That's not the only problem look at this shit. They built an inlet that's perpendicular to the flight direction. It only works at extremely low speeds when the aircraft is level, because then a portion of the turbine power is being used to generate a vacuum and suck up the needed air.
If it's flying too fast, the engine is literally starved of air, and shuts down. If it's trying to rise to altitude at too great an angle, the engine is starved of air and shuts off. If it's trying to land properly, the engine is starved of air and shuts off.
Boeing is fucking retarded and they are selling the navy a bag of hammers for a million dollars.
You think you can bomb russia or china with only a handful of these pieces of shit? Bombing requires an absolute shit ton of airplanes to be fielded, because otherwise your bombing will be like shooting an elephant with a BB gun.
Noah White
20m at 10km is 0.1°, not 1°. And 50m is 0.3°. 1° is twice the angular size of the full moon, and would be incredibly easy to spot.
Benjamin Price
Maybe if your bb had a thermo-nuclear core
Brody Hughes
B-2 wasn't even stealthy in the 80s, it basically had to get refueled within Soviet radar ranges, and the refueling aircraft isn't stealthy. So if the commies ever detected a lone American refueling aircraft at the edge of their radar ranges, they could pretty much guess what was going on and send a MiG-25 to blow the B-2 the fuck out of the sky long before its approach. And modern Russian radars are ridiculously improved compared to Soviet coverage and range.
A ferry range of about 20,000km is needed to properly get in and out of their current detection range, otherwise its a one way trip. B-2 might be able to carry out a one way trip on some outlying Soviet cities, but it likely wouldn't be able to disgorge the full bomb load before it was shot down. Washing away a billion dollar aircraft to nuke some commie city that has a GDP of a million dollars is kind of a waste, and probably won't influence the enemys war fighting capability or resolve.
Right, because at a certain speed you outrun all the air, even the air that's ahead of you. Why aren't you the one proposing UAV concepts to the Navy, since you seem to be the expert on this subject?
Just like put more fuel on the plane lmao. But seriously, it does seem like refueling aircraft are a bandaid for subpar design.
Nathaniel Morris
The faster the flow becomes over a void, the lower the pressure becomes within that void, which helps to counteract laminar flow. When you are saying would be true only at absurdly high speeds that this aircraft would never dream of reaching anyway.
Furthermore this intake isn't truly perpendicular to the direction of flight like in your diagram, the leading edge of the inlet is clearly several inches lower than the trailing edge as you can see in OP's pic.
