Author Topic: Boeing Advanced Bomber Studies (Read 34842 times)

Sundog · « **on:** August 19, 2006, 12:35:26 pm »

These are advanced Boeing Bomber Studies from the late '70s. Except for the two Rockwell design, which I left in due to the two page Boeing 'X-Wing' Bomber design.

Large Version of the above image

sferrin · « **Reply #1 on:** August 19, 2006, 01:18:12 pm »

Show us a picture of the one on the right-hand page! Please

Sentinel Chicken · « **Reply #2 on:** August 19, 2006, 06:32:16 pm »

I think that one on the right hand page was an oblique wing design (can't remember from who) where the wing rotated to be flush with the fuselage leaving a very slim and flattened lifting body design with twin fins.

RP1 · « **Reply #3 on:** August 19, 2006, 06:37:30 pm »

There's a Rockwell design of that description on the Right-hand side of the scan (there should be a scroll bar below the image).

Just how fast was it supposed to go to generate sufficient lift?

RP1

Sentinel Chicken · « **Reply #4 on:** August 20, 2006, 07:18:46 am »

Scroll bar! Dammit I keep forgetting about that on the larger images!!

Sundog · « **Reply #5 on:** August 20, 2006, 08:10:57 am »

Or, On the larger images, I just right click and select "view image" and it shows me the whole image without anything else. Just remember to hit the back buttin when you're finished viewing

BTW, I'm using Firefox, for your ref.

Antonio · « **Reply #6 on:** August 20, 2006, 10:22:06 am »

Some additional pics from my archive

Matej · « **Reply #7 on:** August 20, 2006, 10:27:30 am »

And a lot of others

http://www.hitechweb.genezis.eu/bombers1c.htm

Antonio · « **Reply #8 on:** August 20, 2006, 10:37:32 am »

ATB from 1980

Antonio · « **Reply #9 on:** August 20, 2006, 10:39:32 am »

The last one

Skybolt · « **Reply #10 on:** August 21, 2006, 07:02:49 am »

Uh uh, and would you like some nice sideviews???

Orionblamblam · « **Reply #11 on:** August 21, 2006, 09:51:22 am »

And *where* did those side views come from?

Note: the Rockwell strategic bomber side view has errors. The main wings had positive dihedral.

lark · « **Reply #12 on:** August 21, 2006, 10:29:31 am »

Aviation & Marine international - December 1979 , page 40....

Skybolt · « **Reply #13 on:** August 21, 2006, 11:24:17 am »

Eh eh, Mister Lark wins the First Pize...

Probably Aviazione & Marina had some three-views of the concept but not of all. This explains the wrong dihedral. There is another error in my opinion. The High Supersonic was the tandem wing, the large delta was the "strategic" (it is improbable to drive a so large wing to mach 1+)....

sferrin · « **Reply #14 on:** August 21, 2006, 11:56:11 am »

Quote from: Orionblamblam on August 21, 2006, 09:51:22 am

And *where* did those side views come from?

Note: the Rockwell strategic bomber side view has errors. The main wings had positive dihedral.

I've seen another shot of that one in which it has a negative dihedral. Not saying you're wrong just that somehow the impression got out there that it was negative.

Matej · « **Reply #15 on:** August 21, 2006, 01:05:04 pm »

Seems that its this one. But still artists impression. Better argument should be blueprint.

Skybolt · « **Reply #16 on:** August 21, 2006, 01:08:06 pm »

This one has surely a negative dihedral, but I suspect Scott has a real three views.

Skybolt · « **Reply #17 on:** August 21, 2006, 01:38:43 pm »

Ok, question settled: positive.

Quote

If you want, I will add more pictoriial info to Rockwell studies thread.

You bet!!!

Thanks Flateric, and I think I speak for all the forum members!

flateric · « **Reply #18 on:** August 21, 2006, 02:17:48 pm »

Quote from: lark on August 21, 2006, 10:29:31 am

Aviation & Marine international - December 1979 , page 40....

Please, please, please, mighty Lark, give us higher-res scan!!!

flateric · « **Reply #19 on:** August 21, 2006, 02:22:18 pm »

More pics of Boeing 1978 ASPA concepts

flateric · « **Reply #20 on:** August 21, 2006, 02:24:31 pm »

extra ASPA stuff

PaulMM (Overscan) · « **Reply #21 on:** August 22, 2006, 07:39:57 am »

Fixed the thread (and on holiday too! - luckily some people don't secure their wireless very well) for you.

Sundog, the image you are posting is 1250x1624 in size, when the server tries to resize it down to thumbnail size it decompresses the jpg and then runs out of memory. I can't change the settings on the current server, so best to reduce the resolution. Saving it as a lower quality jpg doesn't help.

Paul.

Skybolt · « **Reply #22 on:** August 22, 2006, 08:12:55 am »

Ok. I'll send the image directly to Flateric

Thanx!

flateric · « **Reply #23 on:** August 22, 2006, 10:07:34 am »

Problems caused by posting large, hi-res scans are described by Overscan two messages above, and all of us could watch the fruitful results of this for about a day. I still eager to see what that large Sundog tried to show us - I bet it was something very interesting as always. I personally didn't know about pixel size limitations of images, and will be more cautious.

If you want, you can just ask Skybolt to post it via e-mail, he surely will be able to help.

flateric · « **Reply #24 on:** August 22, 2006, 10:25:05 am »

Hi-res color versions of Prometablava pictures from Bill Sweetman's 'Inside The Stealth Bomber'

Sundog · « **Reply #25 on:** August 22, 2006, 01:05:22 pm »

Sorry about that, as soon as I get home (At the office now) I'll make it smaller and repost it.

OK, I replaced it with a small image and a link to the larger one. If the first image is too big I'll make it smaller as well. In the future, I'll make big images with links and small preview images, unless the image is small to begin with.

flateric · « **Reply #26 on:** August 22, 2006, 03:19:47 pm »

Boeing 1970s Faster Penetrator concept courtesy Matej Furda

TinWing · « **Reply #27 on:** August 22, 2006, 03:31:39 pm »

Quote from: flateric on August 22, 2006, 03:19:47 pm

Boeing 1970s Faster Penetrator concept courtesy Matej Furda

Any chance of a higher res version of the 3-view of this proposal?

For that matter, is there a full 3-view of the more convetional swept wing, twin engine plus booster design?

Skybolt · « **Reply #28 on:** August 23, 2006, 05:26:51 am »

A couple of nice b/w renderings of the two most conventional ASPA proposals

Sentinel Chicken · « **Reply #29 on:** August 23, 2006, 11:47:52 am »

Some of those Boeing designs could still be viable today- given an environment with almost zero air threat (Afghanistan, Iraq) an efficient "bomb truck" loaded with LGBs and JDAMs could orbit in patrol areas "on call" to ground units that are engaged with insurgent forces. There is a recent article in the latest issue of AWST that talks about discussions at the Pentagon for a close-support aircraft more geared to COIN warfare than the current high-tech legacy systems in use. The article talks about smaller aircraft, but the current generation of sensors and precision weapons I see no reason right off hand why a larger "bomb truck" type aircraft couldn't do the job.

Skybolt · « **Reply #30 on:** August 23, 2006, 01:00:42 pm »

Leave the dirty job to bombs... or to drones with bombs. An aerial drone-carrier (again) loitering at 20.000 m, itself remotely controlled. On the same level of sensors and computer/communication, I'd consider the new explosives (hyper-termites, supercompressed and the like): a 50 kolos bomb could do the job of a half a ton one

sferrin · « **Reply #31 on:** August 23, 2006, 03:00:04 pm »

Quote from: Sentinel Chicken on August 23, 2006, 11:47:52 am

Some of those Boeing designs could still be viable today- given an environment with almost zero air threat (Afghanistan, Iraq) an efficient "bomb truck" loaded with LGBs and JDAMs could orbit in patrol areas "on call" to ground units that are engaged with insurgent forces. There is a recent article in the latest issue of AWST that talks about discussions at the Pentagon for a close-support aircraft more geared to COIN warfare than the current high-tech legacy systems in use. The article talks about smaller aircraft, but the current generation of sensors and precision weapons I see no reason right off hand why a larger "bomb truck" type aircraft couldn't do the job.

I think it's a bummer they didn't build 713-1-138. Think super-sized B-52 with four twin-engine nacelles under each wing instead of two.

Skybolt · « **Reply #32 on:** August 24, 2006, 04:17:33 am »

Since it was hydrogen-fueled, maybe even Greens (well, part of, the H-tribe) would cheer.. 8)

sferrin · « **Reply #33 on:** August 24, 2006, 08:26:28 am »

Quote from: Skybolt on August 24, 2006, 04:17:33 am

Since it was hydrogen-fueled, maybe even Greens (well, part of, the H-tribe) would cheer.. 8)

I'm about 99% certain 713-1-138 wasn't LH2 fueled and if it was it didn't carry very much because it didn't have the Goodyear-blimp look of most LH2 aircraft. It simply looked like a scaled up B-52.

frank · « **Reply #34 on:** August 24, 2006, 09:13:25 am »

I've never seen this 713-1-138. Did I miss a drawing or can someone post one?

Antonio · « **Reply #35 on:** August 24, 2006, 10:33:49 am »

Frank,

I can't post the picture because I get a warning about "file size is too big" even when it is only 88 Kb. So I'll email you a hi-res scan

Cheers,

Antonio

Source:

Valkyrie
Dennis R Jenkins & Tony R Landis
Speciality Press
ISBN 1-58007-072-8

This book is PURE GOLD

frank · « **Reply #36 on:** August 24, 2006, 11:08:19 am »

Thanks! However, if it's in the Valkyrie book, I'm pretty sure I have it in my stash at home. I can look it up then. I guess I haven't seen my copy in a couple of years.

Quote from: pometablava on August 24, 2006, 10:33:49 am

Frank,

I can't post the picture because I get a warning about "file size is too big" even when it is only 88 Kb. So I'll email you a hi-res scan

Cheers,

Antonio

Source:

Valkyrie
Dennis R Jenkins & Tony R Landis
Speciality Press
ISBN 1-58007-072-8

This book is PURE GOLD

sferrin · « **Reply #37 on:** August 24, 2006, 11:48:58 am »

Quote from: pometablava on August 24, 2006, 10:33:49 am

This book is PURE GOLD

Yes it is

Skybolt · « **Reply #38 on:** August 25, 2006, 02:03:24 am »

Quote

'm about 99% certain 713-1-138 wasn't LH2 fueled and if it was it didn't carry very much because it didn't have the Goodyear-blimp look of most LH2 aircraft. It simply looked like a scaled up B-52.

Oooops, you're right. I confused it with with tis one:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=243.msg1444#msg1444

Anyway, not all the liquid hydrogen projects were blimp-like. Think ot he L-400 Suntan, or, in the WS-110A studies, the Boeing 725-101.
Talking of scaled-up B-52s, my favourite is 713-1-135.. almost zwilling...

PaulMM (Overscan) · « **Reply #39 on:** August 26, 2006, 08:48:52 am »

Pometablava: see message above about image sizes.

The current web hosting has a memory limit on PHP code which causes problems with the thumbnail creation process if the pixel size and colour depth of the image combine to exceed the limits.

To minimise these problems:

1) Try not to exceed 1024 pixels in either dimension.
2) Save greyscale images as greyscale JPEGs not colour ones- they use less memory to resize then.

If your image is too large (say, 2000 x 1000), then even saving it as 5% quality for a 20kb file won't stop the error message.

Please note that, generally speaking, 1024 pixels is large enough for a reasonable quality image.

Paul.

Antonio · « **Reply #40 on:** August 26, 2006, 09:10:15 am »

Paul,

Thanks a lot for the info. I'll fit my scans according to it.

Antonio

Sundog · « **Reply #41 on:** December 21, 2006, 09:25:48 pm »

Here's a cool Boeing design I ran across at the patent site, so I thought this would be the best place to post it.

http://www.google.com/patents?vid=USPATD231094

Skybolt · « **Reply #42 on:** December 22, 2006, 06:30:20 am »

Ummm, smells AMSA related...

Triton · « **Reply #43 on:** March 10, 2009, 12:35:05 pm »

The Boeing ABC prop fan is the most interesting of the concepts. Is there a good source of information on the Boeing ABC prop fan concept? What was the advantage of the prop fan design over the jet engine powered designs?

Matej · « **Reply #44 on:** March 10, 2009, 01:19:05 pm »

Lower infra, lower noise, better fuel efficiency and thus range... However with the important negative effect on the RCS.

Triton · « **Reply #45 on:** March 10, 2009, 02:16:31 pm »

Quote from: Matej on March 10, 2009, 01:19:05 pm

However with the important negative effect on the RCS.

RCS being radar cross section?

Avimimus · « **Reply #46 on:** March 10, 2009, 02:20:21 pm »

One could theoretically duct a propfan?

Or does it become a very high bypass turbofan in that case?
Of course, you would need a sufficiently high fuselage volume.

Matej · « **Reply #47 on:** March 10, 2009, 02:46:19 pm »

Quote from: Triton on March 10, 2009, 02:16:31 pm

RCS being radar cross section?

Exactly. This concept may be usefull when your goal is to have the aircraft for the low intensity conflict with the weak air defense and you need quiet low weight subsonic plane with great range.

Quote from: Avimimus on March 10, 2009, 02:20:21 pm

One could theoretically duct a propfan? Or does it become a very high bypass turbofan in that case?
Of course, you would need a sufficiently high fuselage volume.

Almost every new engine for the big civil airliner is the high bypass turbofan. To duct the propfan... hm, there were some tests in Russia recently on the Il-76 but I am not sure about the results. With the relation to Boeing in that era, they probably also considered to use UDF (unducted turbofan) engine. However not any of this concepts can survive in heavily defended territory, so they couldn't meet the coming ATF requirements.

hesham · « **Reply #48 on:** March 11, 2009, 10:45:42 am »

Hi,

an artist drawing on stamp,for a real aircraft and projects,and can't
ID this aircraft,and from Boeing or what ?.
http://stamp-search.com/images/gam0064sh-sst-beyond.jpg

Orionblamblam · « **Reply #49 on:** March 11, 2009, 11:30:45 am »

It's a late-70's Boeing bomber design. I know I've seen the art posted on the forum before.

fightingirish · « **Reply #50 on:** March 11, 2009, 11:33:15 am »

Boeing X bomber project from the late 70's/early 80's.
Can't find the thread so far.....

hesham · « **Reply #51 on:** March 11, 2009, 11:38:14 am »

Thank you my dears.

Matej · « **Reply #52 on:** March 11, 2009, 11:46:05 am »

Merged, consolidated.

But... Gambia stamp?!?

PlanesPictures · « **Reply #53 on:** March 11, 2009, 02:06:20 pm »

See start of this topic

Triton · « **Reply #54 on:** March 11, 2009, 02:13:33 pm »

Quote from: hesham on March 11, 2009, 10:45:42 am

Hi,

an artist drawing on stamp,for a real aircraft and projects,and can't
ID this aircraft,and from Boeing or what ?.
http://stamp-search.com/images/gam0064sh-sst-beyond.jpg

Notice that it says Boeing "X" in the bottom left corner.

Skybolt · « **Reply #55 on:** March 11, 2009, 03:15:30 pm »

Well, there must be a Secret Projects fan in the postal administration of Gambia.. An Honorary Membership for her/him (if not yet here ...)

Triton · « **Reply #56 on:** March 11, 2009, 03:49:50 pm »

Quote from: Skybolt on March 11, 2009, 03:15:30 pm

Well, there must be a Secret Projects fan in the postal administration of Gambia.. An Honorary Membership for her/him (if not yet here ...)

I wonder if they produced this stamp for foreign collectors to get hard currency?

OM · « **Reply #57 on:** March 11, 2009, 04:22:36 pm »

Quote from: Triton on March 11, 2009, 03:49:50 pm

Quote from: Skybolt on March 11, 2009, 03:15:30 pm
Well, there must be a Secret Projects fan in the postal administration of Gambia.. An Honorary Membership for her/him (if not yet here ...)

I wonder if they produced this stamp for foreign collectors to get hard currency?

...Show me a third world nation that doesn't do that. Hell, even the USPS does this with dozens of commemorative stamps each year. After the fall of the Evil Soviet Empire, the Russians got into the game with a commemorative pair block featuring Groucho Marx and John Lennon. It became the largest boost to the post-Empire Russian economy in the first year after the failed coup led to the downfall of Communism in Russia.

Hopefully you foreigners will get the joke...

Just call me Ray · « **Reply #58 on:** March 11, 2009, 06:07:17 pm »

Quote from: OM on March 11, 2009, 04:22:36 pm

After the fall of the Evil Soviet Empire, the Russians got into the game with a commemorative pair block featuring Groucho Marx and John Lennon.

LOL, I wasn't aware that the Russians actually has a sense of humor

flateric · « **Reply #59 on:** March 12, 2009, 01:36:10 am »

yes, we have some

kian · « **Reply #60 on:** June 05, 2009, 07:38:46 am »

where i find the aspa pdf? Many thanks

Skybolt · « **Reply #61 on:** June 05, 2009, 08:38:05 am »

On the AIAA site, paying a modicous amount of bucks.

Kokoro · « **Reply #62 on:** June 05, 2009, 09:33:12 am »

Quote from: fightingirish on March 11, 2009, 11:33:15 am

Boeing X bomber project from the late 70's/early 80's.
Can't find the thread so far.....

awesome tv series

hesham · « **Reply #63 on:** June 28, 2010, 03:59:05 am »

Hi,

there was some different between those two Boeing Delta-wing
bombers,look at the cockpit and the wing,and those two artist
drawings were posted in the same issue.

http://books.google.com.eg/books?id=zBIvBTsHbtUC&pg=PA62&dq=blended-wing&hl=ar&ei=weEnTO3tItO7jAe1nfB8&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=61&ved=0CNQCEOgBMDw#v=onepage&q&f=true

Skybolt · « **Reply #64 on:** June 28, 2010, 09:11:30 am »

Good find Hesham. The bottom one is this http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,602.msg4706.html#msg4706 configuration.

AeroFranz · « **Reply #65 on:** November 27, 2010, 02:25:56 pm »

Moderators, I poked around with the search engine but couldn't find a suitable home for these pictures - the ATB thread may be the closest thing, although i swear i saw some of these on this forum before. The captions shed some light on the concepts.
The following pictures come from AvWeek, circa 1979. There are several Boeing and Rockwell concepts, the latter being Raymer's.

Matej · « **Reply #66 on:** November 27, 2010, 03:05:34 pm »

Merged and consolidated topic. The design, that Stargazer2006 originally posted is Boeing supersonic tailess airplane and is already covered here.

Skyblazer · « **Reply #67 on:** November 27, 2010, 03:26:33 pm »

Thanks Matej. Allow me to say once again, though, that the Rockwell Delta Spanloader is also known as design D645. This may help in future searches.

Matej · « **Reply #68 on:** November 27, 2010, 03:41:59 pm »

Maybe you should write that note also here: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,362.0.html

Skyblazer · « **Reply #69 on:** November 27, 2010, 04:46:49 pm »

Actually it's already there. And this thread (which I hadn't visited previously) describes ALL pre-ATB bomber designs by Dick Raymer as falling under the D645 designation, however different they may have been. The Delta Spanloader was D645-4A.

Sundog · « **Reply #70 on:** November 29, 2010, 03:15:18 pm »

I believe you mean Dan Raymer.

Skyblazer · « **Reply #71 on:** November 29, 2010, 03:22:13 pm »

Quote from: Sundog on November 29, 2010, 03:15:18 pm

I believe you mean Dan Raymer.

Absolutely! I don't know why I always make that mistake...

hesham · « **Reply #72 on:** June 05, 2014, 07:55:26 am »

From Flieger Revue 7/1981,

here is a clearer artist drawing to Boeing Advanced Bomber Concept.

Triton · « **Reply #73 on:** July 31, 2014, 12:31:43 pm »

Boeing advanced bomber concept photo circa 1979 found on eBay.

Source:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1979-Illustration-of-BOEING-Advanced-New-Bomber-Concept-Press-Photo-/111422777719?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item19f150a977

TomS · « **Reply #74 on:** August 01, 2014, 10:55:12 am »

This looks like the Advanced Mission Adaptive design posted in this thread:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,602.msg4643.html#msg4643

Triton · « **Reply #75 on:** August 01, 2014, 11:47:21 am »

Quote from: TomS on August 01, 2014, 10:55:12 am

This looks like the Advanced Mission Adaptive design posted in this thread:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,602.msg4643.html#msg4643

Previously, we only had a black and white image of this concept:

Source:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,602.msg4502.html#msg4502

hesham · « **Reply #76 on:** January 10, 2016, 05:44:55 am »

Hi,

here is a Boeing Advanced Bomber Project.

http://archive.aviationweek.com/image/spread/19721016/24/2

Kadija_Man · « **Reply #77 on:** February 11, 2019, 11:11:11 pm »

I was wondering if anybody has a three view drawing of this aircraft?

flateric · « **Reply #78 on:** February 12, 2019, 04:21:51 am »

Quote from: Kadija_Man on February 11, 2019, 11:11:11 pm

I was wondering if anybody has a three view drawing of this aircraft?

top view https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,602.msg4643.html#msg4643

Bazinga · « **Reply #79 on:** February 12, 2019, 10:00:24 am »

AWST 1979

Kadija_Man · « **Reply #80 on:** February 12, 2019, 02:51:18 pm »

Quote from: flateric on February 12, 2019, 04:21:51 am

Quote from: Kadija_Man on February 11, 2019, 11:11:11 pm
I was wondering if anybody has a three view drawing of this aircraft?
top view https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,602.msg4643.html#msg4643

Thanks. I suppose better than nothing, I suppose. I'd really like a 3 view though.