US Bomber Projects update...

Orionblamblam

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: USAP
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
5 April 2006
Messages
12,082
Reaction score
10,335
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
I haven't updated the webpage yet, but here's the latest collection of drawings. As always, there's no real order to the creation of the drawings... was busy working on some of the early B-52 designs when i diverted to some of the BWB desigsn, and then back to B-52...
 

Attachments

  • Collect B-52.gif
    Collect B-52.gif
    43.8 KB · Views: 861
Orionblamblam, may I ask the address of your webpage?
 
Orionblam

i want to visit your webpage too....how is the address?

Raravia
 
Thanks for this wonderful batch of drawings, Orion! ;D
Questions:
- Is your project of a book on the subject turning successful? Where to buy it? When?
- May I post the 2 asymmetric B-59s on my Asymmetric collection site (already including your Nuclear one) http://cmeunier.chez-alice.fr/Asymm_addition.htm
- If I try to direct as efficiently as possible to a page of yours, is it still http://www.up-ship.com/Book/bomproj.htm (without the B-59s though...)? or should I direct here?
 
Sentinel Chicken said:
Is that a bomber version of the Boeing 2707 SST?
Click to expand...

Nope. That's a missile carryign version of the Boeing HSCT, Model Number (mumble mumble). Dated sometime in the 1990's.

However, Boeing *did* examine a bomber version of the 2707. The late swing-wing variant without canards. Haven't made the drawings for that, though.
 
Tophe said:
- Is your project of a book on the subject turning successful? Where to buy it? When?
Click to expand...

The distant future.

- May I post the 2 asymmetric B-59s on my Asymmetric collection site
Click to expand...


Sure.

If I try to direct as efficiently as possible to a page of yours, is it still http://www.up-ship.com/Book/bomproj.htm (without the B-59s though...)?
Click to expand...

Yep.
 
Interesting stuff, guys. Maybe you can answer a question for me. I don't remember where I first read it, maybe in Ben Rich's book (?), but it concerns a "meteor bomb".

This bomb was built primarily out of concrete (maybe?) and used a hypersonic body. It was designed to be carried bu the YF-12/A-12/SR-71 Blackbird and launched at the target at Mach 3+. On its final dive to the target, a rocket engine would ignite and boost the "hypersonic cinder block" up to (I believe) Mach 15+ upon which the impact would result in an explosion equivalent to several megatons, just from kinetic impact.

I'm pretty sure that the bombe itself was relatively inexpensive and the destructive power, derived purely from kinetic impact, could have put nukes out of business - no radioactive fallout or other nasties.

Ok, you have the floor.
 
papacavy said:
This bomb was built primarily out of concrete (maybe?) and used a hypersonic body. It was designed to be carried bu the YF-12/A-12/SR-71 Blackbird and launched at the target at Mach 3+. On its final dive to the target, a rocket engine would ignite and boost the "hypersonic cinder block" up to (I believe) Mach 15+ upon which the impact would result in an explosion equivalent to several megatons, just from kinetic impact.
Click to expand...

I've never heard of that specific proposal, but the concept is sufficient simple and obvious that somethign simialr has been proposed and even tested numerous times. However, somewhere along the lines the destructive potential has been blow *way8 out of proportion. Some math:

Assume: 1,000 kg impactor
Assume: Mach 15 impact
Mach 15 ~ 1200 km/hr ~ 333 m/sec
Kinetic energy => 1/2 * M * V^2 = 0.5 * 1000 * 333^2 = 55,444,500 Joules
1 Kiloton is defined as 4.184 × 10^12 Joules. That's 4,184,000,000,000

Thus, the impactor has the energy of 0.00001325 kilotons., or 1/75,462 kilotons

I'd doubt the thing could get much faster than Mach 15. Maybe the impactor could have been heavier, but not by a whole lot. You'd need more than seventy-five *million* of 'em to make one megaton.
 
Orionblamblam said:
Assume: 1,000 kg impactor
Assume: Mach 15 impact
Mach 15 ~ 1200 km/hr ~ 333 m/sec
Click to expand...

That's Mach 1 only ;).

Mach 15 yields another factor of 225 for the kinetic energy => E ~ 1.25 * 10^10 Joule.
That's still only about 0.003 kT.
 
Orionblamblam said:
papacavy said:
This bomb was built primarily out of concrete (maybe?) and used a hypersonic body. It was designed to be carried bu the YF-12/A-12/SR-71 Blackbird and launched at the target at Mach 3+. On its final dive to the target, a rocket engine would ignite and boost the "hypersonic cinder block" up to (I believe) Mach 15+ upon which the impact would result in an explosion equivalent to several megatons, just from kinetic impact.
Click to expand...

I've never heard of that specific proposal, but the concept is sufficient simple and obvious that somethign simialr has been proposed and even tested numerous times. However, somewhere along the lines the destructive potential has been blow *way8 out of proportion. Some math:

Assume: 1,000 kg impactor
Assume: Mach 15 impact
Mach 15 ~ 1200 km/hr ~ 333 m/sec
Kinetic energy => 1/2 * M * V^2 = 0.5 * 1000 * 333^2 = 55,444,500 Joules
1 Kiloton is defined as 4.184 × 10^12 Joules. That's 4,184,000,000,000

Thus, the impactor has the energy of 0.00001325 kilotons., or 1/75,462 kilotons

I'd doubt the thing could get much faster than Mach 15. Maybe the impactor could have been heavier, but not by a whole lot. You'd need more than seventy-five *million* of 'em to make one megaton.
Click to expand...

No offence but are you SURE about those numbers? 2,000,000lbs / 75,462 = 26.5lbs TNT and the energy a Mk45 5" gun produces is about 10MJ. LOSAT supposedly puts 40MJ on the target and it's a 176lb weapon that flys about 5000fps (and much of the 176lbs is propellant that isn't there at impact).

According to my handy dandy HP48 Ki=1/2*m*v^2 Ki=1/2 (1000kg) x (4425 m/s)^2 = 9790MJ which is more like 1/421 kt or 4743lbs of TNT
 
I'm telling you guys, algebra, trig, and calculus are the TRUE members of the Axis of Evil.

I'm lucky if I can figure out the tip on the restaurant check!
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom