Spruce Goose

[p38arover]

Today I fulfilled what I always thought would be an impossible dream!

I saw and went inside the Spruce Goose. If you've never seen it it, it is so difficult to imagine just how big this wooden aircraft is.

Imagine an aircraft as big as the A380 and made out of wood!

'Twas brilliant!

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

[willem]

Today I fulfilled what I always thought would be an impossible dream!

I saw and went inside the Spruce Goose. If you've never seen it it, it is so difficult to imagine just how big this wooden aircraft is.

Imagine an aircraft as big as the A380 and made out of wood!

'Twas brilliant!

http://www.sprucegoose.org/images/H4Flight1.jpg

Thats a fascinating plane. I've often heard of it, but I didn't realise it was that big!

Howard Hughes, the man behind it, was a tragic figure. He had everything, but died a paranoid recluse.

Willem

[p38arover]

The museum has a sheet of paper showing the A380 and the H4 silhouettes overlaid. The H4 is ruddy big!

[p38arover]

Willem, you are right about Hughes being a tragic figure.

[willem]

Did it ever fly?

Willem

[p38arover]

Yes, see the pic above! About 1 mile at 70 ft altitude, then Hughes mothballed it.

[Camo]

Thats right.. only flew once

how nuts is that!

[Phoenix]

I've actually got howard hughes' biography at home and read it may years ago. Howard designed a couple of interesting aircraft, a couple of which nearly killed him!!

The XF-11 is one that comes to mind.

I'd love to go and see the Spruce Goose in the flesh one day. one of the few things in the US that interest me enough to want to travel there.

[Casper]

Where is it kept?

[Dinty]

G'day All, Ron come on you know the :rulez: no pix it didn't happen LOL ya lucky bugger, 'did you get any pix? cheers Dennis:angel:

[p38arover]

Yes, took lots of pix. It is at McMinnville, between Portland and Salem in Oregon.

[Pedro_The_Swift]

wasnt it built for the gu'mint ??
only HAD to fly once for HH to collect the money:cool:
took forever to build though

[Lotz-A-Landies]

...I'd love to go and see the Spruce Goose in the flesh one day. one of the few things in the US that interest me enough to want to travel there. Wouldn't that be in the bark? :D :p

[vnx205]

It's hard to imagine how big it must be even looking at its specifications.

This image helps appreciate its size. It is a model with a model DC3 for comparison.

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

[Sleepy]

Sounds impressive Ron, the "all wood" structure. I recall that movie about Hughes (forgot the name) and he really got screwed over by the US govt and the other airlines and aircraft manufacturors. (Maybe just the Hollywood version??)

[Landy110]

It's hard to imagine how big it must be even looking at its specifications.

This image helps appreciate its size. It is a model with a model DC3 for comparison.

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/7/16/2005444/HughesH-4_DC-3_Comparison.JPG

HOLY CRAP !!!!!!
I knew it was big but FAIR DINKUM that is huge.. It was a truly remarkable build when you look at it like that.

[cripesamighty]

Lucky bugger! I managed to get to Long Beach California not long after it was dismantled for shipment so missed out on seeing it. You will have to post some pics.

It was meant to transport goods across the Atlantic during WW2 when shipping was being sunk in record numbers by U-boats. Apparently there were some technical problems they could not overcome so it would not have worked as advertised even though the war soon passed it by. Still what a great achievement.

[Captain_Rightfoot]

What were the problems? I understand why it wasn't put into production - but why didn't it undergo proper flight tests?

It's size is interesting but I wonder how much it could actually carry. I bet it would be a lot less than modern AC.

[JDNSW]

What were the problems? I understand why it wasn't put into production - but why didn't it undergo proper flight tests?

It's size is interesting but I wonder how much it could actually carry. I bet it would be a lot less than modern AC.

The basic problem with it was probably lack of power. Even with eight engines and unloaded it could barely fly. And no successful civil aircraft I can think of has ever had more than six engines, and precious few of them have been successful. To a pretty good approximation, throughout the history of aviation, the largest successful civil aircraft has been the largest you can build using four of the largest engines available. And at the time this plane was built, the largest engines available would have been the R-4360, at this stage in early development, producing only 3000hp in 1945, but I seem to remember that much larger engines were planned, and these may have been intended for it. Another thing that did not help was that these engines were NOT troublefree at the time.

It was designed to carry 750 fully equipped troops or one tank across the Atlantic, so payload was intended to be similar to the 747.

John

[abaddonxi]

Oh, I know, not civil, but look at all of them props!


http://www.californiasolarcenter.org/images/other/helios_art3a.jpg

[rmp]

From memory the Goose didn't manage to get out of ground effect even unloaded, so agree lack of power was a problem.

[willem]

The basic problem with it was probably lack of power. Even with eight engines and unloaded it could barely fly. And no successful civil aircraft I can think of has ever had more than six engines, and precious few of them have been successful. To a pretty good approximation, throughout the history of aviation, the largest successful civil aircraft has been the largest you can build using four of the largest engines available. And at the time this plane was built, the largest engines available would have been the R-4360, at this stage in early development, producing only 3000hp in 1945, but I seem to remember that much larger engines were planned, and these may have been intended for it. Another thing that did not help was that these engines were NOT troublefree at the time.

John

So really, the spruce Goose was ahead of the supporting technology of the time. You could get four modern jets, perhaps similar to the ones powering the A380, and it would fly.

BTW, tho its not civilian - the Spruce Goose wasn't meant to be civilian either - the B52 bomber has 8 engines. Perhaps the reason eight engines are not successful in civilian use is economics and not engineering.

Willem

[p38arover]

According to stuff at the museum, the engines were worth US$75,000 each at the time - the equivalent of US$1.9 million today.

[Tote]

I saw it when it was at Longbeach, I didn't realise it had been reassembled. It's an incredible thing to go through. Can you still get inside and view the cockpit?

Regards,
Tote

[Rudolf]

The Spruce Goose should make a very interesting radio control model.
A 2.5m wing span should do.
The glider my son is holding has a span of 3.1m.

[JDNSW]

So really, the spruce Goose was ahead of the supporting technology of the time. You could get four modern jets, perhaps similar to the ones powering the A380, and it would fly.

BTW, tho its not civilian - the Spruce Goose wasn't meant to be civilian either - the B52 bomber has 8 engines. Perhaps the reason eight engines are not successful in civilian use is economics and not engineering.

Willem

The B52 was (is - still in service, with another 30 years service expected after already fifty years service!) as far as any I can think of, by far the most successful aircraft with more than four engines. It is, however, an exception. There have been a few sort-of successful ones, such as the B36, which, however needed ten engines, having had to add four turbojets to the six engines similar to the Spruce Goose ones to provide adequate power. I seem to remember that the Germans had a couple of six engined aircraft in WW2, but they were not very successful - one was a maritime recce plane, the other a very large powered glider.

But there are any number of outstanding failures as well as the Spruce Goose, such as the Dornier X.

John

[Captain_Rightfoot]

Would jets work on a sea plane? They would suck in a lot of water potentially? They would also have to hang low unless built into the wing.

[JDNSW]

Would jets work on a sea plane? They would suck in a lot of water potentially? They would also have to hang low unless built into the wing.

The Beriev BE-10 is the only turbojet powered water craft I know of. Going into service in 1960 it is a high wing military flying boat with anhedral on the swept wings and wingtip floats. It has two engines, in the wing roots, and holds the FAI speed and altitude records for waterborne aircraft.

John

[Phoenix]

Some of the WIG (Wing in ground effect) craft use jets if I recall, but they are not true aircraft, although fascinating in themselves.

[muddymech]

According to stuff at the museum, the engines were worth US$75,000 each at the time - the equivalent of US$1.9 million today.



A lot of money in those days, but by todays latest engines really cheap.
looking around 10mil for an engine on a B777

[Grumndriva]

The real reason it didn't fly was that it was not allowed to. The end of the war ended the requirement for it, and the program was terminated. The US Government was running and paying for the the project, and it did not authorise flight testing. Hughes was authorised to do a taxi trial only, but decided to at least prove it could fly before the end of the project, which he did. It may possibly have also been limited in use by inadequate power, but that was not the primary reason it didn't fly apart from the one unauthorised departure.

[p38arover]

The Beriev BE-10 is the only turbojet powered water craft I know of. Going into service in 1960 it is a high wing military flying boat with anhedral on the swept wings and wingtip floats. It has two engines, in the wing roots, and holds the FAI speed and altitude records for waterborne aircraft.

John

I'm pretty sure Consolidated made a jet powered seaplane.

[Bigbjorn]

I think Short or Saunders-Roe did also.

[Phoenix]

saunders roe sure did (Single engine fighter actually), not sure about consolodated, they made a few interesting aircraft after the war.

[Phoenix]

ahh, it was the martin I was thinking of!!

Jet Sea Plane & Jet Flying Boat PAGE (http://www.strange-mecha.com/aircraft/J-Sea/J-Sea.htm)

Martin P6M-2 Seamaster! (yes, i'm an aircraft tragic!)

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/05/408.jpg

[Phoenix]

oh, and I found an RC spruce goos, I was sure somebody had done one!

The December 1998 Photo Gallery - RC Groups

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/05/409.jpg

[Tusker]

Monster planes must have been the R&D flavour of the month in WW11

Have a a quiz at this Superman vid from 1942, its just under 9 minutes.

Internet Archive: Free Download: Japoteurs (http://www.archive.org/details/japoteurs)

The Daily Planet headline reads "World's largest bombing plane finally completed"

Regards
Max P

[Captain_Rightfoot]

ahh, it was the martin I was thinking of!!

Jet Sea Plane & Jet Flying Boat PAGE (http://www.strange-mecha.com/aircraft/J-Sea/J-Sea.htm)

Martin P6M-2 Seamaster! (yes, i'm an aircraft tragic!)

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2009/05/408.jpg

Gees... imagine if fisheries got one of these ... people would take a new outlook on the bag limit :eek::eek:

On our other track, I think the spruce goose as an RC model would be best suited to electric power. Getting all those IC engines to run and stay in tune would be a disaster. As with any RC model, making it light would be the challenge.

[cripesamighty]

I am another aircraft tragic. The one I always remember is the Convair Sea Dart which was the only seaplane to break the sound barrier. From memory it fell out of favour because of some technical problems (underpowered, sluggish, ski's created vibrations on take-off/landing) and the carriers finally sorted out their problems having supersonic jets on deck.