User avatar
N328KF
Topic Author
Posts: 5943
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

Tu-95/-142 re-imagined

Sun Mar 10, 2019 4:21 pm

Purely hypothetical exercise here: does anyone care to speculate on how a Bear-like aircraft with modern engines and aerodynamics would do form a performance standpoint? Let’s assume Western turboprops as well. Let’s set aside threat environments.
“In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”
-Donny Miller
 
WIederling
Posts: 8359
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: Tu-95/-142 re-imagined

Sun Mar 10, 2019 6:13 pm

Too loud.
Otherwise: good economy. probably.
Murphy is an optimist
 
User avatar
cpd
Posts: 5898
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: Tu-95/-142 re-imagined

Mon Mar 11, 2019 10:10 am

N328KF wrote:
Purely hypothetical exercise here: does anyone care to speculate on how a Bear-like aircraft with modern engines and aerodynamics would do form a performance standpoint? Let’s assume Western turboprops as well. Let’s set aside threat environments.


Could it be re-imagined with modern jet engines like in the current big business jets (eg, G550 and G650)? Would it have enough fuel capacity to make those work?
 
Catfry
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:20 am

Re: Tu-95/-142 re-imagined

Mon Mar 11, 2019 11:23 am

The limiting factor for turboprops is the propeller. you can easily put a larger jetcore on but it will be limited by the force the props can transfer to the air. The blades on an a400m already weigh 400 kg per engine. Any more and it starts to become ridiculous weightwise. A modern NK-12 like engine could likely have a lighter, more maintainable core, but not much else difference.
There is not much reason to go for props for long range high altitude performance. Props only really win at lower heights and in things like thrust response, since you don't need to alter the rpm of the core, you can just change prop pitch.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Topic Author
Posts: 5943
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

Re: Tu-95/-142 re-imagined

Mon Mar 11, 2019 3:27 pm

Catfry wrote:
There is not much reason to go for props for long range high altitude performance. Props only really win at lower heights and in things like thrust response, since you don't need to alter the rpm of the core, you can just change prop pitch.


Well, the Tu-142 (the ASW version) was often used at low-level (surface skimming ) for hours on end, so there was a use case here.
“In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”
-Donny Miller

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos