Updated BUFF - the B-52J??

[Jennings]

How about four F117-PW-100s in place of the eight TF33s?? She'd be good for another 50 years! Just don't drop that wing too low on a crosswind landing (ouch!).

:)

J

Edited August 4, 2009 by Jennings

[Kevan Vogler]

Or you could just strengthen the wing a tad and mount the engines over top of the wing Antonov An-72 style.

Give her big blown flaps and you've got a STOL BUFF :)

[EDWMatt]

That is way too cool, Jennings!

Someone at Boeing Wichita made a really nice 1/72nd model of the PW2040-powered B-52 proposal from the sow's-ear AMT H kit. Saw it when I was back there for the B-52 50th anniversary. Looked a lot like your illustration!

[Sauragnmon]

Or you could just strengthen the wing a tad and mount the engines over top of the wing Antonov An-72 style.

Give her big blown flaps and you've got a STOL BUFF :(

So... you mean she takes off in only a mile and a half?

[theemodelstarter]

Jennings,

Great drawing, can you do one of the EB-52 Mega Fortress from the Dale Brown series? Pointy nose (like the Concorde), Big "V" tail, straight (0 deg anhedral) rigid unflexed wings, air mine launcher out the back, Amraam missiles under the wings and all black!

[Jennings]

can you do one of the EB-52 Mega Fortress from the Dale Brown series?

I can, but I'm not going to :) I thought that was the dumbest book I ever read....

J

[theemodelstarter]

But just think of table full of "what if" models you could do from that series alone :)

[C-130CrewChief]

That's cool Jennings! How about some of those turboprops for the A400M? That would be interesting. I don't know how much thrust those make though, 11,000 shp beats my dodge Neon! It would drop the cruse speed alot though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EuroProp_International_TP400

Curt

[Jennings]

That's cool Jennings! How about some of those turboprops for the A400M?

Plus ça change, plus c'est la meme chose, non?? Some of the first design studies that led to the B-52 were turboprops :P In Russia they call it the Tu-95..

J

[richter111]

Probably could get by with a couple of those bad boys, not needing the thrust of all four.

Think of the fuel savings alone on the fleet, plus how much easier it would be to get parts!

[RedHeadKevin]

has the USAF actually looked into this?

[DonSS3]

has the USAF actually looked into this?

Many times over the past few decades the USAF has looked at similar re-engining programs. I don't know if they've ever gotten past the artist's conception stage...

Edited August 5, 2009 by DonSS3

[TaiidanTomcat]

That is great Jennings! May not have to worry about scraping on those crosswind landings if you made the engines like a 737:

[TaiidanTomcat]

That is great Jennings! May not have to worry about scraping on those crosswind landings if you made the engines like a 737 :

But just think of table full of "what if" models you could do from that series alone

Yeah, have a heart

[William G]

Plus ça change, plus c'est la meme chose, non?? Some of the first design studies that led to the B-52 were turboprops In Russia they call it the Tu-95..

J

YAY the First Rush Quote of the day!!!! Well sort of

Circumstances

I also think the engines above the wing would be a killer idea.

I never thought the EB-52 was a bad idea for fiction...

William G

[Vesper]

Now if only the AF could get the EB-52 Stand Off Jammer going . . . again

Ves 8)

[tony.t]

You'd give the B-52 wonderful fuel economy but a radar signature the size of a big town covered in tin foil.

[Sauragnmon]

Uh... isn't its radar signature already that big?

[JimE]

How about four F117-PW-100s in place of the eight TF33s?? She'd be good for another 50 years! Just don't drop that wing too low on a crosswind landing (ouch!).

It should be a hack of a lot quieter than the older TF-33s

Jim