North American XB-70A Valkyrie

[Gammera]

Nanashi I belive three of these were built. (David correct me if I'm wrong) Two of them were crashed. One, #2 in the midair collision were they lost the tails, and one #1 crash landed gear up. I think it was later stress tested to death.

I always wondered if the #2 plane could have been saved by lowereing the wings.

[Retracting Head Ter Ter]

Nanashi I belive three of these were built. (David correct me if I'm wrong) Two of them were crashed. One, #2 in the midair collision were they lost the tails, and one #1 crash landed gear up. I think it was later stress tested to death.

I always wondered if the #2 plane could have been saved by lowereing the wings.

Only 2 were built. AV1 and AV2.

AV2 was in subsonic flight when the tail was clipped, I don't think lowering the wings would have done anything other then worsen the situation.

AV1 (the onein the museum) wasn't rated for Mach 3 flight.

[David Hingtgen]

Actually, the wings WERE down. Only half-way, but still down. Even full down wouldn't have been enough, for they could only stabilize, not control. #2 lost like 99% of the right stab, and probably half of the left. No amount of wing-fold could replace 3/4 of your v.stab area being lost. Plus the fact that entire folded portion of the right wing was gone too. We're talking loss of 70% of all control surfaces. Sequence was right wingtip, right stab, left stab. Some were totally gone, others only partially. But pretty much everything was hit. ::searches hard drive::

Here, best pic of #2 in the initial pitch-up:

Edited April 1, 2004 by David Hingtgen

[David Hingtgen]

A few secs later, after aerodynamic forces have ripped off more parts, it's in an inverted flat spin. Left stab gone, right stab just the root is left, and you can see there's a lot less right wing than there should be (compare to the undamaged left wing). (remember the plane's upside down, so left is right, etc)

[Angel's Fury]

This is kinda off topic. David I was fortunate enough to have a copy of your explaination on FSW. It's a good thing I printed it before the old MW forum was replaced. Btw, those are cool pics that you posted above.

Edited April 1, 2004 by Angel's Fury

[David Hingtgen]

Please send me a copy of my own FSW thread if you can, any way you can. Heck, just photocopy it so I can retype it here.

Anyways---here's another XB-70 pic, time frame inbetween the first two:

[Cruel Angel's Thesis]

Not to get off topic, but several planes have gone supersonic over the U.S. many times, we just don't know about them. I will throw out a couple, back in the '90's there was Stove Pipe it was going supersonic over California as it went to its desitnation, I belive Nellis AFB.

Just recently (back in Jan) a FAA controller in Alburquerque NM, had a small talk with a plane that refused to tell what type it was and its true altitude. Only thing revealed was that it was Lockheed Test 2334 and it was going supersonic at Flight Level 60. Then it told the controller it was heading back to Vegas then to somewhere in the Nellis Range, the only places in Nellis for landing is the TTR and AFFTC Det. 3.

Several times when the SR-71 was still flying they set several across the nation records involving them going supersonic over the contry.

Like i said not to get off topic, but the whole can't go supersonic over the US is rather laughable, it seems to be done on a regualr basis, also when we had the ATF trials those planes did go supersonic. So i don't think its a matter of you can't go supersonic, you just need to watch your how high you are when you do it.

Oh by the way nice pics David. Also wow on the Valkyrie drawing by Studio Nue.

I thought the Valkyrie project was retired due to the fact the Russians had a MiG (forgot which one) that could up to Mach 3 and as such the Valkyrie was bait. Then again it was said the same for the Blackbird, but they never caught here eithier. Oh David you forgot the other factor Blackbird had in avoiding SAMs was Music.

Cruel Angel's Thesis

[Chronocidal]

Hehe... as far as supersonic flight goes, I think at least a large chunk of the southern half of California is fair game due to all the flight research that goes on there. Edwards AFB has planes going supersonic routinely, but it's isolated enough to not cause too much ruckus. They start their annual airshow off with a sonic boom, traditionally by Chuck Yeager (dunno if he's done it recently though, last time I know of for certain was the 50th anniversary celebration in '97). Also, they're actually experimenting with making sonic booms less noisy.. it has to do with blunting certain aspects of the aircraft, mainly the nose.. they had a pic of the ugliest T-38 I've ever seen, with a nose cone twice the thickness of the rest of the plane.

But anyway, I did have one question.. I can't tell for sure, but is one of those break-up sequence photos reversed? One of them looks like the plane is missing the left wingtip, instead of the right.

[Zentrandude]

proly got reversed. only thing bothered me about the pics is they look like someone touched up the pics with a ink pen to cover where it broke. could be just the photo came out thou.

[Anubis]

Not to get off topic, but several planes have gone supersonic over the U.S. many times, we just don't know about them. I will throw out a couple, back in the '90's there was Stove Pipe it was going supersonic over California as it went to its desitnation, I belive Nellis AFB.

Just recently (back in Jan) a FAA controller in Alburquerque NM, had a small talk with a plane that refused to tell what type it was and its true altitude. Only thing revealed was that it was Lockheed Test 2334 and it was going supersonic at Flight Level 60. Then it told the controller it was heading back to Vegas then to somewhere in the Nellis Range, the only places in Nellis for landing is the TTR and AFFTC Det. 3.

Several times when the SR-71 was still flying they set several across the nation records involving them going supersonic over the contry.

Like i said not to get off topic, but the whole can't go supersonic over the US is rather laughable, it seems to be done on a regualr basis, also when we had the ATF trials those planes did go supersonic. So i don't think its a matter of you can't go supersonic, you just need to watch your how high you are when you do it.

Oh by the way nice pics David. Also wow on the Valkyrie drawing by Studio Nue.

I thought the Valkyrie project was retired due to the fact the Russians had a MiG (forgot which one) that could up to Mach 3 and as such the Valkyrie was bait. Then again it was said the same for the Blackbird, but they never caught here eithier. Oh David you forgot the other factor Blackbird had in avoiding SAMs was Music.

Cruel Angel's Thesis

Probably from Groom Dry Lake (Area 51), out in the Nellis Range.

[ewilen]

Chronocidal, I think you may be referring to an ugly F-5E

http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/F-1...C03-0229-6.html

It's the F-5 Shaped Sonic Boom Demonstration (SSBD) aircraft.

[David Hingtgen]

Which is why I put the "of course there's exceptions" clause in there.

On one of the SR-71 record runs, it got too low and close to LA before slowing down, and there were like 200 "sonic boom damage" claims that day.

Ok, I think the rule is "No supersonic flights over POPULATED land". And of course populated means so many people per square mile, and ranchers always complain it spooks the cows, so animals count in the population rule... Nothing's simple when it comes to govt regs.

There's also established supersonic corridors across the Atlantic. Concordes also rigidly adhere to the "accel" and "decel" points off the coasts. Usually about 100 miles off-shore, but varies due to temp, pressure, etc.

Edited April 1, 2004 by David Hingtgen

[Angel's Fury]

PM sent David. It sure is a long one.

[hellohikaru]

Take a look at this kit...now imagine the size of it

http://hsfeatures.com/xb70hs_1.htm

oh...how i wish to pose it next to a Yamato.

[David Hingtgen]

Dang that's huge. I have an unbuilt 1/72 under the bed. A sratch-built 1/48 is just insane. Since the pics are good (and most pics of the real thing are 40 years old) it actually looks better than the real thing!

1/48 B-1B is about the biggest jet kit I know (though I'd have to calculate it out against the vac-formed 1/72 747's) , a 1/48 XB-70.....

PS---while the US was heavily investing in an SST, there was lots of work done on reducing or eliminating the effects of the sonic boom. Actually, a lot of the designs looked rather XB-70-ish! Lockheed did the most work. Of course, whenever an aircraft that large changes attitude, there's potential for a superboom.

Superboom: when the sonic booms generated from different parts of the plane happen to impact the same point on the ground simultaneously. They don't cancel each other out, they add to the effect. BOOM! Most often happens to a Concorde when it enters a tight turn. Concorde's also one of the few planes long enough to have a distinctive double-boom. (XB-70 would certainly as well, if anyone ever heard it at low supersonic speeds)

Edited April 2, 2004 by David Hingtgen

[Retracting Head Ter Ter]

Take a look at this kit...now imagine the size of it

http://hsfeatures.com/xb70hs_1.htm

oh...how i wish to pose it next to a Yamato.

DANG! That is one BEAUTIFUL model.

The pictures are very well taken too. Those shots of the nose make it look better then the real thing.

[Angel's Fury]

Take a look at this kit...now imagine the size of it

http://hsfeatures.com/xb70hs_1.htm

oh...how i wish to pose it next to a Yamato.

DANG! That is one BEAUTIFUL model.

The pictures are very well taken too. Those shots of the nose make it look better then the real thing.

INDEED!!!

[sktchrtst2002]

HEH, QUICK SKETCH!

Edited April 5, 2004 by sktchrtst2002

[Boxer]

I like your idea. But where are the arms?

Reminds me of the VB-X

[JValk]

that model belongs in the Thunderbirds show!

[Aurora-7]

that thing is a COMPLETE failure. If Mig-25's can shoot it down....

It's because of the XB-70 that the USSR developed the Mig-25. It had the XB-70 in mind for the 25's primary role.

Edited April 6, 2004 by Aurora-7

[nathan]

Ok granted the art is kind of cool but this is related to Macross how?

[imode]

Valkyrie...

Valkyrie...

See the relation now?

[nathan]

Doesnt make it Macross.

[Retracting Head Ter Ter]

Doesnt make it Macross.

A model of the XB-70 made an appearance in DYRL. So its in by a technicality.

[David Hingtgen]

And this is a *Studio Nue* drawing. Of a Valkyrie. That appeared in DYRL.

[imode]

And it's Kawamori's favorite plane.

The design of the VF-1 is not based around it, but he liked the XB-70 enough to steal the name.

[Boxer]

I wonder hopw many blood vessels burst when the designators resisted the urge to call the VF-1 the "Valkyrie II".

[nathan]

Where does it appear in DYRL? If it's in there then it's macross but only because it's in there not because Studio Nue drew it or its his favorate plane.

[Boxer]

It appears with the VF-X-4 Model.

This screenshot is borrowed from the newbie questions when I asked the same thing there:

[Tekkaman Blade]

Looks like a paper airplane

[David Hingtgen]

Well yeah, an incredibly sleek delta-winged all-white plane with a nearly flat and featureless upper surface probably will end up looking a lot like your standard "delta" paper airplane.

[Skull Leader]

Where does it appear in DYRL? If it's in there then it's macross but only because it's in there not because Studio Nue drew it or its his favorate plane.

Is there a problem with us discussing the XB-70? It was what inspired Shoji Kawamori to do aircraft design. Had he not done that, he never would've designed the VF-1.

[muswp1]

Dang that's huge. I have an unbuilt 1/72 under the bed. A sratch-built 1/48 is just insane. Since the pics are good (and most pics of the real thing are 40 years old) it actually looks better than the real thing!

1/48 B-1B is about the biggest jet kit I know (though I'd have to calculate it out against the vac-formed 1/72 747's) , a 1/48 XB-70.....

PS---while the US was heavily investing in an SST, there was lots of work done on reducing or eliminating the effects of the sonic boom. Actually, a lot of the designs looked rather XB-70-ish! Lockheed did the most work. Of course, whenever an aircraft that large changes attitude, there's potential for a superboom.

Superboom: when the sonic booms generated from different parts of the plane happen to impact the same point on the ground simultaneously. They don't cancel each other out, they add to the effect. BOOM! Most often happens to a Concorde when it enters a tight turn. Concorde's also one of the few planes long enough to have a distinctive double-boom. (XB-70 would certainly as well, if anyone ever heard it at low supersonic speeds)

Actually, the biggest mass produced model plane kit is Monogram's 1/72 B-36D/RB-36H kit. I think the wingspan on it is about 40 inches with a 32 inch fuselage. I have it in my attic somewhere. Just for jets, I think the 1/48 B-1B (I think Revell made it) is the biggest.

[David Hingtgen]

While vac-formed, and not *mass* produced (but easily available), the Transport Wings 1/72 747-400 has a 38.5 inch fuselage, 35.5 inch wings, and has a fuselage several times the size of a B-36's.

The 1/48 B-1B is Revell. A local shop has one on their top shelf. I look at it every time.