It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

XB-70 "Valkyrie Bomber" Pictures...

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 09:49 PM
link   
The photo shoot didn't cause the program to die. It was already on it way out. The main cause was the fact that the Soviets had build AA missiles and aircraft (MiG 25) to counter it.

Having a bomber that could go Mach 3+ is nice, unless the other guy has a missile that's faster.




posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 10:39 PM
link   
Whenever I see pics of the XB70 Valkyrie I think: that was one of the coolest and meanest looking planes ever. It’s such a shame that it went the way of the dodo bird, but I guess times change.

I always thought a modified XB70 would make the ultimate private business jet for someone ultra rich person looking for the fastest way to travel price no object


[edit on 17-3-2005 by warpboost]



posted on Apr, 28 2005 @ 01:33 AM
link   
The XB-70 program was ended not because of the crash. It is a story involving President JFK and Air Force Cheif of Staff Curtis LeMay. Kelly Johnson, head of the Skunk Works was pitching the SR-71 to the CIA and JFK and the question was brought up asking if the SR-71 could be converted to a long range bomber and Richard Bissell, CIA, told JFK that the bomber version was already on the drawing boards. Shortly after the XB-70 was cut from ten birds to four. Then cancled all together. This is straight out of the book "Skunk Works" writen by Ben Rich, Kelly Johnson's hand pick to run the Skunk Works after him.



posted on Apr, 28 2005 @ 07:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Godfather of Conspira
Alleged Aurora Sighting:




I thought this photo had been de-bunked as a photoshop of the original which was 3 F-111. I am sure the original has been on the net with the de-bunking.

If you notice the re-fuel boom coming out of the tail area of the KC-135 to the aircraft does not look right how it meets with the aircraft.

Anyone able to help me out with this?



[edit on 28-4-2005 by Popeye]



posted on Apr, 28 2005 @ 07:52 AM
link   
The B-70 at Dayton is in the experimental hanger, you have to be at the museum at opening and sign up for the limited number of passes granted to get over there. Be prepared to show them your driver's licence.

It is a damned impressive airplane close up; dominates every other aircraft around. The cockpit must be 20 feet off the ground.

Maintanance on it's six huge engines and the fact that it could not be scrambled at a moment's notice like the B-52 as well as the obvious advances in missile technology convinced the Air Force that however cool an aircraft, it's lethality as a weapon system was questionable.



posted on Apr, 28 2005 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Popeye

Originally posted by The Godfather of Conspira
Alleged Aurora Sighting:




I thought this photo had been de-bunked as a photoshop of the original which was 3 F-111. I am sure the original has been on the net with the de-bunking.

If you notice the re-fuel boom coming out of the tail area of the KC-135 to the aircraft does not look right how it meets with the aircraft.

Anyone able to help me out with this?



[edit on 28-4-2005 by Popeye]


Your right, Popeye.



One of the more popular doctored "photos" of Aurora, in an attempt to accompany Chris Gibson's report. This was once referred to as a sighting over Australia

This "photomontage" was created by Bill Rose as a depiction of what a former Royal Observer Corps team member spotted from a North Sea oil drilling platform in 1989. That sighting is considered the most reputable sighting report of its kind, as well as the only truly credible piece of evidence for the existence of the Aurora.

This is not a photograph, although it is easily mistaken for one. It is simply a visual rendering of what might have been seen over the North Sea. The image depicts the Aurora at the bottom of the image, escorted by two U.S. F-111s at upper left, and taking on fuel from a U.S. KC-135 tanker.

On at least one occasion, this image was mistaken for a real photo by a member of the "supermarket press." The image was sent to the British magazine named "UFO Encounters," which paraded it on its February 1996 cover with the byline, "UFO Escort Picture: We Unveil New Evidence Of This US Cover-Up." On another occasion, an almost identical image was publicized as a sighting over Australia.

Source


Right now that's the only site I have found that talks about it.



posted on Apr, 28 2005 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Mmmmm.....Didnt Dubya fly F104's about the same time hat collsion happened? Mmmmmm......Lots of missing data from his time in the service.....Mmmmm......

CONSPIRACY!!!



[edit on 28-4-2005 by skippytjc]



posted on Apr, 29 2005 @ 06:28 AM
link   
Joe Walker, an X-15 Pilot, and considered in all ways an expert pilot, was piloting the F-104 that hit the XB-70. I know this because he grew up on a farm not 2 miles from where I grew up, and my Grade School was named after him. Official story is that wing vortices created turbulance with pitched the 104 out of control. So, I've always had an interest in the XB-70, especially since there was a misconception around here that he died in the X-15, and not this ill-advised photo shoot.

Oh, and Bush flew F-102s in the Texas National Guard. This accident happened years earlier in California.

[edit on 4/29/2005 by soulforge]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 09:03 PM
link   
The reason the XB-70 was cancelled was an accumulation of many things. Most of them have been mentioned, but it's time somebody put them all together. The Valkyrie was very fast, but it had absolutely no stealth capabilities, so when the Soviets came out with their Anti-Air Missiles, they could lock on and outrun it until it was shot down. Also, maintenance on the craft was not easy and it used a special fuel that was very expensive, causing people to lose interest in paying for it with the budget cuts. As somebody mentioned, the SR-71 was being adapted to be a bomber and also an interceptor, which, if successful would make the XB-70 obsolete because it was faster and stealthier. By the time the F-104 hit the XB-70, the budget was getting too tight, the Soviets were working hard on SAMs and the MiG-25, so when they lost one of the only two remaining planes, it was the final straw and the project was cancelled shortly afterward.


SOC

posted on May, 7 2005 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aurora is real
The Valkyrie was very fast, but it had absolutely no stealth capabilities, so when the Soviets came out with their Anti-Air Missiles, they could lock on and outrun it until it was shot down.


Actually there were some extensive signature reduction studies done during the RS-70 program, including RAM coatings inside the intakes.


Originally posted by Aurora is realAs somebody mentioned, the SR-71 was being adapted to be a bomber and also an interceptor, which, if successful would make the XB-70 obsolete because it was faster and stealthier.


The A-12 series didn't have any major RCS advantage, despite the efforts of Lockheed. Testing in Nevada using A-12 #2 on an RCS range, as well as other testing, showed that the A-12 would be detectable by radars used by the Soviet Bloc. Ben Rich stated at the retirement ceremony for the Blackbird that the aircraft had the same RCS as the B-1B. That's probably in the realm of 1sqm.


Originally posted by Aurora is realBy the time the F-104 hit the XB-70, the budget was getting too tight, the Soviets were working hard on SAMs and the MiG-25, so when they lost one of the only two remaining planes, it was the final straw and the project was cancelled shortly afterward.


Rostislav Belyakov, former head of MiG, stated that the MiG-25 was intended to counter the A-12, not the XB-70, as the XB-70 had already been relegated to research status.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 04:24 AM
link   
Actually The main reason for cancelling the XB-70 was a combination of two things -

1) At the time of design and building the XB-70 it was thought that combat planes would soon be obsolete - missiles would completely take over destroying ground targets in combat.

and

2) Combat planes were changing from high altitude high speed for protection to very low altitude to go under radar and have less time over taget to get shot down, in essence a very early stealth concept.

Between these two reasons the XB-70 became obsolete even before going into production.

Just as an afterthought, I remember reading that they were planning an even more powerfull fuel to make it go even faster, but because of the cancellation this idea never got off the drawingboard.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 03:34 PM
link   
The real reason for cancelling it was because:
1. SAM's capable of shooting it down were developed.
2. It was Extremely expensive
3. They found better ways to accomplish there goals with less money.
and finally because of the collision. When it happened the pilots didnt even know. And there is this website where you can buy pieces recovered from the crash site along with a frame and plaque. You can also buy pieces from the first northrup flying wing thing(forgot name) the X-15, The SR-71, and more but less rare planes.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 05:15 PM
link   
While the XB-70 is a very interesting aircraft a less well known fact is that they was a fighter being designed to fly with the XB-70 and help to protect it. It was to be called the F-108 Rapier. While the aircraft was never built the radar developed for it eventually became the radar used in the F-14.




First known as the LRIX (long-range interceptor, experimental), development of the XF-108 followed USAF GOR 114, dated 6 October 1955. The North American letter contract of 6 June 1957 called for an all-weather, two-man, two-engine, long-range interceptor, with a combat speed of at least Mach 3 and swift maneuver at 70,000 feet. The aircraft would carry two or more air-to-air missiles with nuclear or conventional warheads. The armament bay was to house a number of weapon combinations.

The Air Force expected a lot from the complex new plane. Many subcontractors were involved. Hughes Aircraft Corporation would provide the aircraft's fire-control system and GAR-9 missiles; Convair, the wing, Marquardt, the air induction control system; Hamilton Standard, the air conditioning and pressurization; Federal Division of the International Telephone & Telegraph Co., the mission and traffic control system; and Electronic Speciality Co., the antenna system. The Air Force would take care of the engine, the General Electric J-93 turbojet (first developed as the X-279E). It wanted an early 1963 operational date, 1,000-nm cruise speed with 5 minutes of combat at Mach 3, and a cruise speed of Mach 3 for 350-nm and 10 minutes of combat time (also at Mach 3). Finally, the F-108 should be able to fly to a specified point at supersonic speed, loiter for about an hour, and speed on to the target.

A mockup inspection on 26 January 1959 disclosed few needed changes. Nonetheless, the XF-108 (nicknamed the Rapier on 15 May 1959) never flew. The Air Force in 1957 had programmed for more than 480 F-108s, but the pinch in funds wiped out the whole project on 23 September 1959. The Air Force believed the F-108 would have been a good mobile missile launcher to intercept enemy aircraft far away from their intended targets. This was a role the B-70 bomber (being also built by North American and later consigned to the XF-108's fate) could not perform. Total RDT&E expenditures then stood at $141.9 million.

Specifications
Manufacturer: North American
Span: 57.4 ft.
Length: 89.2 ft. (not including nose boom)
Height: 22.1 ft.
Tread: 11 ft.
Weight: 102,000 lbs. maximum design gross weight
Armament: Four 20mm cannons,
108 2.75 in. rockets and
up to 4,000 lbs. of bombs

Engines: Two General Electric J93-GE-3 turbojets of 30,000 lbs. thrust each with afterburner.
Crew: Two
Maximum speed: approximately Mach 3
Range: 1,150 miles

www.globalsecurity.org...





posted on May, 19 2005 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aurora is real
it used a special fuel that was very expensive, causing people to lose interest in paying for it with the budget cuts.


- Actually this is not true.

'Zip fuel' as it was known (a high energy boron based fuel) was investigated but dropped before the XB 70 flew as it was found to be difficult to handle, it left problematic residues and generally made maintenance a nightmare.....and then there was the whole thing about the wisdom of special fuels for individual aircraft and the logistics thereof.

Fundamentally the X/B70 aircraft was not too dissimilar to the later Concorde; an amazing technical feat but the idea of there being a large fleet of them - especially post fuel crisis in 1973 - was just nonsensical.
The operational logistical demands were just so exorbitant as to make cancellation inevitable.

Then along came the early promise of stealth together with a sober appraisal of likely SAM capabilities in the near future and what do you know, program stopped.

(If anyone is interested there was also a 3rd Valkyrie ( to carry tail number #20208) which was apparantly about half way to completion at cancellation.
Sadly it was broken up.

The book 'XB - 70 Valkyrie; The Ride to Valhalla' by Jeanette Remak and Joe Ventolo Jr is a goldmine and a recommended read if you are interested. )

[edit on 19-5-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
(The book 'XB - 70 Valkyrie; The Ride to Valhalla' by Jeanette Remak and Joe Ventolo Jr is a goldmine and a recommended read if you are interested. )


Own it
While alot of the published reports about the reasons for the cancellation were real, the threats could have been mitigated by tactics etc. A recce/strike version was proposed to try to save the program, but as with the YF-12, McNamara was the real reason it was killed off.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 12:26 AM
link   
Can you imagine how impressive a flightline full of camo-ed/blackend XB-70s would have been???



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by liquidvudo
Can you imagine how impressive a flightline full of camo-ed/blackend XB-70s would have been???

Yea, and in the day time in clear skies, would have made the Soviet's day.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Yea, and in the day time in clear skies, would have made the Soviet's day.


Yea, just how the black colored SR-71 made their day flying on clear sunny skies.


[edit on 16-6-2005 by WestPoint23]



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 09:38 PM
link   
THe XB=70 looks as though it is supersonic. It also looks alot like the concorde.


XB-70


Concorde
external image

Again Similar, yet different.


Here's my xB-70


Just for laughs

(mod edit to resize large image)

[edit on 4-10-2005 by pantha]



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 01:05 AM
link   
i've got a video of the plane on my computer...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join