A movie show the B-2 MHD system in action !

So Archangel,
I have to ask - Assuming that Northrop has indeed built the B-2 utilizing research that has grown from the roots of their 1968 paper, "ElectroAerodynamics in Supersonic Flow", is it your assessment that the B2 could be using plasma stealth of one form or another to contribute to it's reduced RCS?

I'm gonna go with the water condensation thingy.B-2 wasn't designed to go supersonic.It's just the atmospheric conditions it was flying in at the time that resulted that effect.Plasma stealth technology is probably a weee bit too high tech to be brought out into the public at this time.

I have to ask - Assuming that Northrop has indeed built the B-2 utilizing research that has grown from the roots of their 1968 paper, "ElectroAerodynamics in Supersonic Flow", is it your assessment that the B2 could be using plasma stealth of one form or another to contribute to it's reduced RCS?

Plasma is not simple to generate in air. Factors determining the potentials required are pressure, temeprature, and humidity. Lower pressure, humidity, and higher temperatures make plasma generation more simple.

The problem is that all of the energy must be added to the molecules at once. After a molecule is ionized it would be repled from the charged surface. Enough energy must be absorbed so that the plasma could survive the time it took to pass the tail of the plane.

You really are looking at millions of volts to do this.

If you charged a thin surface area on the leading edge of the wing to millions of volts would it create a plasma shield while the plane is in flight?

YES

Plasma generation is not needed for eletro-kinetic thrust. The two are related, but seperate issues.

And MHD is an incorrect term. Magnetism is not involved in the effect. Ionic, or Electro-Kinetic would be the correct terms to use depending on the application.

The electro-kinetic force is greater with higher voltages. The electro-static repulsive, and attractive forces are directly related to the magnitude of the charge, and the potential difference(Voltage).

This article states that the electric current going to the leading edges is "millions of volts", which in turn accounts for the precautions a grounds crewman of the B-2 has spoken of to me.



Therefore IF the AW&ST article is correct, it then agrees with your assessment that plasma stealth on the B-2 is indeed possible though potentially difficult.

I have no problem with this although in my original post I was skeptical of plasma stealth being on-board the B-2 and yet I knew there had to be some kind of electrically reduced RCS if Northrop held true to their 30+ years of research.


Well, regarding MHD on the B-2, I think that's fiction as I have basically already stated.

I also agree with you that the actual generation of plasma is not required for electrokinetic thrust - "seperate but related issues" as you state, which is also eluded to in my previous post.

However I think that the consideration of the B-2's leading edges being charged to create an electrically reduced RCS and the high probability of electrokinetic thrust (your more accurate term) as you have specified demonstrates an "economy of assets" type design philosophy from Northrop-Grumman's team, thus killing two birds with one stone.


Great input Archangel...
One thing more regarding plasma stealth - would you think that thermal seeking ordinance is a reduced threat or an increased threat due to the possible generation of plasma?

Right.....




Anyway, Intelgurl asked me to take a look at what she posted a few days ago. Today I finally had some time to read it all back, here it goes:

The origional subject of this thread was a misinterpreted image of a B-2.
external image
Nans claimed this 'cloud' was formed by Migration of the electric discharge (MHD).

In fact, what we see here is an ordinairy "Prandtl-Glauert" cloud. Even Boeing 747's can produce these kind of clouds.

I agree that the B-2's leading and trailing edges, and it's exhaust get charged.
Why? I don't know, from what I've read about it, it creates lift and reduces drag. I haven't read a lot of official info about this though.
I'm affraid that most you read about this are interpretations by normal people like yu and me, not aeronautical engineers.



I have read the article about the Russian plasma stealth technology tests (Its even on my website) so I do believe this kind of technology exists.

www.air-attack.com...


But the B-2 was designed and build in the 80's.
Also, there isn't much information available about US plasma stealth research.

Read my costum user title, it sais "Uber Sceptic"
I just don't simply accept info that easily, I must have read official (or less official) information about it.

Good point... However, (and I apolgize for continuing to bring it up) but Northrop had this technology already researched and recognized in 1968. The wheels at the pentagon move slow but that still gives them (and Northrop) 12 plus years to come up with a method of utilizing this technology in an airframe. It's not a far reach to think that an aircraft built in the 80's could have this type of technology.

In fact, in my original post it is evident that I was truly skeptical of plasma stealth being onboard the B-2, I was however, pretty sure there was some kind of electrostatically charged reduction in RCS.... but then Archangel cleared some things up concerning plasma generation and now I'm thinking that plasma generation was not out of the realm of possibilities.

[Edited on 13-1-2004 by intelgurl]

"I want to believe"

Did you read the quote from the russian research?
The plasma system didn't weigh more than 100 kilo's and the power consumpsion isn't that high.

I won't say it's impossible that the B-2 has such a system on board, but I remain sceptical about it

It seems many of you missed the History channel special. They talked about the planes history of how it was orginally intended to bomb NY, in the Second WW.

Perhaps some of you didn't, it's ok I missed it also. From what I do know though, the concept is for the plane to be able to ride the major wind thermals, there by allowing it much greater range of flight without the fuel consumption. Picture how large birds can just soar and soar, same idea. As for all the high tech means of flight, I really doubt anything spectacular is being utilized.

My favorite pic;

external image

Probably the best source for non classified info, only draw back is they don't collaborate with the history channels take on it's origination.

....Northrop had this technology already researched and recognized in 1968.....

Some of the Northrop experiments have been duplicated. There are other associated effects such as shockwave reduction.

jnaudin.free.fr...

external image

I do not have a link to the original report, but here is a snip.

The tests definitely show that it is possible to modify the airflow and shock structure of a body by electrodynamics.... The tests have proven that electronic charges have considerable effect on supersonic flow. At Mach number 1.4, large changes in shock wave structure were caused using moderate power..... When about 10 to 15 kilovolts were applied to the rod in DC100 there was a large effect on the shock pattern.... Visual observations from the liquid surface indicated that the overall shock pattern was significantly flattened out.

One thing more regarding plasma stealth - would you think that thermal seeking ordinance is a reduced threat or an increased threat due to the possible generation of plasma?

That would depend on the type of missile. Longer range missiles use radar. It is the short range missiles that use infared radiation to track(Not the heat itself). The plasma would absorb most of the IR radiation from the plane itself, but would emit it's own radiation including the IR band. If it would be greater I am not sure, but if a fighter is close enough to fire an IR missile the B2 has no chance of running. It is far to slow and fat to evade a cannon.

Ok, specifically I was wondering if the IR seeking SA-13 with a range of 10 km and the SA-18 with a range of 9 km would pose more than a minimal threat to an aircraft such as the B-2 IF it was utilizing plasma stealth technology...

This is all conjecture but we seem to be having a good discussion here so give me your thoughts

[Edited on 13-1-2004 by intelgurl]

"Ok, specifically I was wondering if the IR seeking SA-13 with a range of 10 km and the SA-18 with a range of 9 km would pose more than a minimal threat to an aircraft such as the B-2 IF it was utilizing plasma stealth technology..."


These missiles are for low-medium altitude targets. The B2 would climb to ~50,000 feet as quickly as possible. Climb, cruise, drop, go home. Land, and sea based IR missiles are no threat to high flying bombers. The only land based threat would be the larger, longer range radar guided missiles which hopefully would not see the B2.

Of course fighter missiles and canons would still be a threat if they somehow detected the B2. Once any bomber has fighters on it's tail the game is over.

[Edited on 14-1-2004 by ArchAngel]

I thought it was odd when I first read that the new F-22 Raptor would carry a 20mm cannon. The small size of the rounds, and the small amount of ammo made it a poor weapon for shooting anything other than planes, but the concept behind the system was to engage the enemy beyond visual range without being detected, and move away from threats before they would be attacked themselves.

The cannon seems to go against the tactics of the large stealth fighter.

Unless they are planning on the possibility of the missiles being defeated somehow.

Calling 20 mm small is like saying .50 is for sissies.
What are you compareing these aircraft weapons to, tank shells?

I'm honestly wondering here.

Please examine this link closely, it will provide you with a better idea of the 20 mm in question. Do click the pic for a larger view.
www.defenselink.mil...


[Edited on 14-1-2004 by ADVISOR]

I doubt the electric system would be used at low altitude. Greater air pressure, and humidity reduce the dielectric strength of the medium, and the system is just short of being a multi-million volt sparkplug. Not a good thing to be carrying with tons of fuel, bombs, missiles, and maybe nuclear warheads. If flashover occurs the plane is gone.

It would be safer, and more effective at high altitude.

Also plasma generation requires less energy in the lower pressures of the high altitude, and the shockwave reduction is of greater value at the higher speeds.

I imagine it would be a multi-mode system. Climb under convetional power, turn on the EK system and reduce jet thrust for cruising, and increase power to create plasma when near enemy radar.

[Edited on 14-1-2004 by ArchAngel]

"Calling 20 mm small is like saying .50 is for sissies."

I was implying that the weapon was designed for shooting other planes rather than ground targets.

Strafing with an F-22 is like delivering Pizza with a Ferrari.

Sure would guarantee that 30 min or less deal.

Would not the B-2's faraday cage protect it's internals, ordinance and crew from this flashover? I've heard it's really well designed...

I'm also under the impression that there is no switch to hit to turn on whatever electrical thrust, lift and reduced RCS system that is onboard, but rather this electrical function is integrated seamlessly into the overall system of the B-2.
Perhaps it is a software/firmware instruction that at a certain altitude it gradually lights up...

Your thoughts?

"Would not the B-2's faraday cage protect it's internals, ordinance and crew from this flashover? I've heard it's really well designed..."

The charged parts of the system would be outside the faraday cage A flashove between them at the potentials suggested by Janes could melt almost anything. The sudden current draw could damage parts in the power supply too.

"I'm also under the impression that there is no switch to hit to turn on whatever electrical thrust, lift and reduced RCS system that is onboard, but rather this electrical function is integrated seamlessly into the overall system of the B-2.
Perhaps it is a software/firmware instruction that at a certain altitude it gradually lights up... "

That would be the best solution. The airforce does not usually build planes that will blow up if a wrong switch is thrown. With everything else under computer control ther is no reason not to. It would be integrated into the entire system.