B-70 Paint scheme

Here is a good "what if" question. If the B-70 had gone into widespread SAC
use in the 60s and beyond, what is the best guess as to how it would have been
painted for operational use? Black like the SR, white like the two XB models,
gray, etc? I doubt it would have had the SAC cammo scheme, since it would not
have done any low level flying.

W. Woodruff

(TWINMAKER) wrote in message ...
Here is a good "what if" question. If the B-70 had gone into widespread SAC
use in the 60s and beyond, what is the best guess as to how it would have been
painted for operational use? Black like the SR, white like the two XB models,
gray, etc? I doubt it would have had the SAC cammo scheme, since it would not
have done any low level flying.

W. Woodruff

If it had gone into service with it's original design mission of a
mach3 high altitude strategic bomber, then it would've still been
painted white. The reason why is that the white paint it used was a
special type called "Anti-flash white". To protect it from the thermal
pulse of a detonating B53 TN bomb(it was 9MT). You see, the USAFT
learned the high pacific atmospheric tests that such protection was
needed. In one test ,a B-36 had it airframe heated by over 3000
degrees fahrenheit, resulting in structural damage to it's tailplane.
In another test a B-52B (52-00013 I think-BUFFDRIVER would know more
about this) also thermally induced damaged to both it's airframe and
systems.

The TBC (Toss Bomb Computer) settings for the weapon, airspeed,
altitude, etc. included calculation for safe separation from the
blast. When the aircraft were painted in camo for the SEA war, the
entire nuclear delivery manual had to be re-calculated, because the
dark paint absorbed the flash much more than the reflective bare
metal. Greater safe separation distance was required.

Frankly that scared the hell out of me. Hard to realize the whole
business was calculated to such close tolerances.


Ed Rasimus

How much more distance did you need with the camo paint scheme?

I remember watching F-4s heave practice bombs in Spain simulating nukes. I
assume the nukes simulated, this was in the late 70s, were a bit smaller that 1
MT, but even so the F-4 seemed to not be very far away at time of detonation.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

I remember watching F-4s heave practice bombs in Spain simulating nukes. I
assume the nukes simulated, this was in the late 70s, were a bit smaller that
1
MT, but even so the F-4 seemed to not be very far away at time of detonation.


But just think how it would have been for one of those Navy Skyraiders, lofting
a nuke..


Ron
Tucson AZ
C-421 air ambulance

You're right. It wasn't just the strategic aircraft either. When I
entered training for the F-105, the airplanes were still polished bare
metal. The nuclear weapon of choice was the B-28 or B-43, each of them
rated at 1 MT. Deliveries were usually programmed for some sort of low
altitude low-angle toss with a wing-over escape maneuver to run away
at about 135 degrees from original run-in heading.


One of my friends showed me a video of him in an F-16 dropping one of those
Special shapes, from an F-16 at Tonapah. Did a 40 degree loft, got the bomb
within 20 m.




Ron
Tucson AZ
C-421 air ambulance