Boeing B-1R

Lauge said:
fightingirish said:
Triton said:
Well, if Boeing cannot sell a new bomber, it will try to make money by rebuilding an old one. I wonder if the R really means "Refurb" or "Retrofit". Is the B-1R meant to be a replacement for the F-111 Aardvark?
Click to expand...
The "R" stands for "regional".
Even the concept from bagera3005 has a V-Tail, how did we not noticed that item before?! :-[
Click to expand...

Is that a gun under the nose?? Love it! After all, a warplane without a gun is a lot like Paris Hilton: Nice to look at, but ultimately quite useless ;D

Regards,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Denmark
Click to expand...
I have one questions about this concept: how the heck will the gun even work when it takes up the same spot as the Lancer's nose gear? And don't get me started on how the ammo feed will work for such an arrangement.
 
Alex Hollings recently posted this interesting video about a what-if massive B-1 upgrade proposed in 2004 (And sadly never implemented) that looks something out of a wet-dream of Dale Brown's:


There was once a plan to not only upgrade the B-1B for an extended lifespan, but to make it so much more than it is today. That proposal, dubbed the B-1R, would have equipped the Lancer with powerful new engines ripped straight out of the F-22 Raptor and it’s own bevy of AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missiles, nearly doubling its top speed while giving this massive jet the means to hunt for and destroy any enemy fighter that flew its way.
Click to expand...

I have no doubt if it had been and Dale Brown had seen one he'd have pitched a tent at the sight of it;):D.
 
Here's another short video about the B-1R proposal that has popped up:


B-1R: Could it be the World's LARGEST Air Superiority Fighter?!Dive into the fascinating world of the B-1B Lancer, also known as "the Bone," in our latest video, "The B-1B Lancer: America's Supersonic Heavy Hitter." Discover how this powerful bomber, boasting a massive payload capacity of 75,000 pounds, has shaped aerial warfare. We'll explore its impressive history, including its original design for Soviet territory penetration and the ambitious B-1R upgrade proposal that aimed to enhance its capabilities. As the U.S. Air Force transitions to the B-21 Raider, learn about the enduring legacy and challenges faced by the aging fleet of B-1Bs.
Click to expand...

A pity it was put into production by modifying B-1Bs, anyway since the B-1B flight-controls call the Lancer the "Bone" I have no doubt they'd have called the B-1R the "Boner";):D.

Edit: One thing I noticed in this video which is a bit annoying is that it has a lot of footage of aircraft that aren't the B-1B
 
Last edited:
jsport said:
iiirdmillennium.blogspot.com

Boeing MB-1R Cavalier

iiirdmillennium.blogspot.com iiirdmillennium.blogspot.com
View attachment 760302View attachment 760303View attachment 760304View attachment 760305
alternative Penetrating Counter Air
Click to expand...
Oh, hey, that's the Old Dog era Super Bone that Dale Brown wrote up! V-tail, exotic radar-absorbing skin materials, black anti-searchlight paint, packs a dozen or so AMRAAMs on external pylons (with a new radar to talk to them) and then the usual gigglefest of "if it fits it ships" with Quail decoys, AGM-130s, IIRC HARMs (and targeting system), and anything else you could think of to blast a Russian ASAT laser with nuclear powered radar off the face of the earth.

Jeez, it's been a really long time since I read Flight of the Old Dog!
 
Conflating. The V tailed bomber in Dale Brown's book is the B-52 known as the "Old Dog", not the B1.
 
V tails r less drag, but w more complex pitch yaw control. Preferred configuration for the superior but ultimately losing x-32 jsf competitor.
 
Using the dod owned digital twin as the basis for a radically improved Lancer new build would also likely place the engines in their houing much deeper to improve stealth
X-32's engine was deep in the craft to reduce radar reflection as well.
 
Hey folks,

I'm enjoying the debate about one of my favorite aircraft (even the
Dale Brown callbacks), since it seems the Bones aren't going away as soon as everyone
thinks. The more missiles we can get in the air, the better, and *every* platform is going
to play a part.
The "regional" concept was always fun to consider, even given the real-world issues
(not enough F119 engines, the drag & radar profile problems from external ordinance).

I always thought modified cruise missiles (penetrators and FAEs, or the MRASM variant of the AGM-109),
or perhaps the 'assault breaker' concept would be ideal weapons for the Bones, though
my biggest peeve was the failure to replace the AGM-69 SRAMs in the 90s. There was limited use
of the early GBU-class PGMs in the late 90s, even though clearance issues limited the
loadout. I know there was also testing to use Paveway-style bombs against sea targets.

The new PJDAM concept looks like a good weapon as well, since it fits the form factor of the 2K JDAM, thus it can be carried internally on the rotary launchers. agm-130_03.jpg

Including an older pic of an AGM-130 being put on a Bone. Always wondered how that was fitted in the bays.

Cheers //
 
Kraut_Bone69 said:
View attachment 762741

Including an older pic of an AGM-130 being put on a Bone. Always wondered how that was fitted in the bays.
Click to expand...
Carefully, I'm guessing. But on a more serious answer, possibly only 4 per rotary, but the rocket booster does fit within the "box" of the wings so it may not be as tough as we're assuming.
 
flateric said:
in no way
Click to expand...
So where would it go? What is going on in this pic?

This appears to have happened in the early 90s, since the Bone is
still in the original "Strategic Scheme" paint.
Not sure the AGM-130 is a regular inventory load, since the colors
don't appear standard (in addition, the Mk84 component has blue stripes).
Anyone know what the "LGT" designation along the top indicates?

Just fitting anything that wasn't gravity bomb/cruise-missile/attack-missile
shaped to the rotary launchers seems difficult. Getting them to clear the
bomb bay into the slipstream was another issue.

I know that certain planned weapons for the Bones, such as the AGM-129 ACM
and the AGM-154 JSOW would have been limited to 4 per launcher due to clearance
issues in the bay or fit with adjacent loaded weapons.
 
Kraut_Bone69 said:
So where would it go? What is going on in this pic?

This appears to have happened in the early 90s, since the Bone is
still in the original "Strategic Scheme" paint.
Not sure the AGM-130 is a regular inventory load, since the colors
don't appear standard (in addition, the Mk84 component has blue stripes).
Anyone know what the "LGT" designation along the top indicates?

Just fitting anything that wasn't gravity bomb/cruise-missile/attack-missile
shaped to the rotary launchers seems difficult. Getting them to clear the
bomb bay into the slipstream was another issue.

I know that certain planned weapons for the Bones, such as the AGM-129 ACM
and the AGM-154 JSOW would have been limited to 4 per launcher due to clearance
issues in the bay or fit with adjacent loaded weapons.
Click to expand...
I mean, the ALCM and SRAM are about 20" deep on the launch lugs.

So as long as the AGM130 is not more than that, it'll physically fit inside the bay.
 
NMaude said:
Here's another short video about the B-1R proposal that has popped up:




A pity it was put into production by modifying B-1Bs, anyway since the B-1B flight-controls call the Lancer the "Bone" I have no doubt they'd have called the B-1R the "Boner";):D.

Edit: One thing I noticed in this video which is a bit annoying is that it has a lot of footage of aircraft that aren't the B-1B
Click to expand...
Also, the whole video is AI generated...
 
Scott Kenny said:
I mean, the ALCM and SRAM are about 20" deep on the launch lugs.

So as long as the AGM130 is not more than that, it'll physically fit inside the bay.
Click to expand...
Oh yes, 17.5" for the SRAM, and 24.5" for the ALCM (the AGM-86 also tapers towards the top). The AGM-130 (based on the GBU-15, itself a re-finned Mk84) is 18". It's the tailfins that conflict, I believe. A quick check of Wiki shows a 59" span. I don't believe they were foldable against the body.

I also recall a report from a 'BONE-driver' that the AGM-84 Harpoon was considered, but there is a cover that comes off the missile when launched, and they didn't want to risk a FOD issue with the engine intakes.

The acoustics between the nacelles are awful and would have beat the hell out of anything mounted externally on the aft points. It will be interesting to see how they address this if they try mounting externals.

Cheers//
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom