- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| My Alternate Jet Age Timeline | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Oct 31 2013, 03:24 AM (1,467 Views) | |
| Lelouch | Jul 9 2014, 04:37 AM Post #51 |
|
Suprised you have not explored Thermal Turbojets. Using the direct Exhaust from a Nuclear Fission reactor combined with the Intake air is enough to output up to 5,000kn of Thrust in a Aircraft. You should especially look into Project Pluto. |
![]() |
|
| Simon Darkshade | Jul 9 2014, 08:25 AM Post #52 |
|
Nefarious Swashbuckler
|
Pluto...Now there was a very bad idea. Much worse than a Snark. |
![]() |
|
| Delta Force | Jul 9 2014, 08:32 AM Post #53 |
|
The B-72 was a prototype nuclear powered bomber in this timeline. Nuclear turbojets are possible, but not very feasible. As for Project Pluto, I don't know how you could even do a full scale test of the cruise missile. Far too dangerous, even by 1960s standards. |
![]() |
|
| Lelouch | Jul 9 2014, 08:50 AM Post #54 |
|
I don't know, if your worried about "Radiation" in the Air, then your worried about something that is not really an issue. Your not actually exposing the reactors plasma to the Air, instead your conducting the Thermal Energy from the reactions into the Turbojet, where the Air is rapidly heated, and expanded. Liquid/AVTAG could also be used in that, which would also dramatically increase the thrust from traditional Air/Liquid Engines when the thermal properties of Nuclear Turbojets are truly harnessed. |
![]() |
|
| Delta Force | Jul 9 2014, 09:10 AM Post #55 |
|
Radiation poses something of an issue if the aircraft should crash, and it's going to be a concern for aircrews and maintenance personnel who work in and around the aircraft. Also, some designs for nuclear turbojets actually did release fallout particles. Not all designs, but the were the ones that were the best studied and most developed during the course of the Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion program were the type that emitted fallout. |
![]() |
|
| Simon Darkshade | Jul 9 2014, 01:23 PM Post #56 |
|
Nefarious Swashbuckler
|
Pluto was noted for being extremely dirty. It had a dual success in that way, if you look at it - cruise over enemy skies making FLKs and then dropping a dozen H-bombs. |
![]() |
|
| Delta Force | Jul 13 2014, 06:09 AM Post #57 |
|
I posted this on AH.com and thought it might be of interest here as well. So, here's something of an alternate history of the F-111, going to the 1980s. I can continue it past the 1980s if anyone is interested, and perhaps do something similar for the F-4. I'm not sure about users apart from the USAF and Commonwealth militaries, so feel free to offer suggestions. Imperial Iran is a likely operator. Rather than combining the naval interceptor program, the F-111 is allowed to proceed on its own as a TAC program, and F-111 development proceeds more slowly and carefully. When the schedule starts to slip, TAC upgrades several F-105D aircraft into the F-105H, a model featuring the Thunderstick II upgrades, amongst others. In 1968 things are finally settled enough to begin producing the first aircraft intended for service. They feature upgraded intakes and engines that ensure more reliable performance, and an early analog version of the avionics, the Mark I. During development, the F-111 attracts the attention of SAC and several export customers, and variants are developed for them. SAC requests an aircraft with a higher maximum takeoff weight and other improvements to make it more suitable for its requirements, and procures the FB-111 as a replacement for the B-47, B-58, and other medium bombers. The FB-111A becomes the first aircraft equipped with the Mark II avionics, including an early version of the glass cockpit. It also becomes the first aircraft to use the new P-100 series TF30 engine, significantly improving aircraft performance. These upgrades are later implemented on Tactical Air Command's F-111B. The Commonwealth countries (Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom) request similar improvements for their aircraft, as well as more Commonwealth content. The British want to reuse some of the systems developed for their TSR-2, the Australians and Canadians want maritime strike capabilities, and all want to use Spey engines (although significantly uprated) to maintain commonality with their Phantom fleets. In the 1970s the FB-111 evolves into the B-2, a significantly enlarged development featuring new airframe segments forward and aft of the wing box, as well as a revised undercarriage design to allow ventral carriage of weapons. Major subsystems from the Rockwell B-1 bomber are incorporated into the design, including the Pratt & Whitney F101 engine. The avionics see major change as well, with the Mark III avionic system featuring the MP944 microprocessor architecture developed by Garrett AiResearch for the Central Air Data Computer used on the F-14 Tomcat. With the V-bomber fleet aging and due for retirement, the Royal Air Force procures its own version of the B-2. In addition to differences in avionics systems, the British B-2 uses General Electric F101 engines to improve maintainability due to the large number of NATO nations and allies operating F-15 and F-16 aircraft with the engine. F-111A (TAC) -- First Flight: 1968 -- IOC: 1969 -- Avionics: Mark I -- Intakes: Triple Plow II -- Engines: Pratt & Whitney TF30-P-7 (12,500 lbf dry thrust, 20,350 lbf afterburning thrust) -- Wings: Standard -- Undercarriage: Standard F-111B (TAC) -- First Flight: 1970 -- IOC: 1972 -- Avionics: Mark IIB (TAC) -- Intakes: Triple Plow II -- Engines: Pratt & Whitney TF30-P-100 (17,900 lbf dry thrust, 25,100 lbf afterburning thrust) -- Wings: Standard -- Undercarriage: Standard F-111C (Commonwealth) -- First Flight: 1968 -- IOC: 1970 -- Avionics: Mark IIC (Commonwealth Mark IIB) -- Intakes: Triple Plow II -- Engines: Rolls-Royce Spey RB.168 MK.300 (15,000 lbf dry thrust, 25,000 lbf afterburning thrust) -- Wings: Long -- Undercarriage: Heavy FB-111A (SAC) -- First Flight: 1968 -- IOC: 1971 -- Avionics: Mark IIA (SAC) -- Intakes: Triple Plow II -- Engines: Pratt & Whitney TF30-P-100 (17,900 lbf dry thrust, 25,100 lbf afterburning thrust) -- Wings: Long -- Undercarriage: Heavy B-2A (SAC) -- First Flight: 1972 -- IOC: 1976 -- Avionics: Mark IIIA (SAC) -- Intakes: Triple Plow II -- Engines: General Electric F101 (17,000 lbf thrust dry, 30,000 lbf thrust afterburning) -- Wings: Long -- Undercarriage: Heavy B-2B (Commonwealth) -- First Flight: 1980 -- IOC: 1982 -- Avionics: Mark IIIB (Commonwealth) -- Intakes: Triple Plow II -- Engines: Pratt & Whitney F100 (17,800 lbf thrust dry, 29,160 lbf thrust afterburning) -- Wings: Long -- Undercarriage: Heavy Edited by Delta Force, Jul 13 2014, 06:09 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Simon Darkshade | Jul 13 2014, 06:57 AM Post #58 |
|
Nefarious Swashbuckler
|
Seems straightforward, although you'd need political changes to keep Canada in the bomber game. The British would want a long range theatre strike aircraft capable of hitting the Western USSR in an ideal world. What type of range, performance and bombload do the various types have? |
![]() |
|
| Delta Force | Sep 22 2014, 03:01 AM Post #59 |
|
I'm doing a nuclear navy timeline now. I think I remember seeing something on nuclear ship economics here a few months ago. Does anyone know which thread that might have been? |
![]() |
|
| Simon Darkshade | Sep 22 2014, 06:00 AM Post #60 |
|
Nefarious Swashbuckler
|
It could be in this thread: http://s1.zetaboards.com/chumsofthedark/topic/4704878/1/?x=90#new or the General Naval Errata thread. |
![]() |
|
| Simon Darkshade | Sep 23 2014, 12:12 PM Post #61 |
|
Nefarious Swashbuckler
|
Once I hit the postwar period/1950s with my own WE 2.0 timeline, it would be interesting to play around with a bit of a collaboration; many of the features that you have explored here would be present in some way, shape or form. |
![]() |
|
| Delta Force | Sep 26 2014, 06:46 AM Post #62 |
|
That's the one. Thanks for the link.
I've been looking into a variety of Cold War technologies and projects for the past few years, and there are certainly things that would be interesting in a scenario involving some worldbuilding or a larger alternate history background. My timeline is more alternate 1950s to the present, but a lot of what I'm looking at could be applicable to other scenarios. Do you have anything in particular in mind? |
![]() |
|
| Simon Darkshade | Sep 26 2014, 07:13 AM Post #63 |
|
Nefarious Swashbuckler
|
What I envisage is a slightly more multipolar 1950s, with a nationalist yet unfriendly China, a different Soviet Union, the United States and a fading Britain as the big players, with some extended colonial conflicts involving France, Belgium and the Netherlands, a stronger Canada and South America and an impetus for a different type of rearmament for the 4 major Axis powers. I even toyed around with the notion of a socialist leaning Brazil as a 'mega-Yugoslavia', if that makes sense. A 'Vietnam along the lines of Korea' conflict could be interesting. Overall, there would be an interesting and significant impact from different tank, ship and aircraft development in the 1930s and WW2, with things evolving down the path from them without reverting back to historical types as is done in some A-H scenarios. I'd like to avoid 'change the world, change the conflict, but the only thing different is a slightly earlier emergence of the F-8.' Edited by Simon Darkshade, Sep 26 2014, 07:40 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Delta Force | Sep 26 2014, 10:34 AM Post #64 |
|
That's similar to my timeline, as the British and French remain more prominent following their victory in the 1956 Suez War (an escalation of the Suez Crisis). Canada, Argentina, and some other middle powers are also fairly prominent.
In my timeline, a Second Korean War is the Vietnam analogue.
That does sound interesting. |
![]() |
|
| Simon Darkshade | Sep 27 2014, 02:47 AM Post #65 |
|
Nefarious Swashbuckler
|
I can't see Suez happening here, because of a different and more overt control of the Middle East; it will be a more gradual change of the guard as compared to a violent shock. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Alternate History · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2






8:39 AM Jul 11