Royal Lindblum ZM-7L Strategic Bomber [MT]

Posts · by **Yohannes** » Fri May 25, 2018 5:02 am

Royal Lindblum ZM-7L ‘Dreadnought’ Strategic Bomber

Technology: real life modern technology

Figure 1: Design blueprint [ Link to full dimension of design blueprint ]

Figure 2: Design illustration [ Link to full dimension of design illustration ]

Table of Contents

1. Design overview and specifications
2. The liberal nation’s bomber
3. The background
4. Flight technology
5. Invisibility
6. Aerial operations
7. Warload

Posts · by **Yohannes** » Fri May 25, 2018 5:07 am

1. Design overview and specifications

Main contractor: Königlich Lindblum GmbH, Yohannes
Technology: Real Life Modern Technology
NationStates Draftroom peer review thread: https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/nsdraftroom/just-another-boring-ns-bomber-clone-t12019.html
Storefront thread: VMK Defence & Steel Works

Type

The design is that of a heavy penetration strategic bomber.

Overview

The ZM-7L, also known as the ‘Dreadnought’, is a military aircraft designed specially for the Luftwaffe for a variety of missions. A squadron of Dreadnought can fill the following roles: (i) precision strike; (ii) electronic attack and defence; (iii) aerial reconnaissance, intelligence, and surveillance; and (iv) weapon system and testing.

Development

In the continent of Yohannes, the aircraft has been characterised for its complex design process. Each section of the aircraft must fit together very precisely so that the overall shape of the design’s sections will be consistent across the surface. This was because any inconsistency on the surface would reduce low observability for the aircraft due to increasing reflectivity. The permissible limit of variation in physical dimension and measured value of materials, manufactured components, systems and services during its designing process was very low.

During its development, it was decided that the Dreadnought must meet the aerodynamic and structural standard required for a deep penetration heavy bomber. However, at the same time the aircraft must also be designed in sucb a way that low observability traits could be maximised. The Luftwaffe further added the criteria of smooth logistics and consistency in operational readiness level, whilst demanding that the aircraft must have the ability to detect its target effectively, have good communication capabilities, and can travel without being identified. The bomber, to be manned by its intellectually capable commander seated to the right and directed by its pilot, was eventually designed to meet all these requirements.

Differentiating its design process from those of previous aircraft assembled in the nineteen countries, project engineers employed by the then Thirty-fifth Christian Democratic Executive Council had to appropriately design and fabricate the final production tooling and entirely judge the make up of the materials using the latest 3D CAD system. The use of graphite fibres impregnated with resin was prioritised over those of metallic materials for the aircraft, whilst composite radar absorbent honeycomb comprising graphite and epoxy constituents combined with aluminium and titanium alloys were used for the airframe.

The guarantee of performance optimisation whilst ensuring low observability for the aircraft meant there was no other way to design the Dreadnought without using composite materials as much as was practicably possible. That, combined with the fact that fabrication of individual structure for the aircraft must be done with very precise engineering limit, whilst its assembly process must be done with very high quality requirement, did inflict notable toll on parliamentary appropriations threshold; at first it was 550 million NSD per bomber, then parliament increased appropriations to a ceiling of 850 million NSD, and finally parliament arrived at the final estimated cost of 1.8 billion NSD per bomber. The inefficiency of the Yohannesian Model bureaucracy further aggravated this budget overextension problem.

Contractors

The company contracted as primary project leader to administer the whole design process, and integrate all the individual subprojects for the many subcontractors involved in the designing of the Dreadnought, was Königlich Lindblum GmbH. Lamoni and Neo-Ixania Arms from the Free Republic of Lamoni was the only foreign subcontractor awarded with the contract to contribute to the project. The latest modern composite technology was used by Palamecia Maschinenfabrik AG to design the aft-centre sections of the fuselage and the outboard of the aircraft. The designs of the armament delivery system which would be used to deliver a wide variety of munitions — conventional freefalling bombs to second generation variable yield gravity nuclear bombs and air launched cruise missiles — as well as the fuel systems and landing gear of the aircraft were also assigned to Königlich Lindblum.

Both the eighteen metres long aft-centre sections and the twenty-four metres long outboard sections were assembled at Königlich Lindblum facilities in the industrial heart of the Regency of Lindblum. Armaments bay for warload was designed in the aft-centre section of the aircraft, with integrated fuel tanks designed in the outboard sections of the aircraft, which have especially high concentration of composite materials.

The subcontractor assigned to design, construct, and assemble the intermediary wing sections, which took up over thirty per cent of the aircraft’s total airframe by weight, was Dietrich-Thordvaldsonn Farbenindustrie AG. With the responsibility to integrate these sections into the aircraft, the company was thus entirely responsible for the daunting task of smoothly integrating the aircraft’s fuel tank, wing structure, and the overall areas round the engine and landing gear for the design as a whole. Farbenindustrie AG contracted at least five companies to supply the military grade aluminium and titanium alloys required to construct the structural components that would harmoniously complement the modern composite components making up these sections.

Criteria

The Luftwaffe demanded that the aircraft must meet a minimum of “stealth” criteria through reduction in acoustic, electromagnetic, infrared, radar and visual signatures, which would hopefully reduce chance of detection by modern defensive systems. The flying wing platform, composite materials, and special coatings — with almost one hour’s worth of logistical and maintenance related work on the ground required for every minute of flight time being the outcome — were chosen based on these requirements.

The aircraft was designed with integrated quadruplex fly by wire controls, which would electrically adjust the aircraft control surfaces through their complementary in-built motor-design. The pilot onboard, seated to the left, need not rely on hydraulically or mechanically adjusted systems to control the integrated computer system, with the steering system slaved to that system. Electronics wise the aircraft was designed to house a collection of at least one hundred and fifty computers, containing no less than seven hundred thousand software lines of code.

The flying wing platform of the aircraft, that of a lambda design, was chosen for two reasons: (i) to ensure the gradual and smooth alignment of the surface of the aircraft to minimise angling as much as practicably possible, and (ii) to ensure that these surfaces would be aligned in an oblique angle against probable enemy radar beams. To counteract heating of the leading edges of the wings from air friction during operation, fuels are pumped internally by the system. Other surface areas are also covered with modern radio aborbing paint and tape.

To maximise low observability, engines and other highly reflective metal components are kept deep inside the composite structure of the Dreadnought. The nuclear bombs and conventional weapons as well as fuel and retractable landing gear are also mounted inside. Air are carried for the engines by intake ports on the top surface of the aircraft through S-shaped channels, with exhaust noozles also placed on top to keep them away from heat seeking ground missile threats below.

Powerplant

Specifications

Length: 25.07 m
Aft-centre: 18.16 m
Outboard: 23.62 m
G: +2.0 limit
Wingspan: 59.39 m
Wing area: 527.3 m²
Height: 5.71 m
Airframe: Lambda flying wing
Stealth: -43dB m²
Propulsion: 4x Royal Lindblum Z-35A non afterburning low bypass turbofan
Thrust: 366.5 kiloNewtons (37,370 kg) net total; 91.6 kiloNewtons (9,342 kg) each
Fuel capacity: 74,300 kg
Empty weight: 72,100 kg
Fuselage weight: 15,030 kg
Wings weight: 13,740 kg
Typical takeoff weight: 152,700 kg
T/w ratio: 0.245
Warload: The two bomb bays located next to one another under the fuselage centre section of the aircraft are used to deliver warload to the enemy.

Standard max warload: 18,100 kg
Service ceiling: 14.95 km
Initial climb: 15 m/s
Range: 9,800 km with internal fuel (17,000 kg warload); 12,000 km extended with internal fuel (11,000 kg warload)
Speed: Mach 0.94 (1,000 km/h) max and Mach 0.84 (890 km/h) cruise @12 km altitude; high subsonic
Crew: Commander & pilot
Avionics:

Maintenance & logistics: 243,000 NSD per hour (heavy mission); 150,000 NSD per hour (light to medium threat operation)
Price per unit: 2 billion NSD
Limited production right: If wanting LPR, sign this statement:

Fuselage radar absorbing coating

A special coating was used for the aft-centre sections of the aircraft fuselage. The reduction of radar cross section for military aircraft have been increasingly realised by the adoption of new radar stealth technologies in the last thirty years. Some examples of these technologies include: (i) the conscious shaping of stealth promoting design, (ii) the development of new radar absorbing materials, and (iii) the integration of radar absorbing structures. In the nineteen countries, the Luftwaffe has especially prioritised funding towards the development of radar absorbing structure in the last twenty year because of its higher load bearing strength and efficient electromagnetic wave absorbing potentials. New lightweight composite structures, with their better specific modulus and strength coupled with low dielectric properties have been integrated as load bearing structures for radar absorbing structure technology. Brian and Scott in their report "Composite ship structures: Engineering America's Maritime Dominance" explained how lightweight radar absorbing structure have been successfully integrated for the modern United States navy Zumwalt-class destroyers.

A typical radar absorbing structure is made up of electromagnetic wave absorber and composite facesheet acting as spacer or reflector. The electromagnetic wave absorber can be divided into two types, depending on the way they are prepared: Dallenbach absorber or circuit-analog absorber. For the ZM-7L Dreadnought, the composition of the wide bandwidth data communication radar absorbing structure was optimised directly from data in the 3D CAD system. A combination of unidirectional e-glass fibre composite laminate and frequency selective surface films against electromagnetic fields, which made up the wide-band radar absoring structure, is fabricated through screen printing and vacuum assisted resin injection. The circuit analog absorber comprises two-layered frequency selective surface films interspersed with resistive square patch arrays. Combined with the multiple composite laminate spacers, this scheme allows for effective radar absorption in the wider negative ten decibel bandwith from eight to eighteen Gigahertz for the aircraft, with less material thickness required and better thermoelastic stability when compared to older absorbing structure combination.

Sacrifices

Related articles

Southern Baptist Empire electro-optical sensor and radar industry to support VMK for ZM-7L regional operation in Right to Life

The historical significance of the Saanangi government procurement contract (2002 to 2017) in the nineteen countries

Stormaen’s avionics softwares contract to create 700 new engineering and information technology jobs by FY2019

The growing Caracasus-Yohannesian material engineering partnership since 2014

Homofront Returns

Jaclean steel essential for the production of Mother of All Ordnance Penetrators

Posts · by **Yohannes** » Fri May 25, 2018 5:08 am

2. The liberal nation’s bomber

In the history of Yohannesian aeronautical engineering, there has never been an aircraft design more dangerous than the ZM-7L strategic bomber. Able to fly anywhere in the world undetected to attack bigoted terrorist organisations and religious extremist regimes, the predator can arrive to meet its prey down below and release its precision munitions; to then fly away knowing that the bombs will most likely hit their prey, and that it will return back home safely.

Designed with capabilities to be the “Liberal Nation’s Bomber”, the ZM-7L illustrates the combination of various disciplines of science; from the science of air flight to low observability “stealth” bombing. It also enjoys a difference not shared by any conventional aircraft used by the Luftwaffe; for the ZM-7L was specially created to avoid detection and engagement in a sneaky way with its sophisticated flying machine design.

In 2018, the ZM-7L is flown proudly by the Luftwaffe and the air forces of other friendly nations. In the continent of Yohannes, it could only be created thanks to almost one hundred years of bombing study and reflection; new approaches to aircraft designing; progressive leaps in engineering and science; the revolution in information technology and computers; and the continuing development of “smart bombs.”

But, all the Luftwaffe scientists and technicians who have participated in its designing and development knew that all due credit must go to an enterprising Russian scientist by the name of Petr Ufimtsev, who was instrumental in developing the early theory behind modern stealth aircraft technology.

The Royal Lindblum ZM-7L’s narrative can be traced back to the first days of strategic bombing during the Second World War.

Posts · by **Yohannes** » Fri May 25, 2018 6:08 am

3. The background

Antecedent “bombers” during the First World War were not very well designed and built nor were they built for a particular purpose. Their designs also rendered them useless even if they were to be built for bombing mission. The aeronautical industry was still young. It was so bad that during the time pilots of these “bombers” would carry and throw bombs by hands at targets down below.

During the interwar years and by the time the Second World War started, faster and stronger bombers could finally bring heavy weapons to the enemy shielded by early-warning radar systems, anti-aircraft guns, and high speed interceptors. During the war, two competing bombing schools of thought were developed by the allied powers. Because it suffered horrendous losses in both aircraft and crews from bombing Germany in daylight, Royal Air Force bombers switched to night bombing. In doing so, they were aided by a small twin-engine bomber design: the de Havilland Mosquito.

In this decentralised bombing method, the Royal Air Force launched the Mosquitos at night in the general direction of the target. The Mosquitos, ejecting fire from their engines, travelled through the skies of Germany without radio support or any large formation aid. They flew high to minimise chance of detection. The forward reconnaissance aircraft fulfilled their path-finding role for those after them. Because of this important role, the Royal Air Force pilots who manned these forward aircraft were the cream of the crop. These pilots were entrusted with ensuring incendiary bombs would be dropped on their targets. Bright amidst the dark sky, the burning fires produced by these incendiary bombs were used as giant torches to allow the main bomber force to quickly identify and strike their targets down below. They would come from different directions to bomb their targets, one by one.

They then escaped quickly from the area.

“Hundreds of bombers would
fly over a single critical or
industrial infrastructure to
drop tonnes and tonnes of
bombs... just one target;
a dam, a bridge... or
a factory...”

Hauptmann Gretel Blücher

The United States Army Air Forces, on the other hand, leaned on daylight bombing raids with hundreds of bombers in tight formation. Manned by ten airservicemen and guarded by thirteen fifty-calibre machine guns, the four-engine Boeing B-17 Flying Fortresses were huge bombers. They carried so much weight for their machine guns ammunition and gunners, that their individual bomb load was the same as that of the smaller twin-engine Mosquito. Escort fighters were not yet designed with enough range to follow these bombers all the way to the heart of the Third Reich, and so these bombers were often being sent without adequate escort presence. Because they were so large, even with their many gun turrets the B-17 bombers were easy targets, ripe for the picking by well armed German interceptors. To complicate things further, they flew in complicated formations because they had to avoid dropping their bombs on each other.

The huge industrial output of the United States, as well as further development in fighter technology, were the two things that allowed the United States Army Air Force to seize the initiative for its bombing campaign in the skies above German controlled Europe. With the aid of a new class of escort fighters, the Strategic Air Forces started to ramp up their sorties with more than a thousand bombers and five hundred escort fighters. Meanwhile, the Royal Air Force Mosquitos suffered a fraction of the losses experienced by the Flying Fortresses. The USAAF ignored the lessons learnt by the RAF that bombing missions could be made more effective by utilising bombers that were harder to detect. Instead, it continued to use large bombers in high altitude until the middle period of the Second Indochina War.

The United States found itself facing a new enemy after the Second World War: the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Billions of Dollars were spent on developing faster, stronger, and bigger bombers; able to carry and deliver more bombs to the enemy. Theoretically, the United States must field better bombers that could deliver powerful atomic bombs deep into Soviet territory. Reformed in 1947, the United States Air Force were presented with two completely dissimilar aircraft designs as possible remedy for this problem.

Designed as a flying wing aircraft, the prototype jet-powered YB-49 heavy bomber could carry the same warload as any larger bomber design; using less power and consequently less fuel. Visualised by an enterprising aircraft designer, Jack Northrop, the all wing design was able to mitigate drag effectively. Sadly, it was considered as too futuristic for its time. The trimmed, sleek efficiency of the YB-49 was defeated by the enormous, beastly Convair B-36 “Peacemaker” strategic bomber. With its four jet engines and six massive pusher propellers, the Peacemaker was one of the few aircraft at the time able to penetrate its way into Soviet territory.

Armed with their sixteen-hundred-millimetre cannons mounted in computer controlled retractable turrets, the Peacemakers were the biggest and most heavily protected United States Air Force bombers ever assembled: it won the battle decisively against the YB-49, with its thirty-nine thousand kilogrammes’ worth of warload. At the time, this was effectively more than ten times the bombing capacity of the Flying Fortress. Further, its huge bomb bay meant it was the only design at the time able to bring the then newly developed H-bombs into Soviet territory.

“To destroy the enemy
air force... by bombing its
bases and aircraft factories
and defeating enemy air forces
attacking... Reich targets.”

Generalfeldmarschall Walden Wever

In the continent of Yohannes itself, far removed from the part of the world where the United States and the Soviet Union reside in, the then Chief of the (Yohannesian) Luftwaffe General Staff, Generalleutnant Walden Wever, realised the mistake that the American had made — for despite the design’s triumph as the chosen United States heavy bomber, the Peacemaker, being first designed as it was during the Second World War, was increasingly becoming obsolete and old. Wever was proven right when, within ten years after the end of the Second World War, jet-powered fighters and missiles began to appear in the sky.

Wever, an early proponent of the theory of strategic bombing as a means to wage war in Yohannes, decided to not look to the USAF for inspiration no more, choosing instead to concentrate on an alternative doctrine by drawing on the lessons learnt by the Royal Air Force during the Second World War: bombing missions could be made more effective by utilising bombers that were harder to detect. It was around this time that the Long Range Striker Act 1958 was successfully tabled through parliament. It called for “the development of a class of long range weapon systems to project the might of Yohannesian industrial output in the rare case that we must defend the cause [sic] of open-minded liberalism.” Appropriations were tabled through; concentrated funding raised earnestly for the aeronautical industry; and research and developments were immediately kick-started.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, as American engineers stripped out the Peacemaker’s complicated defensive gun turrets, the Boeing Company assembled its first Stratofortress for the United States Air Force. The B-52 Stratofortress took its place as the bread and butter of American strategic bombing force, and continues to be a formidable aircraft today. Powered by eight turbojet engines grouped into their four pods, the Stratofortress had ample room along its wings for the then newly released cruise missiles. Like a fighter aircraft, its wings were swept back to combat drag; they were so long that they needed landing gear at the tip.

Bombing tactics for much of the 1950s had not changed since the Second World War. A fleet of large bombers would fly in high altitude formations to target, release their weapons at the same time, and then go back home. It was said at the time by American military experts that the USSR did not have the ability to engage targets above fifteen kilometres. They said that “maximum altitude, not weapons, would keep our bombers safe.” But they were wrong. In 1960, a Lockheed U-2 single-jet engine reconnaissance aircraft was shot down above Soviet sky. It had flown above twenty-one kilometres. Flying thousands of Stratofortresses at fifteen kilometres above Soviet territory would spell immediate death and destruction not for the USSR, but for the attacking Americans themselves.

“To conquer a nation...
first destroy its industry.”

Reichskanzler Rudolf Butler

Back home in the continent of Yohannes, Walden Wever, who by this time had been promoted to Generalfeldmarschall, believed the solution was to fly low and sweep in under the radar system. Limited by the stretch of land and the horizon, ground radar systems discover and identify enemy aircraft in cone shaped patterns. The higher the aircraft are, the longer way out the radar can discover and identify them. Therefore by flying low, Wever believed, Luftwaffe bombers could retard enemy radar detection and arrive over their targets with a smaller amount of enemy resistance.

At the time, most Luftwaffe bomber designs were built to penetrate enemy territory at high altitude, above the speed of sound. The Luftwaffe was very much ill-equipped to put its paper plan into reality. The Long Range Striker project was then only started, and therefore a stop-gap measure was needed. The answer was the already widely available American Boeing B-52 Stratofortress. After procuring the domestic production right for these weapon systems through the World Assembly Patent Office, the Luftwaffe put them through some minor modifications which made them quite good for low level bombing. It would be enough until the time that the Long Range Striker project would produce its first high-technology twenty-first century bomber.

Meanwhile, outside the continent of Yohannes the US Seventh Air Force and the US Navy Task Force 77 conducted their Operation Linebacker II campaign in 1972 to force the Vietnamese Communist Party Central Committee to the negotiating table. For more than a week, hundreds of Stratofortresses bombed the hell out of North Vietnam round the clock. But North Vietnam was not defenceless. The country was protected by USSR imported air defence systems, which forced the Americans to provide escort aircraft and support for more than half of the bombers they sent to North Vietnam. Some of these support aircraft threw cloud of aluminium strips, chaff, to fill the sky and confuse Soviet radar systems on the ground; whilst others, called the “Wild Weasels”, would purposely drew enemy fire onto themselves. They then would strike back with special missiles built to home in on surface to air missile and defensive radar systems.

Back home, the observant Oberkommando der Luftwaffe and Generalfeldmarschall Wever himself believed that it would be nigh impossible for the Americans to attempt any sort of realistic bombing raid against the Soviet Union. Judging from the strength of Communist Vietnam air defences, the nineteen countries would also face similar problems in the case that a conflict would happen in future against even nations from the third world regions. A new weapon system was needed.

The Long Range Striker must be the answer.

“The great questions of the
day... will not be settled by
speeches in parliament... but
by iron and blood..”

Reichskanzler Otto von Thisman

To build the design, in-depth study must be made of exploratory technology at the time. The then Rockwell International B-1 Lancer variable-sweep wing aircraft was one of those aircraft studied by the Luftwaffe. It was fitted with a special terrain guide radar that allowed the aircraft to fly below thirty metres above the ground by matching the ground in front of it. Although the Lancer flew at above the speed of sound, and could do so at low altitude, it was still vulnerable to radar detection. At the same time that the Lancer was first assembled, a new project was being released that would produce an aircraft with even more anti-radar measures. The Americans called it “the stealth fighter”, and it was soon copied by many nation states in many regions with the same industrial capacity as the United States.

The “stealth fighter” could easily enter enemy territory, hit the target, and then escaping safely undetected. Built with the aid of the 1970s’ information technology and computer systems, the Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk twin-engine stealth attack aircraft’s unconventional shapes allow them to bounce enemy radar signal away from targeting systems. However, the Nighthawk could only carry two smart munitions, thus limiting its bombing effectiveness to some extent. Nevertheless, their potency was proven during Operation Desert Shield. They destroyed virtually all of Ba’athist Iraq’s command control sites and ground missile systems. Not a single Nighthawk was identified nor shot down.

Back home in the continent of Yohannes, lessons had been learnt and mistakes rectified. The Long Range Striker project was nearing its end: a prototype had finally been visualised by Luftwaffe engineers. It assimilated research materials stolen from the American “Stealth Fighter” and “Advanced Technology Bomber” projects. Other new attributes included a more stable radar cross-section and better distributed visual profile; lowering electromagnetic discharge and sound in the acoustic domain; and mitigating infrared signature emissivity. In 1992, the first prototype was assembled at Königlich Lindblum facilities in the industrial heart of the Regency of Lindblum. It made such a strong impression on attending Yohannesian financial bigwigs, government technocrats and everyone in between, that they called it:

“The Dreadnought.”

Almost impervious to enemy detection systems, a single Dreadnought can deliver a wide variety of conventional and nuclear munitions from its internally mounted rotating launchers; from cruise missiles to smart munitions and anti ship sea mines. The Dreadnought can fly over its targets with no warning. Their smart munitions are guided by satellite; meaning the aircraft can shoot and bomb at and destroy as many as sixteen enemy targets at the same time. And then it can escape without the enemy knowing what happened.

During the arrival ceremony of the first assembled aircraft on the tarmac of Königlich Lindblum test facility, the weapon system was given the name of the Russian scientist who was instrumental in developing the early theory behind modern stealth aircraft technology. Announcing to the attending financial bigwigs, government technocrats and everyone in between, the Regent of Lindblum Cid Fabool the Ninth formalised her as:

“Petr Ufimtsev.”

“Thank you.”

Posts · by **Yohannes** » Sat May 26, 2018 2:38 am

4. Flight technology

When air hit the wing of a moving aircraft, it is forced to move in two directions: up and down. This creates a high pressure area above the forward area of the wing and below the wing. A low pressure area is then generated after as the wing slopes away, which lifts the wing up whilst the high pressure area formed below pushes the wing. Aerofoils, the shapes of the wings of aircraft, are affected by lift and drag. As the wing pushes through the air travelling against it, a pressure differential is created between the top area of the wing and the bottom area of the wing. This produces lift, as high pressure area attracts low pressure.

Figure 3: When air hit the wing of a moving aircraft.

A conventional aircraft is built with two large wings which support its central fuselage. A tail is built at the rear to act as the aircraft’s horizontal and vertical stabilisers. The information technology revolution and innovation in computer science since the seventies have allowed designers to build better fuselage. Nevertheless, they still produce drag, which not only lower the speed of the aircraft but also put pressure on the wings and increase fuel consumption, thus lowering the maximum distance that the aircraft can fly between takeoff and landing. To increase lift and decrease fuselage drag, Königlich Lindblum GmbH chose the flying wing design for the Long Range Striker project.

A flying wing aircraft can also be called a “self lifter aircraft”, because its physical structure can do just that: lift itself up. When compared with conventional aircraft, the other good thing about the flying wing configuration is that it gives the designer the ability to replace the fuselage with larger wing structure, which means more wing surface area. This gives the aircraft the ability to produce higher and better lift force.

“In comparison to a conventional
aircraft, the whole volume in a
flying wing design is taken by
the wing... drag from the
fuselage is thus taken out of
the picture... and lift is
improved greatly.”

Oberleutnant Clara Hössler

But this comes with a trade-off: the stability of the aircraft. This has always been the main complication with any flying wing design. When the enterprising American designer Jack Northrop designed the Northrop YB-49 jet-powered prototype for the United States Army Air Forces in 1944, it was known for being a dangerously unstable design, and all flying wing designs after it share the same fundamental weakness, supposedly. A flying wing is most stable when banking left or right and pitching up or down. However, it cannot provide enough resistance against yaw; that is, the tendency of an aircraft to fishtail left or right. For a conventional aircraft design, such as the Boeing 777 twin-engine jet airliner, the stabilising forces which give the aircraft — that is, what is pretty much a giant flying lever mechanism in the sky — good control at the end is provided both horizontally and vertically through its tail.

Being an all wing design, a flying wing design cannot enjoy this privilege. Consequently, controlling the surface of the aircraft is much harder. Jack Nothrop’s jet-powered prototypes did have vertical stabilisers. Unlike them, the Long Range Striker prototype does not. Additionally, many conventional bomber designs have huge tails, and these exist for a reason: when radio waves hit the aircraft they will function like giant flat panels. The ZM-7L design does not enjoy this privilege too, and it tries to compensate for these weaknesses by using its twenty-first century computers to control its pitch, roll, and yaw: all with the same set of complex control flap designs that can be found on the rear of the wing.

In other words: the ZM-7L can only fly because it relies entirely on its computer systems. Using the bomber’s collection of modern electronics — such as its air data ports — these computer systems can sense the surrounding environment and aid the bomber’s pilot with input to keep the flying wing design moving safely in the sky. They can be used to compute angles of attack, identify static pressure, sense air loads and side lifts, as well as judge aerodynamic pressures on the ZM-7L, amongst others; and they can do all of these much faster than the pilot could by hand. The collection of computer systems in the aircraft more than make up for the structural weakness that the flying wing design has due to its lack of stabilising tail.

Another compensatory measure on the ZM-7L is the braking system provided by its rudders at the rear. The aircraft can yaw to either side thanks to these identical flaps that can extend themselves up or down. This is why when the bomber is flown, observers will see that both these flaps will be left slightly open; because the whole braking system will not work reliably when they are shut completely. However, during combat operations these flaps are kept fully shut because when left slightly open they will increase the aircraft’s radar signature.

“All those sensing inputs go
into flight control computer...
it then make adjustments to
bring back that stability...
taken out with the tail.”

Hauptmann Isabelle Schöner

When observers look inside from these flaps they will be able to locate the combination of elevators and ailerons used by the bomber: its elevons. In most conventional modern aircraft, elevators and ailerons are respectively located on their horizontal stabilisers and on the trailing edges of their wings; their elevators are used to pitch the aircraft up and down, whilst their ailerons operate in opposite directions to one another so that they can roll the aircraft left and right. The ZM-7L’s elevons combined these functions to control both pitch and roll. If the elevons pitch up or down, the aircraft will pitch opposite to that; if the right elevons pitch down at the same time that the left elevons pitch up, the aircraft will roll to the right and will do the same inversely. This agglomerated functions and organisation is made possible only thanks to the aircraft’s fly by wire technology. The result is that whilst pilots compare flying a heavy bomber like driving a logging truck, flying the ZM-7L feels more like driving a nimble sports car.

Fly by wire takes input from the pilot and other aircraft sensors. They are then being fed for a series of computers that produce an output to a hydraulic actuator; this moves the flight controls for the pilot. Any external forces acting on the aircraft such as wind gusts are counteracted automatically and dealt with immediately by the aircraft’s supercomputers; that is, the job of the computers are to make the aircraft perform according to how the pilot wants it to perform. Thanks to its specialised fly by wire system the ZM-7L can maintain the traditional controls and maneuvers that can be found commonly in a conventional aircraft design.

Royal Lindblum ZM-7L Strategic Bomber [MT]

Royal Lindblum ZM-7L Strategic Bomber [MT]

1. Design overview and specifications

2. The liberal nation’s bomber

3. The background

4. Flight technology

Who is online