Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

W/RB57F

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 01:36 PM
link   
I'm trying to do some research on the W/RB57F. Does anyone know what it was, when it was made, where it flew, ect? My uncle with a TS clearance since 1966 wants me to research it and tell him what I found as a challenge. He helped build it. Thanks!




posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 01:42 PM
link   
That reminds me, saw one of the NASA WB57's back in october whilst up in Norfolk. It was making a stop at Mildenhall and I saw it coming in over the East coast. Not something you see very often



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 02:03 PM
link   
RB57F: Fourteen RB57F models were converted by General Dynamics using the main framework of the B-57E. The wingspan was nearly doubled to 126 feet with the wing area more than double. The J-57 engines were upgraded to Pratt-Whitney (PW) TF100 turbofans. The "all wing and engine" RB57F then strapped on two air-start PWJ60-P-9 turbojets. Using a strengthened
honeycombed skin on the flight surfaces and doubling the area of the vertical fin, the aircraft hardly resembled its
British Canberra predecessor. (Photo: Robert Mikesh) The RB57F was re-designated the WB-57 with the 58th Recon Squadron at Kirkland AFB, NM and served the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and NASA as air samplers.
Wherever there was suspected or known atmospheric nuclear weapons testing from Germany to Australia to Japan,
there, too, was the WB57F.
www.b-57canberra.org...

n 1968 the WRW aircraft were redesignated the WB-57F and used to monitor nuclear tests in China and India by sampling high-altitude fallout. Most aircraft were phased out during the 1970’s and placed in storage at MASDC Davis-Monthan, but NASA continued to use the aircraft until the early 1980s. 21 constructed, 13 at MASDC, 3 with NASA.
www.spyflight.co.uk...

Actually that's not entirely true. The NASA variant of the WB-57 flew regularly, until just a few years ago, when they had budget problems and grounded it. IIRC they still fly it now in support or the shuttle missions.

RB57F:



WB57F:




The NASA WB57 was modified with a bigger tail, and different wing. They later changed the engines to TF33 turbofans for high altitude flights. They also added an upward opening canopy for the pilots, due to them wearing space suits for the flights.



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 02:50 PM
link   
Follow up on my October sighting, here's a page about the WB-57F visit to Mildenhall.

www.airsceneuk.org.uk...



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 02:55 PM
link   
Thanks for the info! My uncle worked on these W/RB57F air craft and it was top secret at the time.

He has also been involved in Systems (Various Electronics) Research since 1966 with a TS clearance. He has worked on every military aircraft that has flown between 1960 and 1993. From the U2, through to the TR1, B1, B52, WB47, B58, RB57F; All the fighter series F100, 101, 102, 104, 105, F5/T38, 106, F7, RF111, RF4 All the cargo C47, C118, C121, C124, C130, C141, C5; Helicopters: UH1n, H3, HH53, Special: A-10, SR-71, T29, T33, T37, T43, A/C Joint Stars, "RC" model 135 "EC" 135, WC 135, KC 97, KC 135, ect...

I didn't even know about this uncle until a few days ago. I guess my family knew if I knew about him, I'd asked him a bunch of questions he couldn't answer because if he did he'd get into trouble. But I'm trying not to ask anything like that. Plus he only talks about declassified projects.



[edit on 24-11-2005 by meshuggah1324]



posted on Nov, 24 2005 @ 05:13 PM
link   
This is what my family member wrote back:

Not sure where you got you W/RB-57F info -- but it is very close. There were only 10 made with the TF33 engines and the solid fuel under wing JATO power packs. They were all stationed at Yokota AB Japan with the 56 WRS (Weather Recon Squadron), from 1966 to until 1972 when they were send back to McConnell AFB, Kansas. Two were retained by NASA for special missions. They could climb to 100,000 feet without using the JATO packs and in-fact flew over China and Russia to air sample for Nuclear tests. Many were shot at and none was ever hit.

For a Test-- we had one shut down engines over Moscow and land at Osan AB in Korea in late 1968 - they are basically a very large high powered glider - with the pilots in space-suits to handle the high altitudes they cruised at. Good work -- The earlier versions that had the TF100 engines were at Kirkland AFB, but while I was in Japan, I never saw any of those launch to fly over China. The Ten with the TF33 engines that I worked on all had Tail-numbers ending in - 500 through 509.





posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 11:17 PM
link   
My father flew this plane from Kirtland AFB, from late 69 through early 73. He has told me many stories that I find very facinating. One day I will get him talking and write (what he is aloud to) down. Though the "official ceiling was 82,000 Ft. my father got very close to 100,000 but was man enough to admit to me that he never made it, though he tried very hard to.



posted on Jan, 8 2006 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Mad to see this plane still flying, Its even older than the U-2. Also descended from the British BAC Canberra.



posted on Jun, 24 2006 @ 06:01 PM
link   
Active imaginations and rumor always accompany classified military aircraft. The RB57F was powered by two TF33 engines and two J-60 engines (which were removable for max range missions). These aircraft never overflew the Soviet Union. NASA continues to operate two of the photo recon RB-57Fs today. They are highly modified for scientific research purposes.

A Junior in aeronautical engineering can prove that a subsonic high aspect ratio winged aircraft (U-2, RB-57F) is limited by the coffin corner airspeed envelope (Between stall and mach tuck). The envelope is critically small above 80,000 feet. Any higher altitude claims are false.


USAF RB57D aircraft made a few Soviet Union overflights in the late 1950s. Once Gary Powers in his CIA U-2 was shot down (24th CIA overflight in four years) on May 1, 1960, all overflights ceased and there have been none since. No USAF SR-71, RB-57F, U-2, or CIA A-12 has ever overflown the Soviet Union. Coffee table books love to "speculate" otherwise. It keeps their sales up. This does not dimish many important flights over other sensitive areas.

I flew the RB-57F for three years, have been to Area 51 (never saw any Martians), and know many U-2 and SR-71 pilots.

Been there, done that, got the T-Shirt.



posted on Jun, 24 2006 @ 06:17 PM
link   
Actually just a couple of years ago the ER-2 was doing overflights of Russia. They were doing some kind of atmospheric research in the region. Technically a U-2 and technically an overflight of Russia.



posted on Jun, 24 2006 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Actually just a couple of years ago the ER-2 was doing overflights of Russia. They were doing some kind of atmospheric research in the region. Technically a U-2 and technically an overflight of Russia.



Agree but got to remember Russia is not the Soviet Union, and the ER2 is a NASA aircraft not USAF. The NASA WB-57F could also participate since there are now "good" relations and lots of aeronautical/space program cooperative efforts.


jra

posted on Jun, 24 2006 @ 06:29 PM
link   
I don't have much to add to this subject, but I've seen photos of this aircraft on airliners.net before. Here's a link to a bunch of them www.airliners.net...



posted on Jun, 24 2006 @ 06:39 PM
link   
I have pictures of the NASA one, but they're all 35mm and I don't have access to a scanner to scan them.



posted on Mar, 29 2007 @ 09:41 PM
link   
Good to see someone who is "telling it like it was" I spent five years cruising around in the back seat of an "F" model. That airplane probably generated more false "facts" than any other airplane around.




[edit on 29-3-2007 by RB57FGator]

[edit on 29-3-2007 by RB57FGator]

[edit on 29-3-2007 by RB57FGator]

[edit on 29-3-2007 by RB57FGator]



posted on Mar, 29 2007 @ 09:56 PM
link   
Good to see someone who's got the "straight skinny"



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 06:02 PM
link   
Shutting down engines over Moscow and gliding to Korea? hahaha Yeah right, sorry that but that is just not remotely possible. Wanna work out the glide ratio for that?



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by firepilot
Shutting down engines over Moscow and gliding to Korea? hahaha Yeah right, sorry that but that is just not remotely possible. Wanna work out the glide ratio for that?


He said engine one engines but I'm not completely disagreeing with you it is probably an exaggeration.



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Actually he said "We had one" (one airplane) "shut down engines" (both engines) "over Moscow and glide to Osan AB Korea.

Sorry for the one liner.



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Actually he said "We had one" (one airplane) "shut down engines" (both engines) "over Moscow and glide to Osan AB Korea.

Sorry for the one liner.


Well your saying to look at the glide ratio of the plane just for interest sake. Whats the Chord and weight and aspect ratio of the plane or the distance for that matter. We know the theory high is between 90 000 or 80 000ft.



posted on Mar, 30 2007 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Actually *I* didn't say let's look at the glide ratio, just correcting the one engine comment. But I think the -57 would have a hard time gliding that far. I can see a U-2 gliding that distance, but it was basically designed as a glider with an engine. The -57 had a lot of extra weight on it which would give it a worse glide ratio.





new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join