B-58 HUSTLER SUPERSONIC BOMBER EJECTION POD DEVELOPMENT ESCAPE AND SURVIVE 71472
Вставка
- Опубліковано 2 кві 2015
- Support Our Channel : / periscopefilm
Produced by the Stanley Aviation Corp. as part of their contract for Convair, "Escape and Survive" details the development of the escape capsule for the B-58 Hustler. Convair's B-58 was the first operational supersonic jet bomber capable of Mach 2 flight, and that aspect posed a unique challenge for aircrew survival. The solution was a large crew capsule that would eliminate the effects of wind blast.
The B-58 aircraft was designed by Convair engineer Robert H. Widmer and developed for the United States Air Force for service in the Strategic Air Command (SAC) during the 1960s. It used a delta wing, which was also employed by Convair fighters such as the F-102, with four General Electric J79 engines in pods under the wing. It carried a nuclear weapon and fuel in a large pod under the fuselage rather than in an internal bomb bay.
Replacing the Boeing B-47 Stratojet medium bomber, it was originally intended to fly at high altitudes and supersonic speeds to avoid Soviet fighters. The B-58 received a great deal of notoriety due to its sonic boom, which was often heard by the public as it passed overhead in supersonic flight.
The introduction of highly accurate Soviet surface-to-air missiles forced the B-58 into a low-level penetration role that severely limited its range and strategic value, and it was never employed to deliver conventional bombs. This led to a brief operational career between 1960 and 1970, when the B-58 was succeeded by the smaller, swing-wing FB-111A.
Stanley Aviation Inc. was founded in 1948 by Robert M. Stanley, a former Naval Aviator, with considerable experience in the Aviation field. Mr. Stanley had been the Vice President of Engineering at Bell Aircraft, participating in many flight test and engineering programs including the Bell X-1, and X-2 programs. The company designed and built many diverse products prior to entering into the escape and egress engineering field.
See our friend's website, www.ejectionsite.com/stanley/, for more information about the Stanley Aviation Corp. and the B-58 survival system.
This film is part of the Periscope Film LLC archive, one of the largest historic military, transportation, and aviation stock footage collections in the USA. Entirely film backed, this material is available for licensing in 24p HD and 2K. For more information visit www.PeriscopeFilm.com
I worked at Stanley Aviation in Denver in 1959 and 1960 on the propulsion of the escape capsule. A very challenging job.
I worked for Stanley Aviation back in those days. highly complex, and ahead of it's day. Stanley was a aviation pioneer, by the way.
Old docs=real explanation
Studying football players to develop part of a supersonic bomber has to be the most American thing of all time.
I didn't think Americans played football.
@@JohnyG29 sure we do, we play soccer as well.
I admit I LOVE these old time videos that explore and teach what went into the production and creation of so many different components of aircraft, regardless of craft use.
It very nearly boggles the mind to contemplate just how many disciplines it takes to conceive, construct and put into service each and every part, no matter how tiny or how big.
Thank you for presenting this video for our learning experience.
As a retired 454X2, i ca appreciate this older film. It, still pertains to todays needs.
Insane to think how much engineering and testing went into just one aspect of that aircraft.
As an engineer I am fascinated watching these documentaries of design processes.
This is really where the idea for the Smartcar came from.
lol
why is it called Smart? only dumb people drive that bucket
When America WAS great.
My dad worked on the B-58 program. One of his friends was beheaded ejecting from a B-58 before the escape pod was developed.
Peter Cox - poor guy "lost his head!"
I can't find any info on this individual. Was that really his name?@@coiledsteel8344
The original myth busters. This video was worth my time
Best looking aircraft ever built.
Machinen Kanone B-47 good
Love these old doc’s, thank you for publishing them!
That being said - at 15:08 really?!?! You had ONE job.....!
The guys who had to sit in that thing for 3 days straight in especially the arctic ocean, sure had a lot of moxie!
Lived it, Loved it was responsible for it....EGRESS was very much important. 3 of the top AFSC's were held accountable throughout their careers...EGRESS was one of them. I know, being one of them.
How many great achievements have began with that 4 worded desire...
"Where There's A Will" -Former Recondo Sgt. 82nd Abn. 32017
No mention of the bears??
My university senior project advisor started his career at Coleman, designing and building the Hurricane Mesa test facility, and was a member of the crew that supported these tests. His stories (some rather hilarious) inspired me to enter the field and a few years later, I worked as a test engineer for the Escape Systems division of McDonnell-Douglas (our motto: "Thrust You Can Trust"). One of my first assignments was at Hurricane Mesa. Good times...
We will be posting a Hurricane Mesa overview film in near future.
This ejection capsule is the most 1950s looking solution I’ve ever seen. How fitting that this was animated because it looks like something out of a comic book.
This is how proper docs are made....I am looking at you Discovery Channel/NatGeo. Loud flashy obnoxious CRAP.
heh, many outstanding youtube vids are documentaries that were shown on those channels back when they were documentary/education channels. I ***don't*** even bother tune to Discovery or NatGeo nowadays.
There used to be people called engineers. They worked in the real world and solved problems in the real world. Now days we have computer models, not real world. The engineers of the past put us on the moon.
Ah, the good old days when everyone could smoke at their jobs, and you had to perform engineering activities dressed in a damn suit, tie (or a bowtie) and dressing shoes instead of comfortable and safe working clothes...
Thats pretty cool, the Stanley Plant where they developed this thing used to be down the street from me. They're not there anymore since they moved to Mexico (yeah.) and then got acquired by some other company. But none the less, AWESOME!
Dat executive chair at 08:17 - wow.
Quick shot of XF8U-3 front end on rocket sled at 12:50.
Outstanding film!
god what a awesome jet, one of my favorites next to the foxbat :)
Ding Chavez : Commie...; )
B58 would turn out to be a one trick pony post Gary Powers and a dead end design wise. Foxbat (designed to intercept B58) was used to make Foxhound - a more interceptor
Two words: "Slide Rule"
These old timer documentaries are hilarious, that affected voice and the music...I cannot imagine a whole orchestra assembled and a director saying "Ok boys, this is the score for a very important film." "About what?" "Uh...about an escape pod for an airlplane..." (tumbleweed passing)
+RL R If only it were like that. All these films used canned music. It would have been the rare exception that got an original score!
@@PeriscopeFilm A-la Rogers and Hammerstein with Victory @ Sea!
Epic Series with a Heavenly Score.
Is this an available option on the Tesla Model X?
Read about these things since 70s never saw the movies until now. Just freaking amazing these things worked, no aircraft since have anything like these. Did not see the baby bear that tested these first.
Cool deathstar music for the landing capsule
15:03 Ohh look a butterfly.......15:07 Wait im supposed to be filming the Escape Capsule lol
loved this.
love this
I worked for Stanley lots of interesting stories
Thanks 👍
Glad you enjoyed it! Subscribe and consider becoming a channel member ua-cam.com/video/ODBW3pVahUE/v-deo.html
Nice.
That test sled is at Barksdale AFB if you happen to be passing through Bossier City, LA. Check it out the f you have time.
Very interesting.
Lol, sorry but this is epic. Life is precious but we are talking about hydrogen bomb carriers. This said it has the quality of most armed forces educational videos of this era.
The B58 is the hydrogen bomb carrier!! The bomb was carried in the pod under the plane, the whole pod would be released from the plane.
my dad worked escape systems and we went to Denver.
Great airplane. Very advanced. However, I think General Curtis LeMay put the nail in its coffin when he said: "The B-58 was an excellent aircraft if we wanted to attack Canada." It had very short "legs" when it came to fuel requirements.
It’s a shame the Great Maple Syrup Raids of ‘67-‘68 never materialized.
I never found out what kind of work my Uncle Art did in Mccllean AFB, Sacramento CA.
When you watch the Smithsonian channel and hear about leg restrains meant to hold limbs so they don't flail in the sir and break. But there's times this restrains don't do shit but break upon ejecting into a supersonic windstream you have to einder just how accurate ground testing is and have to wonder why it even matters that a capsule ejection seat is heavier and hard to maintain. It's called innovation and refining an idea instead of hoping a human body survives ejecting at Mach 1 to 2.
I always thought those canopies would come down and slice some feet off lol. I'm a big fan of the ejection designs on the F-111, B1, and the B-58.
I know.
That intro music reminded me of Blood Feast.
The Hustler fuselage shows clear lineage basis for the B-1 Lancer.
These Rollie-Poly capsules are simply amazing. Is a modern version of this used anywhere? It seems these could have evolved into lightweight and semi-affordable options for commercial/biz/GA.
the F-111 and B-1A had the entire crew cabin able to be ejected, but the XB-70 used the same clamshell pods.
That's got to be the most uncomfortable seat ever!
You have to consider the seat itself was of typical and comparable construction to other contemporary seats of the era with the exception of being highly (!) modified to protect the aircrew in the event of an ejection.
It is only then that the leg, arm and torso retract mechanisms came into play to pull all outlying body parts to fit INSIDE the ejection capsule.
Once the capsule and crewman descended and landed, the clamshell doors could be manually retracted, the leg and arm restraints released and the pilot or crewman would be freed up a bit to stretch his arms and legs.
Assuming they landed on terra firma (AKA, Earth), the capsule would be opened and the crewman could step outside of its confines.
Then there was NO discomfort outside of what was likely experienced from the ejection forces itself.
And assuming they couldn't be recovered by friendly forces in short order, they could avail themselves of all the included survival gear stored INSIDE the capsule itself. Additionally, if it was snowing the crewman could get back inside the capsule, wrap himself inside the included sleeping bag and fall asleep, unless he could find better accommodations such as a nearby cave to spend the night(s). And let's not forget that once ensconced inside the capsule, the crewman didn't have to fear being mauled by a bear, should that concern him present itself.
So, yeah, the seat MAY have been uncomfortable during the actual ejection sequences but the added safety afterwards FAR outweighed the other options.
That Mesa test run is some real Looney Tunes shit.
0:53
37°14'56.96"N
113°13'9.57"W
Everybody going on Vacation to Zion National Park drives past the cold war ejection testing area.
The assumption they made that playing football does not cause injury to the human body.was wrong. We now know that playing football does cause long term brain injuries.
Ejecting from a jet is a lot more punishing than taking a hit on the football field, but it beats the alternative.
neat teach. who would have thought there was such a thing as escape pods on modern aircraft already?
Elmer J Fapp - None for commercial Pilots, they ALL go down with passengers, like the old Captain went down with his ship!
What a amazing jet that was! One of my favs! General Dynamics/Convair is a incredible company! I wish Convair was still around...why aren't they?? They had made some really great innovative features like the ejection pod for example...just think what they could have made with today's tech..great video btw and I subscribed!
Politics. And the 'good old boy' network. It was either get rid of 6 B-52 bomber wings, or get rid of the 4 B-58. The B-52 guys had more political pull, so they did an end run around proper procedures and got the B-58's canceled. Which was a shame, as the B-58 was a better low altitude and penetration bomber than the B52 ever was.
But the B-58 had a lot of problems, too. 20% of them crashed.
Looking it over, about 18 of them were destroyed (maybe 10 actually 'crashed'), and almost half of those were due to pilot error. As just a few more than a hundred were originally built, yeah, I guess you're right, 20 percent. I knew guys who flew them though, and they never felt unsafe in them.
F-111 and F-16 the could and did
Check your history. This was brought about in part by McNamara's "wiz kids" who only seemed to understand abstracts of cost vs acceptable loss. The Air Force had been working on a system of using the B-58 for a stand off fire and forget of nukes and then let the 52's strike deeper into the heart of enemy heck Soviet territory. On that note remember that if we had to use the Convair B-36 for any combat we would have lost with a Convair POS. But, thats another story. :)
18:20 18:50 These guys sat in that thing for 3 days? I would go insane!
12:50 isnt this similar to the Supersonic Sled Physx demo from nVidia?
Just at the end there; why would they drill into those components _post_ anodising, especially for military applications?!? This would compromise the anti-corrosive layer which had just been created, making the bolt holes - _effectively hidden after assembly_ - the most likely points of initial corrosion and structural weakening.
American football keeping the world safe! If I’m not mistaken this specific system was never used or needed on the 58?
Back when MREs had smokes
Closing credit music reminds me of Mad Max...
Mike Mac Original Mad Max done without CG - REAL STUNDS!
Works on lava?
Test at 14:30
i like how they say the guy in the lake was ok with no ill effects but don't show him coming out of the pod lol
Is this the same pod used in the Valkyrie?
no. custom design and very different.
You can keep those subarctic tests... I'm good.
Will install this pod on future B-21?
Not supersonic, so no. F-111 was the last pod ejection system in the US inventory.
I remember my first year working in the Flight Test dept an engineer named Chuck W. Told of a story where they ejected a black bear from a 58. The bear was in good spirits when they strapped him in at the run station. Upon recovery the bear was nuts and had to be put down
@Galileo7of9 they said "here honey"
Oh, bother.
@@johngalt5205 look it up, the story was in AEROSPACE HISTORIAN . You can contact the Smithsonian
@@robertstack2144 I'm aware of the story. I made a Winnie the Pooh joke.
at 50,000 ft going Mach 2 shouldn't ejecting be about the same as ejecting at 10,000 ft at Mach 1 and not need any extra protection cause the airs thinner?
Did any of the crew ever use these "for real?"
Unfortunately as the XB-70 crash showed the escape capsule didn’t work especially in a flat spin.
Did a crew ever have to eject using that system?
+David Haft Visit www.ejection-history.org.uk/Aircraft_by_Type/B-58_hustler.htm
+PeriscopeFilm Thanks for that link. Kind of a morbid list to read, but glad most got out. Thanks!
As I recall this type of ejection was used on the experimental at the time XB-70 Valkyrie. The system FAILED Miserably. A later version of the system was the escape pod used on the F-111 Fighter/Bomber. I don't know if it was ever used successfully.
@ James Tuttle - I saw the remains of an F-111 that had crashed. It was in a huge hanger and the plane was shattered into millions of pieces. However, the escape pod was sitting completely intact in one corner of the hanger. The two man crew had survived.
Yeah, Major Carl Cross's capsule wouldn't close & eject, tragically because of the high G forces it was supposed to withstand so he went down with the aircraft and died. Major Al White's seat did retract but his arm got trapped in the clamshell door, he eventually got it loose and ejected but in the confusion and pain forgot to activate the airbags (which weren't automatic) so he landed hard and was critically injured. All in all a wonder he survided at all.
Didn't that debacle lead to a redesign of the F-111 because the Navy refused to use the individual ejection pods after that & wanted an ejectable cabin?
Don`t forget people NO COMPUTER AIDED DESIGNING ! everything all designed by hand and lots of drawings . And lots of humans doing the calculations, for all of the components and final design ,Brilliant more pleas .
Boeing should look at this
In Russia, pilots cheap, but aircraft expensive, so save plane...pilot, not so much
I read an excerpt from an article on Mig engineers.
The airforce was told the airframe and engine could preform at Gs that would kill the pilot.
The air force generals said
" build it, we'll worry about the pilot."
You only need to look at that one airshow ejection to prove that's not true.
Popeye overseeing 11:01
Looks like johnny quest
I got to tell you that B-58 Hustler was a sexy looking bitch .. What a beautiful aircraft ....
Next step...live testing at mach 2.
Probably would be easier and more practical to make entire cabin detach like in F111.. this is just a disaster waiting to happen
Bruh I love how they proved that the human body can withstand the g-forces in an ejection by rigging up football players
Research Col Paul Stapp, he's the man who did most of the high speed rocket rides...he was an MD by the way.
Matt Bowen they used black bears
#funra
Then:
ULTRA SLOW MOTION -20 times speed!!!!!!!!
Today:
Meh we are just using an old 230,000fps Chronos today so not the best...
I never really understood why some form of ejection is not part of commercial aircraft. Why is the human life not worth saving there?
There are many reasons why it's not even possible, let alone a good idea, unless you are talking about just having seats for the crew. If you are talking about giving parachutes or ejection seats to passengers in a commercial aircraft, it isn't possible. Too much weight to be feasible, too few crashes or situations in which it would actually do any good, and pretty much zero chance of surviving an attempt at getting out of and away from the aircraft alive.
If you are talking about cargo aircraft, where there are only a few crew members, it's a lot of extra weight to carry around that is just useless, very expensive, dead weight over 99.99% of the time. Also, most aircraft designed for transport of cargo are the same or similar aircraft that you'd see in an airliner, so they would not be designed for ejection seats. The crew could be given parachutes, but yet again, even in the very, very rare situation in which it would be necessary, the crew would likely still die, as most crashes take place upon takeoff or landing, in which there is not enough time to bail out, and even if you do manage to get out of the plane, you stand a high chance of hitting the aircraft as you immediately slow down, which would easily kill or severely injure you.
8:31 wait what?
Or Escape in multiple pieces ...........Safely...........
09:01 Hoho
Maybe I'm being naïve, but I would have thought it better for the entire cockpit - including the pilot, co-pilot and (in modern aircraft) a million dollars worth of avionics equipment - to separate from the rest of the airframe during ejection. That way there would be no need to add the weight of an additional pod, which also comes with its own substantial risks and less-than-pretty failure modes.
When the time has come for a pilot to bail the complete plane has become a write-off. Plus if you make the escape pod a large intregal part of the plane you run the risk of it not being intact when needed
The complete plane has become a write-off, you say? I think you're assuming that all ejections are the same. Far from it; in many cases the only reason that most of the plane is 'written-off' at that point is because the pilot has left. It could just be a broken wing. And if the empty plane could attempt a landing by itself, or use its own chute, or if the pilot could take part(s) of the plane with him, then it wouldn't all be lost. It's a technological problem is all.
As for the escape pod being an integral part of the plane, that's still the case with the system shown in the video above. Any additional piece of hardward carries with it additional potential problems. I don't think it's outlandish to design a cockpit that breaks away from the rest of the airframe, and the pilot can continue to use the same life support systems that he was already using in-flight. What percentage of ejections are due to cockpit damage? I doubt it would be many.
Yes I understand your viewpoint, but think about this. The ejection system is there to increase the chances of the pilot surviving. To introduce more hardware to the ejection system is undermining its original purpose. The bigger the system the higher the risk that damage leading up to a bail out is also plaguing the ejection system. Imagine being stuck in an escape pod with a million dollars worth of flaming aviation electronics.
The question is not what percentage of ejections are due to cockpit damage but what percentage of ejections is due to a major malfunction. I'd say it's close to 100%
It's still just a technological problem. It's well within the realm of possibility, and solving technological problems is what we're really good at. I might just as well ask you to compare this system, which has to pull the pilot's knees up to his chest, tuck in his ankles and feet, and deploy a multi-segment guillotine - folding him like a pretzel and encasing him in steel - before jetisoning him over the ocean, to one in which the whole cockpit breaks away gently like a spacecraft, with multiple redundant life-preserving devices on board.
The truth is that neither of us can even really predict the specifics of how a system like this would end up, having gone through the processes of repeated refinement. But there's no reason to believe that size matters in the way you suggest. Parachutes are already made for very large loads, and even at supersonic speeds. Rocket technology is abundant. You never know, it may turn out that ejecting pilot and co-pilot in a single pod is simpler and more reliable than a pair of ejection systems.
nagualdesign, this was done in the F111 fighter bomber, not sure if it was ever used in combat conditions though. check it out.
Man this guy was really drinking to coolaid
Really? Shakespeare?
11:28 looks kinky
They go through all that, spending $$$$$, and then cancel the airplane. Way to go, government.
Huh? It was operationally deployed. The B-58 served for a decade.
dhy5342 is a Hillary supporter...
The introduction of highly accurate Soviet surface-to-air missiles forced the B-58 into a low-level penetration role that severely limited its range and strategic value, and it was never employed to deliver conventional bombs. This resulted in only a brief operational career between 1960 and 1970 when the B-58 was succeeded by the smaller, swing-wing FB-111A.
machenderson it was forced into a low altitude role HOWEVER it was much more effective cost and operationally than any of its counterparts there were plans to convert it into a conventional warfare aircraft that were cancelled due to the aircraft itself being cancelled
Shows a guy who can't figure out a cannon plug......10:12-10:25 before he gives up. Jesus.
Thor Dehr lol that’s pretty funny someone didn’t know enough to edit that out realizing what he’s doing....
Please lose the timecode...easier to just put your logo onscreen rather that that irritating timecode.
Here's the issue: tens of thousands of films were destroyed and many others are at risk. Our company preserves these precious bits of history one film at a time. How do we afford to do that? By selling them as stock footage to documentary filmmakers and broadcasters. If we did not have a counter, we could not afford to post films like this on online, and no films would be preserved. It's that simple. So we ask you to bear with the watermark and timecodes.
So, in the past we tried many different systems including placing our timer at the bottom corner of our videos. What happened? Unscrupulous UA-cam users downloaded our vids, blew them up so the timer was not visible, and re-posted them as their own content. We had to use content control to have the videos removed and shut down these channels. It's hard enough work preserving these films and posting them, without having to deal with these kind of issues.
19:23 lol o my GOD, they used a black man.
Solid Mike P no they used black bears. I know I worked for Stanley
Both the plane and ejection system turned out to be a flop... lol
Needless complicated and inefficient.
Cut the BS
Did a crew ever have to eject using that system?
Yes, several times. One was unsuccessful due to an equipment failure caused by faulty maintenance.