New Russian Bomber revealed
 

Russia finalises new strategic bomber design (ukdefencejournal.org.uk)

It looks like the Russians have updated the B-2?!?!?

FB:)

Why not? Saves you an awful lot of R&D work..................... though they never replicated the B-52................

There doesn't seem to be a lot of stealth around those intakes or those winglets, or the flaperons for that matter. Also a lot of flat surfaces.

SU24 love child looking at the cockpit glass

Should someone tell them that winglets are basically big radar targets?

Nah, let them find out the hard way...

B-2?

Nah, the Armstrong Whitworth AW-52.

With a Sukhoi cockpit at the front. and Daffy Duck at the back.

Are the wingtips folding 777X-style?

Well done Russia, you just developed a Vulcan with winglets...:}

That said the Vulcan replaced the Lancaster, and this latest Russian effort replaces the TU-95 BEAR. So it seems a fair swap (just a few years late).

The Bear has legs, whereas this design does not shout 'superb aerodynamics'.
I guess that blended wing/body holds lots of fuel....

Quite a few years late, bearing in mind that (somewhat remarkably) the first flight of the Vulcan took place less than 12 years after the first flight of the Lancaster

I have seen better designs on the backs of toilet doors . Of course those doors were at the old Avro aircraft plant :)

At least the crew get decent windows.

and the Russians provide ejector seats for the whole crew................

What happened to the tailgunner?

That artists / graphics rendering has been around in aviation publications for at least 4/5 years. Picked up a copy of FlugRevue in my other neck of the woods at SZG around this time 2017.

cheers

lacks the visual presence of the Tu-160(!)

Since about 1945! Whilst the undercarriage is a clear improvement, it looks to me a bit like someone has dusted off the Horten brothers old plans, done a bit of fibreglassing and stuck an F-16 nose on.

It will be very interesting to see what the Chinese have actually come up with....

Hong-20


https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....4bf528d53.jpeg

Looks like a modified B-2 picture to me.

We will have to wait a bit longer to see exactly what it looks like from 1-2m with Maverick's new Polaroid:)

H-20 is supposed to much of a B-2/B-21 clone...

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...cruiting-video

Have a look at Boeing's early proposals for the B47 replacements.
Sharply swept wing, 4 huge turboprops...sound familiar?
At some point in the design stages Boeing swapped 4 props for 8 jets.

They did it overnight - or rather over 4 nights - on Thurs 21st Oct 48 they arrived at Wright Field with a truckload of paper to present the Model 464-35 with 4x 8000shp T35 turboprops. The Colonel (Pete Warren) in charge of the USAF team hardly looked at it but asked them if they could use the JT3 instead.

They went back to their hotel and worked non-stop (no computers of course) and turned up on Monday 25th at 08:00 with the B-52 (model 464-49). They presented a full pack of documents, all typed & bound, working drawings and even a desk-top model. It had the same span, greater sweep, 8 engines , 40% more fuel and 6000 mile range. The rest, as they say , is history

Not sure it was as simple as that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing...Stratofortress

In October 1948, Boeing did have in hand a design for a four-jet, B-47-size bomber as part of the XB-55 program (This had superseded the four-turboprop mini-Bear design). It had improvements such as a wing thickened towards the root, a variable-incidence stabilizer, and more efficient engines. Two of the engineers in Dayton that weekend were on XB-55. Rather than designing a new airplane, they scaled up the XB-55, making appropriate adjustments for scale effects. The balsa model survived and rests in a case at the Boeing HQ in Chicago.

Any similarities the new bat wing has to the German Horton Ho IX is pure coincidence and not a copy .
The Horton and the Nakajimas project Z had the same mission . One was for the east coast and the other for the east coast .The interesting thing about the Horton Amerika bomber was there were plans to make drone version . The crew would only take it so far and get out to avoid the radiation blasts .
Both countries had more interesting submarine projects that had the same objective. The Germans were trying to put V2 ICBM versions on subs , and Japanese had built submersible aircraft carriers like the Sen-Tokugawa I-400 with global reach. A similar secret sub was used to ship nuclear materials to Korea for Japan from Germany for atomic research .

the section on Design in Wikipedia tends to back up the clstory ORAC - I'm sure tho they had a lot of other studies done previously - the point being there was really no way of accessing all that data back in Seattle in the time frame they managed. I suspect they phoned questions and got parameters from Seattle tho'

A more interesting aspect is if this supports the need for strategic manned bombers - together with new standoff weapons.
ISTAR, maritime interests, surface-subsurface; strategic range, but tactical use.
Alternatively an economic / military spoof for the B2 / H20.
Or continuing advanced AeroD evaluation, possible commercial interests, cf Airbus / Boeing ideas re flying wings.