Warbird Information Exchange

One of the guys over on the RC Scale Builder site posted this image of a plane that he has been trying to identify for some time. I thought I'd post it over here and see if any of you very knowledgeable aircraft enthusiasts could identify it.

I was thinking that with the size and shape of the vertical stab and the size and location of the wings if it was some kind of scaled down glider to test the flight charistics of the proposed B-36 bomber.

That's a Cornelius XFG-1 Mallard. The 'FG' stood for 'fueling glider' and it was designed to deliver fuel by air. Only two were built.

Do a websearch for 'XFG-1' and you'll find a few more images...


Fade to Black...

Outstanding Blackwolf3945 !!! I've never even seen a picture of this bird or heard of it's mission.

Wow!!! thanks for the info. I've been searching for days and hadn't come across anything even similar.

Thats Wix for ya.....

Individually we know alot, together we know everything.

_________________
Scott Rose
Editor-In-Chief/Webmaster
Warbirds Resource Group - Warbird Information Exchange - Warbird Registry

Be civil, be polite, be nice.... or be elsewhere.
-------------------------------------------------------
This site is brought to you with the support of members like you. If you find this site to be of value to you,
consider supporting this forum and the Warbirds Resource Group with a VOLUNTARY subscription
For as little as $2/month you can help ($2 x 12 = $24/year, less than most magazine subscriptions)
So If you like it here, and want to see it grow, consider helping out.



Thanks to everyone who has so generously supported the site. We really do appreciate it.

Follow us on Twitter! @WIXHQ

Fueled glider?

Is that like a Molotov Cocktail?

_________________
www.tailhookstudio.com

So...

with that line of reasoning about the designation FG for "fueled glider"...could one infer that an FG-1D would also carry out the same "fueled glider" mission with this aircraft as well ? If that is the case then what in the heck is the reason for the that big ol' round engine and 12 plus foot prop on the front of it used for ??

Okay...I was kidding here...nice job on the ident for this one.

Paul

I would thing that the difference between FGs would come with USN vs. the USAAC naming convention of aircraft. I think this is the first time I’ve seen an overlap with the names like that (or noticed it). Strange.

_________________
www.tailhookstudio.com

A little clarification... it's fueling glider, not fueled glider.

I don't know a helluvalot about this thing, but from what little I've come across the idea was that the glider was to have been towed behind a transport as a 'flying drop tank' of sorts. The towing aircraft was to feed off of the glider which was then released at the destination to land separately.

If anyone has any corrective or additional info on this thing, I'd like to hear about it...


Fade to Black...

I'm guessing it was done something like this (in this case a Ar 234)

_________________
Scott Rose
Editor-In-Chief/Webmaster
Warbirds Resource Group - Warbird Information Exchange - Warbird Registry

Be civil, be polite, be nice.... or be elsewhere.
-------------------------------------------------------
This site is brought to you with the support of members like you. If you find this site to be of value to you,
consider supporting this forum and the Warbirds Resource Group with a VOLUNTARY subscription
For as little as $2/month you can help ($2 x 12 = $24/year, less than most magazine subscriptions)
So If you like it here, and want to see it grow, consider helping out.



Thanks to everyone who has so generously supported the site. We really do appreciate it.

Follow us on Twitter! @WIXHQ

fabulous!! i learned something new today!! never heard of, nor saw anything of this anomaly before!! most definetely developed in the cause of a unique concept. i don't think air classics, wings or airpower magazines covered this rare bird in 30 plus years of publishing. best, tom

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

I think I have a pretty good guess how this glider would have been used. It was intended to be a range extender for certain types of aircraft, most likely bombers. Since engines burn the most fuel on takeoff and climbout, it would have been transferring fuel to the primary aircraft during climb out. It could be released as soon as all of the fuel had been released and it could glide back to the airport of origin. The aircraft probably had an oxygen system for tows to altitudes maybe up to 30,000 ' plus. Imagine say being towed by a B-29 into those fierce headwinds over the Pacific. If the XFG was released at 30,000' feet and had a no wind glide ratio of 20:1 then it could easily glide a distance of about 100 nautical miles. Greater if it had a tailwind helping it back to base.With a 50 knot direct tailwind it could glide for 150 nautical miles. The primary aircraft wouldn't necessarily have to circle the airport, it could start on it's way to it's mission. If runway length were part of the equation then the XFG would allow the Bomber to replace fuel with a more potent bomb load as it could take on fuel after being airborne.
This also might have come into play with say a B-17 which didn't have the range of the B-24. * When towing gliders, the glider creates it's own lift when being towed. Its "cost" is taken from the climb rate (surplus horsepower on takeoff) of the aircraft serving as the towplane.

Holly cr*p!!!
It's that doesn't complete the fire triangle!!!
Fill something made of wood with fuel and put 2 blow torches in front
of it.

_________________
Don't touch my junk!!