Convair B-58 "Hustler" Design Evolution

Pretty sure that pops up in Jay Miller's book on the B-58. Pretty cool idea.
 
Somewhat saner than studies I've seen for B-47 or B-52 shelters. To deal with the excessive shelter span required, the aircraft were parked on an elevator conforming closely to their planform, lowered below the apron, and sliding doors closed above them. :eek:

Annoyingly, I can't remember where I saw the sketches...

Edit: Ah, it is of course RAND's R-266 Selection and Use of Strategic Air Bases, page 301.
 
Some NARA II RG 342FH images of MX-1626, MX-1964 and MX-1926
 

Attachments

  • x342FH-B26603-MX-1626-Consolidated-Vultee-B-58-Artist-Concept.jpg
    x342FH-B26603-MX-1626-Consolidated-Vultee-B-58-Artist-Concept.jpg
    84.7 KB · Views: 601
  • x342FH-B26604-MX-1964-Consolidated-B-58-Artist-Concept.jpg
    x342FH-B26604-MX-1964-Consolidated-B-58-Artist-Concept.jpg
    178.4 KB · Views: 418
  • x342FH-B26605-MX-1964-Consolidated-B-58-Artist-Concept.jpg
    x342FH-B26605-MX-1964-Consolidated-B-58-Artist-Concept.jpg
    191.8 KB · Views: 403
  • x342FH-B26606-MX-1926-Consolidated-B-58-Artist-Concept.jpg
    x342FH-B26606-MX-1926-Consolidated-B-58-Artist-Concept.jpg
    210.7 KB · Views: 441

Attachments

  • download.jpg
    download.jpg
    156.8 KB · Views: 739

Attachments

  • LAL_76022_MX-1626_(B-58)_PARD_1952.jpg
    LAL_76022_MX-1626_(B-58)_PARD_1952.jpg
    466.1 KB · Views: 203
  • LAL_76761_MX-1626_(B-58)_PARD_1952.jpg
    LAL_76761_MX-1626_(B-58)_PARD_1952.jpg
    595 KB · Views: 161
  • LAL_77068_MX-1626_(B-58)_on_Rocket_Booster_at_Wallops_IslandPARD_1952.jpg
    LAL_77068_MX-1626_(B-58)_on_Rocket_Booster_at_Wallops_IslandPARD_1952.jpg
    2.8 MB · Views: 178
Revisting NASA's MX-1626 page

Test 118, which was conducted in January 1953, is listed in the tunnel log book as "MX 1964 Drag Test Model (Convair)". At some unknown date, the tunnel log book was corrected from MX 1964 to MX 1626. The MX numbering system was the (probably classified) USAF project designator system similar to today's code word system for classified projects. MX-1964 was the USAF project designation for the long-range supersonic bomber XB-58 Hustler aircraft and was a continuation of USAF MX-1626 project which was a Convair supersonic bomber/reconnaissance aircraft study (Convair Model W-4). MX-1626 was, in turn, a continuation of the USAF project MX-871, which was a Consolidated-Vultee generalized supersonic heavy bomber study. It is interesting to note that the weapons pod carried by the production B-58 aircraft was originally a strategic high-altitude air-to-surface missile designated MX-1964-A. Regardless of the correct project designation (probably MX-1626), the photographs below obviously show an early B-58 Hustler development model (note the mid-wing mounted, single engine-nacelle on each wing and the long weapon, or weapon pod, mounted under the fuselage). Based on the tunnel log description, the model (note faired-over nacelle inlets) was used to determine the subsonic/transonic drag characteristics of the aircraft configuration.

Tests in the 16-Foot Transonic Tunnel covered all three major development phases (see the first photograph below):

Test 118 (Current Test) - Convair MX-1626 Drag Test

Test 120 - Convair MX-1964 Trim Drag Test

Test 132 - Convair B-58 Aerodynamics Test

 

Attachments

  • LAL_78360_Convair_Model_MX_(B-58)_1953.jpg
    LAL_78360_Convair_Model_MX_(B-58)_1953.jpg
    641.9 KB · Views: 170
  • LAL_78361_Convair_MX-1626_(B-58),_Test_118,_1-2-1953.jpg
    LAL_78361_Convair_MX-1626_(B-58),_Test_118,_1-2-1953.jpg
    716.2 KB · Views: 140
  • LAL_78362.jpg
    LAL_78362.jpg
    511.3 KB · Views: 127
  • LAL_78363.jpg
    LAL_78363.jpg
    282.1 KB · Views: 132
  • LAL_78405_Convair_Model_MX1964_(B-58)_.jpg
    LAL_78405_Convair_Model_MX1964_(B-58)_.jpg
    3 MB · Views: 135
Found in a NACA report a good number of configurations leading to the B-58. Judging from the drawings and model photos published by Jay Miller in his "B-58", the six 3-views I post go from the MX-1626 (number 1) to the definitive proposal. In particular, number 5 seems the configuration mock-upped (twin engine nacelles). Enjoy.. Relevant NACA report is RM SL53K04.
Report is here: https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/19990014470
 
Revisting NASA's MX-1964 page


Test 120 was a follow-on test to Test 118 except the USAF project had progressed to a competition between Convair (MX-1964) and Boeing (MX-1965). Test 120 was conducted in two tunnel entries during July 1953 to September 1953. The first entry was labeled in the run log as a pressure test; the second entry examined the aerodynamic effects of a cambered and uncambered wing, elevon settings, nacelle integration (split and siamese), and fins on the weapons pod. The MX numbering system was the (probably classified) USAF project designator system similar to today's code word system for classified projects. MX-1964 was the USAF project designation for the Convair long-range supersonic bomber XB-58 Hustler development aircraft and was a continuation of USAF MX-1626 project which was a Convair supersonic bomber/reconnaissance aircraft study (Convair Model W-4). MX-1626 was, in turn, a continuation of the USAF project MX-871, which was a Consolidated-Vultee generalized supersonic heavy bomber study. It is interesting to note that the weapons pod carried by the production B-58 aircraft was originally a strategic high-altitude air-to-surface missile designated MX-1964-A.
 

Attachments

  • LAL_81484.jpg
    LAL_81484.jpg
    566.2 KB · Views: 131
  • LAL_81487_Convair_MX-1964_(B-58),_Test_120,_8-31-1953.jpg
    LAL_81487_Convair_MX-1964_(B-58),_Test_120,_8-31-1953.jpg
    736.3 KB · Views: 116
  • LAL_81581.jpg
    LAL_81581.jpg
    246.8 KB · Views: 120
  • LAL_81582_Convair_MX-1964_(B-58),_Test_120,_9-10-1953.jpg
    LAL_81582_Convair_MX-1964_(B-58),_Test_120,_9-10-1953.jpg
    488 KB · Views: 116
  • LAL_81583.jpg
    LAL_81583.jpg
    520.2 KB · Views: 103
  • LAL_81729.jpg
    LAL_81729.jpg
    258.1 KB · Views: 98
  • LAL_81730.jpg
    LAL_81730.jpg
    885.4 KB · Views: 93
  • LAL_81731.jpg
    LAL_81731.jpg
    716.6 KB · Views: 101
  • LAL_81732_Convair_MX1964_(B-58).jpg
    LAL_81732_Convair_MX1964_(B-58).jpg
    2.7 MB · Views: 121
  • LAL_81733_Convair_MX1964_(B-58).jpg
    LAL_81733_Convair_MX1964_(B-58).jpg
    2.6 MB · Views: 132
  • LAL_81734_Convair_MX-1964_(B-58),_Test_120,_9-24-1953.jpg
    LAL_81734_Convair_MX-1964_(B-58),_Test_120,_9-24-1953.jpg
    455.1 KB · Views: 128
  • LAL_81735_Convair_MX1964_(B-58).jpg
    LAL_81735_Convair_MX1964_(B-58).jpg
    3.5 MB · Views: 218
I have a question: Was the B-58 ever used in Vietnam? Did it ever fly into southeast Asia for potential operations? (Say, Thailand.)
 
I have a question: Was the B-58 ever used in Vietnam? Did it ever fly into southeast Asia for potential operations? (Say, Thailand.)
Nope, the small number B-58s were quite busy as SAC's deterrent force. The reorganization of the military under McNamara directed the Air Force to retire them almost as soon as they were coming into service; expensive to operate and maintain, as well as vulnerable to SAMs, to be replaced by the "affordable" TFX F-111 penetrator.

There are plenty of "What ifs" floating around to tickle your fancy however!
 
I have a question: Was the B-58 ever used in Vietnam? Did it ever fly into southeast Asia for potential operations? (Say, Thailand.)
nope
The B-58 never saw action in Vietnam
Three issue were:
Although planned for reconnaissance (pod never build) it was a nuclear bomber only - no conventional Bomb loads
B-58 was build for high altitude bomb drop and was not easy to handle, special in low-level flight the B-58 was dangerous to fly.
Another factor were the huge operation and maintain cost of B-58 fleet of 116 aircraft (were 25 lost in accidents!)

i can understand McNamara why he retire the B-58 for a multi use TFX
 
I have a question: Was the B-58 ever used in Vietnam? Did it ever fly into southeast Asia for potential operations? (Say, Thailand.)

The use of the B-58 in Vietnam was considered, a camouflage scheme was worked out for it.
Also, while not directly SEA related, a terrain following radar pod was schemed, to allow the B-58 to operate at low altitudes.
Images source; Aerofax Aerograph 4, Convair B-58, pages 89 and 130.

cheers,
Robin.
 

Attachments

  • B-58 TFR pod.jpg
    B-58 TFR pod.jpg
    48.5 KB · Views: 215
  • B-58 SEA camo.jpg
    B-58 SEA camo.jpg
    75 KB · Views: 282
Strange infi in my files,

there was a six engined Project version,all of them were
a turbojets (no ramjets) ?!.
 
Last edited:
I have a question: Was the B-58 ever used in Vietnam? Did it ever fly into southeast Asia for potential operations? (Say, Thailand.)
nope
The B-58 never saw action in Vietnam
Three issue were:
Although planned for reconnaissance (pod never build) it was a nuclear bomber only - no conventional Bomb loads
B-58 was build for high altitude bomb drop and was not easy to handle, special in low-level flight the B-58 was dangerous to fly.
Another factor were the huge operation and maintain cost of B-58 fleet of 116 aircraft (were 25 lost in accidents!)

i can understand McNamara why he retire the B-58 for a multi use TFX

I know of no reason why the B-58 could not have been used as a conventionally armed bomber, had there been any serious intention of doing so. It had multiple hard points that could probably have been adapted, much as the nuclear-armed B-52s were adapted. But it would have been expensive and of no greater utility than cheaper types.

Nonetheless, I believe that the B-58 was actually considered for Vietnam service as a navigation leader and ECM escort rather than as a bomber. At the start of the war against the North, USAF Tactical Air Command aircraft lacked the long-range navigation and self-protection systems commonly found in Strategic Air Command bombers. So using the SAC B-58 as a formation leader and ECM platform made a certain sense (hence the SEA camouflage scheme for the B-58). But as things turned out, the evolving threat, the growing availability of ECM and navigational aids for TAC, and the success of TAC's own EB-66 airplanes, which were already configured for the lead/escort role, made use of the B-58 unnecessary.
 
I have a question: Was the B-58 ever used in Vietnam? Did it ever fly into southeast Asia for potential operations? (Say, Thailand.)

The use of the B-58 in Vietnam was considered, a camouflage scheme was worked out for it.
Also, while not directly SEA related, a terrain following radar pod was schemed, to allow the B-58 to operate at low altitudes.
Images source; Aerofax Aerograph 4, Convair B-58, pages 89 and 130.

cheers,
Robin.

I don't know. But I suspect that the terrain-following-radar pod was intended for low-level penetration missions against the Soviet Union. The B-58 had the misfortune of being conceived at the very end of the period when height and speed over target were still expected to make an aircraft immune to Soviet radar, flak, and fighters. The successes of Soviet radar-guided surface-to-air missiles forced all bombers to switch to low-altitude attacks. Even aircraft like the B-52 needed some new avionics for navigation at these altitudes. So I suspect that a high-speed B-58 might require TFR in order to see the hills before it hit them.
 
I know of no reason why the B-58 could not have been used as a conventionally armed bomber, had there been any serious intention of doing so. It had multiple hard points that could probably have been adapted, much as the nuclear-armed B-52s were adapted. But it would have been expensive and of no greater utility than cheaper types.

It would have involved modification of bomb pod and replace nuklear warhead with conventional bombs
but even with 4 external hard points, it would not enough have bomb load for a useful bombing flight
Convair was not confident this would work either and propose the B-58E variant for conventional bombing, that was rejected...
 
From, Revista de Aeronautica y Astronautica 1964.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    204.3 KB · Views: 232
Drawings of NACA test model of Convai MX-1626 from a report dated 1953.
 

Attachments

  • MX1626 1.png
    MX1626 1.png
    124 KB · Views: 156
  • MX1626 2.png
    MX1626 2.png
    101.5 KB · Views: 158
Drawings of 1/15 scale NACA model of Convair MX-1964.
 

Attachments

  • MX1964 1.png
    MX1964 1.png
    149.4 KB · Views: 154
  • MX1964 2.png
    MX1964 2.png
    134.5 KB · Views: 150
  • MX1964 3.png
    MX1964 3.png
    126.4 KB · Views: 134
  • MX1964 4.png
    MX1964 4.png
    168.4 KB · Views: 138
  • MX1964 5.png
    MX1964 5.png
    291.8 KB · Views: 144
  • MX19645 6.png
    MX19645 6.png
    227.9 KB · Views: 196
What I don't understand is why they didn't go with a tailed-delta configuration as it would've had better performance especially when taking off and landing with lower airspeeds since a tailed-delta configuration can use flaps, this might've led to less B-58s being lost in accidents as I gather it was a tricky beast to handle when taking off and landing.
 
I've just noticed the inclined 'hard shelter' design. Was this notion unique to the Hustler ??

FWIW, I nearly spilled my caffeine giggling, as reminded me of the Andersons' series' tech...
 

Attachments

  • early-b-58-mockup.jpg
    early-b-58-mockup.jpg
    212.2 KB · Views: 113
  • 1964 1.jpg
    1964 1.jpg
    61.7 KB · Views: 14
  • 1964 2.jpg
    1964 2.jpg
    54.2 KB · Views: 16
  • mx-1964.jpg
    mx-1964.jpg
    231.2 KB · Views: 18
Last edited:
I don't know if we sent this report before or not ?.
 

Attachments

  • 10.png
    10.png
    77.7 KB · Views: 74
  • 11.png
    11.png
    106.1 KB · Views: 60
  • 12.png
    12.png
    83 KB · Views: 57
  • 13.png
    13.png
    90.4 KB · Views: 59
  • 14.png
    14.png
    83.7 KB · Views: 56
  • 16.png
    16.png
    70.8 KB · Views: 73

Attachments

  • EXmC9mrXYAYXZmE.jpg
    EXmC9mrXYAYXZmE.jpg
    278.6 KB · Views: 45
  • EXmC--wWoAU506N.jpg
    EXmC--wWoAU506N.jpg
    37.6 KB · Views: 57
Last edited:
looking at the mockup photograph, how was the nose leg intended to retract after takeoff ?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom