|
Description
| Manufacturer: | Northrop |
| |
| Base model: | B-35 | ||
| Designation: | YB-35 | ||
| Version: | B | ||
| Designation System: | U.S. Air Force | ||
| Designation Period: | 1924-Present | ||
| Basic role: | Bomber | ||
| Status: | Prototype | ||
| See Also: |
Specifications
| Length: | 53.08 | ||
| Height: | 15.17 | ||
| Wingspan: | 172 | ||
| Wingarea: | 4,000.0 sq ft | 371.5 sq m | |
| Gross Weight: | 193,938 lb | 87,953 kg | |
Propulsion
| No. of Engines: | 8 | ||
| Powerplant: | Allison J35-A-15 | ||
Performance
| Range: | 3,155 miles | 5,080 km | |
| Cruise Speed: | 419 mph | 674 km/h | 364 kt |
| Max Speed: | 493 mph | 793 km/h | 428 kt |
| Ceiling: | 40,700 ft | 12,405 m | |
Recent comments by our visitors
| E P CAMPBELL BRIGHTON UK, OTH | Paradoxically, chaps, perhaps the jet engined version will best be remembered for its signatory presence in the landmark epic film \'War of The Worlds\', 1953.
Such 1950s films created a powerful impression on \'baby boomers\'. To that generation the science fiction films of the 1950s were awe inspiring to children because we were in a very scary period of post-WW2 nuclear standoff with the West v Russia. Many films of the period played on the hysteria of McCarthyism \'Reds Under The Beds\' and Hollywood was subject, like so much of the entertainment world to obligatory witch hunts, causing many of our famous entertainers to leave the country (er, USA). The wonderful thing about that golden era was that anything science-speculative seemed possible. As a 6 year old boy who emigrated to Canada in 1957, I was terrified by the B film \'Space Master X7\' which looks very cheap and cheesy by today\'s standards but in those days people were much more gullible about what was possible with radiation effects, with above ground and air burst nuclear tests ranging from the diminutive Davy Crocket, shoulder-launched 1/4 kiloton field deployable rocket, up to the 25 tons, 56 megatons yield, air burst Tsar Bomba. Even scientists were guilty: For example they tried to build an atomic airliner but discovered that the lead shielding prevented the thing from leaving the ground. Another example is the Flying Bedstead. I saw one of these floating around Short and Harland\'s in Belfast, N Ireland, early 1960\'s. Transformed many years later into the AV 8 B - aka British Harrier. Personally, I\'d love a flying wing full scale model in my back garden, if I had a big enough back garden and planning permission. Flying saucers? First there was the abortive US Army Avrocar 1955-60, the USAF T588 ... then in 1996 came Dark Star. Anything\'s possible... 12/26/2008 @ 12:22 [ref: 23347] |
| E P CAMPBELL BRIGHTON UK, OTH | Paradoxically, chaps, perhaps the jet engined version will best be remembered for its signatory presence in the landmark epic film \'War of The Worlds\', 1953.
Such 1950s films created a powerful impression on \'baby boomers\'. To that generation the science fiction films of the 1950s were awe inspiring to children because we were in a very scary period of post-WW2 nuclear standoff with the West v Russia. Many films of the period played on the hysteria of McCarthyism \'Reds Under The Beds\' and Hollywood was subject, like so much of the entertainment world to obligatory witch hunts, causing many of our famous entertainers to leave the country (er, USA). The wonderful thing about that golden era was that anything science-speculative seemed possible. As a 6 year old boy who emigrated to Canada in 1957, I was terrified by the B film \'Space Master X7\' which looks very cheap and cheesy by today\'s standards but in those days people were much more gullible about what was possible with radiation effects, with above ground and air burst nuclear tests ranging from the diminutive Davy Crocket, shoulder-launched 1/4 kiloton field deployable rocket, up to the 25 tons, 56 megatons yield, air burst Tsar Bomba. Even scientists were guilty: For example they tried to build an atomic airliner but discovered that the lead shielding prevented the thing from leaving the ground. Another example is the Flying Bedstead. I saw one of these floating around Short and Harland\'s in Belfast, N Ireland, early 1960\'s. Transformed many years later into the AV 8 B - aka British Harrier. Personally, I\'d love a flying wing full scale model in my back garden, if I had a big enough back garden and planning permission. Flying saucers? First there was the abortive US Army Avrocar 1955-60, the USAF T588 ... then in 1996 came Dark Star. Anything\'s possible... 12/26/2008 @ 12:22 [ref: 23346] |
| mike , CA | theyb 35 was a development aircraft with intention to eventually build a jet powered version. The jet engine used was develped by i believe a division of Northrop the turbo dyne? I need to check.
the b 36 was a consolidated vultee aircraf the contract was the reward for the merger. Northrop forgot how congress can over rule the airforce when the contract he held was determined null and void. the aircraft built were buldozed on the company site now jack northrop feilf in hawthore ca. 05/20/2008 @ 21:12 [ref: 20964] |
| Nathanael Wilde Vancouver, WA | Well, the B-49's nominal weapons load was to be 10,000lbs (16,000 max). Many of the early weapons were more; the Mk 17 was over 40,000lbs, for example. It also had little room for payload growth. The B-52 can carry 70,000lbs (current) and came with external stores ability. If you were budgeting the USAF wouldn't you rather have a plane that could nuke multiple targets with large yield weapons instead of just one target with a small yeild?
Personally, I think they cancelled it because of: - Very poor lateral stability (all the pilots commented on it), necessity in the nuclear age is another issue, - Its association with the YB-35 which was embarassingly over budget and behind schedule (not really the YB-49's fault). - Its exotic looks (between jet engines, nukes, radars, and so on, the USAF was tired of "experiments"). That's my theory anyway. With time and technology all those things faded away. N. Wilde. P.S. On a side note, the B-2 design appears to have more in common with the Ho-229 than the YB-49 (cocpit and engine nacelles, exhausting on the upper surface, lengthened center section, etc.). Maybe it's just me, but the 3-view drawings of each make for an interesting comparison. 03/30/2006 @ 11:12 [ref: 12978] |
| White Rabbit , NC | Nathaneal writes in the opening post:
"They do have one significant redeeming quality, known to Northrop and the Horten brothers, and that was low radar cross section. The Horten's wood and fabric wings were undetectable altogether and even the metal YB-49 was nearly so. It may seem a shame that only recently this attribute has been valued..." I wonder how this could be. Surely they were quick to notice the lack of radar image. Surely they understood that this could be a very significant advantage in mission effectiveness. Is that not the salient advantage of the 'look-alike' mega-dollar current version of the YB-35, the B-2 Stealth bomber? It took a long time to re-invent this radar-foiling 'perfect' wheel design. Why so long? My second question is WHY we did not produce derivatives and then fleets of these 'stealth aircraft' to carry strategic weapons rather than the B-52? I know the B-52 carries more weight, but this is no advantage in post Nagasaki weaponry. Surely they knew and understood the advantage of very low radar profile in the 1950's. Reason enough to push development -- not quick retirement and destruction of all that were built! 03/25/2006 @ 19:13 [ref: 12923] |
| Nathanael Wilde Vancouver, WA | I may take some flak for saying this, but "perfect design"? Poor pitch authority, high roll inertia, and non-existent lateral stability could hardly be considered a "perfect design". If the inclusion of a simple tail boom can solve most of your control problems, what's your excuse for not using one? All-wing aircraft are elegant in their simplicity, but ulitmately unnecessary-- it doesn't take wings that large to lift that mass.
They do have one significant redeeming quality, known to Northrop and the Horten brothers, and that was low radar cross section. The Horten's wood and fabric wings were undetectable altogether and even the metal YB-49 was nearly so. It may seem a shame that only recently this attribute has been valued, but since avionics have only recently made them pleasant to fly, maybe the delay was for the best. N. Wilde. 01/25/2006 @ 07:34 [ref: 12297] |
| the burk fort worth, TX | i still cant belive they didnt save any of these amazing craft, i hope that some day someone will build a full scale copy of the craft, that is a working replica, it makes no sense to me that they would just destroy something so important, but then again how many other amazing planes were destroyed because they failed? and this wasnt even that big of a falure, and the b-36 wasnt that successful in and of itself, but there are still plenty of those around. 01/20/2005 @ 15:16 [ref: 9195] |
| Dr. Michael Verdun Red Lake Falls, MN | I believe I was about 9 to 11 years old in about 1956 to 1958 and playing in my grandfathers farm yard and alone and this low flying triangle shaped plane came right over my head and it sounded like a jet but had no body. It banked and was gone.
This was outside the small town of Chanderville Illinois and I ran in and told my parents what I saw and discribed it and even drew it for them and they all assuered me that now such plane exists and could not fly if it did. I must have been mistaken. I knew what I saw but never knew until the last year or so that it was real. I wish I knew where it came from or was going to be in that space at that time. I wonder how to find out. today I am a High School Principal and several times I have had kids tell me things that I wondered about but always think back to my experience. That plane was so neat flying up there! 01/07/2005 @ 11:38 [ref: 9074] |
| Akula , NV | The XB-35 and YB-49 planes were a beautiful idea. They were the perfect design; no vulnerable fuselage, lots of lift, lots of bombs, etc. If the technology was up to it, the flying wings stability problems would have been solved, and they would have entered service. I design bombers and every single bomber I have designed is based on the YB-49s idea. Just think about it for a moment. If Jack Northrop had thought of these wonder bombers a few years earlier, they wouldnt have been caught in the transformation from props to jets, then the Americans would have listened. Oh well, history is history, and we cant change it. I just hope more flying wings enter service before I die. 04/21/2004 @ 13:56 [ref: 7255] |
| Akula , NV | The XB-35 and YB-49 planes were a beautiful idea. They were the perfect design; no vulnerable fuselage, lots of lift, lots of bombs, etc. If the technology was up to it, the flying wings' stability problems would have been solved, and they would have entered service. I design bombers and every single bomber I have designed is based on the YB-49's idea. Just think about it for a moment. If Jack Northrop had thought of these wonder bombers a few years earlier, they wouldn't have been caught in the transformation from props to jets, then the Americans would have listened. Oh well, history is history, and we can't change it. I just hope more flying wings enter service before I die. 04/21/2004 @ 13:54 [ref: 7254] |
Recent photos uploaded by our visitors
