What if the B was turned into an "F-52" "F-2".

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3906
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post01 Apr 2020, 14:28

weasel1962 wrote:Supersonic bones....B-1Apf

Apparently the B-1Bs can be re-engined with afterburners back to the B-1A concept. Adding the gun that Boeing got a patent for as reported by the drive previously below. Revived arsenal ship concept = B-1A pairing fighter or B-1Apf designation.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... th-cannons


Whether it's the B-52 or B-1A, Apf or whatever version, they both suffer from fatal flaws..

1.) In the case of the B-52, not nearly enough launch energy for the missiles
2.) The B-52 has a VERY large RCS, the B-1B less so but it's still bigger than most fighter sized targets, certainly the SU57/J-20
3.) The latter 2 will be/already are fielding "AWACS Killer" hypersonic AAM's, with ranges far exceeding AIM-120D (perhaps not their brochure ranges, but longer ranged nonetheless)
4.) A single kill of such an arsenal plane and you'd loose 4+ crew, plus the 100 AIM-120D's you probably haven't fired yet
5.) Both the B-1 and B-52 would be detected first, shot at first and probably killed first.

It would be handing the Russians our "first look, first shot, first kill" game plan and ceding them the advantage. Not going to happen anytime soon...
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2191
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post01 Apr 2020, 16:01

I heard the Japanese and Koreans may be interested... b-1Apf jk.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5554
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post01 Apr 2020, 18:47

wrightwing wrote:It's not the engines that keep it from hitting M2+. It's the inlets, which were redesigned for lower observabiilty, and low altitude performance.


This. The B-1B uses the same engines as the Mach 2.2 B-1A. Now fixe the inlets and swap out those F101s for F135s. :drool: (Though range would probably go down as the F101 has a much higher bypass ratio.)
"There I was. . ."
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2191
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post02 Apr 2020, 10:57

With TERFLW off, looks like the B-1's flight profile will be higher at altitudes in any case which would improve KE. Add the 161A which is probably one of the most powerful (12x 99), would still ensure better survivability going forward up to year 2048. Far cry from the 80s when the 161 was panned.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3906
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post02 Apr 2020, 14:37

weasel1962 wrote:With TERFLW off, looks like the B-1's flight profile will be higher at altitudes in any case which would improve KE. Add the 161A which is probably one of the most powerful (12x 99), would still ensure better survivability going forward up to year 2048. Far cry from the 80s when the 161 was panned.


I have heard anecdotes as to how insanely powerful this system is. The issue being, how many B-1B's are going to be around in 10 years, let along 2048?

Sounds like USAF is intent on retiring them, which seems absurb IMO. A supersonic, reduced RCS platform with the ability to carry a wide range of USAF munitions. And its legs are nothing to sneeze at. Whether it was the nuclear mission, CAS or other, the B-1B has performed admirably.

It's interesting that the Russians see a lot of life left in their TU-160, but USAF doesn't in the B-1B. Yes, I'm aware the B-21 is on the way but.... it's not here yet. That, and USAF's wish of 100+ B-21's is far from a sure thing, especially considering the COVID19 outlays. If I were USAF, I wouldn't be writing the B-1's eulogy just yet...
Offline

zero-one

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2331
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post02 Apr 2020, 17:03

rowbeartoe wrote:Hi everyone.

With a lot of talk of dog fighting becoming a thing of the past I was curious on the thought of our Bombers becoming fighters vs "real" fighters?


Weather or not "dogfighting" will be a thing of the past are simply opinions of people. And everyone has their own.
There have been some people in the fighter community that have said that dog fighting may be an "old think" mentality and sort of a failure to grasp the para-dime shift of 5th gen platforms. -Ret. Col Chip Burke (F-22 and F-35 pilot)

But likewise there are also people in the fighter community who say the opposite, this was addressed in detail by Colonel Charles Moore here:
download/file.php?id=32303
His bottom line is yes, not just dogfights but the cannon on the F-35 as an air to air weapon is still a necessity


There are also many in the fighter community who believe that dogfigting will simply be reduced not totally eradicated if everything goes according to plan. An example can be found here where F-15 and F/A-18 pilots talk about what they would want to see in 6th gen aircraft and they stressed the importance of performance because they believe that dogfighs will still be a possibility.

Personally I agree with that sentiment, dogfights won't be the norm but will certainly still happen from time to time.
Are we wrong, we certainly could be, as long as we don't see air combat with the likes of what we saw in Vietnam, we will not answer this for sure.
Offline

boogieman

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 227
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2019, 03:26

Unread post02 Apr 2020, 21:40

I see dogfighting/BFM as largely analogous to hand to hand combat for modern infantry. It's unlikely to occur but still possible, and certainly something you want to be well prepared for.

The thing that amuses me is the assumption that this is an area that red team has an advantage in, when it simply isn't. The Archer/Shlem combo made life hard for us back in the 90's but AIM9X/JHMCS well and truly turned the tables on that one for the last 15 years or so. We still have the advantage in this area across the board, as the Russians have yet to field a SRAAM/HMD combo that is as capable, and the PLAAF are only just starting to (maybe) do so now with PL10. The teen series jets have all the maneuvering capabilities they need for fighting in the phonebooth and the F22 & F35 only build on this.
Previous

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests