B-70A Valkyrie in service

The only feasible B-70 was going to need to be scaled down in complexity, so was Mach 3.1 really a necessity? Seems like competitors all suggested Mach 3 was more realistic, but North American was the only competitor that was deadset on pushing that extra tenth of a Mach. Even Mach 2.5 would have been a huge threat for the Soviets but more importantly was a significantly lower bar to hit. So a four engine design probably doesnt need to worry about Mach 3.
 
kaiserd said:
The B-70 also had a lot of development problems to still overcome that they never really had the chance to. For example the prototypes had a lot of issues with shedding skin/ parts with clear manufacturing issues that needed to be resolved.
Click to expand...
FYI AV2 AF 62-207 had no such skin issues, had already done full heat soaking 33 minute sustained Mach 3 flight with many longer Mach 3+ flights scheduled ahead before it was lost in the mid-air.
 
As explained in Valkyrie: The North American XB-70 by Graham M. Simons (2011), the XB-70 / B-70 Valkyrie has a pair of tandem 14-foot weapons bays separated by a one-foot section. Due to the placement of the sliding weapons bay doors, each of the weapons bays could only be opened and used one at a time. This meant that the Valkyrie could not carry weapons longer than about 13 feet within its weapons bays.

@Scott Kenny also suggested that the Valkyrie's bomb bays could carry a pair of bomb "clips" similar to those used on the B-52 Stratofortress. These pair of "clips" could enable the Valkyrie to carry up to eight 2000-lb or two 9000-lb thermonuclear bombs.

If I understand correctly, the following thermonuclear bombs would have been available for the Valkyrie in the late 1950s thru late 1960s:
  • B28
  • B39
  • B41
  • B43
  • B53
  • B57
  • B61
There is also the possibility that the Valkyrie could carry a pair of GAM-87 Skybolt ALBMs underneath its wings, but at the cost of increased drag.
 
Christopher Wang said:
As explained in Valkyrie: The North American XB-70 by Graham M. Simons (2011), the XB-70 / B-70 Valkyrie has a pair of tandem 14-foot weapons bays separated by a one-foot section. Due to the placement of the sliding weapons bay doors, each of the weapons bays could only be opened and used one at a time. This meant that the Valkyrie could not carry weapons longer than about 13 feet within its weapons bays.
Click to expand...

If they couldn't do longer than 13 feet, and certainly no more than 14 feet, that would rule out the carriage of SRAMs or quite a few guided weapons.
 
Rosdivan said:
If they couldn't do longer than 13 feet, and certainly no more than 14 feet, that would rule out the carriage of SRAMs or quite a few guided weapons.
Click to expand...
Except that if the B-70 was in service, the SRAM would have been designed to fit in it.
 
Rosdivan said:
If they couldn't do longer than 13 feet, and certainly no more than 14 feet, that would rule out the carriage of SRAMs or quite a few guided weapons.
Click to expand...
Yellow Palace said:
Except that if the B-70 was in service, the SRAM would have been designed to fit in it.
Click to expand...
The Valkyrie could have carried the SRAMs externally underneath its wings and possibly the centerline, but at the cost of increased drag. It could have carried at least four SRAMs underneath the same pylons for the Skybolts, plus possibly four more SRAMs on the centerline.

1751141572352.png
SOURCE: Landis, T. R. (2020, November 23). NAA B-70 Valkyrie Variants: A Future That Never Was. AFMC History & Heritage Program. Retrieved from https://media.defense.gov/2020/Nov/23/2002540204/-1/-1/0/B-70 VARIANTS.PDF
 
Christopher Wang said:
The Valkyrie could have carried the SRAMs externally underneath its wings and possibly the centerline, but at the cost of increased drag. It could have carried at least four SRAMs underneath the same pylons for the Skybolts, plus possibly four more SRAMs on the centerline.
Click to expand...
Yes, but why would you do that when you can make a missile that fits internally? The historical missile was 14 feet long because that's what fit in the B-52. If it needed to fit in a B-70, it would be 13 feet long.
 
Byeman said:
Proof please.
Click to expand...
Sure I'll try to put it aside for you when I see it again.
As I recall it was around the 80-90 % range after acceleration to high Mach. I believe that info is in the NAA pilots reports, and maybe also in the thrust settings charts in the T.O.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom