The US Secret Aircraft That Made Everyone Go Crazy

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 28 кві 2024
  • The North American Aviation XB-70 Valkyrie is a retired prototype version of the planned B-70 nuclear-armed, deep-penetration supersonic strategic bomber for the United States Air Force Strategic Air Command. Designed in the late 1950s by North American Aviation, it was intended to replace the aging B-52 Stratofortress.

КОМЕНТАРІ • 1,8 тис.

  • @johngalt2506
    @johngalt2506 Місяць тому +5149

    Designed in the late 1950s to replace the "aging" B52....that was still in production.

    • @spran369
      @spran369 Місяць тому +148

      Exactly what I thought 😂

    • @CNI2063
      @CNI2063 Місяць тому +122

      I was thinking it was new back in the 1950s.

    • @westsonrises
      @westsonrises Місяць тому +40

      I came to say this. It was so annoying lol 😆

    • @bashkillszombies
      @bashkillszombies Місяць тому +1

      It's got props and flies under mach. That's outdated by 1950's standards. The fact in 2024 we still use them tells us we are a civilisation in collapse. We decided babysitting the third world was more important.

    • @jj3449
      @jj3449 29 днів тому +152

      And it is still flying in 2024.

  • @robertpesche
    @robertpesche Місяць тому +3280

    "Designed in the late 1950s to replace the aging B-52..." You mean the B-52 that first flew in 1952 and entered service in 1955? Aging? Who writes this stuff? You need to fire your writers.

    • @Smacklover
      @Smacklover Місяць тому +197

      prob ai

    • @Svitjod1
      @Svitjod1 Місяць тому +347

      All these shorts have intentional faults. That sparks discussion, which increase traffic and income.

    • @michaelmaynard3696
      @michaelmaynard3696 Місяць тому +52

      @@Svitjod1work SMART not HARD 😁👏

    • @calvinnickel9995
      @calvinnickel9995 29 днів тому +34

      In terms of the speed of aeronautical development, the B-52 was aging at that point.

    • @BLACKMONGOOSE13
      @BLACKMONGOOSE13 28 днів тому +20

      True. At that time was the overlap in propeller and turbine aircraft. Early jets were almost obsolete as soon as they came out.

  • @modelmanfrank
    @modelmanfrank 26 днів тому +329

    Your facts are all wrong. It was not built to replace the B-52 . It built to fly into Russia at Mach 3 speeds and work along side the B-52 which was not Aging. The XB-70 cancelled because of the addition of longer range nuclear missles. Even though the bomber program was cancelled the plane still flew with NASA for a bit before being retired and sent to the Airforce museum.

    • @DontMansion
      @DontMansion 21 день тому +7

      There was no Russia at 1952.

    • @k7y
      @k7y 19 днів тому +14

      ​@DontMansion no need to correct him we get what he meant. Russian part of USSR or what would become modern day Russia.

    • @DontMansion
      @DontMansion 19 днів тому +4

      @@k7y he corrects someone. I correct him:)

    • @k7y
      @k7y 19 днів тому +5

      @@DontMansion fair, but he actually had a point

    • @DontMansion
      @DontMansion 19 днів тому

      @@k7y but me too

  • @amdreallyfast
    @amdreallyfast 24 дні тому +48

    B-52 70 years later: "I can do this all day."

  • @BelugaChonky
    @BelugaChonky Місяць тому +1362

    The fact we went from prop plane's in 1945 to mach 3 with nukes amazes me

    • @john2g1
      @john2g1 Місяць тому +171

      It's actually not that amazing. It's precisely what happens when you take all of the smartest people in the country and put them in the same room.
      That whole free market, best ideas, and capitalism drives innovation is simply a myth.
      Necessity and curiosity/imagination are the drivers of innovation.

    • @calvinnickel9995
      @calvinnickel9995 29 днів тому +68

      Except that we actually went to Mach 25 with nukes.. which is why the XB-70 was cancelled.
      It was a fully automatic flintlock rifle in the era of cartridges.

    • @Intrusive_Thought176
      @Intrusive_Thought176 28 днів тому +83

      ​@@john2g1Coping about capitalism is so funny. Kept the economy going throughout the cold war. What happend to the communist soviet economy?

    • @john2g1
      @john2g1 28 днів тому +69

      @@Intrusive_Thought176 So you think that because someone points out a problem with capitalism (which I didn't do) then they are pro communism?
      If I said I like pancakes are you going to ask me why I hate waffles too?
      Read again I said (paraphrasing ): if you put the smartest people in a room interesting things happen.
      Necessity and imagination fuel innovation. Mr. Kalashnikov didn't get a dime for his idea, and yet he innovated one of the greatest small arms platforms in the world.
      Last thing if communism is what domed Soviet Russia; how is capitalism helping the Russian Federation today? Shouldn't Russia be Switzerland by now?

    • @mtman2
      @mtman2 28 днів тому

      ​@@john2g1
      Helps Putin's net worth@$3Billion

  • @darthgamer2014
    @darthgamer2014 Місяць тому +619

    The XB 70. Living proof that the BUFF is forever 😂

    • @Spyder7051
      @Spyder7051 Місяць тому +12

      Habitual Crossover fan

    • @Spyder7051
      @Spyder7051 Місяць тому +10

      Linecrosser*

    • @darthgamer2014
      @darthgamer2014 Місяць тому +12

      @@Spyder7051 Hehe, I mean the jokes are okay and he can be pretty educational on some topics.

    • @TOOLDIE54
      @TOOLDIE54 Місяць тому

      WAY KEWL, !!!!!😂😂👍👍👍

    • @0-purple-0
      @0-purple-0 Місяць тому

      @@Spyder7051the BUFF is its real nickname nothing to do with HLC

  • @Troubleshooter125
    @Troubleshooter125 26 днів тому +76

    To this day, I think the XB-70 is the MOST BEAUTIFUL AIRCRAFT I have ever seen.

  • @paddymalky1979
    @paddymalky1979 26 днів тому +143

    Those engines look like a star destroyers

    • @phillyphil1513
      @phillyphil1513 24 дні тому +19

      exactly, i wouldn't be surprised if that's where Lucas' special effects team got some of their inspiration for Star Wars.

    • @BBWBEASTMASTER
      @BBWBEASTMASTER 19 днів тому

      Dark 🕶️ people always want to kill the light

    • @AhmedAymanM
      @AhmedAymanM 18 днів тому +1

      Your comment for me appeared to be reviewed from UA-cam app for some reason …

    • @skyler9988
      @skyler9988 18 днів тому +2

      It kinda looks like the ship from the first Transformers cartoons, the hand drawn animations

    • @derekbaird8245
      @derekbaird8245 18 днів тому +1

      💯

  • @mattisingestrom6piratensko839
    @mattisingestrom6piratensko839 Місяць тому +276

    i call it the military concorde

    • @mickregan2620
      @mickregan2620 Місяць тому +12

      Far more sophisticated than Concorde.

    • @yvessautter8592
      @yvessautter8592 Місяць тому

      In what way?​@@mickregan2620

    • @mattisingestrom6piratensko839
      @mattisingestrom6piratensko839 29 днів тому +30

      @@mickregan2620 iknow but i still call it the military concorde

    • @AzraelThanatos
      @AzraelThanatos 28 днів тому +10

      The military concorde came later...we still have no clue about the maximum potential capabilities of the SR-71 because they never really tried and even at the speeds they were at, each time they throttled up, the materials would harden and improve themselves with the specifics of the heating/cooling

    • @crazynedry5085
      @crazynedry5085 28 днів тому +8

      @@AzraelThanatosi fuckin love the SR-71 its such a special plane

  • @rolandreynoso1392
    @rolandreynoso1392 Місяць тому +266

    lol the aging B52 is still here, going strong🤣

    • @hallquiche
      @hallquiche 24 дні тому +6

      And will be for probably another 30 years

    • @rokpepeshogun
      @rokpepeshogun 23 дні тому +1

      until the new birds have to fly to save some president

    • @jeremiah4267
      @jeremiah4267 23 дні тому +1

      they have secret stuff thats crazier.

    • @angelOcrisu
      @angelOcrisu 23 дні тому +1

      😆 "going strong" and smoky 😑

  • @JDemonpbt
    @JDemonpbt 26 днів тому +50

    There were only 2 of the XB-70’s made. The first one was destroyed during a photo op mission. The only remaining one is on permanent display at The National Museum of The United States Air Force, at Wright-Patterson AF Base, Dayton OH.

    • @paulcochran1721
      @paulcochran1721 23 дні тому +8

      The first one SN# 62-0001 is at Wright Patterson, Second one, SN# 62-0207 was the one lost.

    • @jonathanozment4523
      @jonathanozment4523 18 днів тому +3

      ​@@paulcochran1721just curious but if they only made two, why was the first serial number 0001 and the second serial number 0207...? sincere question, I don't actually think they secretly made 205 more in between but that's weird numbering, wouldn't you say... 🤔

    • @Pat_Playz
      @Pat_Playz 18 днів тому +2

      @@jonathanozment4523 To my understanding, serial numbers are based on what number of aircraft or missile it was within the fiscal year, so the first XB-70 was the first purchase of the 1962 fiscal year while the second one was the 207 purchase. According to my quick research, the numbers in between are Titan II and AGM-28 Hound Dog missiles

    • @leonardo5225
      @leonardo5225 17 днів тому +1

      True, I have been there directly inside the operational air base, together with other experimental aircraft

    • @LiPo5000
      @LiPo5000 15 днів тому +2

      National Museum IMO is the finest one in this country!

  • @memelord9737
    @memelord9737 26 днів тому +7

    I’ve seen it in person at the Dayton Air Force Museum. It’s massive and especially imposing from the back with its 6 engines.

  • @Xeonicks
    @Xeonicks Місяць тому +401

    It’s also sad how the main prototype got destroyed during a photoshoot

    • @larrysfarris
      @larrysfarris Місяць тому +61

      The surviving example (two were built) is on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force (old Wright Patterson Air Force base) near Dayton, OH.

    • @GracedSeeker763
      @GracedSeeker763 Місяць тому +17

      How does it get destroyed in a photo shoot?

    • @dosgamer74
      @dosgamer74 Місяць тому +57

      @@GracedSeeker763 Because the
      F-104 that was intended to be part of the photoshoot got too close to B-70's turbulent wake, causing the starfighter to roll over and shear off both vertical stabilisers on the big plane.

    • @pisnotmynamesisnotmygame3757
      @pisnotmynamesisnotmygame3757 29 днів тому +28

      ​@@larrysfarrisWright Patterson AFB is still active. Yes the museum is there. Yes the XB-70 is there. :-)

    • @crazeelazee7524
      @crazeelazee7524 27 днів тому +31

      ​@@dosgamer74Ah, the F-104. One of only two aircraft I can think of that were so accident prone they are responsible for the accidents of other aircraft (the other being the DC-10 causing the Concorde accident, in case you were wondering).

  • @dr.ptrkjc
    @dr.ptrkjc 28 днів тому +391

    Plot twist, B-52 is still in service 😅

    • @TheDweeb002
      @TheDweeb002 23 дні тому +10

      Plot twist: they got us to engage with the post and boost them in the algorithm with this simple trick

    • @DiscoDashco
      @DiscoDashco 22 дні тому +2

      And there even brand new J models of the B-52 still on order too, with more efficient engines and state of the art avionics.

    • @peasantsarerevolting9343
      @peasantsarerevolting9343 22 дні тому +6

      Oh, there's more plot twists... The Russians created the Mig 25 to combat the B-70 Valkyrie. The only thing the Mig 25 foxbat did well was travel at mach 3+. Not knowing this, the US Air Force thought the Russians were building a super fighter, so the US Air Force authorized the creation of an air superiority fighter. At the time, it gave birth to the F-15. A captured Mig 25 proved the Mig's were over hyped.

    • @dakotaclement7751
      @dakotaclement7751 15 днів тому +1

      ​@@peasantsarerevolting9343 mig-25 had a top speed of Mach 2.83 while carrying no Armament

  • @dallasyap3064
    @dallasyap3064 25 днів тому +3

    Soviet advancement in high-altitude SAMs were the other main reason why it was cancelled. USAF strategic bombing doctrine shifted to low level penetration (which is a more effective method of evading enemy defenses). This shift in doctrine also led to the cancellation of the B-1 program. But few years later, the B-1 was brought back by Reagan, and this time the B-1 went through some changes (airframe changes to reduce rcs such as engine shape, stabilizers, other changes included increased range, lower supersonic speed but higher subsonic speed etc), and was designated the B-1B.

  • @jimbutke
    @jimbutke 27 днів тому +8

    Loved seeing this plane at the USAF museum in Dayton Ohio! One of my favs

  • @philgiglio7922
    @philgiglio7922 29 днів тому +27

    Absolutely beautiful aircraft

    • @scandalouslando204
      @scandalouslando204 21 день тому

      You too must like the deep penetration feature.... 😅

  • @jeffputman3504
    @jeffputman3504 Місяць тому +356

    The B-70's capabilities forced the Soviets to build a fleet of jets that could intercept it. Canceling the B-70 made the Soviets' expenditure useless. Mission accomplished.

    • @mickregan2620
      @mickregan2620 Місяць тому +43

      And it only cost the US tax payers $800,000,000, equivalent to $8,000,000,000 today. Bargain👍🤣

    • @d.bcooper2271
      @d.bcooper2271 Місяць тому +11

      🤡 the gained experience

    • @d.bcooper2271
      @d.bcooper2271 Місяць тому

      🤡 they gained experience​@@mickregan2620

    • @robwernet9609
      @robwernet9609 Місяць тому +36

      ​@@mickregan2620 I mean it was. We won the cold war.

    • @bastianfarstvede8634
      @bastianfarstvede8634 29 днів тому +24

      @@robwernet9609the cold war was. Basicly who had more money. To throw at the wall in my mind.

  • @Mike-hy9wy
    @Mike-hy9wy 26 днів тому +3

    It was the most beautiful bomber ever built.

  • @ivandemiguel8607
    @ivandemiguel8607 26 днів тому +5

    the best looking aircraft ever made, shame on the military and the politicians for not letting this airplane fly

    • @winternow2242
      @winternow2242 16 днів тому

      A shame that the military and politicians didn;t spend money on an airplane that didn't add to America's military abilities?

    • @ivandemiguel8607
      @ivandemiguel8607 16 днів тому

      yes absolute shame, it is a technology demonstration platform, now they are spending again hundreds of millions to achieve the same, while we had it 50 years ago. same
      thing that happened with the Apollo program….🤷

    • @winternow2242
      @winternow2242 16 днів тому

      @@ivandemiguel8607 " they are spending again hundreds of millions to achieve the same, "
      They are? Looks like most manned aircraft are subsonic, whereas the high speed research is into unmanned aircraft, which has been going on for decades. Also, the development of high speed unmanned vehicles is not what the Valkyrie was designed to do.
      "while we had it 50 years ago."
      Actually we didn't. We had 2 airplanes that we didn't need and couldn't afford to put into production.

  • @markbowles2382
    @markbowles2382 Місяць тому +38

    I swear it looks like a dragon to me....
    A very beautiful dragon with just a wisp of a smile.

    • @blackjed
      @blackjed 28 днів тому +3

      Like it knows that if it had the chance... Everything would be fire.

    • @DennisCosteaJr
      @DennisCosteaJr 17 днів тому

      I wonder how much fuel it drinks up for each flight hour?
      Those engine exhausts certainly look very large, and so with this model still around and the blueprints available, could we build an updated version to protect the planet from invasion today?
      They could arm it with the latest air-to-air missiles, or lasers and so forth, plus give the airframe a stealth coating.

  • @tobsixi6702
    @tobsixi6702 Місяць тому +123

    Engineer at home: we are almost finished with the project but we still need a name for it
    Engineers 8yo son: XB70 nuclear armed deep penetration supersonic strategic bomber 😂

    • @GrrrRu
      @GrrrRu 28 днів тому

      Deep penetration? Isn't it too much for a 8yo😂😂😂

    • @1yoan3
      @1yoan3 27 днів тому +16

      XB70 nuclear armed deep penetration splinter covert super mega monster extra fast supersonic brilliant genius tactical strategic bomber

    • @herbderbler1585
      @herbderbler1585 27 днів тому +4

      ​@@1yoan3 Nenechi, is that you?

    • @prezentoappr1171
      @prezentoappr1171 26 днів тому

      Lmrofl
      ​@@herbderbler1585

    • @prezentoappr1171
      @prezentoappr1171 26 днів тому +1

      ​@@herbderbler1585BBit chungus Ollie moment

  • @fetusofetuso2122
    @fetusofetuso2122 26 днів тому +3

    Mean time the USSR put a satellite in orbit.

  • @w5527
    @w5527 26 днів тому +2

    The Buff will never be replaced! Grandpa Buff will live forever!

  • @BLACKMONGOOSE13
    @BLACKMONGOOSE13 28 днів тому +28

    Wouldn’t it have been cool if the Air Force had kept planes like this, that were ahead of their time, going just for airshow purposes.

    • @BLACKMONGOOSE13
      @BLACKMONGOOSE13 28 днів тому +7

      I know the expense would’ve been crazy.

    • @christopherdecorte1599
      @christopherdecorte1599 26 днів тому +5

      They kinda do go to any base they put the old air crafts on pedestals it's not economical to maintain them in working order but they are kept in cosmetic shape and look amazing.

    • @flying_kiwi_thatflies
      @flying_kiwi_thatflies 25 днів тому +2

      or even just have them in taxiable condition like xh558

    • @slate613
      @slate613 25 днів тому +1

      The Valkyrie has been at the AF Museum in Dayton, Ohio for years. She's still there and looking awesome as ever.

    • @n003lb
      @n003lb 17 днів тому

      Not only would it have been prohibitively expensive to keep the Valkyrie flying just for PR purposes, it would have been kind of dangerous. From what I've heard, this was not an easy dragon to ride, and the fact that there is only one in existence, it would be far too valuable to potentially lose in a crash.
      It would be amazing to see it fly again, though, I'll admit.

  • @roberluancoluanco
    @roberluancoluanco 27 днів тому +11

    Absolutely gorgeous machine😮

  • @homefrontforge
    @homefrontforge 18 днів тому

    I first met this beautiful bird in 1970. She sat outside the old museum facility on the other side of Wright-Patt. For years she sat outside the museum's present location. I was very happy to see her cleaned up and inside, next to my other favorite bird, the SR-71. Growing up near the base was and is a privilege. So much history!

  • @erikwaters238
    @erikwaters238 25 днів тому +2

    This bomber program was the prime motivation for the development of the MiG-25, IIRC.

    • @gregalcorn-pu5ye
      @gregalcorn-pu5ye 17 днів тому

      25 was designed to intercept the SR-71 Blackbird man get your facts straight the mig-25 wasn't even thought of when the valkyrie what is being developed do your research man

    • @winternow2242
      @winternow2242 16 днів тому

      Yep, that's what the internet says. Problem is, the facts don;t support that. The B-70 was designed in 1957, years before the Soviets authroized developmen of the MiG-25. The US cancelled the B-70 a few weeks later, but development of the MiG-25 continued for the following decade.
      Clearly, the 2 planes have nothing in common.

  • @tomnisen3358
    @tomnisen3358 Місяць тому +43

    It's at Wright Patterson AFB in Dayton Ohio.
    The world's largest Air Force Museum!
    Better than the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum!

    • @slate613
      @slate613 25 днів тому +3

      Been there many times. Got to walk under the SR-71 before they put up the rope barriers
      Truly amazing place..

    • @phillyphil1513
      @phillyphil1513 24 дні тому +3

      yup i visit regularly (although the Smithsonian out by Dulles with a Shuttle, a Concorde, a SR-71, and an F14 definitely holds its own). was just at Wright Patterson back in Dec 2023 to photograph the newly added Sukhoi Su-27...
      ironically something overlooked about NAFM is actually found in the name, in that unfortunately what you WON'T see there are any Navy Aircraft like the aforementioned F14, F18, etc...
      oh another place with a half-decent collection is the museum at Hill AFB, Salt Lake City. a well known base for F16 and now F35, they have on display the only SR-71C in existence, which apparently was a hybrid made from the rear half of a YF-12 and the front half of a 71.

    • @dallasyap3064
      @dallasyap3064 21 день тому

      I thought Smithsonian was the largest??

  • @retiredsmlltwncop3985
    @retiredsmlltwncop3985 28 днів тому +15

    The Museum of the United States Air Force... beautiful bird...

    • @decay21450
      @decay21450 23 дні тому +1

      Dayton, OH. Worth the trip.

  • @juandiegoprado
    @juandiegoprado 18 днів тому +1

    It’s absolutely insane that in 15 years, long-range bombers went from the propeller-driven B-29 to a bomber that could cruise at mach 3 at 70,000 feet, and was immediately deemed obsolete because self-guided, intercontinental nuclear warheads delivery systems were invented. The pace in which technology has been advancing ever since the industrial revolution is astonishing.

  • @vectoralphaAI
    @vectoralphaAI 23 дні тому +1

    The 1950s saw a massive jump in technology capability and innovation for some reason.

  • @DeepThought77
    @DeepThought77 27 днів тому +27

    How many bombers have they designed to replace the B-52? Yeah they can never find a way to replace it lol

    • @dallasyap3064
      @dallasyap3064 25 днів тому +4

      Actually they can and did. But the question isn't about capabilities but about money.

    • @darkmatter1152
      @darkmatter1152 24 дні тому +1

      B-21 Raider

    • @the_darkgameryt
      @the_darkgameryt 23 дні тому +3

      the b-52 was still in production so this was not made to replace it

    • @winternow2242
      @winternow2242 16 днів тому +1

      @@the_darkgameryt While the "aging" part is clearly wrong, it's not surprising that defense designers would start working on the replacement for a system still n production.
      As an example, M60 tank production continued into the 1960s, which was about when the US began developing its replacment, the MBT-70.
      Being proactive turned out to be a good idea, because the MBT-70- was ultimately cancelled, as was its successor, XM803. Eventually the Army got its M60 replacement, the M-1, around 1980, 20 years after the older tank entered service, and over a decade after they began trying to replace that older tank.

    • @clarenceobert5860
      @clarenceobert5860 16 днів тому +1

      @@darkmatter1152 The B-21 is to replace the B-2, hence it's first assignment to Ellsworth AFB, SD. With the new engine replacement program for the B-52 (along with electronic upgrades), it's expected to still be in service for at least another 30 years.

  • @Kahless_the_Unforgettable
    @Kahless_the_Unforgettable 28 днів тому +31

    B-52's first flight was 1952. It came into service in 1955. They were still being built up until 1962. They were not "Aging" in 1959. They were brand new.
    The Valkarie wasn't meant to replace an "Aging" airframe. It was meant to usher in a new strategic doctrine. One that turned out to be wrong.

    • @FP194
      @FP194 27 днів тому

      The B-52 was obsolete before it was built as Vietnam proved
      It’s role now is as a stand off platform to launch ALCMs

    • @Kahless_the_Unforgettable
      @Kahless_the_Unforgettable 27 днів тому

      @@FP194 Yes. I believe I mentioned that. The doctrine changed. The airframe was still brand spanking new. It was not "Aging".
      It was built for carpet bombing. But our politicians became increasingly cowardly. They were afraid to use this tactic because it might strike a cold war adversary on accident.
      If they would have used it as it was intended, it wouldn't have been "Obsolete" at all. It would have been bleeding edge.
      But now it has upgrades to fit into the new, cowardly doctrine of politics. A doctrine that will be abandoned if we ever have a real war. Because it's way too expensive.

    • @dallasyap3064
      @dallasyap3064 25 днів тому +2

      Correct, which is why the B-1A was cancelled, and when it was brought back, it went through some redesign and re-designated as B-1B, for low level penetration.

    • @Kahless_the_Unforgettable
      @Kahless_the_Unforgettable 25 днів тому +2

      @@dallasyap3064 exactly. The doctrine changed both times. Even though the airframes were brand new. Neither of them were "Aging".

    • @HuntingTarg
      @HuntingTarg 21 день тому +1

      Doctrines aren't "right" or "wrong" except in their effectiveness. The doctrine of high-speed flyover missions through USSR airspace was abandoned and reworked after the Gary Powers incident.

  • @joshrandall3632
    @joshrandall3632 25 днів тому +2

    I saw this bad bird at Wright Patterson AFB when I was a young Boy Scout in the '80s. I remember being in awe if it's immense size and the look of those 6 engines.

  • @zacharysherry2910
    @zacharysherry2910 25 днів тому +2

    It was a game changer... Changed the game so much that they never used it.

  • @TinDogg21
    @TinDogg21 Місяць тому +12

    seen that aircraft flyinh in north Texas back in 67😮😮😮😮

  • @In_Need_of_a_Savior
    @In_Need_of_a_Savior 27 днів тому +5

    So far ahead of its time. MIND BOGGLING
    Reminds me of Darth Vader's ship only with wings🪽🪽

  • @domosrage5434
    @domosrage5434 25 днів тому +1

    everyone talking about how the B-52 was not "aging" in the 50s because it was still "new"
    But you guys fail to realize that the B-52 was already considered an "obsolete" design when it was being designed, let alone by the time it entered service. Not to mention, command always wants something new to replace the things they *just* put into production. While we all love the BUFF, you can't ignore that it is a relic from a different era of warfare.
    All that said, I would love to see a BUFF in space combat

  • @R462venom
    @R462venom 23 дні тому

    I love how retrofuturistic the plane looks! Definitely a big change from the B-52

  • @JavaU18C
    @JavaU18C Місяць тому +27

    How many adjectives does a plane need?

    • @MarkSparks-xd9yy
      @MarkSparks-xd9yy Місяць тому +8

      23

    • @oeliamoya9796
      @oeliamoya9796 Місяць тому +8

      You should hear the names of today's missiles. Advanced tactical extended range armor penetrating bunker busting hypersonic JDAMs

    • @Woollyduck6766
      @Woollyduck6766 25 днів тому

      So no one’s gonna question the “deep-penetration” 😂😂

    • @suntzu1409
      @suntzu1409 24 дні тому

      70

    • @scandalouslando204
      @scandalouslando204 21 день тому

      Well. It completely knocked the deep penetration out the park. Gotta love the deep penetration feature. I think I just like saying deep penetration. Call sign "penetrator" . 😅😅😅

  • @brotherenoch6838
    @brotherenoch6838 Місяць тому +29

    Awesome Piece of Machinery!
    Mach 3+ on an average day 😉

  • @charlesballiet7074
    @charlesballiet7074 26 днів тому +3

    god thats so pretty they just dont makes aircraft look that cool and powerfull anymore

  • @davidbrooks187
    @davidbrooks187 23 дні тому

    This was fantastic. It warms the soul that these Gen Z’s see the past & want to celebrate it. Made my day !

  • @jimsanders4412
    @jimsanders4412 Місяць тому +9

    I would think it would be known as the predecessor to the B-1. Overall, very similar.🤷‍♂️
    And the “BUFF” is STILL getting it done!!!👍😉😄😄

  • @IsfetSolaris
    @IsfetSolaris 27 днів тому +3

    The B-70 is much like the SU-47. An aircraft that was seeming solely designed to force the opponent's hand into building a counter, with little to no realistic chance it would ever enter service.

  • @literallyshaking8019
    @literallyshaking8019 19 днів тому

    One of the most beautiful planes ever made.

  • @Smoos54
    @Smoos54 19 днів тому +1

    50s and 60s golden age of aerospace, now the industry is stagnant

  • @that_Dominic_guy
    @that_Dominic_guy Місяць тому +3

    It also didn’t help that a high altitude U-2 spy plane was downed at the cruising altitude of (a lot of feet). Interceptors also got better and air to air missiles were becoming increasingly sophisticated, so high altitude bombers which didn’t have any, if at all, defensive systems were basically a clay pigeon at a trap shoot competition

  • @everypitchcounts4875
    @everypitchcounts4875 Місяць тому +10

    Now imagine it going up against the XF-108 Rapier

    • @john2g1
      @john2g1 Місяць тому

      Well now you're just making the USA version of: if GOD can do anything can you create an object that he can't lift?

  • @justanotherperson2960
    @justanotherperson2960 25 днів тому +3

    All beautiful until a Foxbat takes you out with conventional missile 😂

  • @kvmoore1
    @kvmoore1 24 дні тому +1

    That plane was designed and built way back during the 1950s. WOW!!! It looks so far ahead of its time and still looks very modern even today! It instantly reminds me of the Concorde.

  • @maksstefaniuk6761
    @maksstefaniuk6761 29 днів тому +3

    Thats what mig 25 was made to defeat

    • @gregalcorn-pu5ye
      @gregalcorn-pu5ye 17 днів тому

      The mig-25 was made to intercept the SR-71 Blackbird man get your facts straight

    • @winternow2242
      @winternow2242 16 днів тому

      I don;t see how. The B-70 was designed in 1957, and the Soviets didn;t authorize work on the MiG-25 until 1961. A few weeks later, JFK announced cancellation of the B-70. The Soviets contunued developing the MiG-25 for over a decade afterwards. The 2 planes obviously have nothing in common with each other.

  • @k7y
    @k7y 26 днів тому +4

    Currently there are no retirement plans for B52. It's expected to stay in service for at least until 2050s

  • @andylewis7360
    @andylewis7360 23 дні тому

    To think that aviation went from wood and cloth to THIS in half a century is absolutely mind-boggling!

  • @eckyx9019
    @eckyx9019 14 днів тому

    Stunning design...a Real beauty

  • @HPDrifter2
    @HPDrifter2 27 днів тому +3

    "Aging B52?" Quit wasting server space.

  • @thomasrobinson182
    @thomasrobinson182 Місяць тому +7

    Not 'ICBM', but surface to air missiles.

    • @thomasrobinson182
      @thomasrobinson182 Місяць тому +5

      @@chieftain-sid ICBM = Intercontinental Ballistic Missile. Intercontinental means continent or land mass to land mass. Not a surface to air missile.

    • @DennisHolmberg-sl1hz
      @DennisHolmberg-sl1hz 26 днів тому +1

      @@thomasrobinson182 It sounded like a computer generated run on sentence.
      It said 'fighter interceptors were the primary threat to bombers at the time'
      Didn't pause long and went into the reason bombers are less useful with 'Continental ballistic missiles'.
      It did omit the SAM's becoming the actual reason why bombers are less useful in actual combat.
      AI and CG voices have no sense of timing and it just rolled along like one sentence.

  • @davidcontini7217
    @davidcontini7217 24 дні тому

    An absolutely beautiful aircraft. One of my favorites.

  • @jamesburton1050
    @jamesburton1050 26 днів тому +2

    And the B-52? Still flying!!

  • @_firecat_
    @_firecat_ 29 днів тому +3

    why don't we have that plane as an airliner?

    • @naokid7329
      @naokid7329 27 днів тому +4

      because look at where those engines are. where on earth would the passengers go? there is no space, the interior space is dedicated to fuel and engines

  • @Yuri.Msk.777
    @Yuri.Msk.777 Місяць тому +19

    The TU-160 flies and can do it's job, hopefully it'll never have to 🙏

    • @stephenh4177
      @stephenh4177 Місяць тому +5

      TU-160 VS. B1 Lancer
      Who wins?

    • @TheRogueminator
      @TheRogueminator Місяць тому +11

      ​@@stephenh4177Neither, they are bombers, not meant to hit each other?

    • @butchwilliams
      @butchwilliams Місяць тому

      @@TheRogueminatorI think what the douchebag meant was which one is everyone’s favorite, not which one would win in a fight. You’d have to be dumber than drool on a dildo to think theses two would actually fight each other…but on the other hand, look who asked that comment…..

    • @john2g1
      @john2g1 Місяць тому +1

      ​@@TheRogueminator I guess none of them have an Amazon Prime video subscription... Fallout is fun to watch; terrible to live through.
      Maybe Dr. Strangelove should be required reading (viewing) in school?

    • @Intrusive_Thought176
      @Intrusive_Thought176 28 днів тому +4

      The b1 lancer all the sudden doesn't exist?

  • @frankreynolds445
    @frankreynolds445 21 день тому

    I had a model of this air craft in the late 1960s. Awesome looking bomber.

  • @jeffschroder3572
    @jeffschroder3572 23 дні тому

    The xb-70 will always be my favorite.

  • @jamesmartinez1246
    @jamesmartinez1246 Місяць тому +15

    Leave it to the Americans to use supersonic Jets as bombers instead of air travel

    • @scottjustscott3730
      @scottjustscott3730 Місяць тому +5

      So? Why don't you take a nice vacation and be sure to book your flight on one of the air travel industry's fleet of supersonic airliners. Be sure to let everyone know how it goes.

    • @john2g1
      @john2g1 Місяць тому +2

      ​@@scottjustscott3730 Should we tell him who invented the first airplane and that it was for air travel? Or do we leave him to his catchphrases?

    • @sinenomine7984
      @sinenomine7984 28 днів тому

      @@john2g1They look for any reason to trash America so logic will do no good.If it’s anything like TikTok around here, it’s full of Russian trolls.You can say”good morning”and they’ll somehow twist into an anti-American statement.The funny thing is that after you see it enough, it starts to look REALLY desperate. 😂

    • @Intrusive_Thought176
      @Intrusive_Thought176 28 днів тому +3

      Why did the Concorde get retired again?

    • @iamaloafofbread8926
      @iamaloafofbread8926 28 днів тому +3

      ​@scottjustscott3730 Go easy on the uninformed. They don't know how easy it is to die from stupidity.

  • @charlesrichardson8635
    @charlesrichardson8635 25 днів тому +3

    The XB70 scared the crap out of the Soviets and it was discontinued because of fears of destabilizing MAD.

    • @rap2xtrooper878
      @rap2xtrooper878 23 дні тому +2

      No, the concept of strategic nuclear bombers flying over the enemy mainland just went obsolete with the introduction of SAMs. Flying sustained Mach 3 at 70,000 feet was no longer even enough to keep bombers safe from radar-guided ground-launched missiles

    • @charlesrichardson8635
      @charlesrichardson8635 23 дні тому +2

      @@rap2xtrooper878 Actually at the time, that is not correct. It was the MiG25 that had the ability to get up fast enough and use AA missiles but even they had to had enough need time. Plus the B70 would have a crap load EW

    • @winternow2242
      @winternow2242 16 днів тому

      Huh? I have yet to see any sign that the Soviets were scared at all. By 1964, when the 1st had flown, the SOviets had already flown the MiG-25, SAMs, nuclear armed missiles in land-based silos and in submarines, and the larges conventional forces in Europe.
      A few bombers which were vulnerable to intercptor missiles and aircraft, and slower than ICBMs wasn't going to threate or scare anyone, or destabilize anything.

  • @vettebecker1
    @vettebecker1 15 днів тому +1

    It’s the concord!!! I love it!!

  • @BK-dy8jk
    @BK-dy8jk 16 днів тому +1

    I CAN tell you for sure that the coating that goes on the aircraft at that speed makes all the difference from a turtle to a cheetah. I recommend a Teflon coating. It won’t get ripped off at those speeds. It will slice through air like butter. Take it from my ex race car driver, I know…

  • @kennethwilson8633
    @kennethwilson8633 Місяць тому +3

    We should have made them

    • @john2g1
      @john2g1 Місяць тому +1

      It would have been a massive waist and ultimately we got the B1 which is basically the same thing but better.

    • @kennethwilson8633
      @kennethwilson8633 Місяць тому

      @@john2g1 it was never really built as designed or in any kind of numbers needed that’s why we are stuck with ancient B52s that fall apart during press missions like going to help in the pacific.

    • @john2g1
      @john2g1 29 днів тому +1

      @@kennethwilson8633 Are you talking about the B1?
      The decision to move to stealth aka B2 and Fighter/Bombers or Joint Strike Fighters is why we don't have a fleet of B1s. Not to mention land and sub based ICBMs.

    • @Intrusive_Thought176
      @Intrusive_Thought176 28 днів тому +2

      We had mach 25 missles that went 8K miles and flew 700 miles up in the air.

    • @kennethwilson8633
      @kennethwilson8633 28 днів тому

      @@Intrusive_Thought176 those things with 40 year old computers with floppy disk drives??? We would be lucky if half of what we kept still works.

  • @piotrkrudysz8153
    @piotrkrudysz8153 22 дні тому

    Astonishingly beautiful

  • @jonasmcrae2
    @jonasmcrae2 23 дні тому

    Probably the most badass airplane ever

  • @pdtech4524
    @pdtech4524 17 днів тому +1

    The fact we went from the first ever powered flight on 17th December 1903 to jet engines, delta wings, mach 3 and nukes in 50 years tells me one thing, we traded technologies with aliens 👽 😳

  • @Pat_Playz
    @Pat_Playz 18 днів тому

    I recently got to see this in person, it is truly a beauty to look at

  • @Kieran0
    @Kieran0 25 днів тому

    Stuff like this just makes Concorde seem even more insane - the fact that it could cruise at mach 2 whilst full of passengers sipping on champagne is just crazy to me.
    Concorde's first flight was only 5 years after the XB70, wild.

  • @admiralpavelnakhimov8755
    @admiralpavelnakhimov8755 24 дні тому +1

    "crewed nuclear bombers seen as obsolete"
    Yet still part of the Nuclear Triad alongside ICBMs and SSBNs

  • @FirstnameLastname-rc8yd
    @FirstnameLastname-rc8yd 18 днів тому

    I know I’ve never heard this before, but that was a mouthful.

  • @davidca96
    @davidca96 25 днів тому

    one of the most incredible planes ever produced.

  • @EchosTackyTiki
    @EchosTackyTiki 23 дні тому +1

    They tried to get a speed freak to replace Grandpa Buff. Fuck that.

  • @nacholiron
    @nacholiron 20 днів тому

    One of the most beautiful airplanes, together with the TSR.2

  • @edwinlipton
    @edwinlipton 16 днів тому

    Beautiful looking mechanical Bird.

  • @mrnohax5436
    @mrnohax5436 25 днів тому

    b-52 has something no other aircraft has....
    *and that is old man strength*

  • @rossdavis2294
    @rossdavis2294 23 дні тому

    Awesome looking aircraft!

  • @PowerandControlUFU
    @PowerandControlUFU 26 днів тому

    The best typewriters ever made

  • @frankshannon3235
    @frankshannon3235 9 днів тому

    It’s worth the trip to Dayton all by itself.

  • @2FRESH-4U
    @2FRESH-4U 23 дні тому

    What a golden age of engineering it was

  • @keithhendrickson8522
    @keithhendrickson8522 18 днів тому

    1950s: "Hey old man, I'm here to replace you."
    B-52 70 years later and still in production: "Did you say something, prototype?"

    • @sonza68
      @sonza68 6 днів тому

      They are still in service and have gone through numerous upgrade programs, but they have been out of production since 1962.

  • @001jetman
    @001jetman 25 днів тому

    Beauty in motion

  • @silveresquire
    @silveresquire 26 днів тому +1

    The galaxy isn't empty we should use these weapons against any possible threats not ourselves

  • @richardeldridgesr.9919
    @richardeldridgesr.9919 18 днів тому

    It would be nice to see one of these at air shows.

  • @ericcjohnson7414ej
    @ericcjohnson7414ej 19 днів тому

    The Buff will has outlived every other aircraft.

  • @darrenbauer3291
    @darrenbauer3291 23 дні тому

    if this plane was a “secret” aircraft from the 50s-60s, i can only imagine what we have now.

  • @nathanmccabe2085
    @nathanmccabe2085 17 днів тому +1

    if this is one they told us about, imagine the ones they haven't.

  • @grizzlycountry1030
    @grizzlycountry1030 26 днів тому

    Designed to replace the B-52 which has been in service since 1955 that is expected to be inservice until the 2050s. 100 years is damn impressive service life for a plane in the military.

  • @andrewlorentz685
    @andrewlorentz685 19 днів тому

    And yet "The Buff" is still in service and probably will be forever!

  • @projecttdx44
    @projecttdx44 14 днів тому +1

    60% percent yapping
    40% percent facts

  • @samaktush
    @samaktush 15 днів тому

    Валькирия прекрасный образец мощи человеческого гения и инженерии! Красивая машина!

  • @j.pendergrass9805
    @j.pendergrass9805 19 днів тому

    Wingman always subverting that nuclear deep penetration

  • @singleasasin
    @singleasasin 24 дні тому

    This was fun to watch & learn 😊👍

  • @flechette3782
    @flechette3782 25 днів тому

    The B-70 is a magnificent design. In many ways better than the SR-71.

  • @johanfahlberg3778
    @johanfahlberg3778 23 дні тому

    This is one of the coolest planes, still. It has a special place in my heart, where B-17G, Viggen and Spitfire (amongst a couple of others) resides.