AntiGravity Tech in B2

[tatra]

LOL we all know that russians were no good in R&D at that time russians even after absorbing all the R&D and scientist couldn't produce capable engines for there migs we (UK had to give them those) the only two countries that had serious R&D at that time for modern WarFare equipments were undoubtedly Germany and UK.

1. Let's not include the US (e.g. Manhattan project)?!?!?

2. The key operant words being "at that time" > my point exactly

3. for your information:

Source: Krylya Rodiny [Wings of the Motherland, a Russian monthly for aviation fans]
Issue 3 (782), March 1996, p30-31
Author: Vladimir Perov
Title: Not Copying Germans. The first indigenous projects of turbojet-powered aircraft [in the USSR]

[Abstracts]

In early 1943 when not only there was no captured examples of
jet engines and aircrfat, but even there was no information at
all about German and British turbojet-powered aircraft [in the
Soviet Union], the designer M.I.Gudkov has completed a prototype
design study of Gu-VRD turbojet-powered fighter.

The project documentation was submitted on 10 March 1943.
Gudkov was one of the designers of LaGG-1 and LaGG-3 fighters,
he developed and launched series production of the LaGG-3
variant with 37mm ShK-37 gun firing through the propeller
shaft. The aircraft had provisional designation K-37. In 1941
Gudkov was the first to have designed and built the LaGG-3
variant named Gu-82 with M-82 air-cooled engine. By that time
the Gu-1 fighter resembling Aircobra was approaching its
completion. Gudkov also designed LaG-5 modifications powered
by M-71 air-cooled engine and DM-30 diesel.

The Gu-VRD project [VRD = vozdushno-reactivny dvigatel, the
Russian for turbojet] was reviewed at NII VVS (Scientific
Research Institute of the Air Force). A resolution of the
leadership of the institute dated 10 April 1943 ordered:
"Prepare urgently an evaluation review of the superfast
fighter-interceptor of Gudkov's design powered by Lyulka's
engine". Department chief I.I.Safronov wrote in his memo of 17
April 1943: "... Apparently, the aircraft would fly with the
claimed speed, but the problem is that as of today there is no
engine, just the name of its designer. Hence, the emphasis is
to be on the engine".

In the meantime Gudkov in his explanatory memo to the project
wrote that by that time a combustion chamber of Lyulka's engine
had been tested, a two-stage axial compressor had been built
and tested, achieving 1.25 compression ratio in each stage with
0.75 energy efficiency ratio, both figures rendered quite
successful. An engine prototype rated at 750kg of static thrust
had been designed and built to 70% readiness. Gudkov noted that
the engine itself and majority of Lyulka's design team were in
Moscow. Lyulka planned to begin developing an engine rated at
1,500kg thrust.

Gu-VRD was a monoplane with the engine placed in the bottom of
the fuselage aft of the nose section. The side view of the
aircraft had a step behind the engine's nozzle after which the
fuselage had a much lesser cross section. Later this layout was
named "stepped" and was used in the first Russian jet fighters
MiG-9, Yak-15, La-150 and others. Some sources claimed that the
stepped layout originated from German design studies of 1944-
1945. It is evident now that the stepped layout appeared in the
USSR in 1943 without any foreign influence.

The tipped nose of the aircraft had four segmented air intakes.
The wing had trapezoid planform with curved tips. The
horisontal and vertical tail design was standard. The
retractable landing gear had two main legs and a small tail
wheel. The aircraft take-off weight was estimated at 2,250kg,
including 400kg of fuel. The engine had 700kg weight, 0.9m
diametre and 2.1m length. The wing area was relatively small -
11.0 sq.m.

The aircraft's armament was to be mounted in the upper section
of the nose and was comprised of one ShVAK 20mm cannon with 200
rounds and one BS high-calibre [12.7mm] machine gun, also with 200
rounds. The static thrust of the engine was assumed to be
1,500kg. Gudkov's calculations estimated maximum speed at
870km/h at sea level and 900-1,000km/h at 6,000m altitude. Time
to climb to 5,000m was estimated at 1.39 min. Range at 80%
maximum speed - up to 700km, endurance - about 1 hour. The
take-off run was estimated at 222m, a rather overoptimistic
forecast as the future experience with first turbojet-powered
aircraft showed. Landing speed was estimated at 141km/h.

On 9 April, 1943 Gudkov sent a letter to NII VVS informing the
Air Force that he was completing a project of a high-speed
bomber powered by two Lyulka's turbojets rated at 1,500kg
static thrust. The aircraft's flight weight was to be 6,500kg
with the crew of three, maximum speed 780-800km/h at 6,000m,
1,200-1,500km range , 1,200-1,500kg bomb load. The armament
would be comprised of one cannon and one BS machine gun.

In late February, 1944 Captain Engineer V.R.Yefremov, the
military representative at OGK (Chief Designer's Department) of
the plant #21 informed in his regular report that OGK was
designing the La-VRD project powered by Lyullka's turbojet
rated at 1,250 kg of static thrust. The aircraft had to have a
twin-boom layout with all-metal one-spar wing with laminar
airfoil. The turbojet was to be installed in a fuselage nacelle
mounted under the wing. The pressurised cockpit was placed in
front of the engine, the air intakes were at each side of the
fuselage nacelle.

The landing gear had a nose wheel retracting behind the
armoured back of the pilot's seat. Main landing gear legs were
retracted backwards in the conjunction of tail booms with the
wing.

The armament was comprised of two NS-23 cannons installed in
forward sections of tail booms with total 120 rounds. The take-
off weight was to be 3,300kg including 910kg of payload. Wing
area - 15.5 sq.m, aspect ratio - 5.85. The layout of the
aircraft was approved by S.A.Lavochkin and its was agreed with
TsAGI (Central Aero/Hydrodynamics Institute).

The estimated flight performance was as follows: maximum sea
level speed 890km/h, service ceiling 15,000m, landing speed
140km/h. As was the case with the Gu-VRD, the estimated flight
performance was mostly quite achievable. V.R.Yefremov noted
only that the problem of acceleration time from idle to full
thrust of Lyulka's engine had not been solved. Nevertheless the
decision to build that aircraft had been made with the goal to
hand over the first prototype for flight testing by 1 March,
1946. By 1 November, 1944 the prototype design study had been
completed, but because of reasons beyond designers' control
neither Gu-VRD, nor La-VRD were built. The wide-scale work on
turbojet-powered aircraft in the USSR was delayed for 1.5-2
years.

 

[adsH]

the AK-47 owes its existence to the MG-42.

Russia was only able to create an early working jet fighter due to acquiring Salamanders and Me 262's.

AK47 derives from Sturmgewehr 44 not Maschinengewehr 42

As for a working Russian jet: that would only have been a matter of time, not a matter of capability.

Thanks for the correction on the Ak47 lineage, As it was the MG-42 is also the grandaddy of some US squad weapons.

The Russians made amazing changes to their own jet development from 1945-48, but the generational change was really only made possible by their acquisitions from running over the german factories, ironically they nearly missed out on them as their troops were initially destroying everything in their path. The fortuitous creation of OKB-1 stopped that. (they'd also been automatically shooting german scientists and technicians up until then, so they were damn lucky that OKB-1 was created early enough to stop the "brain drain"

wel yeah i wouldn't blame the Russian aoldiers they were taunted and literlly torchurd by the German's. the germans did put the russians through a rough time !! but thanks for correcting me i was reading up on the russian tank designs break improvements when they managed to slant the angle of armour on there tanks lol without adding other layers of steal to make them heavy!!.

 

[gf0012-aust]

3. for your information:

Source: Krylya Rodiny [Wings of the Motherland, a Russian monthly for aviation fans]
Issue 3 (782), March 1996, p30-31
Author: Vladimir Perov
Title: Not Copying Germans. The first indigenous projects of turbojet-powered aircraft [in the USSR]

Tatra, is this available online, still in publication? If so I wouldn't mind subscribing. One of my vices is technology research stemming from the 1930's on (usually german and russian) so it would be a good "fit" for ongoing research.

One of the interesting things to note is that one of the limiters to russian engineering was that prior to running over germany, their machine lathes were unable to reliably get beyond 600rpm (machine quality and electricity reliabity issues), whereas the german/english/french machines could run reliably at 3000rpm. Once the russians managed to redesign their electricity generators off german copies, and acquire german manuf plant, they made enormous strides. In real terms they were still designing working concepts that just never came to fruition due to engineering quality limitations.

 

[tatra]

Dunno if it is online. Found the article here: http://aeroweb.lucia.it/~agretch/News/SHARENEWSbulletin.html#Engines
You may want to rummage around there for a bit.

Also, google-search on the author name. Da guy wrote some books on Russian aviation 1924-1945
http://www.eastview.com/xq/ASP/sku=...a/Russia/Russian/qx/russian/books/product.asp

 

[stealthseven]

Well, Where to Start;
I haven't worked on the B-2so I will leave that out of my comments for now.
But I have worked on the Stealth F-117, Specifically propulsion.
I have been in the Cockpit and participated in changing out the F404-GE-402-F1D2 powerplant.
With all that said this aircraft outside it's stealth technologies and unique exhaust system is an off the shelf aircraft that utilizes already existing technologies such as F/A-18 Powerplants (with exception of the afterburner)
and APU (Auxiliary Power Plant), Generators, Cockpit DDI/SMS/HSU Displays and many F/A-18 Fuel System components.
There are components from the F-15 and F-16 on this aircraft as well.
Yes it is still a very high-tech aircraft but all its flight characteristics are managed by (3) Primary, Secondary, and tertiary flight control computers.
This is what allows an otherwise unflight worthy aircraft to fly. The same is true for the F-16 even though it airframe design is much more conventional than the F-117.
As for all the other Comments and the Blue T-Handle with Alternate Drive on it;....What a bunch of Hoooey! There is nothing exotic about this planes propulsion or flight characteristics people all this speculation is from to much Sci-Fi watching and viewing too much conspiracy theory web-sites and listening/reading from people that don't know what they are talking about and speaking when they have no basis of fact or experience to back it up!
Sorry but that is the cold hard truth!

 

[Jambo_100]

B2

B2s with anti grav capability? its an interesting concept. yes i beleive the B-2 is the most expensive combat plane in the world. i think 2 billion dollars is an aweful lot for a plane even if it does have stealth. i meen what else would make it so expensive? its probably just conspiricy theorist making up a load of trash again. lol :unknown

i looked this up on the net and found this picture. some people say its just the aircraft breaking the sound barrier (but the B2 isnt super sonic?) others say its the anti gravity system in the wings. apparently the B2 charges the front of its wings and its exhaust fumes with static electricity, maybe to create an anti gravity effect?

anyway check the picture out

http://www.wilk4.com/misc/b2_ocean_small.jpg

 

[rabs]

anyway check the picture out

http://www.wilk4.com/misc/b2_ocean_small.jpg

Actually sir, I am fairly sure you just have a photo shopped image of a B-2 kinda like this one of a B-52

http://www.elchineroconcepts.com/B-52.jpg

 

[phreeky]

http://www.wilk4.com/misc/soundbreak.htm#b2

 

[gf0012-aust]

i looked this up on the net and found this picture. some people say its just the aircraft breaking the sound barrier (but the B2 isnt super sonic?) others say its the anti gravity system in the wings. apparently the B2 charges the front of its wings and its exhaust fumes with static electricity, maybe to create an anti gravity effect?

anyway check the picture out

http://www.wilk4.com/misc/b2_ocean_small.jpg

Its a condensation "boom and plume". Its not an indication of some secret super duper electrostatic generator kicking in...

 

[StingrayOZ]

The B2 costs are so high because they only built 12 of them. It has to be the stealthiest of all aircraft for its duty.

Its designed as a strategic nuclear bomber. Funny 12 can deliver exactly half the US's aircraft deliverable nuclear bombs. It was never really designed to drop conventional bombs, but does so more for training than anything else.

From what i've heard the amount of preparation that is required for each flight is huge. 30+ hours per 1 hour of flight or something crazy (might even be more), most of it on stealth materials.

 

[gf0012-aust]

From what i've heard the amount of preparation that is required for each flight is huge. 30+ hours per 1 hour of flight or something crazy (might even be more), most of it on stealth materials.

I think you'll find that they've dramatically altered that turn around. They developed new robotic managed coating procedures recently and thats saved some considerable time.

 

[Magoo]

The B2 costs are so high because they only built 12 of them. It has to be the stealthiest of all aircraft for its duty.

Its designed as a strategic nuclear bomber. Funny 12 can deliver exactly half the US's aircraft deliverable nuclear bombs. It was never really designed to drop conventional bombs, but does so more for training than anything else.

From what i've heard the amount of preparation that is required for each flight is huge. 30+ hours per 1 hour of flight or something crazy (might even be more), most of it on stealth materials.

Actually, they've built 21 of them, of which 20 are active duty.

It's not realistic to divide the US$41bn development and program costs between 21 airframes to extrapolate a cost of $US2bn each, especially considering some of that would likely have been diverted to other secret squirrel programs (hence where the mythical 'Aurora' came from)!

Also, a lot of the technology developed in the B-2 program has or will flown downhill to other programs such as F-22, F-35, UCAS and others we may not know about yet.

Had the original 132 B-2s that were planned been built, they would have worked out to a much more realistic unit cost of about US$300m each in about 1990-ish dollars.

Cheers

Magoo

 

[pankajbhagwati]

Hello Gentlemen, I am new to your fraternity. But I was reading this thread and was interested in the Anti-gravity part and the questions whether the B-2 or the F-117 uses antigravity, and gravity control mechanisms.

Well firstly the only valid proof of anti-grav has been demonstrated using the Famous balsa-wood lifters, where one passess mamoth amounts of electricity through metallic struts on the balsa-wood framework, causing it to lift up and hover in air. Again the explanation is that lift-up is caused due to the downward flow of an "ion wind" that is generated when you direct massive amounts of electricity to flow through thin wires.

Other than this, it has been demonstrated that the effect of gravity on gyroscopical object are lesser than otherwise. The reason to this is still unknown.

Using of gravity control devices in aircraft is still way off. Firstly the main problem confounding the Scientific community is "how is gravity propagated". Like light is propagated through photons, sound through waves...etc, the propagation of gravity and magnetism remains unknown. if it is known that will be one of the greatest "finds" of science as all the fragments of knowledge that we have today regarding the universe can be tied with this string. Naturally you cannot create gravity control devices without knowing how it is propagated.

 

[rjmaz1]

The reason why people thought the B-2 uses anti gravity technology is because of the speed it could travel considering it is so underpowered for its weight..

The B-2 uses fairly low bypass engines with high exhaust velocity. This means alot of thrust at high altitudes. The flying wing design gives alot of lift allowing the aircraft to fly at high altitudes. The air at high altitudes is thinner so less drag is produced on the aircraft. The flying wing design also would naturally have low drag so this requires less thrust to maintain speed. So the thin air combined with the optimised high altitude levels engines makes the speed very realistic. No need for fancy anti gravity technology.

 

[Jambo_100]

B2

it probably is just a "photo shopped" image. like i have said before, the whole anti gravity thing is probably a bunch of sad conspiricy theorist. but i guess we will never know. after all the B2 is a very secretive aircraft, it holds a lot of high tech equipment. but one thing that remains un-answered. why does the B2 charge its wings and exuast fumes with ion energy? has any one got a theory? ive only found a bit about it, not alot. any ideas guys?

i found out some more stuff-------

apparently when the B2 moves to anti gravity mode, it extends its cruising range dramaticly. it gives it lightning fast manuverability and wait for the coolest bit...............it can even use the anti gravity systems to make the plane invisible! it can supposedly do this by bending the light around itself so appears like nothing is there! awesome or what. the F-117 is supposed to have these abilitys too. but is it real?

http://americanantigravity.com/laviolette-b2-bomber.shtml

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/project055.html

 

[ripper]

"Anti-gravity" technology exists. But to put forward the idea that its used on the B-2? Laugable at best. That ranks up there with a nut that I knew in my college days that wanted me to compute the "surface tension" of some element I can't remember.... This same guy also burned off his eyebrows in a chemistry experiement gone wrong in his garage. Simply, there's most likely not enough room in the B-2 for the equipment... Too full of fuel, avionics, and other airplane stuff. Then you also wouldnt risk it in Iraq and Kosovo type stuff to drop JDAMs on AK-47 carrying goofballs. Now then, there may be some truth to the elctro-whatever-you-call-it stuff on the B-2. Of course someone finds a little bit of truth about something they dont understand and, 'Presto!', you got B-2's achieving low earth orbit and nonsense about anti-gravity tech stuff on it rants and raves on the internet.

There's plenty of publicly available information on the benefits of electrifying panels/skins on LO airplanes... Also about what you can do to IR signatures...

But as RPF (another physicist with addiction problems) said, 'You want anti gravity? Sit in chair and the chair keeps you from falling. Thats anti-gravity. Be clear in what you're asking and stating.' Or something to that affect.

 

[KGB]

Let's clarify terms to avoid confusion.

Using electromagnetic force to fly the plane isn't quite anti gravity. Call it an ion engine if ou wish, but such a system, though revolutionary isn't anti gravity.

Anti gravity meaning negating the way mass folds space... surely this isn't what they mean when they talk about B2?

 

[Todjaeger]

Let's clarify terms to avoid confusion.

Using electromagnetic force to fly the plane isn't quite anti gravity. Call it an ion engine if ou wish, but such a system, though revolutionary isn't anti gravity.

Anti gravity meaning negating the way mass folds space... surely this isn't what they mean when they talk about B2?

Indeed, there does seem to be a bit of confusion about terms, as well as wishful or imaginative thinking on the part of some. Keep in mind though, I'm not an expert.

Anti-gravity is something that cancels out gravity, which is the attraction between masses. Gravity has also been determined capable of distorting space. At present, there is a search for a theoretical particle called a graviton which is believed to be involved in the attraction between masses. No official announcement has been made about such a discovery, which makes it unlikely that it has been done, since the discovery is likely to merit a Nobel prize. And in order to see if "anti-gravity" is possible, it seems reasonable to need to know more about how gravity works beforehand.

As for using EM fields to defy gravity... That's been done. A maglev train is propelled using magnetic fields which floats the train above the track while moving it forward. The problem with trying to fly an aircraft using EM fields, is that two fields are required, one on the object moving, and another field coming from whatever the object is moving away from, in this case, the ground. I don't see a practical way to use an EM field to propel aircraft given the amount of lift required to fly.

Now, if the B-2 does have the leading edges charged, I can see how that might be done as part of the stealth system. It's distinctly possible that the RAM might perform differently while charged, it also might be done to prevent condensation buildup, etc. that could interfere with the LO characteristics.

-Cheers

 

[Oryx]

Indeed, there does seem to be a bit of confusion about terms, as well as wishful or imaginative thinking on the part of some. Keep in mind though, I'm not an expert.

Anti-gravity is something that cancels out gravity, which is the attraction between masses.

Indeed. Using a force to oppose the force of gravity, be that through lift of a wing, thrust of a lift-fan, magnetic force on levitating trains or some fancy ion-thruster used for maneuvering on some space vehicles, is not "anti-gravity". These things all use existing technologies to counter the force of gravity. None of them do anything that is currently unknown to physics, although some are quite innovative in how they harness the laws of physics.

So-called "anti-gravity" currently only exists as science fiction or some unproven and undemonstrated theories by certain "scientists". Other scientists think many of those proposing "anti-gravity" ideas are a little "weird" to put it mildly, but you never know what some eccentric will come up with one day... Since no scientist has so far come up with an experiment that proves "anti-gravity" exists and went on to claim his Nobel prize, let along actually having built a vehicle that utilizes the theory, the idea that the B-2 uses some sort of anti-gravity becomes really far-fetched. And why should it? There is nothing about the B-2's flight characteristics that do not conform with normal aerodynamic theory. You can compare its cruise and landing speeds with its mass, wing area and thrust available and everything comes out as pretty ordinary - I know this because I have used the B-2 before (among many other aircraft) as an example when teaching applied aerodynamics at university.

People seem to believe these conspiracy theories way too easily - probably because the "cool factor" overrides the "common sense" factor. Note that, so far at least, no secret project that ever eventually became public knowledge actually challenged the known laws of physics. It is usually just the very innovative application of known physics by engineers in a way that would give one side an edge over the other side that causes projects to become secret. Take "stealth" for instance: no new physics laws were discovered during the Have Blue/F117 development and the techniques used for analysis actually came from openly published journals - it is the innovative application of all these already well proven theories in order to design an aircraft with a very low RCS as its primary design driver that made it so innovative, and that caused it to be so secret for a long time.

Just as an aside - "ion propulsion systems" (the real deal - not the science fiction version) all produce very low thrust levels. They are very useful for interplanetary craft due to their efficiency, but because of the low thrust produced they have very little use in atmospheric flight. No existing or proposed system would have anywhere near the thrust levels to levitate an aircraft or even produce a useful addition to the lift produced by the wings. Magnetic systems, on the other hand, such as those used on levitating trains are also useless since those powerful magnetic forces only work over very small distances (read a few millimeters). You would require a magnet straight out of the most far-fetched science fiction book in your airplane and another on the ground in order to keep something with the mass of a B-2 up at typical cruise altitudes.

 

[Systems Adict]

LOL we all know that russians were no good in R&D at that time russians even after absorbing all the R&D and scientist couldn't produce capable engines for there migs we (UK had to give them those) the only two countries that had serious R&D at that time for modern WarFare equipments were undoubtedly Germany and UK.

Yet again, us Brits, being the kindly folk that we are, offered the Russians a batch of 4 of Mr Whittle's finest designs, as a sort of Olive branch, to help them. From my memories of Programmes from both the discovery & History channels, they fitted 2 to an aircraft for physical flight trials, & stripped the other 2 to bits, to be "cloned", which they managed rather sucessfully.

Additionally, taking it back to comments about the F-117, part of the original design ethos was to use parts from other A/C, to help keep down costs, as well as helping pilots transfer filght/handling characteristics, & ground crew maintenance knowledge from other A/C to the F-117.

Part of this knowledge was to use the Prowler landing gear, as well as making the pilots do training here in the UK out of Mildenhall, at night, so that it wouldn't attract so much attention.

Finally, as for the B2 having anti grav facilities. BALONEY !!!

The B2 is based on the concept B-47 flying wing of the 1940's. Flying wings are renowned for their lift characteristics, as well as being able to endure higher weight loading for take-off. This means more fuel (as the wing is the fuel tank as well as the fuselage), meaning greater distance/endurance. The fact that the A/C is sub-sonic also means it's not so greedy, especially at altitude. The hardest part of a 30hr flight is the fatigue suffered by the flight crew.

I know that most of this data is probably within the thread, but felt it would help others to bring it together in a single post, along with the other details I threw in.

Systems Adict