Boeing XB-2002 Stealth Hawk

Great find Skyraider3D,


and you can put its picture here.
 

Attachments

  • BOEING BMAC XB-2002 STEALTHAWK DECOY STEALTH AIRPLANE.JPG
    BOEING BMAC XB-2002 STEALTHAWK DECOY STEALTH AIRPLANE.JPG
    17.9 KB · Views: 1,314
The label and the designers....


Do you want me to post the rest of the original pics?
 

Attachments

  • label.jpg
    label.jpg
    557.3 KB · Views: 1,162
  • designers.jpg
    designers.jpg
    528.5 KB · Views: 1,088
Saw it a couple of days ago but was reluctant to share it, not having the background of it. Two questions:

1°) What identifies this model as a Boeing design? What does BMAC acronym stand for?
2°) What is meant by a "decoy stealth aircraft"? Something to fool observers into thinking stelath aircraft would look something like this?
 
Stargazer2006 said:
Saw it a couple of days ago but was reluctant to share it, not having the background of it. Two questions:

1°) What identifies this model as a Boeing design? What does BMAC acronym stand for?
2°) What is meant by a "decoy stealth aircraft"? Something to fool observers into thinking stelath aircraft would look something like this?
Click to expand...

BMAC stands for Boeing Military Aircraft Company. It's a term that hasn't been used much since the 1980s. This would tie in with the model, since it has the SAC emblem on the nose and SAC disappeared in 1992.

Regarding "decoy stealth aircraft", that may be just something ebay made up, since the nameplate identifies it as a conceptualization.
 
From the eBay auction...

"ONE OF A KIND ! THIS IS THE ONLY MODEL MADE BY BOEING OF THE XB-2002 STEALTHAWK - THIS WAS A DECOY MADE TO FOOL THE COMPETITION WHILE THEY WORKED ON THE REAL STEALTH BOMBER - IT WAS DESIGNED BY RANDALL PARKER WHILE WORKING FOR BMAC AS A FOUR ENGINE SUB SONIC STEALTH-TYPE BOMBER CONCEPTUALIZATION 1/30 SCALE - 50 FOOT WING SPAN - INCLUDES MODEL WITH STAND AND 3 BMAC PHOTOS SHOWING THE DESINER MAKING THE MODEL ! CIRCA FEB 8 1984 TO MAR 23 1984 - HEAVY WEIGHS 26 POUNDS - A REAL PIECE OF HISTORY ! BOEING SHOWED THIS ONE TO THE WORLD TO THROW THEM OFF THE TRAIL OF THE REAL B2 BOMBER ! "

So did Boeing (who was part of the Northrop B-2 team) make this model to throw off other aerospace companies in the US about the real B-2 configuration? Surprised this has never seen the light of day before.
 
What is the significance of "Man Tech" in the bottom right corner? Not too familiar with that company. Did they really design this or build the model?
 
jjnodice said:
What is the significance of "Man Tech" in the bottom right corner? Not too familiar with that company. Did they really design this or build the model?
Click to expand...

It generally means "Manufacturing Technology", which would fit for the organization making the model.
 

Attachments

  • s-l1600.jpg
    s-l1600.jpg
    300.8 KB · Views: 137
  • s-l1600 (11).jpg
    s-l1600 (11).jpg
    49.9 KB · Views: 119
  • s-l1600 (10).jpg
    s-l1600 (10).jpg
    349.5 KB · Views: 120
  • s-l1600 (8).jpg
    s-l1600 (8).jpg
    154.8 KB · Views: 110
  • s-l1600 (9).jpg
    s-l1600 (9).jpg
    221.8 KB · Views: 105
  • s-l1600 (7).jpg
    s-l1600 (7).jpg
    147.9 KB · Views: 99
  • s-l1600 (6).jpg
    s-l1600 (6).jpg
    214.2 KB · Views: 101
  • s-l1600 (5).jpg
    s-l1600 (5).jpg
    133.8 KB · Views: 97
  • s-l1600 (4).jpg
    s-l1600 (4).jpg
    239.6 KB · Views: 101
  • s-l1600 (3).jpg
    s-l1600 (3).jpg
    274.3 KB · Views: 98
  • s-l1600 (2).jpg
    s-l1600 (2).jpg
    205.8 KB · Views: 96
  • s-l1600 (1).jpg
    s-l1600 (1).jpg
    382.8 KB · Views: 136

Attachments

  • Revell B-2 Kit.jpg
    Revell B-2 Kit.jpg
    75.5 KB · Views: 147
Would the XB-2002 have worked as a stealth design? Would it have been as stealthy as the B-2 had it been built? How would it have been used? Obviously, it was meant to be a decoy, but, I'm wanting to see whether there was a line of thought that the designers were following, and I'm wondering whether company officials, perhaps even a Soviet mole, were asking questions like these.

If the Moderators believe that this is delving to much into the hypothetical aspect, I would be more than willing to delete this.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom