Watch more aircraft, heroes, and their stories and missions ➤ www.youtube.com/@Dronescapes To support/join the channel ➤ www.youtube.com/@Dronescapes/join IG ➤ instagram.com/dronescapesvideos FB ➤ facebook.com/Dronescapesvideos ➤ X/Twitter ➤ dronescapes.video/2p89vedj ➤ THREADS: www.threads.net/@dronescapesvideos
The book "Valkyrie - North Americans Mach 3 Superbomber" is the best aircraft book I have ever read. Nothing else even comes close. Not only does it go into tremendous detail on the design, engineering, production, and testing of the XB-70, it also explores competing designs and the foray into nuclear power for bombers and even the cold war politics and polices. It stands above any other aircraft specific book I have ever read. It is out of print but you can find used copies on line. If you love military aviation, THIS is the book to read.
I agree, but the other plane that shocked me was the B-36. After seeing the B-36 in person (which was a jaw dropping experience) I read the book "Magnesium Overcast" , and I confess that prior to seeing it and reading the book, I had a rather low opinion of the B-36, but after seeing it and reading the book, I came away a complete fan of the plane. The XB-70 is still my favorite though.
It amazes me that such an old bomber is gonna have the great grandsons of the first pilots flying the same aircraft! I suspect the 100 years will be pushed out further.
I used to pay and stopped. They left the adverts out for an entire year. Now they are dropping doubles on me. $14/month doesn't seem so bad now. My time is money. Podcasts at work are a lot easier to listen to without running to my phone every 5 minutes to hit Skip Ad. Signing back up.
I recall a giddy Neil Armstrong interviewing one of test pilots. He seemed in awe of the fact that he flew the XB-70. I thought, "Dude, you walked on the moon"!
1:00:30 John Glenn was NOT the first American in space. That honor was earned by Alan Shepard in 5/61, followed by Gus Grissom in 7/61. Glenn was in fact 3rd, his flight was 2/62.
I don't even know if the US could build this plane today. NASA Engineers confess that they would struggle to build the Saturn F1 engines because the don't fully understand how they were built.
Great documentary(s). I have enjoyed this alot. The XB70 was almost a science fiction story. I read a book about it in the late 70's. I couldn't understand why we didn't keep making them. But I was only 10 at the time. By the 1980's, it seemed that high speed, high altitude, super-sonic bombers would not be practical. It's easier to make a mach 5 missle, than a mach 3 bomber.
The SR-71 of the bomber world (or more like the SR-71 being the XB-70 of the recon world)....so far ahead of its time, and such a beautiful aircraft from any angle, and such a tragic loss of AV-2, given the rapidly changing nature of the nuclear weaponised world, that she never ever saw a production life, but wow, what an aircraft regardless...we now may have the B1 Lancer, but she"s not the XB-70!!!!
I wish to thank you profoundly for using tons as the unit of measure. The traditional measure used, of pounds, is too infinitesimal, requiring a conversion factor.
Yes, but it was not meant to fly with the tips down and the gear down. If it were on a pedestal, then the tips down would be best. On the gear, wings flat.
The collision in 1966 did not need to happen big wigs at General Electric engines wanted an aerial photo of all the U.S.A.F. aircraft that utilized G.E. engines.
I wouldn't put the blame all on Boeing. NASA is upto it's old tricks of putting it's launch schedule before crew safety. Oh sorry they call it 'acceptable risk'. They did it over a certain O'ring on a solid fuel rocket that resulted in the death of seven people and they have potentially done it again with this helium leak. The only saving grace is that the NASA administration that allowed that shuttle to take off outside the operational temperature range of the solid booster has retired, so l they are guilty of being destined to repeat the mistakes of their forbears.
101:40. There was never a Miles M-52.It wasn't 80% complete.It never got past the mock-up stage.Eric Brown was a great test pilot but the Miles M-52 story simply isn't true.
You would be surprised to learn that we know the person that taped the Miles archives before they were destroyed, and according to him there is VERY important material that shows the progress of the M.52 beyond the few documents and even fewer photos you can see. Hopefully we can transfer those Betacam tapes to digital soon, as they would be a great addition to the story. Obviously he said that having been part of the tape transfer, it is obvious that stopping the Miles was purely political, and that the company still had money to spend for the project, when it was halted. The first test flight, apparently, was really scheduled, and Brown was certainly not suicidal, given that to this day he is the test pilot that flew just about anything you can think of, including semi suicidal German prototypes. Brown was not known to be a liar, he did not need to. He praised aircraft and accomplishments from othe rpoeple and nations when credit was due. I really hope we can soon unearth that treasure trove of information regarding the M.52 and other obscure projects, we are working on that, including WW2 primitive drones used by the U.S., another hidden gem.
@@Dronescapes Eric Brown was one of the greatest test pilots who ever lived.He was not a liar.The fact remains that Miles never started to build the M-52.They may have had 80 % of the parts to start building it but the most they ever did was build a Ply-wood mock-up.The real problem with the M-52 was Frank.Whittle's company. Power Jets wasn't even close to having an engine ready.I believe Miles could have built the M-52 airframe but with out an engine it would be useless.
History is confusing on that as well, as Brown was ready for the flight, and defended Whittle's engine as well. As you might know a radio controlled version of the M.52 later broke the sound barrier. It was tested in sort of a covert way. The Miles tapes might reveal, as far as I know, VERY interesting things. did you watch the Eric Brown and Whittle tapes we have on the channel? Most of them were never released before. We also have upcoming Von Ohain interviews (also never released).
You should learn more about the subject. SAC was never called s a c It was called "SAC" pronounced sack. Strategic Air Command TAC, tack, Tactical Air Command MAC mack, Military Airlift Command.
Watch more aircraft, heroes, and their stories and missions ➤ www.youtube.com/@Dronescapes
To support/join the channel ➤ www.youtube.com/@Dronescapes/join
IG ➤ instagram.com/dronescapesvideos
FB ➤ facebook.com/Dronescapesvideos
➤ X/Twitter ➤ dronescapes.video/2p89vedj
➤ THREADS: www.threads.net/@dronescapesvideos
title correction, "things you might NOT know"
Almost as beautiful as the B58 Hustler
The book "Valkyrie - North Americans Mach 3 Superbomber" is the best aircraft book I have ever read. Nothing else even comes close. Not only does it go into tremendous detail on the design, engineering, production, and testing of the XB-70, it also explores competing designs and the foray into nuclear power for bombers and even the cold war politics and polices. It stands above any other aircraft specific book I have ever read. It is out of print but you can find used copies on line. If you love military aviation, THIS is the book to read.
i've seen the one at the air force museum. awesome beast.
This airplane alone is worth a trip to the air force museum.
Yes sir
I agree, but the other plane that shocked me was the B-36. After seeing the B-36 in person (which was a jaw dropping experience) I read the book "Magnesium Overcast" , and I confess that prior to seeing it and reading the book, I had a rather low opinion of the B-36, but after seeing it and reading the book, I came away a complete fan of the plane. The XB-70 is still my favorite though.
Bombers not needed? The B52 is on course to be a 100 year in-service delivery vehicle.
Bombers are needed, supersonic nuclear bombers are not. And XB-70 could hardly be used in any other way.
It amazes me that such an old bomber is gonna have the great grandsons of the first pilots flying the same aircraft! I suspect the 100 years will be pushed out further.
We have a J-93 on display at GE Aerospace Evendale Ohio
the 5 and 12minute YT ads during this are brutal.
At least most you can opt out of. YT is sucking more and more.
I used to pay and stopped. They left the adverts out for an entire year. Now they are dropping doubles on me.
$14/month doesn't seem so bad now. My time is money. Podcasts at work are a lot easier to listen to without running to my phone every 5 minutes to hit Skip Ad. Signing back up.
whats an ad?
Use an ad blocker. Works perfect.
I recall a giddy Neil Armstrong interviewing one of test pilots. He seemed in awe of the fact that he flew the XB-70. I thought, "Dude, you walked on the moon"!
1:00:30 John Glenn was NOT the first American in space. That honor was earned by Alan Shepard in 5/61, followed by Gus Grissom in 7/61. Glenn was in fact 3rd, his flight was 2/62.
This episode was very cool and good. Good job on this one. Loved it !!! Keep it up
At 19:13, regarding a nuclear reactor carried aboard a Convair B36; "Tests were carried out in Earnest". Poor Earnest. I hope he survived the tests.
A half million pounds of stainless steel and titanium, powered by 6 J-93 engines, cruising at mach 3, designed and built by people with slide rules.
1/4th of a century? Over half a century.
This documentary was made more than 25 years ago
General Fred Ascani great narration
its just glorious looking aint it.
Wonder how many other countries could build this and make it work even today.
I don't even know if the US could build this plane today. NASA Engineers confess that they would struggle to build the Saturn F1 engines because the don't fully understand how they were built.
Great documentary(s). I have enjoyed this alot. The XB70 was almost a science fiction story. I read a book about it in the late 70's. I couldn't understand why we didn't keep making them. But I was only 10 at the time. By the 1980's, it seemed that high speed, high altitude, super-sonic bombers would not be practical. It's easier to make a mach 5 missle, than a mach 3 bomber.
Thrust numbers on boeing are way off
Hard to imagine an airplane that large moving at more than 3 times the speed of sound.
The SR-71 of the bomber world (or more like the SR-71 being the XB-70 of the recon world)....so far ahead of its time, and such a beautiful aircraft from any angle, and such a tragic loss of AV-2, given the rapidly changing nature of the nuclear weaponised world, that she never ever saw a production life, but wow, what an aircraft regardless...we now may have the B1 Lancer, but she"s not the XB-70!!!!
I wish to thank you profoundly for using tons as the unit of measure. The traditional measure used, of pounds, is too infinitesimal, requiring a conversion factor.
We need a video on the underrated F-105
There's literally 8 of them already on this channel
I know that the use of one of these beauties in earnest would be a true nightmare, they are so elegant and beautiful, it fools the eye.
I saw both at edwards open house in 1966
Does anything exist of the 3rd xb 70????
Até hoje, não entendo como um piloto de teste qualificado, poderia, bater a asa de seu F104 , em um avião tão grande e visível como o B70.
Are you a pilot?
How come the MIG 25 did not have the tire problem? How did the Soviets solve it?
What tire problem? Also, the MiG-25 was in development for about 10 years.
They need to display it with the wing tips down. That is the way she was meant to fly.
Yes, but it was not meant to fly with the tips down and the gear down. If it were on a pedestal, then the tips down would be best. On the gear, wings flat.
The collision in 1966 did not need to happen big wigs at General Electric engines wanted an aerial photo of all the U.S.A.F. aircraft that utilized G.E. engines.
Marketing…
The first supersonic flight of the X-1 was October 14, 1947. Don’t make up facts because you are too busy to do actual research.
I wouldn't put the blame all on Boeing. NASA is upto it's old tricks of putting it's launch schedule before crew safety. Oh sorry they call it 'acceptable risk'.
They did it over a certain O'ring on a solid fuel rocket that resulted in the death of seven people and they have potentially done it again with this helium leak.
The only saving grace is that the NASA administration that allowed that shuttle to take off outside the operational temperature range of the solid booster has retired, so l they are guilty of being destined to repeat the mistakes of their forbears.
What does any of that have to do with the XB-70A?
It’s SACK not s-a-c 🙄
101:40. There was never a Miles M-52.It wasn't 80% complete.It never got past the mock-up stage.Eric Brown was a great test pilot but the Miles M-52 story simply isn't true.
You would be surprised to learn that we know the person that taped the Miles archives before they were destroyed, and according to him there is VERY important material that shows the progress of the M.52 beyond the few documents and even fewer photos you can see. Hopefully we can transfer those Betacam tapes to digital soon, as they would be a great addition to the story.
Obviously he said that having been part of the tape transfer, it is obvious that stopping the Miles was purely political, and that the company still had money to spend for the project, when it was halted.
The first test flight, apparently, was really scheduled, and Brown was certainly not suicidal, given that to this day he is the test pilot that flew just about anything you can think of, including semi suicidal German prototypes.
Brown was not known to be a liar, he did not need to. He praised aircraft and accomplishments from othe rpoeple and nations when credit was due.
I really hope we can soon unearth that treasure trove of information regarding the M.52 and other obscure projects, we are working on that, including WW2 primitive drones used by the U.S., another hidden gem.
@@Dronescapes Eric Brown was one of the greatest test pilots who ever lived.He was not a liar.The fact remains that Miles never started to build the M-52.They may have had 80 % of the parts to start building it but the most they ever did was build a Ply-wood mock-up.The real problem with the M-52 was Frank.Whittle's company. Power Jets wasn't even close to having an engine ready.I believe Miles could have built the M-52 airframe but with out an engine it would be useless.
History is confusing on that as well, as Brown was ready for the flight, and defended Whittle's engine as well.
As you might know a radio controlled version of the M.52 later broke the sound barrier. It was tested in sort of a covert way.
The Miles tapes might reveal, as far as I know, VERY interesting things.
did you watch the Eric Brown and Whittle tapes we have on the channel? Most of them were never released before.
We also have upcoming Von Ohain interviews (also never released).
You should learn more about the subject.
SAC was never called s a c
It was called "SAC" pronounced sack.
Strategic Air Command
TAC, tack, Tactical Air Command
MAC mack, Military Airlift Command.
Has anyone seen the UFO in this video, please let me know I'm not crazy!!!!!