![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Radar aimed or crew served???
Bruce R "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message ... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Didn't make any difference. The supersonic speed going forward versus the
bullet speed going backwards, meant that it was totally eneffectual. Luckily, they never were in a position where it was needed. But, it was radar controlled. Ron "Bruce R" wrote in message ... Radar aimed or crew served??? Bruce R "Mitchell Holman" wrote in message ... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Ron Monroe" wrote in message ink.net... Didn't make any difference. The supersonic speed going forward versus the bullet speed going backwards, meant that it was totally eneffectual. Luckily, they never were in a position where it was needed. But, it was radar controlled. Ron Did it actually attack at supersonic speeds? If so, how do you drop a nuke at that speed? Bruce R |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't know the methods involved. According to Jay Miller's book on the
B-58, Aerograph 4, they did several drop tests at supersonic speed, one being 1.4 M at 40,000 feet, so, it could be done. It sounds like pod separation was very flat and stable. There may be more in the book about mission and attack profiles, but, I haven't come accross them yet. Ron "Bruce R" wrote in message ... "Ron Monroe" wrote in message ink.net... Didn't make any difference. The supersonic speed going forward versus the bullet speed going backwards, meant that it was totally eneffectual. Luckily, they never were in a position where it was needed. But, it was radar controlled. Ron Did it actually attack at supersonic speeds? If so, how do you drop a nuke at that speed? Bruce R |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
True. But while it could drop its bomb pod at supersonic speeds it quickly
became a suicide mission to penetrate Soviet airspace at high altitude even at Mach 2. Soviet radar and missiles would blow us out of the sky. Modifications were made to use low altitude drogue chute retarded bombs to get below the radar/missile coverage. So the supersonic ability of the Hustler became somewhat useless as a weapon system. We did gain a lot of data on supersonic flight from the Hustler. -- Darrell R. Schmidt B-58 Hustler Web Site http://members.cox.net/dschmidt1/ Cadet Class 55-I Web Site http://pilotclass55india.org/ "Ron Monroe" wrote in message link.net... I don't know the methods involved. According to Jay Miller's book on the B-58, Aerograph 4, they did several drop tests at supersonic speed, one being 1.4 M at 40,000 feet, so, it could be done. It sounds like pod separation was very flat and stable. There may be more in the book about mission and attack profiles, but, I haven't come accross them yet. Ron "Bruce R" wrote in message ... "Ron Monroe" wrote in message ink.net... Didn't make any difference. The supersonic speed going forward versus the bullet speed going backwards, meant that it was totally eneffectual. Luckily, they never were in a position where it was needed. But, it was radar controlled. Ron Did it actually attack at supersonic speeds? If so, how do you drop a nuke at that speed? Bruce R |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Ron Monroe" wrote in message
ink.net... Didn't make any difference. The supersonic speed going forward versus the bullet speed going backwards, meant that it was totally eneffectual. Luckily, they never were in a position where it was needed. But, it was radar controlled. Ron Not quite, Ron. Say the B-58 is traveling at 1,000 MPH and has a tail cannon with a muzzle velocity of 1,000 MPH. In relation to a ground observer, if the cannon was fired just as it flew overhead of the observer, the cannon shell would stop and free fall towards the observer while the delivery aircraft flew away from the shell at 1,000 MPH departure rate. But.... if a fighter was pursuing the B-58 at 1,000 MPH he would fly into the cannon shell at a closure rate of 1,000 MPH. BLOOOOey!!!! goes the fighter. Everything is relative!!! |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ok, then dispute it with Jay Miller and every other article I have ever read
on the gun. They said the gun was inefective. And remember, eeven with that fighter closing in at 1000mph, the bullet is losing altitude. Probably the only way the fighter would get hit is if it was in a dive. Another thing, which they have proven with the SR-71, the closure rate isn't too good if the chase aircraft isn't flying any faster than the aircraft he is pursuing. Even if he was 100mph faster, by the time he caught up, the plane would probably be over a friendly country. I don't think they had too many aircraft that good intercept the B-58, when the B-58 was flying. Everytrhing is relative, but you have to look at it in the proper perspective. BLOOEY! Ron "Panic" wrote in message ... "Ron Monroe" wrote in message ink.net... Didn't make any difference. The supersonic speed going forward versus the bullet speed going backwards, meant that it was totally eneffectual. Luckily, they never were in a position where it was needed. But, it was radar controlled. Ron Not quite, Ron. Say the B-58 is traveling at 1,000 MPH and has a tail cannon with a muzzle velocity of 1,000 MPH. In relation to a ground observer, if the cannon was fired just as it flew overhead of the observer, the cannon shell would stop and free fall towards the observer while the delivery aircraft flew away from the shell at 1,000 MPH departure rate. But.... if a fighter was pursuing the B-58 at 1,000 MPH he would fly into the cannon shell at a closure rate of 1,000 MPH. BLOOOOey!!!! goes the fighter. Everything is relative!!! |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Ron Monroe" wrote in
thlink.net: Ok, then dispute it with Jay Miller and every other article I have ever read on the gun. They said the gun was inefective. And remember, eeven with that fighter closing in at 1000mph, the bullet is losing altitude. Probably the only way the fighter would get hit is if it was in a dive. Another thing, which they have proven with the SR-71, the closure rate isn't too good if the chase aircraft isn't flying any faster than the aircraft he is pursuing. Even if he was 100mph faster, by the time he caught up, the plane would probably be over a friendly country. I don't think they had too many aircraft that good intercept the B-58, when the B-58 was flying. Everytrhing is relative, but you have to look at it in the proper perspective. BLOOEY! Ron Gravity acts on a bullet whether it is in forward flight or free fall. A tailgunner would have to take into account leading his target for both target motion and the effect of gravity on his rounds. If anything, the realtive speeds of the pursuing fighter and the tail gunners rounds would be slightly higher in the B-58 case hypothesized here, since the rounds would not be slowed toward their target by drag as they moved horizontally through the air, only the vertical acceleration due to gravity would occur. Mind-messingly fun to envision... =) "Panic" wrote in message ... "Ron Monroe" wrote in message ink.net... Didn't make any difference. The supersonic speed going forward versus the bullet speed going backwards, meant that it was totally eneffectual. Luckily, they never were in a position where it was needed. But, it was radar controlled. Ron Not quite, Ron. Say the B-58 is traveling at 1,000 MPH and has a tail cannon with a muzzle velocity of 1,000 MPH. In relation to a ground observer, if the cannon was fired just as it flew overhead of the observer, the cannon shell would stop and free fall towards the observer while the delivery aircraft flew away from the shell at 1,000 MPH departure rate. But.... if a fighter was pursuing the B-58 at 1,000 MPH he would fly into the cannon shell at a closure rate of 1,000 MPH. BLOOOOey!!!! goes the fighter. Everything is relative!!! |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Ron Monroe" skrev i en meddelelse thlink.net... Even if he was 100mph faster, by the time he caught up, the plane would probably be over a friendly country. or the fighter would have run out of fuel . . . |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Hustler, concluded - b58 plan.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman[_2_] | Aviation Photos | 0 | March 8th 07 09:05 AM |
The Hustler, concluded - b58 29.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman[_2_] | Aviation Photos | 0 | March 8th 07 09:05 AM |
The Hustler, concluded - b58 27.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman[_2_] | Aviation Photos | 0 | March 8th 07 09:04 AM |
The Hustler, concluded - b58 26.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman[_2_] | Aviation Photos | 0 | March 8th 07 09:04 AM |
The Hustler, concluded - b58 25.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman[_2_] | Aviation Photos | 0 | March 8th 07 09:04 AM |