if it comes out

Trailmakers dude

It releases today 🔥🔥

I think he means he doesn’t believe he’s seen someone make a video about it Edit: sorry he means splitting power from a jet engine to a prop engine. The Jet engines from the B-36 are separate from the prop engines. This as he explains uses 50% of the Jet engine to drive the props (like a turbo prop) and the other 50% using the turbine power as a jet engine which hasn’t really been done. Other aircraft have used the jet engines more as boosters than engines.

This almost sounds like a bastard child of motorjet and turboprop

thunderscreech?

I think he's just doing this build to get in the mindset of building a bomber since he hasn't yet.

Maybe

Side (open ones) turrets on a plane going 900km/h doesn't sound fun

This is why we need those racing seats found on cars with harnesses on them, heck maybe even cover the window with bulletproof glass, give the gunner level 5 body armor, and some invincibility juice as well! Safe and sound

These engines are more based off the P4M Maritime Recon plane. It is interesting to see how many American planes experimented with this turning and burning engine scheme. It would be cool to see a more modern example somewhere

I believe a few did, but not all carriers.

No carriers in World War Two had catapults, they were big heavy and reserved for recon planes. It wasn’t until the BS 4 was equipped on the Ark Royal during a refit in the 50s, this is why the last 40’s was filled with prop aircraft with jet boosters and turbo props for STOL use like the Fireball and A2 savage

@@CallMeMark_that’s just wrong but ok

@@CallMeMark_ if you are talking about Steam Catapults then you're right but those didn't come from the Brits until around mid 50's to the US navy for trials. And the only carriers in the US navy by the start of the war that didn't have a hydraulic catapult (thanks to the London Naval treaty that closed the Washington treaties lop hole on putting so called experimental catapults on carriers) was the Yorktown class (that included the baby Yorktown Wasp) and the Enterprise (the last of the Yorktown's) had one put on before the wars end.

I think it depends. I think the Essex-class carriers had, and maybe the Implacable/Audacious. The Graf Zeppelin was supposed to have one too.

Apologies, I was a little ill and tired while making this comment and clearly not thinking at my sharpest, after further thought, and a bit of research to check facts, this concept literally has been done. Lookup propfans. It's exactly this. Propeller with jet exhaust. It never got all that far, but for a brief while it was very much considered that this technology would be the future, to the point CFM at one point announced they would be designing no further turbofan engines, as Propfans would takeover. If you look them up, you'll also find them referred to as Unducted fans (UDFs) as effectively what they are is a turbofan engine where the fan stage has been placed outside the nacelle, and re-optimized to operate there. There was a lot of work on these in the 70s and 80s, but they eventually fell out of favor, I think mainly because they created a lot of noise in the cabin, these were primarily being looked at for commercial airlines, as the big benefit is efficiency, which means lower cost, when you're an airline, that's everything, the military aren't quite so interested, so obviously cabin noise is kind of a big thing, for passenger comfort. I think there were other issues too, more complicated engines, so more of an engineering challenge, more maintenance from vibrations, etc etc. And, combined with falling fuel prices, making efficiency less of a driving force, they fell away, and companies stopped investing money researching and developing them. Aircraft did fly with them, experimentally, at the time, I think it was an MD-80 that flew around as the demonstrator for one. With all this said about how the concept was effectively abandoned, it has recently been creeping back in, with a number of the big names, such as Airbus, Boeing, and Rolls Royce, showing renewed interested in the propfan concept, so who knows, maybe it'll become common place.

Heavy bombers as far as I know refers to those bombers which can carry very large payloads compared to their mass. For example, a 17 ton bomber which can carry 10 tons of ordnance. They differ from the frontline bombers in that way that they can't reach that far, at least that's how I imagine this maybe I'm wrong. In short, heavy bombers heavy in a sense that they carry a LOT of ordnance and can level an entire city in one bombing run while lacking in range and/or altitude of the frontline bombers

@@LastGoatKnight in a way, this would technically be a heavy bomber then. Since it would have 16 or more jets on its wings, it would most likely be taking fuel like a german drinking beer on oktoberfest. And due to its high payload capacity of what could be imagined as a superflat world generator, it could classify as a heavy bomber in a sense. I imagine this bomber would (try to) have enough fuel for a few hours in the sky.

I cannot also explain my love for the two mixed propulsion aircraft, They turned the Neptune into a gunship, I bet they could turn the P4M-1 into one, It was such a fine aircraft, Wish they made more, They were heavy babies, But they were faster, Had more bomb load, Had the range greater than any WWII bomber for something that came out only a few years after it.

I don't know if they're realistic, but I believe the calculations for the propellers are fairly accurate, so it's somewhat safe to assume they'd at least "work" in real life.

@@PatchBits About what I thought (think). I can't wait to try my best to make them good and not accept that you are right even of you are. Keep up the content, love it.

Yeah the aspect ratio of the blades are really small aren't they.

it is just a PBJ with different engines and less turrets/guns

how old are you? 7?

@@coalthedergsune how old are YOU? 8???

​@@flimsysteve says the one asking a mentally stable person to make something from a completely dead series.

@@coalthedergsune ur da

i am actually certified insane so you got me there, i guess @@coalthedergsune