I am somewhat surprised you we able to flight over a SAC base with bombers
standing nuclear alert.

Be that as it may, the B-29 and B-50 had wings that were exactly the same
size (141ft, 3 inches), but the B-50's wings where made of a different
material and were lighter, yet stronger.  You are indeed correct, the
engines were different.  If you remember a few weeks ago, there was a short
thread on the Constellation.  The B-29 had the same engines as the early
Lockheed Constellation, the Wright Cyclone R-3350 (2,200 HP on the B-29,)
the B-50 had Pratt & Whitney R-4360-35 engines (3,500 HP).  The engine
nacelles of the B-50 were distinctly larger and longer than that of the
B-29.


Denys

-----Original Message-----
From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
Bill Brandt
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 12:48 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: HP3000-L Digest - 14 Feb 2003 to 15 Feb 2003 (#2003-47)

Denys - that is a fascinating web site - on Merced - that is one of those
places in the Central Valley that you **have** to want to go to - Years ago
when I used to fly (little Cessnas & such) I remember flying over Castle and
seeing literally dozens of B-52's ready to take off at a moments notice.

Now like so many of our other closed Air Force Bases the town has an 11,000
foot runway in search of a purpose ;-)

BTW this museum has both a B-29 and a B-50 - the B-50 I believe had a bit
larger wings and different engines.

Bill

*

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *