Jump to content

B-58s, ground speed, and flight lunches


Recommended Posts

Several years back I got the B-58 Blunder book mentioned.

It too is interesting. Is from 2015.

Page 112 is, "The case of the A-10 Warthog -- another blunder in the making?"

 

Backing up to earlier pages about B-58,

top of page 63,

"

For the claim that B-58s were more expensive to operate, one

would have to believe that the size of a B-52 Wing was the same size

as a B-58 Wing. Not True. The two B-58 Wings each had 39 UE

(unit equipped) B-58s assigned, whereas the six B-52 Wings had a 

normal complement of only 15 UE (unit equipped) B-52s assigned.

...

Thirdly, a Top Secret report (now unclassified) estimated the

annual operating costs of strategic bombers, including the associated

cost for KC-135 tanker refueling support for both the B-52 and the B-

58. Surprisingly, it showed that the B-58, on an airplane-to-airplane

basis was lest costly to operate. 25.

"

that 25 refers to a footnote.

 

Author also addresses some myths about the B-58.

One of them concerning low-level operations. 

Just below middle of page 72,

"

In Sept 1959, even before the B-58 entered the operational force,

it flew three low altitude penetration flights. One four hour mission

on Sept 18 included a two hour flight at .92 Mach (700 Mph) at 500

feet or less AGL (above ground level.) One portion was as low as

200 feet AGL.  The low-level route started at Carswell AFB Texas

and ended with a simulated bomb attack on Edwards AFB in

California for a total of 1217 miles. It was noted to have been a

smooth ride despite turbulence and showed that the B-58's delta wing

with its low aspect ratio and strength was uniquely adaptable for low

level, high speed, flight. 19.,40. 

"

the 19 and 40 refer to footnotes

Link to post
Share on other sites

And the B-58 could have easily been upgraded with newer engines with the engine nacelle/pylon design ...

Interesting article, thanks SWF ...

 

-Gregg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The bit about cutting the B-58s in favor of retaining older B-52s and ultimately losing them as well, is even present in today's Air Force. Cutting Here to save There and in the end, still losing overall. 
Great article!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...