Martin B-26 Marauder Video is coming
I'm not sure how this happened, but I'm almost done with a B-26 Marauder video. It started off as an attempt to quickly answer some member questions and sort of developed into it's own video. I get two questions about it all the time. Why was it so slow? Why was it so dangerous to fly? As usual when questions imply conclusions, it's just not at all simple.
Greg
Comments (16)
I asked about the image posting, from what I can find, 2 C 47s were trialed on floats during the war, I found a 1943 ish film of helicopter trials, in the background is a C 47 on floats.
One of the aircraft I am most interested in, the medium bomber formula with high wing loading makes it special in the American arsenal.
I don't know about posting an image.
Is there any way to post an image in a message?
I just went and looked again at some of my sources. You are correct From what I can tell, the initial 201 B-26As had R2800-5s which were rated at 1850hp. Later the B-26Bs would receive later R2800s rated at 2000hp. For some reason my memory was that they stuck with the earlier rating. In retrospect, I think many sources simply post whatever the initial design specifications were and don't pay attention to which model or variant they are posting data on. I see this often with the change in wing span. Sometimes the earlier engine ratings are posted with a wingspan that corresponds to a later variant, like say a B-26G. Confusing.... Anyway, I get the feeling that the B-26 wasn't as clean aerodynamically as it initially seems. I do think the change in wing incidence negatively influenced raw performance, but that's just s hunch. I still love the looks of that plane. In the long run it proved to have one of the best combat records of any medium bomber if the war.
Greg, how about what if, at Midway, the 4 26's skipped bomb into the side of the carriers? Better than torpedoes Clarke, where are you finding 1850HP on the 26's? I have always found 2,000, correct me if I am off.
I've always wondered why they stuck with the R2800s at the 1850hp power rating and never upgraded. I'm sure there's a reason. I too have always thought the B-26 seemed low on performance, specifically speed especially considering the power plants available and the intent to design it to be fast. I do believe, however, that much of the data floating around is for the later models with extended wings as well as the change in wing incidence. I doubt this did anything to help in the speed department. I think the earlier "B" model was actually quite fast, but also a lot to handle.
One a day in Tampa Bay… lets do this.
I know as a kid I always wondered why the B-25 was such a piker compared to the B-26, and only learned much later of the A-B-A-26 confusion. I know the AAC/AAF had A-nn dive bombers, including the first P-51 model. But how the A-26 was not a B-nn has always been a mystery, since it is so similar to the B-26 in looks and purpose, and if you ever do an A-B-A-26 video, that would be an interesting part of it.
Looking much forward to this one.
A hotly debated aircraft! were the changes made to it a result of the Truman Commission or were they going to happen anyway (increasing the wing area comes to mind). Did Martin knowingly deliver a "widow maker" to the USAAF. Look forward to the "Greg Treatment"!
Medium bomber time, yeesss! Stoked! Thanks Greg!
The videos are always welcome. That is one of the things that drew me to this channel that and keen interest in airplanes and automobiles ever since I was a kid.
What a treat...B-26 video! YAY!
Thanks Greg 🤠
I’m really excited about the B-26 getting “The Greg Treatment.” Can’t wait to watch- thanks!