piping for the fuz. dismissing the product as being to heavy, at the diameter i wanted. I could not identify a tube long, or light enough, of sufficient strength and at a cost I would pay.

I guess that in the era of 3d printing 6 engine pods can be produced, that reduces the work involved considerably. I do not a printer, though as many others I keep toying with the idea.

I many ways it could be a simple model to build at normal type scales, if the tube and nacelles issues can be solved.

Edited By Erfolg on 22/01/2020 16:34:32

Andy Stephenson22/01/2020 17:05:32
221 forum posts
36 photos


How about this, a model with twice as many engines as you are considering...

12 engine Dornier


SR 7122/01/2020 17:10:05
463 forum posts
140 photos

Oki have made a start, found a piece of 160 mm drain pipe the right size for the centre section of the fus20200109_173326.jpgelage

Erfolg22/01/2020 18:59:07
11801 forum posts
1346 photos

Hmm, I also have a long length in my garage.

From memory what finally doused my enthusiasm for a B36 was an anticipated CG issue. My thoughts went along the lines that the TE was straight and 90 degrees to the Fuz. All of these motors (mass) would be on the wrong side of the CG. I anticipated that even with the Lipos right up against the cabin, there would be to much mass aft of the CG. There is the obvious tail plane and a massive rudder/fin arrangement. All on a roughly equal moment arm to the Lipo, potentially of similar masses. The motors would alter the balance for the worse.

I had a solution, that was extension shafts to the motors. This could move the motors onto the CG. My problem was I did not and do not have a lathe.

I envisaged a plug in nose which carried the Lipos

Yet, I know others have achieved a viable model, that can be flown in most weathers.

Edited By Erfolg on 22/01/2020 19:00:08

Edited By Erfolg on 22/01/2020 19:02:02

Don Fry22/01/2020 19:06:02
4557 forum posts
54 photos

SR 71, having seen your previous efforts, respect.

But as the old joke goes, how do I get to Birmingam. Arrr says Worcestershire yokel, I wouldn't start from here,

Weight behind the CG is rarely good. Or is it a mould.

eflightray22/01/2020 19:13:24
624 forum posts
132 photos

Have you got 6 G-26 engines ?

john davidson 122/01/2020 21:32:32
67 forum posts

In the video 6 burning 4 turning, the rudder acts in opposition to the nose wheel, I can't see a reason for this, any theories?

Simon Chaddock22/01/2020 21:44:01
5776 forum posts
3055 photos

john d

I think you will find the nose wheel steering is independent of the rudder and has its own control. Once lined up on the runway the nose wheel will be locked to straight ahead.

I think the 'steering wheel' is on the commanders side.

Edited By Simon Chaddock on 22/01/2020 21:56:26

Former Member22/01/2020 21:46:55
3577 forum posts

[This posting has been removed]

Brian Neasham22/01/2020 21:50:35
27 forum posts
5 photos

A lot of larger aircraft have a nose wheel steering control which is not connected to the rudder pedals

All Topics | Latest Posts

Please login to post a reply.

Support Our Partners
Sussex Model Centre
electricwingman 2017
Advertise With Us
Latest "For Sale" Ads
NEW POLL - has the pandemic altered your event safety perceptions?
Q: Has the covid pandemic deterred you from attending shows and events in 2021?

 No, I'll be attending just as many as I usually do
 No, but I'll choose my event with greater care
 Yes, I'll attend fewer events going forward
 Yes, I wont attend any where previously I have

Latest Reviews
Digital Back Issues

RCM&E Digital Back Issues

Contact us

Contact us

Magazine Locator

Want the latest issue of RCM&E? Use our magazine locator link to find your nearest stockist!

Find RCM&E!