Bear question

"Ozman Trad" wrote
"Ken Duffey" wrote

descendant of the Boeing B-29 !!

it is my understanding all modern passenger airframes are based on the
design of the B29

That would be a bit far fetched.

All modern passenger airframes are swept wing? Which large aircraft had
that first? (I'm thinking B-47, but I'm probably wrong).

All modern passenger airframes have the fuselage on top of the wings, and
not in the middle (ala B-29).

The Bear bomber is a utilitarian delivery machine, designed for high-speed
over tonnage. It was/is probably one of the best bombers ever designed by
any aircraft company. We should have bought them in 1991 and phased-out
the B-52! :-) A Bear-H is probably about the best cruise-missile platform
there is. We could fly cruise-missile missions from the east coast to Iraq
and back, with no air refueling in a Bear-H (24 hour endurance unrefueled).

"S. Sampson" wrote in message
news:ToqVb.16319$Q_4.12353@okepread03...
"Ozman Trad" wrote
"Ken Duffey" wrote


All modern passenger airframes have the fuselage on top of the wings, and
not in the middle (ala B-29).


Nope some are high wing like the BAE-146

Keith

"S. Sampson" wrote:

The Bear bomber is a utilitarian delivery machine, designed for high-speed
over tonnage. It was/is probably one of the best bombers ever designed by
any aircraft company. We should have bought them in 1991 and phased-out
the B-52! :-)

Absurd. The Bear was approx. 200 mph SLOWER than the Stratofortress.

The Bear bomber is a utilitarian delivery machine, designed for high-speed
over tonnage. It was/is probably one of the best bombers ever designed by
any aircraft company. We should have bought them in 1991 and phased-out
the B-52! :-)

Absurd. The Bear was approx. 200 mph SLOWER than the Stratofortress.


A B-36 was capable of 40+ hour missions, but that doesnt mean it could have
made it to Iraq and back either.

A P-3 has a very long endurance too, when 2 engines are shut down, when it
needs endurance.

I do not quite think a Bear could have made it from US to Iraq and back,
unrefueled, just because it can stay in the air 24 hours. It would probably
have to slow down considerable to be able to achieve that.

You can have speed and you can have endurance, but it is hard to have both.




Ron
Pilot/Wildland Firefighter

.. Absurd. The Bear was approx. 200 mph SLOWER than the Stratofortress.

Not at cruise altitude it wasn't. The bears I intercepted were clocking .8
IMN, about 480 KTAS. At altitude, the Buff isn't that much faster,
certainly not "200 mph" faster.

R / John

"John Carrier" wrote
. Absurd. The Bear was approx. 200 mph SLOWER than the Stratofortress.

Not at cruise altitude it wasn't. The bears I intercepted were clocking .8
IMN, about 480 KTAS. At altitude, the Buff isn't that much faster,
certainly not "200 mph" faster.

And they would fly from Murmansk to Havana unrefueled at that speed.