2 ms·
I always wondered why the B-52 didn’t get replaced by converted airliners (787 has quite similar dimensions I believe). Would be much cheaper to run and could d
by rmnwski 2y ago
I always wondered why the B-52 didn’t get replaced by converted airliners (787 has quite similar dimensions I believe). Would be much cheaper to run and could do practically the same thing, no?
- retrocryptid 2y agonot really.
- runjake 2y agoThey look the same to a layman, but they are very different airframes, with a different wing sweep and different load capabilities, among many, many other differences.
- rmnwski 2y agoof course the b-52 is a completely different airframe. Just wondering what the reasons are you wouldn't be able to convert airliners to be used in that role. It's been done for fire bombing!
- aerostable_slug 2y agoThere was thought given to using 747s as cruise missile carrier aircraft. Each 747 CMCA would have carried dozens of AGM-86 nuclear-armed cruise missiles on rotary launchers that shuffled around the plane's cargo bay on rails (the missiles would be ejected one at a time from a small door near the rear of the fuselage).
- mrguyorama 2y agoWhich was an interesting idea, but it eventually evolved into a much much better one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_Dragon_(missile_system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_Dragon_(missile_system)
- ianburrell 2y agoRapid Dragon is using cargo aircraft for cruise missiles.
- BonoboIO 2y agoI read something about those systems, they really have that already in service? Damn. Those kind of system would be really „cheap“ to deploy, you overwhelm a lot of air defense systems with it and well it’s transportable outside of air defense range.