Jump to content

MB.3


Nek
 Share

Recommended Posts

I’ve been working on a model of the Martin Baker MB.3 for some time now and I believe my under wing detail is wrong.

I plotted the location of the under wing radiators and fully retracted undercarriage from the best 3 view drawing I could find. I’ve since read that MB may have used the wing from the MB.3 on the MB.5 however I believe this to be wrong as the rear of the U/G clashes with the radiators positions.

As anyone got any detail of the underside of the MB.3 main wing.

Many thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The MB3 and MB5 wings were dimensionally similar but the undercarriage retraction was different as was the armament.
The MB3 wheel wells were close to the leading edge with what appears to be a 'straight' hinge line.
On the MB5 the wheel wells were further back requiring the hinge to be set a compound angle.

I hope this helps.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
Hi Nek

There is a lack of real detail available on the MB3 so your 'best guess' is probably as good as anything. It certainly looks just about spot on to me.
 
One problem you may find is that with the wheel well so close to the leading edge the wheel covers will need quite a distinct curvature on them to follow the wing profile when retracted.
 
As they were further on the MB5 the covers are almost flat.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
It does not look like the wheel wells were all that close to the leading edge.
 

 

Edited By perttime on 28/01/2012 21:21:06

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hi Pertime,
 
Thanks for your input. i believe your top drawing shows the MB.3 in the Napier Sabre final configuration however it was never built. there are a few fake photos out there in that configuration.
 
Look at the relationship of the wheel to the LE edge in this photo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nek
Interesting.
If perttimes picture is correct it would suggest that when retracted the front of the wheel well is about in line with the hinge point, as in the MB5, rather than significantly ahead of it as in your diagram and in some of the drawings.
 
One has to assume the picture is real but it does raise the question of exactly what is it a picture of.
Was more than one wing built?
Could this be an early MB5 type wing?
 
What is really needed is a picture of the completed MB3 on the ground but showing the wheel wells.
I have not found such yet.
.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I really have is a series of pictures that someone has put up on picasaweb/google.
 
Some of those photos show what-they-identify-as MB.3 on the ground, with wheels wells and covers visible, although from less than perfect angles. The photo I posted a few posts up is probably the clearest (clicking on it gives a larger version).
 
Whatever radiator structures there are under the wing, seem very small to me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At first I did not think that the (pertime) canopy looked right does it for a MB3. After studying a picture in Interceptor Fighters for the Royal Airiforce 1935-45 by Michael J F Bowyer, it looks spot on.I guess a drawing smooths the lines out a bit, the photo, how it really was.
 
Given that two were made, there could well be differences.
 
As for the MB5, the engine being a Griffon it was quite different. After all this was not an aircraft built from jigs and fixtures, rather bespoke manufacture.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nek
I think I must stand corrected.
I have blown up and adjusted the brightness of the "MB3 at Wing" photo.
To me this looks exactly like the wheel well positioning that was used on the MB5 where the well is positioned just behind the spar.
This makes sense as the spar/torsion box arrangement was a feature of the Martin Baker wing.
It would also explain the very modest curvature shown on the well covers.
 
I have looked at my scale MB5 and I reckon there is just about room between the well and the flaps for those wide but narrow chord radiators used on the MB3.
As over heating was an issue with the MB3 it is logical that the under fuselage location was chosen for the MB5.

Edited By Simon Chaddock on 29/01/2012 19:53:08

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...