@HJMC3345 The YB-60 had a greater payload, then the Buff. If you want a significant increase in air speed, then go supersonic. Supersonic fighters had to escort the B-52, because it was a subsonic bomber. Since, both bombers needed a fighter escort, why not save the taxpayers some money and go with the less expensive bomber? Incidentally, I, too, saw the program about the ten best bombers and I do not agree with the results. For example, some people would rate the B-17 as the best bomber ever.
It turns out that the the YB-60 was putting a bandaid on a bad solution.
It tuns out that the Buff significantly out performed an old design during testing including more modern technology, faster air speed, etc. The correct solution involved more than putting swept wings and jet engines on a world war 2 design.
The B-52 was just voted the best bomber ever and the tax payers got excellent value for their money. Note that they could have made a B-47 out of the B-50, etc
@HJMC3345 The BUFF was a completely new design and much more expensive than the YB-60. The fiscally responsible decision would have been the modification of the B-36 design, which was the YB-60. The YB-60 was larger than the B-52 and had a larger capacity for a greater bomb load. However, as with the B-29 versus the B-32, Boeing had her stooges in our Defense Department, while Convair did not. Why pay for a completely new design, when you already have an existing design? That is my point.
@crysis888 1,000% agreed!
stephenwinkler 1 month ago
@HJMC3345 The YB-60 had a greater payload, then the Buff. If you want a significant increase in air speed, then go supersonic. Supersonic fighters had to escort the B-52, because it was a subsonic bomber. Since, both bombers needed a fighter escort, why not save the taxpayers some money and go with the less expensive bomber? Incidentally, I, too, saw the program about the ten best bombers and I do not agree with the results. For example, some people would rate the B-17 as the best bomber ever.
stephenwinkler 1 month ago
@stephenwinkler
It turns out that the the YB-60 was putting a bandaid on a bad solution.
It tuns out that the Buff significantly out performed an old design during testing including more modern technology, faster air speed, etc. The correct solution involved more than putting swept wings and jet engines on a world war 2 design.
The B-52 was just voted the best bomber ever and the tax payers got excellent value for their money. Note that they could have made a B-47 out of the B-50, etc
HJMC3345 1 month ago
@HJMC3345 The BUFF was a completely new design and much more expensive than the YB-60. The fiscally responsible decision would have been the modification of the B-36 design, which was the YB-60. The YB-60 was larger than the B-52 and had a larger capacity for a greater bomb load. However, as with the B-29 versus the B-32, Boeing had her stooges in our Defense Department, while Convair did not. Why pay for a completely new design, when you already have an existing design? That is my point.
stephenwinkler 1 month ago
Beautiful aircraft. Too bad both examples were scrapped shortly after testing.
wrenwright 6 months ago
Voiceover sounds like Bill Peach (Aussie).
A line comes to mind - "Dispatch War Rocket Ajax - to bring back his body!"
JBofBrisbane 7 months ago
You got that right.
i wish that the air force would of thought that.
kirkconway 8 months ago
It's a nicer looking airplane than the B-52.
isuckaman 1 year ago
@crysis888 100% agreed
walkandlookup 1 year ago
It is kind of fun to see those old analog instruments. Almost seems funny in a way.
BuzzBait007 2 years ago