B-52 Stratofortress

[kiwi_dave]

Some more B-52 inspiration - a couple of real world proposals for re-engining:






Regards,

Greg

Also of note – that first picture of the ‘Buff’ with canards wouldn’t be a bad idea for a ASW/MP aircraft flying at low altitude so often, as it would contribute greatly to taking a lot of buffeting out of the ride over water – especially with the Buff’s tendency to be susceptible to cross winds and its nose-down flight profile at low speed


M.A.D

I seem to recall the work undertaken in the late 60's with an NB-52E on the Load Alleviation and Mode Stabilization (LAMS) program which featured canards. Two at right angles to the nose roughly in-line with the cockpit and one directly under the nose. These were linked to a FCS and apparently it was a success and allowed the aircraft to fly at full speed at low level whilst cancelling out the damaging buffetting. I had a picture somewhere which I'll try and find, but the declassified Pentagon report is available to buy from http://www.stormingmedia.us/55/5554/0555468.html

[jcf]

How about the USN as a Buff operator?

Funny you should mention that.  I just picked up two 1/144 B-52's (and a B-47) that I was going to turn into PB-52's (and a PB-47), armed with Harpoons, torps, and in a nifty USN paint scheme (may do one in non-low vis white and grey, and the other in low vis).

They'd only be PB-47 and PB-52 post 1962, prior to that they'd have a Navy designation, and its anybody's guess as to whether they'd be plain 'P' or 'PB'.

The B-17 and B-29 received a 'P' designation:
B-17 = PB-1 (actually a rare reuse of an old designation)
B-29 = P2B-1

There was also an unbuilt Boeing turboprop patrol aircraft design that was designated XP3B-1.
So, based on that maybe P4B-1 for the B-47A and P5B-1 for the B-52B?

Now in the 'PB' class, Boeing built the PBB-1 Ranger, which was not proceeded with in preference to more B-29 production.
The Boeing built modified Catalinas were designated PB2B-1and PB2B-2.
So in that case, PB3B-1 for the B-47A and PB4B-1 for the B-52B?

The Model 450-150-30 was a B-47 based long-range patrol bomber project with four J57-P-1 engines that was worked on in the early '50s.

Jon

[dy031101]

Watched Casino Royale during the weekend......

That Skyfleet airliner...... it has an engine arrangement that is pretty similar to the Stratofortress.  It uses a 747 fuselage, but I can easily imagine an evolution for the B-52 similar to the one that went from Tu-95 to Tu-114?  Then how about a maritime patrol version like the proposed Tu-114PLO?  

[ChernayaAkula]

<...> quite a few proposals to re-engine the Buffs <...>

Ditch the eight engines, go for GE90-115Bs and make the BUFF a single-engined bomber! Okay, might not work for the H, but would've worked for the D. Okay, give it two. Just in case. 

[jcf]

Watched Casino Royale during the weekend......

That Skyfleet airliner...... it has an engine arrangement that is pretty similar to the Stratofortress.  It uses a 747 fuselage, but I can easily imagine an evolution for the B-52 similar to the one that went from Tu-95 to Tu-114?  Then how about a maritime patrol version like the proposed Tu-114PLO?  

There were many stops along the way from the Model 367 to the Model 367-80 (prototype for the 707 and C-135).
One of these was the Model 367-64.

As to evolving the B-52 into an airliner, well that is kinda of what happened with the development of the 707, it started out as a jet-powered 367/377 Stratocruiser but by the time the 367-80 configuration was decided on, engineering wise it had far more in common with the B-52.

Jon

[PR19_Kit]

Now that 367-64 is JUST the sort of thing that Brian would build. But without spats perhaps..... 

[Gary]

I have been reading this thread and it dawned on me that had the Buff been purchased for ASW in the 60/70's and considering the lowered threat, the fleet of Buffs would likely be re-designated for things like fishery patrol or SAR. Loading the bombay with inflatable lifeboats would be cool, however, I have to wonder how the beast would handle is the crap weather over the North Atlantic at a low altitude. That and the cost to operate...

Now that I think of it, in Canada's case, The Buff would be a useless tool for a country that doesn't really practice force projection.

[ajmadison]

IIRC, a bunch of the 367 proposals were disinformation.  I won't say that Boeing went directly to the "707", but pretty quickly they had the parameters of what they wanted to do, a plane fast enough to keep up with B-47's & B-52's (airborne refueling) and could be easily repackaged as an airliner.  I'd love to hear the thinking behind this effort.  Many (all?) of them involved repackaging the 377, and I wonder if that was to make Douglas & Lockheed (maybe deHavilland) think that Boeing was making a mistake going with an older design.  Still, I could just imagine the engineers thinking some of these concepts up, "Wait, wait.  They'll love this one.  Triple bubble hull, straight wing two jets and two recips."

[McColm]

Rolls Royce put in a proposal for a four engined B-52 using trent engines.

[Jschmus]

Not a whiff (except for markings), but of interest here because of the weapons loadout.

http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal11/10001-10100/gal10022-B-52-Granata/00.shtm

[KJ_Lesnick]

I had thought of an idea of a WHIF-AF Bomber-plane that would be like a mix of the B-52 and P6M Sea-Master.  It would be an amphibious design that could take off of runways and off of the sea, it could carry the B-52's payload and achieve performance at least equivalent to that of the B-52.  

Could you imagine how awesome that would be?

[Taiidantomcat]

[ChernayaAkula]

^ Got some "No Link" icon first. Right-click and "copy image address" got the pic displayed after all. Way cool! Here's the link:

http://img2.a9vg.com/359000/358861/album/1198392047/1213142554280.jpg

[Cliffy B]

Your link opens the same "no link" image.  Try again 

[dy031101]

Are those airborne laser turrets on that B-52?

Perhaps...... try uploading the pic instead?