"Priceless" in Afghanistan

In article ,
(BUFDRVR) writes:
Don't see why not. If the high-altitude designed B-47s could do them
(admittedly,
with some serious wing fatigue problems as a result), then the low-altitude
stressed B-1 shouldn't mind.

It's not a stress issue, it's an excess thrust issue. The Bone may be able to
pull off an immelman,but I'm betting you won't find too many pilots eager to
test out that theory.

If it's qn excess thrust issue, than that would weight it even further
into the "Yes, sure the B-1 can do an Immelman" side. Of all the
things the B-47 didn't have, thrust was probably the most obvious.
According the the B-47S Standard Aircraft Characteristics, Takeoff
Ground Roll for a loaded B-47E-IV, without RATO, could be upwards of
10.500'. That's not exactly a high t/w. (A better context for excess
thrust numbers woudl be SEP at Combat Weight - in that case, the B-47E
data gives us 4450 '/mion @ Sea Level, a 1965-era B-52H gives
6500'/minute. (Score one for the Buff)

For that matter, I've flown planty of Immelmans in sailplanes - it's
hard to find a lower T/W than 0. (Although the roll at the top _was_
kinda sloppy_ What would be more important is Drag/Weight. If you'ge
got a really slippery shape, you won't lose speed as quickly with the
nose high.
If thrust exactly equalled drag (SEP = 0), it'd take _anything_ pulled
straight up anout 260 seconds to lose 300 KTS. Your entry adn exi t
speeds would be rather dependant on the airplane, of course. but
there's plenty of energy for a 2-3 G pull through 180 degrees.


By the way, the B-47 could do many things niether the B-52 or B-1B can do.

Well, fly around the pattern trailing a parachute is one...
Tobogganing behind an overstressed KC-97 would be another.

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