B-52 Stratofortress

[KJ_Lesnick]

I was thinking of

of variations of this before, but imagine a B-52 with Vickers Valiant and HP Victor characteristics?

• The B-52's larger overall size and number of engines is useful
  
• The Valiant's cockpit shape is good for a pseudo-bubble canopy (attempted on the YB-52/XB-52) shape
  
• The Victor's crescent wings are very aerodynamic
  

As I envision the idea, I figure the design would come out as follows at the most basic...

• The wings would have a lower incidence than the B-52, and the fuselage above that area would be "flattened" and blended to some extent with the wings (the fuselage below would remain basically the same), which would produce less drag as well as an unofficial area-ruling.
  
• The crescent shape would result in a higher inboard sweep, but a lower outboard sweep and reduce wing-flexing enough to possibly allow a more conventional aileron to be employed
  
• The aspect-ratio would also likely be higher than the Victor, yet lower than the B-52 with more area than the real B-52's: This combination would likely increase high altitude performance.
  
• Engines would include four to six carried internally in the wing-root, with two to four carried under the wings: This arrangement might sound weird except the RB-49 had such a set-up to make-up more room for fuel
  
• Enough room might also be present for a tricycle landing-gear
  

I'd also be inclined to make the bomb-bay a little bit longer, even if it stretched the plane out a few feet in front of and behind the wing: Never use a small bomb-bay when you can build a huge one.

[scooter]

BUFF is finally getting an engine upgrade - something that's been bandied about for probably as long as the BUFF has been in service.

DAF Awards RR B-52 Engine Contract

From the press release:

The Rolls-Royce F130 engine will replace the TF33-PW-103, which has powered the B-52 since the 1960s, and is projected to no longer be supportable beyond 2030. The B-52 original equipment manufacturer, Boeing, is responsible for integrating the engines onto the aircraft. The Air Force plans to finalize integration activities and deliver the first lot of B-52H modified aircraft by the end of 2028.

I also saw that they'll be losing their distinctive chin mounts.

[PR19_Kit]

Presumably still eight of them, as the F-130 has the same thrust as the TF-33, still 17000 lbs. Just a small amount of potential business for the resin casting companies making the newer shaped nacelles then. 

But will it be a B-52J as a result?

[crudebuteffective]

BUFF is finally getting an engine upgrade - something that's been bandied about for probably as long as the BUFF has been in service.

DAF Awards RR B-52 Engine Contract

From the press release:

The Rolls-Royce F130 engine will replace the TF33-PW-103, which has powered the B-52 since the 1960s, and is projected to no longer be supportable beyond 2030. The B-52 original equipment manufacturer, Boeing, is responsible for integrating the engines onto the aircraft. The Air Force plans to finalize integration activities and deliver the first lot of B-52H modified aircraft by the end of 2028.

I also saw that they'll be losing their distinctive chin mounts.

until the american manufacturers "persuade" congressmen to get it stopped

we have been here before........new presidential helicopters....and tanker contract

[scooter]

until the american manufacturers "persuade" congressmen to get it stopped

we have been here before........new presidential helicopters....and tanker contract

Considering RR America, who won the contract, also builds all the T56s used by DoD and DHS, my best guess will be a "Wait & See" approach.

[Rheged]

I STILL think that four RR Trents would be the appropriate choice.........

[Dizzyfugu]

...but this would lead to serious ground clearance problems, due to the bigger engines' huge diameter. Replacing the eight relatively small engines might be the most effective and probably only possible update.

[PR19_Kit]

Put the big engines on TOP of the wings.   

Actually it shouldn't be too much of a problem, they tested the CF-6 under a B-52.

[kitnut617]

I've worked out that a GE90 would fit under the wing if the nacelle and pylon was designed similar to the set up the 737 Max has it's nacelles and a bit closer to the fuselage (it would have more ground clearance than a 777 has with the same engines). Of course, you would only need two engines so hanging two others out on the wing become a moot point. I've a plan for a Super Superfortress where I'll use a 767 wing and two GE90's, the fuselage would be dramatically revised in the mid section to increase the bomb bay size. The larger bomb bay would make the two inboard weapon pylons redundant so allowing for the engines to be moved closer to the fuselage.

[jcf]

until the american manufacturers "persuade" congressmen to get it stopped

Rolls-Royce is an American manufacturer. The F130 engines will be made by R-R North
America, formerly Allison, in Indianapolis, Indiana.


Changing to four engines was nixed a long time ago due to the huge amount of rede$ign
required to make that conversion, wing structure would have been involved. It isn't simply
a matter of new pylons and systems replacement/integration.

Also, evidently the shortened vertical stabilizer and rudder doesn't have enough control
authority to counter the resulting yaw in the case of a single engine out in a four-engine
configuration. Losing 1/8 of your thrust is not as a serious an issue as losing 1/4.

[sandiego89]

I STILL think that four RR Trents would be the appropriate choice.........

While the 4 big fans looked great in artists renderings, it was not as straightforward as thought, and would have required large amounts of wing, pylon and cabling work, but the real kicker was significant concerns with engine out flight parameters/tail authority. 

[zenrat]

Presumably the USAF maintains its B52s for use only when air superiority has been achieved and ground based anti aircraft defences have been destroyed or rendered impotent?

[scooter]

Presumably the USAF maintains its B52s for use only when air superiority has been achieved and ground based anti aircraft defences have been destroyed or rendered impotent?

Yes.

[kitnut617]

I STILL think that four RR Trents would be the appropriate choice.........

While the 4 big fans looked great in artists renderings, it was not as straightforward as thought, and would have required large amounts of wing, pylon and cabling work, but the real kicker was significant concerns with engine out flight parameters/tail authority.

Plus you wouldn't need 'four Trents', four CF6-80's would be better (each twin pod of TF33 produces 34,000lb thrust, one CF6-80 produces 50,000lb thrust). The CF6's would then be common with the C-5M, KC-10, the 747 'Airforce One' and 767 or KC-46 tankers. The replacement twin RR engine pods will also produce 34,000lb thrust.

[jcf]

The B-52 doesn't need an increase in thrust because its gross weight isn't going to
grow, the new engines actually reduce net weight by 8,000 lbs, nor does it need to
go faster, what was needed was a major improvement in terms of fuel consumption
- which equals greater range, and improved reliability and maintainability. Those are
the factors driving the re-engining program.