Solution to Northrop XB35

What are the problems of the flying wing bomber Northrop XB35? And how to fix them?

One thing I know is that it needed a fly-by-wire system

Thanks in advance!
 
Fly by wire isn't the problem, it needs a computer to control the plane and keep it going where you want it to go. Most flying wings in other than level flight with no wind except from the front or back are not stable.
 
It was my understanding that the XB-35 seemed to suggest that the stability issues with flying wings aren't as severe as they're made out to be. The biggest thing that killed it was the fact that Northrop stretched its resources too far, too thin on experimental projects.

It was engine vibration from the contrarotating piston propellers that compounded this. The army supplied components really frakked up the prototypes, and caused a lot of metal fatigue in the drive shafts.
 
Yes, I read that on wiki
But what components did the Airforce supply to the prototype? And how can a counter-rotating propeller create a strong vibration on XB35? I don't remember Tupolev Bear has that problem (or is it?)
 
Yes, I read that on wiki
But what components did the Airforce supply to the prototype? And how can a counter-rotating propeller create a strong vibration on XB35? I don't remember Tupolev Bear has that problem (or is it?)
The powerplants and propellers were supplied by the AAF. The problem wasn't counter-rotation itself, but the fact that it was poorly implemented. The propellers really weren't compatible with the engines, espescially in that arrangement.
 
Various aircraft throughout history have had problems caused by the propellor type/materials/suitability. Pusher propellors often had problems with unforeseen airflow instability. Counter-rotating props have had weird interaction problems. Props with extension shafts and gearboxes have caused problems. Complex problems usually have complex solutions. In the case of the XB-35, it was the XB-49.
 
What does it do better than conventional airplanes that we already build?

The real problem with flying wings is this question. What does it do better than conventional airplanes that we already build?

There's a sadly long gap between coolness and usefulness.
 
The real problem with flying wings is this question. What does it do better than conventional airplanes that we already build?

There's a sadly long gap between coolness and usefulness.

It's the optimum shape to minimize aerodynamic drag and structural weight, so the plane can carry more payload and use less fuel, at least in theory.
 
Top