|
If you haven't
already done so
Please
Sign ASTRA's Guestbook
Should you wish to contact the
society or require general information please contact ASTRA
using the following Email address:
info@astra.org.uk
Should you encounter any problems
with this Web
Page please
email:
portwin@easynet.co.uk
|
|
Nick
Franco's Personal Summary
Some have looked at
the XB-70 program, pointed out that the expenditure of $1.3
billion only resulted in 128 flights and one
high-maintenance aircraft at the USAF Museum. Others have
pointed to the YF-12 and SR-71 as far more successful and
capable testbeds for Mach 3 flight.
But the Valkyrie was
more than just an airplane. It was a complete package that
advanced aerodynamic design, created the template for
honeycomb construction, and allowed for extensive testing
almost a decade before the first SR-71 appeared at an
airshow. In addition, the YF-12 and SR-71 were never
destined for mass production -- their cost was far too high
with the composite and titanium skin, and maintenance costs
off the charts (In 1991, with just a few airframes in
service, the USAF still spent more than $400 million on
maintaining the Blackbird).
Much of the costs
related to the XB-70 would have easily been amortised out
had production ever become a reality. The J93 engines, the
tooling to build the airframes -- all of this normally would
have been spread across hundreds of aircraft. Indeed,
indirectly, the research from the program went on to benefit
many aircraft, from supersonic fighters to mundane
commercial jetliners. Had AV/2 not been lost, there would
certainly have been many, many more flights. But even with
the limited flights, and the use of AV/1 at the end of the
program, critical data regarding the SST was gained. Even
though we don't think about it, the Valkyrie effectively
killed the SST program by showing that supersonic flight by
airliners, no matter how high they flew, would have too
great a sonic boom at ground level to ever be
acceptable.
Modern test programs
have involved high angles of attack, improved control, and
many other features important to the planes of tomorrow. But
unlike the Valkyrie, they represent advances into the known,
enhancements of what aircraft are capable of today. The
Valkyrie was conceived in 1959, a year when the Air Force
was getting its first Mach 2 fighter (ironically, the F-104
Starfighter), yet here was a program calling for a Mach 3
bomber with long range endurance. And despite never being
truly optimised from flight data, the program developed a
plane that could take off weighing more than 538,000 pounds,
and cruise at three times the speed of sound.
For me, the magic of
the Valkyrie is not just in what she accomplished, but in
how far she reached to accomplish it.
Nick
Franco
|
 Page
Nine
|
Page
Eleven
|
|
