B-58

More proof of a German connection?
http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.co...er/gal4963.htm

Rob Arndt wrote:
Darrell S wrote:
If you want to see and read more about the Hustler, click on
the link to my B-58 web site, below.
Don't forget to sign the guest book. The More B-58 Pictures Annex link
takes you to 3 more pages of pictures and text.

--

Darrell R. Schmidt
B-58 Hustler History: (see below)
http://members.cox.net/dschmidt1/

The Lippisch connection and F-102/F-106 delta predecessors aside, the
B-58 is a great a/c. My USAF neighbor worked on the machine and he
still loves that plane above all other US postwar bombers.

Despite my constant German rhetoric I love the B-52 Stratofortress,
especially the D-model from Vietnam with the bullet nose and tall tail.

Hey, at least Dan can't complain about that!

Good luck with your site Herr Schmidt.

Rob

wrote:
More proof of a German connection?
http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.co...er/gal4963.htm

That is pretty original and funny... yet historically and factually,
Dr. Lippisch is firmly established postwar with Convair and their
designs.

Thanks for the humor though... impressive!

Rob

Rob Arndt wrote:
Well the XB-70 was a class above the B58,
but the Ruskies may have had something
better.

Ken

What a/c are you referring to? The Tu-128 Fiddler interceptor or the
Tu-22 Blinder bomber (both based on the failed Tu-98 Backfin)?

Tysbin had its own design based on the NM-1- the RSR:

http://vif2ne.ru/nvi/stuff/Bask/mode...ybin_rsr_2.jpg

Rob

Thanks...
IIRC the Ruskies built something similiar to
the XB70 though smaller, I'm sorry I couldn't
find an online ref. and it was obviously not
deployed, it may be rumor. I'll reiterate,
"may have had something better".
Regards
Ken

Not that its all that germane to topic but the image of B 58's on a
one-way to Moscow in Fail Safe (negative reverse images as I recall)
comes to mind. Guess it was known to more than just the
crews.....................Doc
m wrote:
Hi Darrel

Darrell S wrote:
If you want to see and read more about the Hustler, click on
the link to my B-58 web site, below.
Don't forget to sign the guest book. The More B-58 Pictures Annex link
takes you to 3 more pages of pictures and text.
Darrell R. Schmidt
B-58 Hustler History: (see below)
http://members.cox.net/dschmidt1/

Here's another interesting link,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-58_Hustler

As I understand it, the B58 was a high
speed - high altitude bomber that entered
service about Mar/15/1960, with nil stealth
capability. Gary Power's U2 was shot down
May/1/1960, and had some stealth paint,
that the Ruskies managed to circumvent.
So 2 months after entering service, the
B58 became a *low altitude penetration*
bomber, with enough range for a one
way trip into the USSR, effectively
rendering it a kamikaze bomber.
I think the crews knew that and it's their
courage that helped keep us safe during
the transition to ICBM's.

IMO it was as sexy as anything that flew
but it was not a good warplane because
it was difficult to adapt, while the B52
could carry stand-off weapons and make
it home, though in hindsight, it filled a
vital deterrence gap in the early 1960's,
that was equivalent to the B52 swarm,
depending on gravity bombs.
Regards
Ken

wrote:
Not that its all that germane to topic but the image of B 58's on a
one-way to Moscow in Fail Safe (negative reverse images as I recall)
comes to mind. Guess it was known to more than just the
crews.....................Doc

I can add that the seating configuration in
the Fail-Safe Movies Vindicator bomber
isn't a B58, but the shots of the B58 take-
off with afterburner are awesome, and a
wee bit of the formation flying is super!
Ken

m wrote:
Hi Darrel

Darrell S wrote:
If you want to see and read more about the Hustler, click on
the link to my B-58 web site, below.
Don't forget to sign the guest book. The More B-58 Pictures Annex link
takes you to 3 more pages of pictures and text.
Darrell R. Schmidt
B-58 Hustler History: (see below)
http://members.cox.net/dschmidt1/

Here's another interesting link,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-58_Hustler

As I understand it, the B58 was a high
speed - high altitude bomber that entered
service about Mar/15/1960, with nil stealth
capability. Gary Power's U2 was shot down
May/1/1960, and had some stealth paint,
that the Ruskies managed to circumvent.
So 2 months after entering service, the
B58 became a *low altitude penetration*
bomber, with enough range for a one
way trip into the USSR, effectively
rendering it a kamikaze bomber.
I think the crews knew that and it's their
courage that helped keep us safe during
the transition to ICBM's.

IMO it was as sexy as anything that flew
but it was not a good warplane because
it was difficult to adapt, while the B52
could carry stand-off weapons and make
it home, though in hindsight, it filled a
vital deterrence gap in the early 1960's,
that was equivalent to the B52 swarm,
depending on gravity bombs.
Regards
Ken

thats right, the pilots were side by side. I recall the fighters that
were scrambled in an attempt to shoot them down were Voodoos. I
remember them spiraling out of the sky after running out of fuel in the
film (carrying thier hapless pilots with them).................Doc
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
wrote:
Not that its all that germane to topic but the image of B 58's on a
one-way to Moscow in Fail Safe (negative reverse images as I recall)
comes to mind. Guess it was known to more than just the
crews.....................Doc

I can add that the seating configuration in
the Fail-Safe Movies Vindicator bomber
isn't a B58, but the shots of the B58 take-
off with afterburner are awesome, and a
wee bit of the formation flying is super!
Ken

m wrote:
Hi Darrel

Darrell S wrote:
If you want to see and read more about the Hustler, click on
the link to my B-58 web site, below.
Don't forget to sign the guest book. The More B-58 Pictures Annex link
takes you to 3 more pages of pictures and text.
Darrell R. Schmidt
B-58 Hustler History: (see below)
http://members.cox.net/dschmidt1/

Here's another interesting link,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-58_Hustler

As I understand it, the B58 was a high
speed - high altitude bomber that entered
service about Mar/15/1960, with nil stealth
capability. Gary Power's U2 was shot down
May/1/1960, and had some stealth paint,
that the Ruskies managed to circumvent.
So 2 months after entering service, the
B58 became a *low altitude penetration*
bomber, with enough range for a one
way trip into the USSR, effectively
rendering it a kamikaze bomber.
I think the crews knew that and it's their
courage that helped keep us safe during
the transition to ICBM's.

IMO it was as sexy as anything that flew
but it was not a good warplane because
it was difficult to adapt, while the B52
could carry stand-off weapons and make
it home, though in hindsight, it filled a
vital deterrence gap in the early 1960's,
that was equivalent to the B52 swarm,
depending on gravity bombs.
Regards
Ken

Ken S. Tucker wrote:
Rob Arndt wrote:
Well the XB-70 was a class above the B58,
but the Ruskies may have had something
better.

Ken

What a/c are you referring to? The Tu-128 Fiddler interceptor or the
Tu-22 Blinder bomber (both based on the failed Tu-98 Backfin)?

Tysbin had its own design based on the NM-1- the RSR:

http://vif2ne.ru/nvi/stuff/Bask/mode...ybin_rsr_2.jpg

Rob

Thanks...
IIRC the Ruskies built something similiar to
the XB70 though smaller, I'm sorry I couldn't
find an online ref. and it was obviously not
deployed, it may be rumor. I'll reiterate,
"may have had something better".
Regards
Ken


Ken,

That was the Su-100, a.k.a. "T-4":
http://www.pilotfriend.com/photo_albums/potty/19.htm

In response, the US would have used the XF-108 Rapier as a B-70 escort:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...108_mockup.jpg

However, ALL these aircraft projects were cancelled...

Rob

Rob Arndt wrote:
wrote:
More proof of a German connection?
http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.co...er/gal4963.htm

That is pretty original and funny... yet historically and factually,
Dr. Lippisch is firmly established postwar with Convair and their
designs.

Thanks for the humor though... impressive!

Rob

Besides Lippisch, the real pioneer of delta craft (not counting German
gliders) was Roland Payen. He had a multitude of delta designs that
even surpassed Lippisch in terms of futuristic configurations and the
Nazis captured his unflown Pa-22 in France:

http://www.strange-mecha.com/aircraft/Ente/pa22.JPG

This was originally to be a ramjet fighter powered by the Melot ramjet,
but that engine failed so Payen just used a prop one instead.

The funny story here is that no one told the Luftwaffe pilot taking the
a/c that it had never been flown. He waved them aside with arrogance
and just just flew it back to Germany where it was at Rechlin for a
time before it was to be returned back to France. The Allies bombed its
storage area and so Payen lost the a/c...

I don't think it had any influence on the Lippisch P.XIII fighters, nor
the DM-1 design.

It is, however, one of hundreds of delta designs Payen had concieved
and yet he is historically all but forgotten compared to Lippisch. Sad,
but true.

Rob

Darrell

We couldn't catch you but in a front quarter attack we ran a Pk of
about 98%. F-89J and MB-1 Atomic Air to Air Rocket.

Big John
`````````````````````````````````````````````````

On Wed, 5 Jul 2006 10:03:39 -0700, "Darrell S"
wrote:

You are correct. By the time the B-58 became operational the Russian radar
and missile defense systems improved to the point that high altitude, mach
2, attacks would have been suicide. The operational tactics changed to high
subsonic low altitude attack which made the mach 2 capability of the B-58
relatively unusable for combat. All the design features necessary for mach
2 flight such as the narrow fuselage made it impractical to add terrain
avoidance radar for IFR low altitude.

We practiced our low altitude high speed tactics in Oil Burner routes (now
Olive Branch) at 600 knots on the deck. Great sport.

Rob Arndt wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:
Rob Arndt wrote:
Well the XB-70 was a class above the B58,
but the Ruskies may have had something
better.

Ken

What a/c are you referring to? The Tu-128 Fiddler interceptor or the
Tu-22 Blinder bomber (both based on the failed Tu-98 Backfin)?

Tysbin had its own design based on the NM-1- the RSR:

http://vif2ne.ru/nvi/stuff/Bask/mode...ybin_rsr_2.jpg

Rob

Thanks...
IIRC the Ruskies built something similiar to
the XB70 though smaller, I'm sorry I couldn't
find an online ref. and it was obviously not
deployed, it may be rumor. I'll reiterate,
"may have had something better".
Regards
Ken


Ken,

That was the Su-100, a.k.a. "T-4":
http://www.pilotfriend.com/photo_albums/potty/19.htm

Hmmm, T-4 bears some superficial resemblance, though it apparenly lacks
the VG wing-tips and double fin, is smaller and never demonstrated
quite as high a speed. I've never heard "compression left" directly
associated with the T-4, so if anybody has, I'd love to hear it. And
don't ge me started about that nose-droop thing. The B-70 used some
kind of motorized wing-screen which always seemed more preferable to
the big pivoting nose on T-4 which seemed more aesthetically and
functionally appealing. Does anybody know what T-4's operating
altitude was? Or its mission? I heard that T-4 was designed to strike
at enemy warships in waters along the Russian frontier, as opposed to
the B-70's strategic strike mission. From the stories floating around
the net, it appears that the T-4 was less a Soviet weapon to be used
against the West than one to be used by Sukhoi against Tupolev, hinting
that Russian aerospace was probably inundated with all sorts of
warplanes and making it inevitable that one looking somewhat like one
of our own would emerge.

In response, the US would have used the XF-108 Rapier as a B-70 escort:

....which is confirmed by everybody else, including WPAFB website, but
I've always been skeptical of that given what I've read in Anderson's
"To Fly and Fight". While describing his work on the parasite fighter
program, he remarks on SAC's traditional aversion to escorts - noting
that bomber pros claim that they can go it alone and then pay the price
when that proves optimistic. (Anderson gave the Korean experience for
B-29's as an example.) Seems to me that the USAF requested the B-70 to
have high-speed/-alt performance in order to obviate the need for an
escort. So why the F-108?