I'd love to hear from Bob what Boeing thought about this Convair SST proposal... pretty darn cool looking airplane, although 1+1 seating? Swanky Convair B-58 Derivative SST - Circa 1960 - blog - AirPigz
Scott Lowther has published a delightful monograph that shows this and other B-58 derivatives: Aerospace Projects R... | APR Special: B58 Derived SSTs | MagCloud
I have to be honest, Don, that I don't know much about this Convair idea. It does address the issue of lowering frontal area and presenting the long skinny body necessary for supersonic flight but at the expense of passenger count and comfort. The engines on the wing tips would be a deadly event if one quit in any flight regime, especially on takeoff and in supersonic flight. Don, I'm not an expert on this stuff so these are just my personal observations. Convair had a knack for designing to the edge of the performance envelope in many cases and other important design points were compromised. In this case, pax payload.
When they were working on this project, Convair did sonic boom tests with the B-58, Delta Dart, etc. over Oklahoma City. About 3 percent of people were upset enough to file a formal complaint. That was the death knell for the project.
If that was done in 1960 as the link suggests, sonic booms were not terribly unusual. Military was still doing it pretty routinely, at least where I lived and I was in a metro area as well. Today I think you could put a very big multiplier on that 3%.
As did I... lived within blocks of Kirland AFB in Albuquerque as a kid. Booms almost daily. Rivaled by the noise of B-36's landing over our house.
Part of the genius of the concorde was getting cabin comfort and enviromental controls that worked in a mach 2 airliner as well a relibaility such that it could be civillian operated. From what i have read, the b58 was fast on afterburner ie short endurance,but far far from being civillian operated systems wise, it was suspended due to operating costs which were high even for the airforce, landing speeds were ridiculous for any civillian pilot or airport, and an outboard eo at full thrust was catatstrophic. There is a world of difference between going mach 2 in a military craft and sustainig high speed in a civillian operated airliner. Still they might have built something that sorta worked, it would have been totaly uncomercial and you might be really fatiqued and partialy deaf after a flight assuming you had somewhere long enough to take off and land, not too far to go, unlimted fuel and maintanance budget and fueselage drag allowed for the speed desired.. B58 my fav looking aircraft, looking at nose section it seems almost impossible to believe that this was a 1950s product. Compare cars then to today, and look a B58 nose section compared to a B1 or anything contemporary. Unlimited budgets in those days, and seems like electronics did not absorb the giant share of the developmental budget. We are talking nabout a potential civillian plane with worse comfort economics range etc than a TU144.
just take a good look at the nose gear of a B-58 it is quite complicated in design as it is tall and has to retract up and forward to fit into a small space due to the pod and radar space. https://www.google.com/search?q=b-58+nose+gear+photos&biw=1600&bih=799&tbm=isch&imgil=hIqChCuUJ1QLzM%253A%253B8j40hCeZhn1mXM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fblenderartists.org%25252Fforum%25252Fshowthread.php%25253F119108-Convair-B-58-Hustler&source=iu&pf=m&fir=hIqChCuUJ1QLzM%253A%252C8j40hCeZhn1mXM%252C_&usg=__JOPs9BRm9_6z3-xg2DGi0UBpzm4%3D&ved=0CDIQyjdqFQoTCOSGtsWAtsgCFVHvYwodUl4MMQ&ei=awUYVqSlBtHejwPSvLGIAw#imgrc=YimW8zY07sMtLM%3A&usg=__JOPs9BRm9_6z3-xg2DGi0UBpzm4%3D
The B-58 had so much of the design devoted to aerodynamics and performance that there was no great space or place for military mission loads . So, there had to be a huge pod slung under the area-ruled fuselage.
The B-58 seemed preternaturally advanced even for a time of incredible innovation. The contrast of that aircraft and those avionics compared to what was the state-of-the-art just 10 years prior is remarkable.
You are absolutely right on , they were always far in advance and broke a lot of ground but most of the time it was used on other vehicles that melded it with commercially viable operations. The B-24 was an advance over the B-17 but there were many short comings in the combat operations. The Davis wing was faster but it didn't perform at anything much over 25,000 feet while the B-17 was good for 30-35000 feet. The B-24 wasn't the nicest flying airplane either and it took a man of strength to fly one at times. Tail arm was too short and rudder trim tabs were woefully ineffective. Structurally the B-24 was lighter and of more modern structure technology but it could not take much damage and folded up quite easily. It ignited quickly when hit by flak or fighters. Many systems were dependent on the health of others and if one went , a lot of others went. I was told by a C240 pilot that that was the same with that airplane. He told me about the time he had to use full wing deicing and needed altitude at the same time. The deicing drew so much from the engines that he couldn't maintain the required altitude so he was in a spot. Then, we can go back to the Consolidated PBY5 and what a great airplane that was.
Quite scifi thing from past, specially if it ever would had matrialized to real world. Please, I could listen or read about it hours. So Bob if you dont mind special topic of Catalina you would make me a happy guy.
The B-58 had a hi accident rate. I flew on a Delta Convair 880 I spoke to a pilot who flew the Convair 990 with American. (it had the carrots built into the wings).
I think that Bob needs to write another book. Not about himself this time, but rather musings about all the other things that he's seen in aviation over his lifetime, such as his replies in this thread.
Samuli, I'm not much of an expert on the Cat since I was an Air Force guy. I don't believe that I'm an expert on anything, really. The only thing that I can offer about the Catalina PBY-5 is what I have learned from chatting with my Navy buddies, high school mates who had a little bit to do with them. And , I suppose witnessing the long night on the shores of Chesapeake of one amazing display of piloting and aircraft duration in a horrible electrical storm. I was friends with a top pilot of many planes, Orville Wilbur Tosch who flew a Cat around the world and he loved it. I know that there was a club called the Sunrise to Sunrise Club composed of those who had flown the airplane literally from sunrise to sunrise. One of the oddities of the aircraft was the flight engineers position in the pylon that supported the wing. One can spot his window in some shots. There is a lot about the Cat in books that trace its amazing history and I think that one of the most amazing was its use as a nighttime torpedo bomber when some enterprising navy types hung 21 inch torpedo under the wings and terrorized the Japanese with midnight raids. They were painted black and hence the name "Black Cats".Anyway, there is much more in the many books that have been written about it and all I can offer are the things that I have bumped into in my knocking around.
Speaking of Cats I was checking this one out yesterday.. I was told it was missing the red circle in the centre of the normal RAAF/RAF markings because of potential trigger happy pilots shooting at anything that had any red circle on it.. I was also told of the sunrise club via a WW2 story of them being used to (slow) ferry VIP from west coast Aussie to ol' Blimey via Colombo (detour long way west avoiding the Japs) and thus 30+hr trip seeing 2 sunrises in the one flight.. (excuse pics overexpose to get ultra black plane in hangar shadow to come out when also so bright outside!) Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Up until recently a PBY was located here at NAAS Arlington airport (AWO). It was rigged for fire bombing. #85 A little rough but flying. Here is a demo shot of it dropping water at (KPAE), Paine Field in 2012. [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfPWczVrIy4[/ame]
Thanks for that, I had never seen it. I recall a Catalina in Deer Park, Wa. that was a water bomber with R2600 power packs from a B-25 installed. Must have been a good hauler.
I am trying to remember what the connection is between the Convair SST and the PBY... An example of topic 'drift'
I guess that I'm partly responsible for that. It started with the Concord, then the Boeing SST, then the Russian SST, then the Convair SST, then I think that I made some comments about Convairs design flaws that went back to the B-24, C 240, and then happened to mention one good Consolidated design, the PBY-5 and that triggered a lot of interesting thoughts from a few others. Funny how this happens.
Not complaining, Bob... but it's interesting. And we wouldn't read such great tales (as yours and others) without 'drift'. thanks.