The Atomic Bomber p.1(5)
Top Comments
All Comments (34)
-
After a while, wouldnt an engine fail?
-
The spitfire could have been equipped with long range foul tanks as early as 1940, but bomber command had a commitment to the elect gun turret. This cost the lives of 10s of 1000s of airmen, this is a fact that NO ONE talks about, guns on a bomber are useless!!
-
I am going to have a drink and watch this, thanks for posting this! I love the power to cheap to metre!
-
great!
I have made myself a cappuccino and now I gonna enjoy watching this.
thanks for posting! :)
-
Prof. Cus Habong was chief engineer of this project!
-
This thing does look like the areal base idea from Ace Combat.
-
@chokedad I believe the ability to orbit on-station for prolonged periods of time was a consideration as well. The bomber would leave its holding pattern and penetrate Soviet (or Chinese) airspace once the final order to launch an attack was given. (If you've never read "Fail-Safe" or "Red Alert," do. I highly recommend both books; the latter served as the basis for the movie "Dr. Strangelove.")
-
@terentii didn't thought about that but it is logic, you're right ;)
And after five days in such an environement you're too much subject to make errors...
thanks!
There was no intention of flying the plane for months. The critical term here is 'theoretically'. The actual aim was to increase range.
chokedad 9 months ago 12
@westlock I wondered about that myself. It isn't just a question of "crew endurance." It's a question of supplying the crew with food, fresh water, personal hygiene, waste management, laundry, recreational facilities, sleeping quarters, and so on. Plus, you would need at least two rotating watches (no one could be on permanent duty 24 hours a day). This isn't a description of a strategic bomber, it's a bloody submarine (or starship)!
terentii 9 months ago 11