The Lockheed Martin U-2 Dragon Lady Replacement ideas

[McColm]

Lockheed Martin has a few ideas of it's own to replace the U-2S, yes there's a few drones that are suitable but a pilot or AI is one of the options that the USAF is looking into.
Having watched a few videos of the U-2 the landing always intrigues me, surely there's room for the landing gear in the wings from a whiffers angle.

I've never built any of the kits available although the Myasishchev M-55 or something similar in appearance is possible. Then there's the Canberra, longer wings than the RB-57F which does seem to be a good idea.
I had a go at building the Mach2 RB-57F kit but found it was very difficult so I bought the Italeri B-57G Nighthawk and started adding the Mach2 parts on to it. I didn't finish the build but I'd like to have another go.

[The Rat]

Having watched a few videos of the U-2 the landing always intrigues me, surely there's room for the landing gear in the wings from a whiffers angle.

Probably is, but having been a 'chase vehicle' driver for a few launches and recoveries, I can tell you that those wings flex so much that outriggers would be required anyway, so it's perhaps easier to engineer one landing gear bay than two. Placing gear further out on the wing may lead to other problems: extra stiffening for the weight of the whole mechanism, assymetric drag in the event of one not lowering, and possibly others. But I'm not an engineer.

[PR19_Kit]

There's not enough thickness in a U-2 wing to take any reasonable size gear legs and wheels, That's why the outrigger wheels fall off on take-off. Making the wing thicker just for the gear would wreck the aerodynamics.

[MikoLee]

There's not enough thickness in a U-2 wing to take any reasonable size gear legs and wheels, That's why the outrigger wheels fall off on take-off. Making the wing thicker just for the gear would wreck the aerodynamics.

Yep, you'd end up with super thin wheels and tyres on long spindly gear legs, a solution the Lightning had taking valuable space for fuel!

Retractable out riggers were done with the early Harriers with that tiny wheel hanging out behind the wing tip!

But it's true to say the weight penalty would be detrimental to speed range and aerodynamic performance

The only replacement would be a high aspect ratio wing 'super' Canberra!

[PR19_Kit]

Retractable out riggers were done with the early Harriers with that tiny wheel hanging out behind the wing tip!

And the later ones too, they just weren't as far outboard as on the originals.

[MikoLee]

And the later ones too, they just weren't as far outboard as on the originals.

Oh yes, so they are! seems like a poor design choice but I suppose the aerodynamic drag penalty isn't so great compared to tucking the outriggers away, maybe if the Harrier was supersonic, might have been a thing

Miko

[PR19_Kit]

It looks pretty logical to me, most of the wright of the airframe is in that socking great engine, and it's sensible to put the main gear leg as close to it as possible. As it doesn't have a conventional jeptpipe, the gear leg fits naturally aft of the engine, and a conventional nosewheel keeps the nose up. After that they only needed some lightweight legs on each side to stop it falling over, and where else to put them but at the wing tips?

[kerick]

Also for the Harrier I'm sure having the outriggers helped stability on a vertical landing.
As for the U-2, remember it's basically a jet powered sailplane so every ounce counts. The drop away outrigger legs probably equals several thousand feet additional altitude. Not just the legs themselves but all the additional stiffening to the wing would add a lot of weight. I'm sure Kelly Johnson and company thought this out in many different ways. Even the B-52 and B-47 had outriggers so it's a pretty good idea.
There's a story about how the Chicago Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve base at O'Hare IAP (ORD) had an open house and brought in a B-52 for display. Well, the outriggers were exactly the same distance apart as the taxiway lights. Lots of broken glass along both sides of the taxiways. The BUFF was request to not return......

[NARSES2]

There's a story about how the Chicago Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve base at O'Hare IAP (ORD) had an open house and brought in a B-52 for display. Well, the outriggers were exactly the same distance apart as the taxiway lights. Lots of broken glass along both sides of the taxiways. The BUFF was request to not return......

Ooooops