Have You Incorporated B-17's, B-29's, or, Mustang Fighter Planes With Your Menards' "Nose Art" Boxcars On Your Layout? ...Thanks For Pix!

Dennis, a 1:48 scale B-17 will take up a huge amount of space on a layout.  I guess one could always use the 1:72 scale and have them in the background somewhere or have them hanging from the ceiling someplace.  Good thought, I've seen some guys pictures of their layouts and they had incorporated some WWII aircraft.  

JEM,

Thanks!  I suspected that would be the case.  On an earlier layout, I worked around the sizing problem by making the item a roadside attraction with people viewing it from the side.  In this regard, the Mustang fighter plane might be more user friendly.  I recall a pre-Mustang WW II film where the Flying Fortress Commander radioed, "Goodbye Little Buddies", when the fighter escorts had to peel off from the bombing run due to their limited fuel capacity.

So, a few of the fighters and a hanger and landing strip might be more suitable depending on space constraints.  I'm contemplating a 7' to 8' wide layout with wide radius curves, and no duck-unders. I thought that by keeping the track more on the perimeter, I could use building and other details in the center, so that derailments or other operating faux pas would be easily accessible.  

A WW II airport scene might be ideal for that type of interior space.

Ha!  I have my own rivet counting moment... 

Martin Aircraft never built any B-27's...

I like the idea, wish some manufacturers would mak a realistic flatcar with fighter loads. This is from marklin set with 3 fighters and separate wing flatcars.

not on...but my sky is well protected...

Remember The Bomber on the Gas Station? How about The Bomber on the Roundhouse

Super O Bob posted:

I like the idea, wish some manufacturers would mak a realistic flatcar with fighter loads. This is from marklin set with 3 fighters and separate wing flatcars.

Just remember, during WW2 except for engines, and parts shipped by rail. Planes were fully assembled at factories and then flown  to USAAF sites, not shipped by rail. This is were many WASP besides ferrying planes to bases or overseas did their duty.

Super O Bob posted:

I like the idea, wish some manufacturers would mak a realistic flatcar with fighter loads. This is from marklin set with 3 fighters and separate wing flatcars.

Steamer posted:

not on...but my sky is well protected...Remember The Bomber on the Gas Station? How about The Bomber on the Roundhouse

Dave,

That's really cool!

you could do captured aircraft

 Me-109

RAF Hurricane

Mosquito going to a museum

I had a model of a P-51 Mustang that I had intended to build with my young son. Well, "young son" is now 33 with a family of his own. So, I sadly put it together myself and decided to build some of the other famous World War II era planes. Here they are on the layout. 

I built them all with their landing gear down before I had decided to hang them above the layout. The Corsair above actually is above an area where potential expansion might be. I do believe I have all of the Menard's Nose Art Boxcars, though I do not believe any show in these pictures.

Rick

Dennis GS-4 N & W No. 611 posted:

Super O Bob posted:

I like the idea, wish some manufacturers would mak a realistic flatcar with fighter loads. This is from marklin set with 3 fighters and separate wing flatcars.

Bob,

My father left training in Kearney, Nebraska with 35 planes, a crew of ten per plane, plus support personnel, and flew to England.  I presume, without knowing that they refueled in Iceland.  I suspect the planes were also flown to Kearney first after their manufacture. 

Can you elaborate about your Martin post, above.  On a humorous note, I suspect rivet-counting on the exterior of an airplane would be a difficult task, but, you would know much better.  Also, my father and and his close friend from the 100th Bomb Group who lived nearby us,  and regularly stayed in touch, always made reference to B-17's, and B-27's.  I never even thought about the "B" reference until much later -- obviously a reference to the manufacturer Boing, and, a touch earlier than the "767"!

The "B" has nothing to do with Boeing. It is the designation for bomber. P was for pursuit, F was actually for photo recon, T for trainer etc. The number was for the design or contract number. This is why some many numbers are missing. Who remembers the B-18 Bolo or the famous B-19 of Bugs Bunny reference, a real prototype actually. All the way up to the B-52 and presumably beyond. At some point the Air Force or someone in the Government determined the numbers were getting to high, hence the B-1 and B-2 and whatever else we don't no about. The Navy is a totally different story. When the Air Force was formed out old the Army Air Corps, the designations were modified. F is now for fighter and R is photo recon.

Dave,

Great ideas, and, great original pics.  Those are really unique.

Rick,

Your layout is beautiful, and, I love the planes and the way that you have displayed them!  The clouds and sky in the background really highlight the nicely detailed planes -- especially the Corsair.  And, by "flying the planes", you avoid their size and scale compared to trying instead to display the planes on the layout.

I have references with photos of p-47d's being uncrated and finally assembled in england.  So they shipped also.  But a bunch of crates marked 'Republic' isnt as exciting as a full airframe on flats...

I remember the  Bolo...

Martin was the designer of the B-27 medium bomber, but it never progressed past design work.  Martin produced the B-26 Marauder medium bomber.

Steamer posted:

 

Nice to see the Chow Hound flying there!

TIMDUDE said:

"The "B" has nothing to do with Boeing. It is the designation for bomber. P was for pursuit, F was actually for photo recon, T for trainer etc. The number was for the design or contract number. This is why some many numbers are missing. Who remembers the B-18 Bolo..."

Thanks Tim,

Looks like I was misinformed, and appreciate the correction.  I've edited that part of the post so I won't be misinforming others.

Super O Bob posted:

Steamer posted:

 

Nice to see the Chow Hound flying there!

I don't have a good pic, but along with Nine O Nine and Chow Hound, The Wabash Cannonball is in formation.

Ranger Rick posted:

I had a model of a P-51 Mustang that I had intended to build with my young son. Well, "young son" is now 33 with a family of his own. So, I sadly put it together myself and decided to build some of the other famous World War II era planes. Here they are on the layout. 

 

I built them all with their landing gear down before I had decided to hang them above the layout. The Corsair above actually is above an area where potential expansion might be. I do believe I have all of the Menard's Nose Art Boxcars, though I do not believe any show in these pictures.

Rick

I was just at Menards looking for those scale length flatcars from another post.  I have never checked out Menards for train stuff before.  They didnt have any flat cars, but i was shocked to see O96" o gauge track!  How cool is that? I also like the buildings...

I did see the noseart box cars!  Really liked them!

Well, they are not on the layout but here are mine in my case. I believe I have the entire set so far.

I made this with one of the Menards Air Force flat car with rockets. Removed the he rockets. Added a snap together B 17 kit to it. Basically a B-17 being taken to a museum

TIMDUDE,

Thats a great display!  I love how you have added the glass cases over what appear to be RailRax, or a similar product.

KHAYDEN93,

That flatcar is awesome, and, very creative.  The propellers on the front are great.  That is better than a lot of the OEM flatcars with loads.  Also, the B-17 is perfect for the time period of the Menards Nose Art Boxcars.

DOC posted:

Parking is tight, and there is limited space, so the rooftop looks like a good choice to park the plane.  And, to quote the singer Cheryl Crow in, "All I Wanna Do", the happy couple appears to be "dangerously close"...and, has attracted a small crowd of approving onlookers.  

"Bombs Away", as the adjacent boxcar exclaims!

Doc,

These 2 photos are priceless, and, the scenery is awesome. Kudos for the photography, and if you haven't sent either or both pictures to OGR to publish in their magazine, I would certainly recommend it!

My favorite was always the B-24 Liberator.

J DADDY,

Thanks for the beautiful pics of the well displayed planes, and, beautiful room! (I love the ceiling, and the display shelves.) I had heard about the B-24 Liberator, but, really knew nothing about it.   So,  I did a little research in Wikipedia:

       "While aircrews tended to prefer the B-17, General Staff favored the B-24, and procured it in huge numbers for a wide variety of roles.^[4][5] At approximately 18,500 units – including over 4,600 manufactured by Ford Motor Company – it holds records as the world's most produced bomber, heavy bomber, multi-engine aircraft, and American military aircraft in history.

The B-24 was used extensively in World War II. It served in every branch of the American armed forces, as well as several Allied air forces and navies, and saw use in every theater of operations. Along with the B-17, the B-24 was the mainstay of the U.S. strategic bombing campaign in the Western European theater."

Thanks for the pix!

No WWII planes, but a paratrooper's open chute and a "cur ra hee" floats in the air eternally here. 

If asked, the "perfectly good airplane" is already out of sight

(A scene with a 1:72 F-14 fighter jet buzzing King Kong makes an occasional appearance; nothing permanent though )

(Great thread folks  

My friend's dad flew on B-24's in WWll in Europe, was in Korea, and then Vietnam.  Veterans' jaws dropped at the campaign ribbons displayed at his funeral.  As a kid l built WWll aircraft models and am familiar with B's 17, 24, 25, and 26.  Never heard of 27.  I always liked the twin-ruttered planes best: 24, 25, and P-38.

colorado hirailer posted:

As a kid I built WWll aircraft models and am familiar with B's 17, 24, 25, and 26.  Never heard of 27.  I always liked the twin-ruttered planes best: 24, 25, and P-38.

Colorado hirailer:

Thanks Colorado hirailer!  I'm not sure why I referenced "B-27" (age and mileage?), but those references should have been to "B-29".  I appreciate the memory jog!

Adriatic:

Thanks, and keep those parachutes properly opened!  Better not to have that omnipresent paratrooper reach  terminal velocity...  

Not really ready to transport on main line, still need secured and braced.

Jesse   TCA

Hi Dennis...

Martin Aircraft was designing the B-27, but it never progressed past design stage.  Martin is known for the B-26 Marauder medium bomber.

Its likely you were originally referencing B-24's as this was about European Theater Operations...  B-29's were only used in the Pacific, not in Europe...

Super O Bob posted:

Hi Dennis...

Martin Aircraft was designing the B-27, but it never progressed past design stage.  Martin is known for the B-26 Marauder medium bomber.

Its likely you were originally referencing B-24's as this was about European Theater Operations...  B-29's were only used in the Pacific, not in Europe...

 

 

Actual designation was XB-27. It was designed as a High Altitude/Medium Bomber. But as mentioned, never got further then design stage and proposal based on the Marauder.

We talked a lot about this plane and what it might have been like to fly since it was based on the Marauder. Its length would have been 2 ft longer, Approx 14ft longer wing span. Speed would have been only 7mph faster. The only really big difference that would have been its ceiling range 33,000 ft compared to 21,000 ft.

I did see some original blueprints of this proposed plane, but only interested in how she might have handled.

As to handling, the B-17 was the best. This plane wanted to fly. 2nd best was the B-25.

Here's my last landing of my favorite plane. The wife was let on the field to record it after a 3 month tour of the plane.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBw1YUvE6II

Bob,

Thanks for the Further info!  After VE Day, as detailed below, my father and his Group were gearing up for an assault on Japan.  As I recall, he mentioned that the B-29's came later in his Air Force service as a mechanic (and sometime substitute Bombardier) for the 100th. 

JOSEF,

The video is awesome.  I wish my father could see it, as he would have literally been thrilled.

TEXASTRAIN and M MITCHELL MARMEL,

Thanks for the pix!  Those are creative and well done flats with loads.  I'm going to have to get busy.  What types of models are you and the other Forum Members finding and using for this purpose.  I know that Bob used a very cool Marklin model.

I've been searching for die cast WW II planes to use, and need to do some more searches.  Wouldn't it be great if Menards could create some "Plug & Play models, and WW II Air Force Buildings?  (Menards has done at least one, which I plan to purchase.)  Obviously, such an endeavor would have to properly fit Menards' business model.  Based on my above post, I should also be looking for a small "planetarium like" building for the model of an air base on the layout.  I'll likely have to do some painting and detailing, but, that should be fun.

josef posted:

Super O Bob posted:

Hi Dennis...

Martin Aircraft was designing the B-27, but it never progressed past design stage.  Martin is known for the B-26 Marauder medium bomber.

Its likely you were originally referencing B-24's as this was about European Theater Operations...  B-29's were only used in the Pacific, not in Europe...

 

 

Actual designation was XB-27. It was designed as a High Altitude/Medium Bomber. But as mentioned, never got further then design stage and proposal based on the Marauder.

We talked a lot about this plane and what it might have been like to fly since it was based on the Marauder. Its length would have been 2 ft longer, Approx 14ft longer wing span. Speed would have been only 7mph faster. The only really big difference that would have been its ceiling range 33,000 ft compared to 21,000 ft.

I did see some original blueprints of this proposed plane, but only interested in how she might have handled.

As to handling, the B-17 was the best. This plane wanted to fly. 2nd best was the B-25.

Here's my last landing of my favorite plane. The wife was let on the field to record it after a 3 month tour of the plane.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBw1YUvE6II

The B26 Marauder had wicked handeling tendancies.  This was to be improved in that area.  Longer tail moment from increased length and better wing with longer span.

After B26 crews figured out how to fly these beasts, they did quite well...  actually developed a great record with them.

All pre production aircraft got the 'x' infront of the designation to signify the development aircraft...

Douglas had a much better aircraft in the A-26 and so those arrived near end of ww2 in ETO.  So no real need for the B-27...

Much more modern design, and a close air support star.  The A-26 served up and into Vietnam.

Naturally I am biased, being a McDonnell Douglas guy!

AMCDave posted:

I have about all the US WWII 1/48 scale planes in plastic kits. At one time I thought about building that gas station that is made from a B-17.....when I mocked it up....WAY to big!!  All 1/48 scale WWII planes are pretty much space hogs on a 3R layout. 

Except for the big red star which causes me to gasp...  i love it!

Thankfully thats a texico star!

As to my layout, my preference would to be to use a model of B-17, given my father's WW II service, but, based on the experiences of AMC Dave, and Bob, and others who have posted, it looks like even a1/48 model will be just too big.  I may fly the B-17 over the layout as the excellent pictures above show, using several different large aircraft.  I will likely do a little trial and error with the 1/48 B-27, but as noted it will likely be too big for the center of an 8' wide table, even with the mainlines for the track on the outside perimeter of the tables  Probably better to stick with the Mustangs.

I did a little research, and there is a new Revell-Monogram scale model kit of a B-17 coming out (RMX855600):  Specifications :

• Scale: 1/48
• Pieces: 148
• Wingspan: 26"
• Length: 19.2"

So, that's pretty large, as stated.

Note to Bob, from below:  Thanks, the above dimensions are for the B-17.

As to the B-17 itself, the crews loved the flying characteristics and durability/flyability of the B-17, even after suffering heavy damage.  

Dennis GS-4 N & W No. 611 posted:

 I may fly the B-27 over the layout as the excellent pictures above show, using several different large aircraft.  I will likely do a little trial and error with the 1/48 B-27, but as noted it will likely be too big for the center of an 8' wide table, even with the mainlines for the track on the outside perimeter of the tables  Probably better to stick with the Mustangs.

Hi Dennis...  you may be typing '27' accidentally here.

You also could explore some 1/48 scale medium bombers such as B-25's that are much smaller and maybe would fit better...

It could just as easily be "spell-wreck" run amok. I don't know what hoop.la or Dennis use, but current G-versions don't like to obey an off setting. (Linux is a "toy OS" IMO. Made worse by Chrome, etc. I made so much money rebooting its early uses it's funny...or was it sad? I never chose it for others, they insisted )

All this fly talk is very interesting. I liked flying, but like in a car, always wanted to "drive". I can't fully relax in the air. Not panic prone, even being tossed around by a storm in a Huey was more "fun" than scary.

"Please Sir, may I have another" 

Nice modeling, guys.

A bought a large print of this Jack Fellows painting a while back. Once I have my home office back from my son, I'm going to put together a diorama with the post war Hudsons I have. I bought 3 1/48 P-38J kits from Academy, and German anti-aircraft gun from Tamiya. With the painting on the wall behind the diorama.

Might look kinda cool.