HIGHER FURTHER FASTER | From Rockets To Scramjets. Pushing Engineering And human Limits

HIGHER FURTHER FASTER | From Rockets To Scramjets. Pushing Engineering And human Limits | Part 2

Рет қаралды 70,280

Ай бұрын

Higher Further Faster | Evolution Of Aviation Part 2.
➤ Part 1: • HIGHER FURTHER FASTER ...
A look at the evolution of aviation.
A Look at the Bell X-2, North American XB-70 Valkyrie, Mikoyan-Gurevich Mig-25, McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle, Concorde, Lockheed F-104 Starfighter, Bell X-1, and Chuck Yeager's biography. as well as a look at Skunk Works Kelly Johnson.
The North American Aviation XB-70 Valkyrie was the 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 (NAA), the six-engined Valkyrie could cruise for thousands of miles at Mach 3+ while flying at 70,000 feet (21,000 m).
By the mid-1950s, the United States had developed a state-of-the-art, all-jet-powered bomber force. The newly introduced Boeing B-52 Stratofortesss could reach the Soviet Union from just about anywhere in the world. The soon-to-be-introduced supersonic Convair B-58 Hustler could dash to supersonic speeds. Both aircraft were engineering marvels. But even so, they were expected to perform poorly over Soviet airspace. The B-52 flew too slowly to stand a chance against the latest generation of Soviet interceptors, while the supersonic B-58 lacked the required range and payload to be truly effective. The U.S. Air Force needed a next-generation bomber that would combine the capabilities of both these aircraft. A plane that could fly at supersonic speeds travel long distances and carry large payloads.
To meet their new bomber requirements, the Air Force contracted leading aerospace companies to explore radical new technologies, like nuclear-powered jet engines for extending aircraft range and high-energy ‘zip-fuels’ to increase aircraft performance. Boeing and North American Aviation would play a vital role in research. But given the limitations of technology, the most practical solution put forward was the ‘dash concept’, which detailed an enormous aircraft that would travel most of the way to its target subsonically before jettisoning outer portions of its wings and fuel tanks to make a supersonic dash. These concepts were studied in an era of extraordinary advances in aviation technology and engineering, and by 1957 it became apparent that it might be possible to build a large, long-range bomber that could fly supersonically over its entire mission.
In 1957, the Air Force outlined their specifications for an aircraft that would cruise at Mach 3, up to an altitude of 75,000 feet. It was expected to offer a similar payload and range to the B-52. Boeing and North American Aviation both submitted design concepts, but North American’s proposal was selected for development. A key principle in North America’s design was compression lift, which would significantly improve the aircraft’s lift-to-drag ratio when flying at high supersonic speeds. The new bomber would be designed as the B-70 (XB-70 in experimental prototype form) and named the Valkyrie.
General characteristics
Crew: 2
Length: 185 ft 0 in (56.39 m)
Wingspan: 105 ft 0 in (32.00 m)
Height: 30 ft 0 in (9.14 m)
Wing area: 6,297 sq ft (585.0 m2)
Airfoil: Hexagonal; 0.30 Hex modified root, 0.70 Hex modified tip
Empty weight: 253,600 lb (115,031 kg)
Gross weight: 534,700 lb (242,536 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 542,000 lb (245,847 kg)
Fuel capacity: 300,000 pounds (140,000 kg) / 46,745 US gal (38,923 imp gal; 176,950 L)
Powerplant: 6 × General Electric YJ93 afterburning turbojet, 19,900 lbf (89 kN) thrust each dry, 28,000 lbf (120 kN) with afterburner
Performance
Maximum speed: 1,787 kn (2,056 mph, 3,310 km/h)
Maximum speed: Mach 3.1
Cruise speed: 1,738 kn (2,000 mph, 3,219 km/h)
Combat range: 3,725 nmi (4,287 mi, 6,899 km)
Service ceiling: 77,350 ft (23,580 m)
Lift-to-drag: about 6 at Mach 2
Wing loading: 84.93 lb/sq ft (414.7 kg/m2)
Thrust/weight: 0.314
Watch more aircraft, heroes, and their stories and missions ➤ / @dronescapes
To support/join the channel ➤ / @dronescapes
IG ➤ / dronescapesvideos
FB ➤ / dronescapesvideos
X/Twitter ➤ dronescapes.video/2p89vedj
THREADS ➤ www.threads.net/@dronescapesv...
#engineering #fastest #aircraft

Пікірлер: 18

@Dronescapes Ай бұрын

➤ Part 1: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/rbKFl6SmvdCVemw.html 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

@michaelsteiger8509 29 күн бұрын

The F-16 can accelerate thru Mach in the pure vertical . Done it a few times in a Block 10 and 15.

@markrix Ай бұрын

Dj fatboy slim must have played for the engineering crew during dev :)

@krungangkor9693 25 күн бұрын

Great and interesting from dangrek mountain capital hill

@jesse75 Ай бұрын

What was Yeager doing at this time ?

@DBoonful Ай бұрын

He was in Germany at this time flying Super Sabres

@KingPantocrator Ай бұрын

9:58...looks like an ostrich

@micodyerski1621 Ай бұрын

USA's Concorde, 20 years earlier!!!

@Dronescapes Ай бұрын

As a reminder, Concorde was a passenger aircraft, which is a whole different thing with a whole different set of issues. Boeing was working on their own Concorde counterpart, the 2707 SST. It was shut down and never went past the mockup stage for a variety of reasons, and despite it being one of Kennedy’s wishes, being essential in showing American technological superiority. If it is any consolation the Tupolev Tu 144 was a failure, despite the Soviets stealing Concorde’s plans all along. They could not even copy properly, as they had done so many other times before. Ironically the Tupolev was eventually sent to the U.S. for research purposes for a while.

@garneauweld1100 3 күн бұрын

SST

@davidelliott5843 Ай бұрын

The British Miles M-52 was intended to fly 1000 miles in one hour. It used a turbo jet engine and had a pilot escape capsule copied by USA for their X2. The M-52 project was close to flying the prototype when British government suddenly cancelled it and gave the designs to USA. Nobody knows why.

@Dronescapes Ай бұрын

There are some speculations regarding the Miles M.52, but I believe that you are taking it too far. They certainly shut down the project abruptly and without any explanation. For example, It was not sent to the U.S., but Miles did help Bell with aerodynamics, and yes the U.S. had full access to the program, as well as to other British projects, including the turbojet back in early 40s, during the war. I do not think that the Bell X-1 was a copy of the Miles, but it is also true that when people speculate that Miles run out of budget, that is also incorrect, as they still had plenty money left to keep going when the project was shut down. This exclusive recently published video filmed by Whittle’s friend shows a glimpse into the M.52 and some footage of the M.52 had not been seen before: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ld1drNOo3M-XeKM.htmlsi=6P4aGlrgMLb_qQph To the ones that claim the engine never worked, or even existed, here you can see it being tested, which is pretty interesting. Perhaps the greatest test pilot that ever lived, Eric Brown, was pretty clear in stating it would have worked. He was the designated test pilot. The testing day had already been established when it was shut down by the government without explanation. It will remain a mystery for years to come…

@peterdoege1740 8 күн бұрын

It was never built because it wouldn’t work. The UK was much better off pursuing civil aviation in the early days of the jet set.

@copuis Ай бұрын

ahem, just quickly, how would the XB-70 have influenced concorde's design??? the design for both jets started at the same time, both had different roles from the outset not only that, at the time, and for a NUMBER of years before, the UK was the leader in aircraft design, omg, and the mig25, was already in the works, to intercept UK jets, (the EE lightning was nuts, but the V bomber force was a greater risk as far as the russians thought)

@Dronescapes Ай бұрын

Concorde had some brilliant solutions that even the Soviets could not replicate, despite constantly stealing the plans, as we know today. Concorde made minimal use of the afterburners, and that was key.

@peterdoege1740 8 күн бұрын

The primary lesson of the XB-70 was that sub sonic aircraft were optimal for civil aviation. The lesson of the V-bombers, Concorde, and EE Lightning were the you should use American SLBM and non-UK aircraft.

@copuis 8 күн бұрын

@@peterdoege1740 what??? so you know that UK aircraft (and french) had far far far better aircraft at that same time, thats first off want a great example of that, the most successive bomber of the vietnam war was the b-57, which was a british design the U2, once documents started to get declassified, was intercepted from ABOVE by the lightning, and that was a number of years before garry took his USSR holiday but I am guessing you're "merican" so your knowledge is pretty bias, and lacking (just as an FYI, i am not an merican, french, or pom, dont even live in the northern hemisphere, so lack the cultural bias, or lack of education/historical knowledge )