Skybolt said:Hi all, let me revive this old topic:
link to WIND TUNNEL INVESTIGATION OF A 1/9-SCALE BOEING COMPANY AMSA AIRPLANE- INLET MODEL AT TRANSONIC AND SUPERSONIC MACH NUMBERS.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/385284.pdf
Aircraft very similar to the traced out sketch published by Scott along time ago. From the wind tunnels model, they tried out three-engined configurations too.
And
Wind Tunnel Investigation of a 1/8-Scale AMSA Aircraft-Inlet Model at Transonic and Supersonic Mach Numbers from GD published here and on which a rather complete report exist on DTIC.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/385450.pdf
Very similar to the above mentioned well known AMPSS configuration.
sferrin said:That looks like a fighter canopy, not something you'd see on a bomber. ???
Mark Nankivil said:Slow day at work coming up with that..... Mark
GTX said:Mark Nankivil said:Slow day at work coming up with that..... Mark
That or someone wanted to impress their kid...or tapped into their inner child.
Avimimus said:GTX said:Mark Nankivil said:Slow day at work coming up with that..... Mark
That or someone wanted to impress their kid...or tapped into their inner child.
I had to stare at it for some time before I'd accept what my eyes were telling me...
sferrin said:Sure but do you really want to send the message, "we think our best ideas come from Wile E. Coyote cartoons"?
Orionblamblam said:If you develop a palletized gun system that can deploy at substantial airspeed, slew around and accurately hit targets at some distance
sferrin said:Orionblamblam said:If you develop a palletized gun system that can deploy at substantial airspeed, slew around and accurately hit targets at some distance
And there's the problem. If you've ever seen footage of Apaches firing their canon it's not all that accurate. If they're in a hover they can hit a single guy...eventually. Put that on a plane at 20,000 feet (to stay out of reach of small arms fire) and forget it.
Orionblamblam said:You probably wouldn't send a B-1 or B-52 to nail a single guy. If you wanted to mess up a truck column, or theatrically turn a building or an industrial area or a missile launch site or a mass of infantry or a gunboat or a cargo ship or a train or low flying helicopters or cargo planes into confetti, this would be a dandy way to do it. Orbit at 20,000 feet and drop five thousand rounds of 40MM on a target, the *right* *kind* of target, and you'll leave an impression. With a 40MM cannon, the possibility certainly exists to use guided rounds. Imagine having a 40MM cannon capable of nailing one guy from five miles up... thousands of times. The mission limitation might be fatigue in the on-board WSO, so the plane might have to have remote gunners.
Still, consider: a B-1 with a high-precision gun is available, and you've just found out that the leader of ISIS is going to be standing on such-and-such a balcony hundreds of miles into enemy territory in a few hours. Soon enough that a B-1 could get there, but not an Apache, not a SEAL sniper team. It might be worth it to send that B-1. The guy is standing there chatting with his buds when BLAMMO his chest is turned into a cavity. Everyone starts looking around but can't see diddly because the gun is *miles* up and *miles* away. The B-1 gunner (now that he has definite confirmation that the target is indeed toast) gets to decide whether to call it a day and leave the rest of the people wondering, or start plinking. Individuals would be too busy simulating Brownian motion to be individually targeted (unless the rounds are laser guided), but their vehicles and structures certainly could be. If you want to be especially entertaining, use rounds that detonate a meter or two prior to impact, thus making a real mess of soft targets.
Jeb said:See, this starts to sound like the Project Insight Helicarriers from Captain America: The Winter Soldier.
Orionblamblam said:Jeb said:See, this starts to sound like the Project Insight Helicarriers from Captain America: The Winter Soldier.
Science fiction has often been a decent way to envision future developments. A high altitude aircraft capable of sniping individual combatants at high volume, high rate and some distance would be a *fantastic* capability.
TomS said:Such scenarios are more or less fantasy anyway, since actionable intelligence with that high precision in terms of both space and time is exceptionally rare.
A B-1 with a bays full of SDBs or 500-pound JDAMs would be more than adequate for such missions.
dispersion is unvoidable. Even the guns on attack helicopters are far from precision implements, as Scott pointed out. Hence the interest in small guided weapons like APKWS to provide actual low-collateral-damage lethality.
sferrin said:Orionblamblam said:Jeb said:See, this starts to sound like the Project Insight Helicarriers from Captain America: The Winter Soldier.
Science fiction has often been a decent way to envision future developments. A high altitude aircraft capable of sniping individual combatants at high volume, high rate and some distance would be a *fantastic* capability.
That was basically the concept in Real Genius but they used a laser in a weapons bay in a B-1. Why not do the same instead of a projectile weapon? Make a self-contained pallet that slides into one of the bays on a B-1B.
Orionblamblam said:And since there are guided .50 BMG rounds, a 20MM and especially a 40MM with guided rounds is pretty straightforward. Imagine how many tens of thousands of rounds of guided 20MM a B-52 could carry, along with the optics needed to pick out individual targets. With a proper controlling AI software system, that B-52 could overfly enemy territory and apply one 20MM round to each person. A single B-52 could wipe out an entire invasion force landing in, say, Taiwan or Ukraine (by targeting everyone wearing a particular nations uniform... killing them, but leaving a lot of their *stuff* intact, and *not* trashing the friendly territory the B-52 is protecting). It could kill the crews of every single small attack boat within 20 miles. It could turn an infantry assault sweeping west through Poland into just a whole lot of dead guys. And missiles and aircraft sent to bring that B-52 down had better attack from above, because they won't get close.
Jeb said:Hell, fill the two forward bays with laser pallets and some sort of fly-out smart weapon in the third. I mean, since we're making stuff up and all.
Those are excellent, and beefy, PDFs. Thank you.flateric said:some great B-1A references here
A NASTRAN Model of a Large Flexible Swing-Wing Bomber. Volume 1: NASTRAN Model Plane - NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)
A review was conducted of B-1 aircraft no. 2 (A/C-2) internal loads models to determine the minimum model complexity necessary to fulfill all of the airloads research study objectives. Typical model sizings were tabulated at selected vehicle locations, and scale layouts were prepared of the...ntrs.nasa.govA NASTRAN model of a large flexible swing-wing bomber. Volume 4: NASTRAN model development-fuselage structure - NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)
The NASTRAN model plan for the fuselage structure was expanded in detail to generate the NASTRAN model for this substructure. The grid point coordinates were coded for each element. The material properties and sizing data for each element were specified. The fuselage substructure model was...ntrs.nasa.gov
Video:PeninsulaSrsVideos said:B-1 Bailout: Hazards of Flight Test
B-1 Flight Test Engineer Otto Waniczek recounts conditions, causes, and aftermath of the crash of a B-1 Lancer prototype that crashed on 29 August 1984. Only two of the crew members survived the bailout, sadly pilot Benefield did not. Produced by Jarel & Betty Wheaton for Peninsula Seniors www.pvseniors.org
https://youtu.be/TN-mXzAFCqM