Author Topic: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration  (Read 33925 times)

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #25 on: May 01, 2013, 08:38:55 PM »
I'm thinking you're going to want larger engines that CFM56's or more than just four.  CFM56's replaced TF33's on a one-for-one basis between the E-3A and the E-3D/F.

I seem to recall that a B-52 re-engining with four RB211's was studied at one time.

you could always do a B-52 with eight CFM56's mounted much the way TF34's were on Boeing's original AWACS proposal, with teh ability to shut down four engines to increase patrol time on station.


I want to have fewer engines.  Some versions of the CFM56 were putting out enough thrust to equal the TF33 so with that in mind I was hoping it might be plausible to switch from eight to four engines.  Also toying with the idea of using 1:48th scale TF34 engines from a couple of trashed ESCI A-10 kits but have to dig them out of storage to be sure.  A quick comparison of a Monogram and Italeri A-10 engine pod shows some hope of it working but the huge gap in the side of the pod will require some body and fender work to cover it up.  More later as the situation develops.


Sounds like you really need those CF-6's I sent you Jeff ---  which you can also get from Aircraft in Miniature seperately through Hannants (you get four plus the pylons)

http://www.hannants.co.uk/product/TWC72009
« Last Edit: May 01, 2013, 08:41:55 PM by kitnut617 »

Online GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #26 on: May 02, 2013, 02:39:32 AM »
I'm thinking you're going to want larger engines that CFM56's or more than just four.  CFM56's replaced TF33's on a one-for-one basis between the E-3A and the E-3D/F.

I seem to recall that a B-52 re-engining with four RB211's was studied at one time.

you could always do a B-52 with eight CFM56's mounted much the way TF34's were on Boeing's original AWACS proposal, with teh ability to shut down four engines to increase patrol time on station.

I want to have fewer engines.  Some versions of the CFM56 were putting out enough thrust to equal the TF33 so with that in mind I was hoping it might be plausible to switch from eight to four engines.  Also toying with the idea of using 1:48th scale TF34 engines from a couple of trashed ESCI A-10 kits but have to dig them out of storage to be sure.  A quick comparison of a Monogram and Italeri A-10 engine pod shows some hope of it working but the huge gap in the side of the pod will require some body and fender work to cover it up.  More later as the situation develops.

If you want the same performance you going to have to go for roughly at least the same thrust.  That's why the RB.211 was proposed:  8 x TF33s (total thrust ~ 136,000 lb) vs 4 x RB211s (total thrust ~149,600 lb).  If you go for the CFM56 (even in its big -7B27 version) you get 4 x CFM56s (total thrust ~109,200 lb).  TF34 is going to be even worse...unless you call it something else. ;)
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Online GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #27 on: May 02, 2013, 02:41:02 AM »
I'm thinking you're going to want larger engines that CFM56's or more than just four.  CFM56's replaced TF33's on a one-for-one basis between the E-3A and the E-3D/F.

I seem to recall that a B-52 re-engining with four RB211's was studied at one time.

you could always do a B-52 with eight CFM56's mounted much the way TF34's were on Boeing's original AWACS proposal, with teh ability to shut down four engines to increase patrol time on station.


I want to have fewer engines.  Some versions of the CFM56 were putting out enough thrust to equal the TF33 so with that in mind I was hoping it might be plausible to switch from eight to four engines.  Also toying with the idea of using 1:48th scale TF34 engines from a couple of trashed ESCI A-10 kits but have to dig them out of storage to be sure.  A quick comparison of a Monogram and Italeri A-10 engine pod shows some hope of it working but the huge gap in the side of the pod will require some body and fender work to cover it up.  More later as the situation develops.


Sounds like you really need those CF-6's I sent you Jeff ---  which you can also get from Aircraft in Miniature seperately through Hannants (you get four plus the pylons)

http://www.hannants.co.uk/product/TWC72009


CF6 would definitely work from a thrust perspective.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Jeffry Fontaine

  • Unaffiliated Independent Subversive...and the last person to go for a trip on a Mexicana dH Comet 4
  • Global Moderator
  • His stash is able to be seen from space...
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #28 on: May 02, 2013, 03:10:10 AM »
If you want the same performance you going to have to go for roughly at least the same thrust.  That's why the RB.211 was proposed:  8 x TF33s (total thrust ~ 136,000 lb) vs 4 x RB211s (total thrust ~149,600 lb).  If you go for the CFM56 (even in its big -7B27 version) you get 4 x CFM56s (total thrust ~109,200 lb).  TF34 is going to be even worse...unless you call it something else. ;)

48th scale TF34 on a 72nd scale B-52 = scale-o-rama and a new identity for the engines in question. 

Even with the weight saved by reducing the number of engines by half it is still challenging to find something suitable as a replacement.  The problem I see with the CF-6 is that the engines are huge and this could become a real issue for the outboard engine locations where the ground clearance would be the real problem.
"Every day we hear about new studies 'revealing' what should have been obvious to sentient beings for generations; 'Research shows wolverines don't like to be teased" -- Jonah Goldberg

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #29 on: May 02, 2013, 03:25:56 AM »
Shorten the mounting pylon, or stick'em on top of the wing.  ;D


“Conspiracy theory’s got to be simple.
Sense doesn’t come into it. People are
more scared of how complicated shit
actually is than they ever are about
whatever’s supposed to be behind the
conspiracy.”
-The Peripheral, William Gibson 2014

Offline Diamondback

  • SC
  • Head of the crew dog fan boy club
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #30 on: May 02, 2013, 04:34:24 AM »
For the X/Y conversion, you need a D--there's a lot of revision in the crop-tail rear fuselages... and even a D will need a lot of work, but it does get you closer.

Reengining: GO BIG OR GO HOME! I had actually pitched to a contact IN B-52 program management @ Boeing Wichita, after consulting a GE tech-rep, installing four monster GE90's uprated to 125,000# each and strengthening the wing to handle it. A StratoPig that can accelerate STRAIGHT UP?

As part of that, I had also endorsed the full Old Dog conversion (replace three-piece stabilizer system with a short V-tail, faster Concorde-style nose, total rebuild with carbon-fiber and other more advanced materials), but also adding the capability to mount a full second weapons pylon (maybe not as high-cap as the mains, but DEF not just a Sidewinder/pod rail as already used) between each wing's nacelles. Possibly reverting to the old 3000-gallon tiptanks and adapting them into a BUFF version of what the F-15 "FAST Pack" CFT concept was: "Fuel/Armament/Sensor, Tactical"--to include a Nemesis DIRCM on the rear of each.

A lighter empty weight, a heavier MTOW--and most importantly, the ability to rack up a buttload of air-to-air payload for those "When you need to close down somebody's skies and KEEP 'EM CLOSED" situations. Might be interesting to compare costs and capabilities of a theoretical "FB-52"-enforced No Fly Zone vs. one patrolled by F-15s...
« Last Edit: May 02, 2013, 04:37:54 AM by Diamondback »

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #31 on: May 02, 2013, 10:51:15 AM »
Boeing-Republic B-536, 1950.

Did piston engine confer any low-tech (for being low-tech?) or economical advantage compared to turbojet/turbofan?
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline deathjester

  • 'Remember - Tiredness Kills Hedgehogs...!'
  • His Mother-in-law has Tardis pockets...
    • stormfront models
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #32 on: May 02, 2013, 06:24:06 PM »
If you want the same performance you going to have to go for roughly at least the same thrust.  That's why the RB.211 was proposed:  8 x TF33s (total thrust ~ 136,000 lb) vs 4 x RB211s (total thrust ~149,600 lb).  If you go for the CFM56 (even in its big -7B27 version) you get 4 x CFM56s (total thrust ~109,200 lb).  TF34 is going to be even worse...unless you call it something else. ;)

48th scale TF34 on a 72nd scale B-52 = scale-o-rama and a new identity for the engines in question. 

Even with the weight saved by reducing the number of engines by half it is still challenging to find something suitable as a replacement.  The problem I see with the CF-6 is that the engines are huge and this could become a real issue for the outboard engine locations where the ground clearance would be the real problem.
Mount the outriggers in bays on the outboard engine nacelle?

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #33 on: May 03, 2013, 01:16:11 AM »
If you want the same performance you going to have to go for roughly at least the same thrust.  That's why the RB.211 was proposed:  8 x TF33s (total thrust ~ 136,000 lb) vs 4 x RB211s (total thrust ~149,600 lb).  If you go for the CFM56 (even in its big -7B27 version) you get 4 x CFM56s (total thrust ~109,200 lb).  TF34 is going to be even worse...unless you call it something else. ;)

48th scale TF34 on a 72nd scale B-52 = scale-o-rama and a new identity for the engines in question. 

Even with the weight saved by reducing the number of engines by half it is still challenging to find something suitable as a replacement.  The problem I see with the CF-6 is that the engines are huge and this could become a real issue for the outboard engine locations where the ground clearance would be the real problem.
You could perhaps mount and install it similarly to how the CFM56 is mounted and installed on the later 737 models?

Offline Diamondback

  • SC
  • Head of the crew dog fan boy club
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #34 on: May 03, 2013, 04:28:47 AM »
Evan beat me to the punch... I was JUST about to post "chop down the pylons" after seeing Greg's reply by email.

Problem with doing it YC-14 style is that puts the hot exhaust above the wing... right where a fighter in Look Down Shoot Down can see it, while as-is they're somewhat screened by the wing.

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #35 on: May 03, 2013, 12:33:50 PM »
Evan beat me to the punch... I was JUST about to post "chop down the pylons" after seeing Greg's reply by email.

Problem with doing it YC-14 style is that puts the hot exhaust above the wing... right where a fighter in Look Down Shoot Down can see it, while as-is they're somewhat screened by the wing.
There are steps that can be taken to mitigate that problem, but not totally resolve it.  I'm familiar with some of them from various LO programs.

Offline Nexus1171

  • SC
  • I go by many names...you may know one...
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #36 on: May 05, 2013, 03:16:59 AM »
I was thinking a cockpit more like the B-47 -- more transparency and less greenhouse. 

I was thinking of the following

1: 2 x Pilots, 1 x EWO/RC Gunner, 1 x Navigator/Bombardier

2: Wing design more like the HP Victor, lower incidence than the B-52; wing repositioned to the mid-position, fuselage flattened a little in the mid-section (allows more lift out of the carry-through area, blends with the wing); engine intakes more like the Avro-Vulcan (better blended) 4 to 6 engines carried there venting through the back of the wing; the remaining 2-4 carried under the wing in a B-52-esque pod  :icon_ninja:

3: Tailcone more like the later B-52's with the remote controlled tail-gun

Offline Diamondback

  • SC
  • Head of the crew dog fan boy club
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #37 on: May 05, 2013, 03:24:15 AM »
I had proposed something more like a Victor wing in the "extended upgrades" section of my pitch as well, but without fuse recontouring--my version, the goal was to increase the number of attach points at wing-body join so it could take more stress and add both speed and maneuverability, and CG was maintained by adding a plug to the forward fuse and stretching the bomb bay.

Offline Nexus1171

  • SC
  • I go by many names...you may know one...
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #38 on: August 01, 2013, 01:31:58 AM »
I had proposed something more like a Victor wing in the "extended upgrades" section of my pitch as well, but without fuse recontouring--my version, the goal was to increase the number of attach points at wing-body join so it could take more stress and add both speed and maneuverability
The idea of flattening the fuselage is that it is even more effective in building strength into the aircraft as the fuselage and wing become progressively blended into each other allowing a lighter fuselage for the same g-load.  So long as an adequate bomb-load could be carried, you're good.

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #39 on: August 01, 2013, 10:07:49 AM »
As an alternate engine fit, consider the flying testbed for the B-2 engine and exhaust (a special nacelle under a NKC-135) and use twin engine nacelles with a B-1B style intake and B-2 style exhausts.  It'd still be an eight-engined aircraft but have a much lower signature and there would be engine commonality with the B-2 and U-2S.

Offline Diamondback

  • SC
  • Head of the crew dog fan boy club
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #40 on: August 14, 2013, 04:06:47 AM »
ISTR that B-52s actually WERE used as the testbed for both CF6 and JT9D...

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #41 on: September 26, 2013, 02:01:16 AM »
Last night while going through some of the models I got an idea for an upgraded B-52.  I had pulled some parts out of the box which has my Boeing 767 in (radome AEW bits) when I looked at the kit itself again.  The fuselage is earmarked for another project which would leave me with the wings (Jeff already has the engines from it), so after all the talk of re-engining the B-52, how about re-winging it too.

Some google searches reveals that the new 767-400 has a max' take-off weight of 450,000 lbs, that's pretty much on par with the max take-off weight of a B-52H (480,000) and one CF6 has almost the power as four TF-33's.  So I would shoulder mount  the 767 wing on the B-52 but then use a GE90 engine.  You could modify the nacelle to a shape like the new 737 CFM 56 nacelles to make sure we had ground clearance.

I would do away with the wing tip u/c gear, and spread the main gear wider and have them in sponsons, maybe like a C-17 sponson only longer with the main gear at the front and back of each one, maybe even use C-17 main gear instead (three wheels per corner).  The space between them could be additional bomb bay space -----   I think I like this idea   ;)
« Last Edit: September 26, 2013, 02:04:32 AM by kitnut617 »

Offline Nexus1171

  • SC
  • I go by many names...you may know one...
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #42 on: September 27, 2013, 08:52:22 AM »
Kitnut 617

I'd recommend against reducing the number of engines to two for the following reasons
  • The B-52 was designed with four engine pylons with double-pods
  • Even if you removed the double-pods and put a single engine in their place you'd keep the pylon number the same
  • The pylons and pods effectively counteracted the flexure of the wing: You'd have to reposition the new pylon somewhere between the two old ones: This could necessitate a total wing redesign
That being said, I'd recommend using the RB211-535E4B
  • Though I'm not fond of using a foreign engine in a military aircraft because it requires us to depend on a foreign country for supplies
  • I'm also not fond of using foreign products when domestic products exist that can do the job
  • That being said the RB211-E4 have already been proposed for the B-52
  • Thrust level is about 43,500 an engine, fairly close to double that of the TF33 (maybe a little higher)
  • It has a fairly low bypass ratio by the standards of most modern high-bypass ratio turbofans (4.0 to 4.4:1) which means more thrust at altitude than the PW2043 (the other design)

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #43 on: September 27, 2013, 09:43:24 PM »
Kitnut 617

I'd recommend against reducing the number of engines to two for the following reasons
  • The B-52 was designed with four engine pylons with double-pods
  • Even if you removed the double-pods and put a single engine in their place you'd keep the pylon number the same
  • The pylons and pods effectively counteracted the flexure of the wing: You'd have to reposition the new pylon somewhere between the two old ones: This could necessitate a total wing redesign [/b]

Nexus1171

I have said I would change the wing entirely, I'll use a Boeing 767 wing  --- shoulder mounted ----

Offline Jeffry Fontaine

  • Unaffiliated Independent Subversive...and the last person to go for a trip on a Mexicana dH Comet 4
  • Global Moderator
  • His stash is able to be seen from space...
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #44 on: September 28, 2013, 03:54:33 AM »
I have said I would change the wing entirely, I'll use a Boeing 767 wing  --- shoulder mounted ----

Robert, might be a good time to consider the "V Tail" too :)
"Every day we hear about new studies 'revealing' what should have been obvious to sentient beings for generations; 'Research shows wolverines don't like to be teased" -- Jonah Goldberg

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #45 on: September 28, 2013, 04:12:31 AM »
I have said I would change the wing entirely, I'll use a Boeing 767 wing  --- shoulder mounted ----

Robert, might be a good time to consider the "V Tail" too :)

Not a fan of the 'Vee' tail Jeff, plus it's not that popular with the real engineers either, otherwise we'd see a lot more aircraft with it.  I think for my project the fin and rudder will end up a little like a 767 though ----

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #46 on: September 28, 2013, 05:16:00 AM »
Unless you've got other reasons, like hiding the engine exhuast on the Global Hawk, a V-tail does not ipso facto impart any special LO benefits.  If I was doing an "Old Dog"-style aircraft, the tail would probably more resemble an inverted and scaled TSSAM set of tail surfaces and probably use similar LO structure.

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #47 on: September 28, 2013, 05:38:40 AM »
If I was doing an "Old Dog"-style aircraft, the tail would probably more resemble an inverted and scaled TSSAM set of tail surfaces and probably use similar LO structure.

What benifits does the TSSAM style tail offer Evan ? and if I use the 767 wing, would it be compatable ?

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #48 on: September 28, 2013, 06:03:01 AM »
Inverting and scaling the TSSAM tail surfaces gives you very nice planform-aligned edges.  Since they are also all-moving, you can use big actuators within the fuselage rather than a bunch of small ones in the fixed portions of the tail surfaces.  I don't expect there'd be any problem with using the 767 wing, though I suspect such a fit on a 1/1 scale bird would use different materials for signature reduction.

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Re: Boeing B-52 Ideas and Inspiration
« Reply #49 on: September 28, 2013, 06:57:31 AM »
A plan comes together ------  ;)