Longer B-47 Service Life?

[isayyo2]

Greatly inspired by the "Longer B-58 Hustler service?" thread by @Rule of cool

How could the B-47 have had a more impactful service life?

Improved engines and aerodynamics?

Exports to friendly nations?

As a total What-if thought, I would consider a four-engine B-47 evolution as seen with the B-47C/B-56 designs. I propose GE's J73 as they provided a 50% increase in thrust over the J47, I would also be curious if a thrust-reverser could be developed for the J73/B-47 upgrade to reduce its landing roll. Would the increase in thrust decrease the B-47's "Coffin Corner" susceptibility?

 

[Rule of cool]

There was some idle talk of the RAAF getting some at one point, but they were obsolete when they were offered so the offer was rejected.

 

[riggerrob]

Greatly inspired by the "Longer B-58 Hustler service?" thread by @Rule of cool

How could the B-47 have had a more impactful service life?

Improved engines and aerodynamics?

Exports to friendly nations?

As a total What-if thought, I would consider a four-engine B-47 evolution as seen with the B-47C/B-56 designs. I propose GE's J73 as they provided a 50% increase in thrust over the J47, I would also be curious if a thrust-reverser could be developed for the J73/B-47 upgrade to reduce its landing roll. Would the increase in thrust decrease the B-47's "Coffin Corner" susceptibility?

B-47 was most valuable to nations that also had nuclear weapons.
How well would B-47 have worked dropping iron bombs?

 

[isayyo2]

How well would B-47 have worked dropping iron bombs?

About 25,000 pounds worth...

The B-47B and E had differing bomb-bay lengths as "long" and "short" lengths, as conventional weapon carriage was a distant secondary concern. Per a Beyond the Sprues post we can see their conventional load out:

Loadouts were for B-47B:
Long bay, low density kit:
2 x 4000lb or 9 x 2000lb or 16 x 1000lb or 16 x 500lb WW2 box fin bombs
6 x 2000lb or 8 x 1000lb or 8 x 500lb "interim design" bombs (WW2 fitted with new conical fin)
1 x 25000 lb
8 x 750lb (M117)
Long bay, high density kit:
6 x 2000lb or 18 x 1000lb or 28 x 500lb "interim design" bombs (WW2 fitted with new conical fin)
1 x 25000 lb or 1 x 12000lb or 1 x 10000 lb (I assume these are nukes though, or did the US have Grand Slams and Tallboys?)
4 x 3000lb (M118) or 21 x 750lb (M117)
Short bay, high density kit:
3 x 2000lb or 6 x 1000lb or 13 x 500lb "interim design" bombs (WW2 fitted with new conical fin)
7 x 750lb (M117)

For B-47E:
Long bay, high density kit (only on Block III and prior, strangely low density kit is not given as an option here):
6 x 2000lb or 18 x 1000lb or 28 x 500lb "interim design" bombs (WW2 fitted with new conical fin)
1 x 12000lb or 1 x 10000 lb
4 x 3000lb (M118) or 21 x 750lb (M117)
Short bay, high density kit:
3 x 2000lb or 6 x 1000lb or 13 x 500lb "interim design" bombs (WW2 fitted with new conical fin)
7 x 750lb (M117) or 6 x 750lb (MC-1 chemical cluster)
Short bay, low density kit:
3 x 2000lb or 4 x 1000lb or 8 x 500lb "interim design" bombs (WW2 fitted with new conical fin)
4 x 750lb (M117) or 4 x 750lb (MC-1 chemical cluster)

 

[Dilandu]

Exports to friendly nations?

This seems to be most likely. The export market for long-range bomber was pretty much occupied by USSR with Tu-16 and Britain with Canberra. It's plausible that some pro-American but neutral nations may ask for compatible plane (especially if USA would bother to develope some missile-carrying version)

 

[isayyo2]

It's plausible that some pro-American but neutral nations may ask for compatible plane (especially if USA would bother to develope some missile-carrying version)

Australia is the natural choice as they were the closest to adopting 24 Stratojet's as interim before their F-111s were delivered.

I think Iran is another possibility as they were keen on the F-111s, B-47s would serve as a regional deterrent against its Arab neighbors and RB/EB-47s would serve along their Soviet border.

Another possibility for the J73/B-47 is being transferred from SAC to TAC much like the FB-111As "transforming" into F-111Gs. TAC could use B-47s in a conventional role alongside B-57s, or be converted into KB-47 fast tankers to replace the KB-29/50s.

 

[BlackBat242]

As a total What-if thought, I would consider a four-engine B-47 evolution as seen with the B-47C/B-56 designs. I propose GE's J73 as they provided a 50% increase in thrust over the J47, I would also be curious if a thrust-reverser could be developed for the J73/B-47 upgrade to reduce its landing roll. Would the increase in thrust decrease the B-47's "Coffin Corner" susceptibility?

J71s were proposed for the YB-47C (YB-56).

The J73 produced 9,200 lb thrust without an afterburner.

Boeing YB-56/B-47C Stratojet
The early versions of the Stratojet were all severely underpowered, and in pursuit of a more powerful Stratojet the Air Force proposed a version of the B-47 powered by four 10,090 lb.s.t. Allison J71-A-5 turbojets. The designation YB-56 was assigned to this project, since the different engine configuration was thought to justify a change in designation. A reconnaissance version known as RB-56A was also planned. According to the original planning, the 88th B-47B (50-092) was scheduled be converted to YB-56 configuration as a testbed for the concept.
For a time, the YB-56 was intended to be the "definitive" Stratojet. However, since the airframe was basically that of a "stock" B-47B, the designation of the YB-56 was changed to YB-47C. The J71 engine was later found to be unsuitable for the Stratojet, and a decision was made to switch to the new Pratt & Whitney YJ57 turbojet. However, these engines were not yet available, and in any case they were already earmarked for the B-52. Consequently, the YB-47C program was cancelled in December of 1952, and no four-jet Stratojet was ever built.

The cockpit seems to have been not finalized before cancellation.

 

[Apophenia]

... How could the B-47 have had a more impactful service life?

Improved engines and aerodynamics? ...

Re-wing to deal with spar cracks and related fatigue problems?