Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site bonnie.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!dpw
From: dpw@bonnie.UUCP (David P. Williams)
Newsgroups: net.aviation
Subject: Re: B-70
Message-ID: <210@bonnie.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 6-Sep-84 14:28:48 EDT
Article-I.D.: bonnie.210
Posted: Thu Sep  6 14:28:48 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 7-Sep-84 07:37:42 EDT
References: <3116@rabbit.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Whippany NJ
Lines: 39

With regard to numerous aircraft mentioned in a previous article:

  The XB-70 served a couple of purposes even if it never went into
production: it inspired the Soviets to produce the Foxbat and load it
up with an immense radar set and jp-guzzling engines, and it served
as a hypersonic testbed for engines and airframe.  The crash occurred
when a chase plane maneuvered into a wing vortex and was spun into the
upper wing surface and exploded - it would be pretty hard to fly out of
that situation.  The XB-70 crew had one casualty.
  The B-58 (produced by Convair, now General Dynamics), when in service,
could outrun every aircraft in the U.S. inventory except the F-106.
My understanding is that the airframe was years ahead of the engines,
which were a maintenance nightmare and had a tendency to shed fan
blades on takeoff.
  The X-29 looks like a conservative engineering approach on the part of
Grumman to check out principles that are well-understood, previously
flown, and attractive in light of new materials technology.  The
forward-swept wing offers superior maneuverability, but it requires
the stiffness of graphite-epoxy.  Also, that wing placement allows a
smaller fuselage and wing and a smaller, lighter, more maneuverable
aircraft.  Grumman has got to be the most solid of the aircraft
manufacturers and they are developing the X-29 in concert with DARPA,
which has sponsored successful programs like HIMAT.  Grumman is using
an F-5 fuselage forward half and mating it to new hardware to cut down
on expenses.
  The FB-111 (General Dynamics) is still in the inventory and will be
there until 1995 or later.  Its problem is the same basic engine set
that the Navy is scrapping for the F-14.  The Navy is replacing the
Pratt & Whitneys with GE F110s, the same powerplants that are in the B-1.
  I don't think there is any problem with Rockwell.  As North American,
they produced the P-51 and F-86, two respected fighters, and as
Rockwell they are doing a respectable job with the Space Shuttle.
There aren't very many details of the B1 crash, but if the pilot was
trying to avoid a chase plane, low altitudes and high speeds put him at
a disadvantage.

							David Williams
							AT&T Bell Labs
							Whippany, NJ