EU Heavy Bomber ideas?

In article ,
(Chris Manteuffel) writes:
Alan Minyard wrote in message . ..

I don't recall ever seeing a probe on a SAAB and I thought
probe and drogue was the "Brit method".


AIUI, everyone but the USAF uses probe-and-drogue (USN, NATO countries
other than USAF, people who buy their jets, etc.). Buddy refueling is
a tremendous advantage for people operating tactical jets, and so they
use probe-and-drogue. The USAF, though, needed (and still needs) much
higher flow rates to keep their enormous aircraft in the sky. For
uniformity, the USAF went to booms for all of their aircraft, even for
the tactical jets that don't need those flow rates.

Not quite true - the Spanish used boom-equipped KC-97s to refuel their
F-4s, right off the top of my head. I'll have to dig my copy of teh
NATO Air Refuelling Guidebook to give you more current answers.

Buddy refuelling doesn't buy you much, in terms of fuel transfer, and
cuts the number of bomb-carriers in half. It's worth noting that the
French Force de Frappe originally intended to buddy-refuel their
Mirage IVs, but abandoned that concept adn went with KC-135s, albeit
with the Drogue Adapter.

The Soviets worked out some crazy-fool system involving passing the
fuel from wing-tip to wing-tip for their big thirsty jets, I seem to
recall. Though I'm not sure what Backfire and Blackjack used, the wing
system was for the Badger, I do believe.

The Tu-16 Bombers & Tankers used the wingtip-wingtip method. (I'd
hate to see what a hookup looked like - the Tanker ends up as the aft
plane in the formation). The Tu-95, M-4, and various Backfires used a
fairly standard-type Probe & Drogue.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster