Can anybody identify this for me ?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 4 2008 @ 05:30 PM
link   
I believe this is the aircraft breifly shown in a video interview with Boyd Bushman.

He claims it flew with an nuclear reactor onboard could this be true ?






posted on Feb, 4 2008 @ 06:14 PM
link   
The US never flew a nuclear powered bomber. They had plans to modify a couple of B-36s into nuclear powered aircraft but they abandonded them. The Soviets flew a TU-95 with a nuclear reactor on board, but most of the flights were done with it shut down.

The B-36 that was modified actually flew with a 1 megawatt reactor on board, but the shielding was too prohibitive for it. They actually powered a J-47 engine in ground tests however. They were making progress, however, it was determined that the risks were too high. The more power the reactor put out, the more radiation it put out, and jet engines at the time were too inefficient.

Here's a good page on the US project.
www.nuclear.com...



posted on Feb, 4 2008 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Thanks for the background info on the nuclear question.

I am assuming the image above was an artists impression maybe from a rumoured aircraft or perhaps a technolgy test bed.

So can we say this aircraft had no connection with the nuclear program ?



posted on Feb, 4 2008 @ 06:25 PM
link   
I don't have the resources of Waynos or some others on here, but it MAY have been an actual nuclear design, or an artists impression of what it may have looked like. Or it could have just been an artists impression of what the artist thought it might look like and have no relation whatsoever to anything.



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 12:40 AM
link   
Yeah Zaph's right Sherpa, Waynos will probably be able to nail this one in a millisecond. And given the thread title you can bet he will zero in on it like a bee to honey.


Ill take a stab though and say it's an artists concept from the USAF's 1960's CX-HLS competition to develop a large strategic airlifter ( Zaph: Note the 747 style nose cargo door). The same competition that was won by Lockheed with their C-5A offering and spurred further development of Boeing's failed bid, then allowed development of the 747 concept. This may even be a Boeing conceptual artwork given the humped cockpit blister that is reminiscent of the 747 and the earlier XB-52 prototype. Also note that the age of the image can be roughly guessed by the artistic style (which is VERY 60's/70's) the white colour sheme, style of USAF markings, and importantly the earlier style TF-39/JT-9D engine layout.

Im sure it won't take long to get an answer though. I'll keep digging.

LEE.

[edit on 5-2-2008 by thebozeian]



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
The B-36 that was modified actually flew with a 1 megawatt reactor on board, but the shielding was too prohibitive for it.


I beleive they did get the reactor to go critical for both the US and the Soviets while airborn but it was not used for propulsion. As you noted the amound of shielding required basically killed off this project.


The closest anybody came to a nuclear powered aircraft was the nuclear powered cruise missile aka Project Pluto. Actually it was the subejct of one of my very first threads here on ATS

www.abovetopsecret.com...

They got as far as testing and proving the reactor design.


[edit on 2/5/08 by FredT]



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by thebozeian
 



I don't think its Boeing..... Bushman worked for Lockheed and Hughes unless im mistaken


[edit on 2/5/08 by FredT]



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 
Then it is very possibly Lockheed as Hughes did not enter a design in the competition. However Martin Marietta, Douglas and General Dynamics did so it is also possibly one of theirs. Regardless, it would be interesting to find the images origin as I am certain it is an airlifter concept.

LEE.



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 03:23 AM
link   
www.brookings.edu...


thats the NB-36H



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 06:26 AM
link   
reply to post by thebozeian
 


I tend to agree with your assessment as a CX-HLS contender.

Given that Convair/General Dynamics were quite 'into' the canard layout for there X-6 and NX-2 nuclear bomber designs, I'm thinking (and only thinking) that this could be GD's submission for the CX-HLS.

Both Convair and Martin-Marietta were the first knocked out of the competition, leaving Boeing, Lockheed and Douglas

The Winged Wombat



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
www.brookings.edu...


thats the NB-36H


H It does not look like the one in the picture. Large winglets 4 nacells etc.



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 08:11 AM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 


what i meant was it was mentioned about the NB-36 above - not the OP`s picture but as the only flying nuclear airplane

en.wikipedia.org...:NB36H-2.jpg

thats another picture of teh NB-36H which was converted and isn`t the OP picture ofc.



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 08:25 AM
link   
Ok, I may have got this wrong having looked at the video footage again The pic I posted is not an exact match to the pic in the video, so I think I had better post the video so you guys can judge for yourself.

I have noticed there appears to be only 2 wing mounted engines as opposed to 4, still look for yourselves the pic is around 2:54 on the video



[edit on 5-2-2008 by sherpa]



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 09:19 AM
link   
I have seen that picture before and I have seen the claims before of it being nuclear powered. The first image of the plane which I have screen captured is nothing new.


What is new is his claim or misunderstanding on the interviewers part that the it concept drawing which I have never seen any proof of its construction before was flown with what Boyd shows as a nuclear reactor which is the second picture.


Caption text as best as I can tell reads as follows.
"NE?? CRANE OPERATIONS A?
PIT REMOVING ASTR
CONVAIR FT. WORTH TEXAS"

The second picture looks like it could of been taken from/during the NB-36H project of installing/removing a working NUCLEAR reactor (not anti gravity) in a plane though it was never powered by it. A miss informed interviewer makes the wrong connections and you think the concept plane actually flew with this reactor. Looks to me like the interviewer is informed in theory but not in aircraft.

Interesting things to note.
-Bushman uses Lazar as a source to give information to the interviewer on area 51. A problem for a aviation person like myself who would rather see facts
-Also was Bushman work for lockheed when he was 67 in 1995 or retired?
[edit on 5-2-2008 by Canada_EH]

[edit on 5-2-2008 by Canada_EH]



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 09:31 AM
link   
It's odd isn't it, it makes me wonder if the footaage has been edited to deliberately obfuscate.

The interviewer says to much in my opinion and should have let Boyd finish what he was saying instead of interjecting.


The first image of the plane which I have screen captured is nothing new.


So the image is a concept drawing which you have seen before, do you have any details/backgroubd ?



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 09:42 AM
link   
I'll try and find actual links etc. But I have seen the picture before and its was referred to as a Nuclear powered concept aircraft. Was the idea that would of been followed up with after the 36 if the concept had been proven. The reactors didn't work out so it never did go any further.

[edit on 5-2-2008 by Canada_EH]



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Well found it. The concept was another Convair design called the NX-2. Its was on the drawing board and I also found a interesting blog with a article on the aircraft/concept.



Here is a article that was run in PM I believe on the development of the nx-2 concept. I've posted 2 pages of the article if you want to read the entire thing just search nx-2 and I'm sure you can find it. (just copy right issues)





[edit on 5-2-2008 by Canada_EH]



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Canada_EH
 


Thanks for that I would appreciate any links just to clear up the connection, if any, with the nuclear progamme.

I am aware of the problems they had with the concept namely the weight penalty that was incured with the shielding and the project was scrapped.

I have caught a whiff of recent talk using Hafnium 178, though of late there seems to be a lot of conjecture on that one
.



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 10:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Canada_EH
 


Ah. you posted above me.

I am getting "Sorry, no posts matched your criteria." on your link though





[edit on 5-2-2008 by sherpa]



posted on Feb, 5 2008 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by sherpa
 


See above again as I have posted 2 pages of the article and with a search I'm sure you can find anymore info you desire on the nx-2 concept.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join