• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

1945 Short SA4 Long range Bomber

PMN1

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
742
Reaction score
82
There is a drawing dated 16.12.45 in Tony Buttler's British Secret Projects Jet Bombers since 1949 (P15) of the 'Short SA4 six-engined long range bomber (not the later SA4 Sperrin I must add).

This had a wingspan of 154ft, a length and 128.6ft, wing area 3,615 sq ft and was powered by 6 AJ65's and a range of 5,000 miles using 6,000gallons fuel. The book says a 2,120lb payload but that must be a typo??

What impact does a successful LR bomber have on the later V-bombers - its more expensive but more capable in terms of range.

What kind of range would you expect if the AJ65's were replaced by Whittle's LR1 turbofan?
 

TinWing

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
888
Reaction score
49
The V-bombers more of less fell within the same medium bomber category as the B-47. From what I've read, there was a degree of early planning for a true heavy bomber, but it is clear that the funding was absent. Personally, I'd argue that all three V-bombers, and especially the Vulcan and Victor, were entirely superior to the B-47, but they also were far later aircraft, with far superior turbojet technology and perhaps somewhat over thought aerodynamics.

I also believe that if the United States had mistakenly pursued 3 separate medium bomber programs equivalent to the B-47, there most likely would have been a funding gap when it came time to procure the B-52 as a B-36 replacement.
 

Spark

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Messages
361
Reaction score
19
TinWing said:
The V-bombers more of less fell within the same medium bomber category as the B-47. From what I've read, there was a degree of early planning for a true heavy bomber, but it is clear that the funding was absent. Personally, I'd argue that all three V-bombers, and especially the Vulcan and Victor, were entirely superior to the B-47, but they also were far later aircraft, with far superior turbojet technology and perhaps somewhat over thought aerodynamics.

I also believe that if the United States had mistakenly pursued 3 separate medium bomber programs equivalent to the B-47, there most likely would have been a funding gap when it came time to procure the B-52 as a B-36 replacement.

Bomber Commands chosen route of a Support Force based on the V1000 is often overlooked with its Tankers, Radio Warfare and logistical support for global deployment

What does the Short SA4 look like?
 
Top