Why does the B 52 put out so much exhaust? Doesn't that mean the engine is running "rich"?It's designed for looong travels. Seems to me like they're wasting fuel. What's the deal?
>>61501570Ukraine is far away?
>shows a picture of a low pass at an air show while it deploys smoke >it's so inefficient!
>>61501576Actually I noticed this from the movie Dr. Srangelove.
>>61501554It's normal for 1960s engines. The B-52 uses those obsolete engines because bureaucracy never approved any re-engine proposal for decades.
>>61501595Makes sense I guess, but the B 52 is still a great plane. What other plane compares?
>>61501595Still think the B-52 should have got 4 engines.
>>61501554It's not that simple. You can have localized rich and lean burn regions inside the combustor.With better injector and combustor can design you can swirl and rich and lean regions and combust the unburnt hydrocarbons that would form soot, you can inject air in specific places, etc so you don't even have to significantly change fuel consumption as you're just averaging out your initial fuel/air mix.Now why is the B-52 flying with old ass engines that didn't introduce a fix other jets had for decades? The B-52 was built around those 8 engines, and replacing them with larger and more efficient 4 turbofans created issues with ground clearance and the fear that loss of an engine would equal the loss of two on the same side on an aircraft that has weak rudder authority. So Rolls Royce is gonna make engines with a similar size as replacement.
>>61501772They're still working out problems/the b 52 is still in action?
>>61501554>rolling coalyou city slickers wouldnt get it.
>>61501624The Blackjack and its better
>>61501855>rolls coal over you’re country’s capitol. heh, nothing personell
>>61501927>Switches to boron zip fuel outside CONUSTake that foreigners.
>>61501570That $60b really broke you faggots, huh?
>>61501848It's one of those peculiar situations where the B-52 should have been replaced but wasn't so retirement kept getting delayed, and it's an aircraft design where you couldn't easily get a re-engine program going.In the 2000s the USAF also figured the A-10 would need an engine upgrade, but funding a program for it would eat into the budget to upgrade the avionics, which was more pressing as precision guided munitions became the A-10's bread and butter.
>>61501554at low altitude most jet engines run incredibly inefficiently. They're at a fraction of their max power power, and jet engines become more efficient the higher power they are. Modern high bypass engines with all their fancy technology probably solved whatever causes the smoke, meanwhile those 1960s engines were just like fuck it, we'll run rich to lower power. That's my guess
>>61501595Hmmm that looks nice in whitePaint all the BUFFs white
>>61501998At low altitude the air is denser which means more O2 going into the intake. Aircraft fly less efficiently at low altitude because they require more thrust to fight drag, while at higher altitudes they face less resistance.These smoke trails develop at high altitude too, older B-52 rolled coal on takeoff due to water injection, but these are the smoke trails even fighters left. The J79 was notorious for the smoke trails, but eventually a fix was developed with a new combustion chamber design.
>>61502239Kek broken
>>61502239This really isn't any different from a pajeet asking to look at bobs and vagene, really makes one think
>>61501554The (correct) answer in full detail is all over the internet you didn't spend five seconds to search.>>61501576That's not deployed smoke as B-52 doesn't use smoke generators>>61501584Search "MITO" for more takeoff pics. I didn't work J-57s but did train on them. Simple and easy to work on so it makes sense they kept them so long. The J-model Rolls-Royce conversion should be even more impressive but of course no longer inefficient and smoky.
>>61501848B-52s are so refined and debugged they require little change. The men who built them are nearly all dead of old age as that workforce would have mostly been WWII vets and contemporaries.
>>61502239Quality seething, lol.
>>61501576Grew up near Barksdale AFB during the cold War. Thats how they look normally. You haven't lived til you've seen 400 b52's practicing their scramble drill, getting the entire base airborne in the time it takes a ballistic missile to fly from Cuba to Louisiana.
>>61501756it has a tab driven vertical stabilizer. it doesn't have enough control authority to survive an outboard engine failure If it only has 4 engines.
>>61502642I would also like low cost blowjobs by attractive women. Is that still a thing in eastern europe? Ive heard the asian countries dont really like sex tourists.
>>61501624777 utterly mogs it.If any nation wants the best bomb truck in the world, they should buy 777s and add bomb racks.
Ukrainian servicemen whose aging mother just had my cock in her throat dumping enough semen in her belly to feed her for the day has now gone and deleted my posts. Curious. Guess they are winning hard. Still gonna watch their drone drop vids cuz like I said I the winner here.
>>61502937No need for mods, the 777 is already a capable bomber with a proven combat recordhttps://www.businessinsider.com/video-united-airlines-boeing-777-loses-tire-takeoff-sfo-2024-3?op=1
>>61501554>Ctrl-F>Water injectionThe invasion of tourists was a mistake. TZD.
>>61502937what percentage of the internal volume will be consumed by the time it reaches max bomb load?
>>61503163>water injection>B-52H
>>61503252The 777 can take off with max fuel and a bomb load greater than zero. This already makes it a more capable bomber than the B-52.
>>61503163almost an hour ago:>>61502243>older B-52 rolled coal on takeoff due to water injectionit's so easy to actually do a ctrl+fson, I am disappoint.
>>61502048It has been done before. We can bring this back for China and Russia.
>>61501624The Tu-95 and its worse
>>61502937Can your 777 launch intercontinental ALBMs from the middle of the Pacific?
>>6150155452Gs and predecessors always had that problem of incomplete combustion, J variant is supposed to fix that if not minimize it
>>61501848
>>61501896Shit combat range
>>61501756You would need to redesign tail and rudder to do so. They are going for 8 small engines nicked from business jet for a reason. Engines are kinda part of control system.>>61501772RR BR700 family engines have been in use business jets and regional airliners since mid 90's.
>>61503161kekA good point though, do we really want Boeing building more planes at this point in time? At least the new engines are built by someone who hasn't nosedived down the shitter recently.
>>61502494>..400 b52's practicing their scramble drill, getting the entire base airborne..Now that would have been an impressive sight to see. I have long wondered if I witnessed a scramble fly over Victoria, BC in the early 80s.On a clear winter night in November 1983 (maybe 1982?) I was out stargazing with my telescope when dozens of contrails started crossing the sky at high altitude heading NNW. Dad and I tried to see the planes but were unable to ID them other than they were flying in clusters.
>>61501595The elites don't want you to know the turbines at the Rolls Royce plant in Indianapolis are free. I have 42 jet engines.
