ECM & Aerodynamics

[I'm a layperson at this, so please excuse this naive question.]

What does all that external ECM that they keep adding on to older
aircraft do to their aerodynamics? I look at a B-52 with its EVS
turrets sticking out of its nose and all those ECM antennas and other
crap sticking out of its fuselage. Or an F-111 "Wild Weasel" with that
pod high on its rudder.

What does that do to drag, handling, airspeed, etc.?

I also seem to remember that the G & H models of the B-52 had its whole
nose lengthened to accomodate a bigger radar or something (as compared
with the older B-52 models). That's in addition to putting an insert in
the tail to lengthen the tail behind the rudder. What did all those
modifications do to the B-52's aerodynamics?


--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:

Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.

"Steven D. Litvintchouk" wrote:

[I'm a layperson at this, so please excuse this naive question.]

What does all that external ECM that they keep adding on to older
aircraft do to their aerodynamics? I look at a B-52 with its EVS
turrets sticking out of its nose and all those ECM antennas and other
crap sticking out of its fuselage. Or an F-111 "Wild Weasel" with that
pod high on its rudder.

What does that do to drag, handling, airspeed, etc.?

In partial answer to your question, Boyne gives the following data on the
decline of the L/D ratio:

B-52A/F: 21:1

B-52G/H (clean): 19:1

B-52G/H (12 SRAM, EVS): 17:1

B-52G/H (12 ALCM, EVS): 17.4:1 (improved pylon).

Guy

On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 01:08:11 GMT, "Steven D. Litvintchouk"
wrote:

[I'm a layperson at this, so please excuse this naive question.]

What does all that external ECM that they keep adding on to older
aircraft do to their aerodynamics? I look at a B-52 with its EVS
turrets sticking out of its nose and all those ECM antennas and other
crap sticking out of its fuselage. Or an F-111 "Wild Weasel" with that
pod high on its rudder.

What does that do to drag, handling, airspeed, etc.?

I also seem to remember that the G & H models of the B-52 had its whole
nose lengthened to accomodate a bigger radar or something (as compared
with the older B-52 models). That's in addition to putting an insert in
the tail to lengthen the tail behind the rudder. What did all those
modifications do to the B-52's aerodynamics?




The drag induced has found to be much less than that induced by a
large missile hole ;-),.

Sorry I couldn't resist
John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-

Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

It's not really a tradeoff between ECM and aerodynamics. It's more a
tradeoff between ECM and not surviving.

WDA

end

"Steven D. Litvintchouk" wrote in message
ink.net...
[I'm a layperson at this, so please excuse this naive question.]

What does all that external ECM that they keep adding on to older
aircraft do to their aerodynamics? I look at a B-52 with its EVS
turrets sticking out of its nose and all those ECM antennas and other
crap sticking out of its fuselage. Or an F-111 "Wild Weasel" with that
pod high on its rudder.

What does that do to drag, handling, airspeed, etc.?

I also seem to remember that the G & H models of the B-52 had its whole
nose lengthened to accomodate a bigger radar or something (as compared
with the older B-52 models). That's in addition to putting an insert in
the tail to lengthen the tail behind the rudder. What did all those
modifications do to the B-52's aerodynamics?


--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:

Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.