Flight Of The Valkyries, pt 3 - XB-70 27.jpg (1/1)

In article ,
John Szalay wrote:
=
= AND in Chuck Yeager's opinion:
= an accident that should not have happened.
= the F-104 driver was NOT a good enough formation pilot to be
= in that formation.
=
= "Yeager"
= page 179

A reasonable description of the accident can be found he

http://www.thexhunters.com/xpeditions/xb-70a_accident.html

The wikipedia entry on the XB-70 gives some interesting additional
detail on possible reasons for the crash:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XB-70_Valkyrie

Though this was an experimental program managed by North American, the
United States Air Force conducted its own accident investigation. The
Air Force Summary Accident Report[17] found that, given the position of
the F-104 relative to the XB-70, the F-104 pilot would not have been
able to see the XB-70's wing, except via looking back over his left
shoulder. This position would not have been comfortable for extended
periods of time. The Accident Report concluded that Walker, piloting the
F-104, likely maintained his position by looking at the fuselage of the
XB-70, forward of his position. The Report estimated that the F-104 was
70 ft to the side of, and 10 feet below, the fuselage of the XB-70. In
addition, the Report found that from that position, there would be no
suitable alignment points to maintain a precise position relative to the
Valkyrie. Given this supporting evidence, the Report concluded that due
to the unavailability of appropriate sight cues, Walker was unable to
properly perceive his motion relative to the Valkyrie, leading to his
aircraft drifting into contact with the XB-70's wing.

Excellent summary of the entire XB-70 program he

http://www.afa.org/magazine/june2006/0606valkyrie.asp

There is now a huge amount of information about this aircraft on the
web and some of it presents more than just speculation or opinion.

OIV

--
Orlando Quattro -- oquattro at magma dot ca
The Starving Artist's Garratt

"John Szalay" wrote in message
42...
"Canuck" wrote in
:


"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
n
it's just before accident. Red vertical stabilizer is Joe Walker's
F-104



Why did the flight require "chase planes" - and
five of them, at that............

It didn't. It was a promotional phot op for GE. They provided engines
for all of the aircraft in the formation as I recall. I read about
this a while back so my memory may be faulty.

Nick



AND in Chuck Yeager's opinion:
an accident that should not have happened.
the F-104 driver was NOT a good enough formation pilot to be
in that formation.

"Yeager"
page 179

Yep. I read that too quite a while ago. For those of you who haven't read
either one of Yeager's books, do yourself a favour and get them. They are
well worth reading and quite entertaining even if you aren't an aviation
buff.

While I'm at it, I'd also recommend Tom Wolfe's book "The Right Stuff" as
well as the movie by the same name which is based on the book.

Nick

On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 14:55:57 -0500, John Szalay
wrote:

"Canuck" wrote in
:


"Mitchell Holman" wrote in message
n
it's just before accident. Red vertical stabilizer is Joe Walker's
F-104



Why did the flight require "chase planes" - and
five of them, at that............

It didn't. It was a promotional phot op for GE. They provided engines
for all of the aircraft in the formation as I recall. I read about
this a while back so my memory may be faulty.

Nick



AND in Chuck Yeager's opinion:
an accident that should not have happened.
the F-104 driver was NOT a good enough formation pilot to be
in that formation.

"Yeager"
page 179

I can remember as a yoot seeing the photos of the incident in Life
magazine. Very dramatic and rather troubling to my young senses.

Bob ^,,^

Yep. I read that too quite a while ago. For those of you who haven't read
either one of Yeager's books, do yourself a favour and get them. They are
well worth reading and quite entertaining even if you aren't an aviation
buff.

While I'm at it, I'd also recommend Tom Wolfe's book "The Right Stuff" as
well as the movie by the same name which is based on the book.

While we're on the subject of books and the XB-70, might I recommend
Valkyrie: North American's Mach Three Superbomber by Dennis R. Jenkins
and Tony R. Landis, published by Specialty Press. A terrific book
that covers everything you'd ever want to know about the XB-70
program. Filled with hundreds of photos, line drawings, schematics,
etc. It starts with the NB-36H "nuclear bomber", moving through the
attempted developement of the XF-103 and XF-108 Mach 3 fighters to the
XB-70 program itself, beginning to end. Included is the complete
accident investigation report discussed here. A great book,
especially if you like seeing some of the really "out there" design
concepts that litter aviation history in the 50s and early 60s. I
include a link to the book at Amazon, but I imagine any decent
bookstore could get a copy (mine came from a local Borders).

http://www.amazon.com/Valkyrie-North...4232631&sr=1-3

Frogdog has left the building.

Frogdog a écrit :

While we're on the subject of books and the XB-70, might I recommend
Valkyrie: North American's Mach Three Superbomber by Dennis R. Jenkins
and Tony R. Landis, published by Specialty Press. A terrific book
that covers everything you'd ever want to know about the XB-70
program. Filled with hundreds of photos, line drawings, schematics,
etc. It starts with the NB-36H "nuclear bomber", moving through the
attempted developement of the XF-103 and XF-108 Mach 3 fighters to the
XB-70 program itself, beginning to end. Included is the complete
accident investigation report discussed here. A great book,
especially if you like seeing some of the really "out there" design
concepts that litter aviation history in the 50s and early 60s. I
include a link to the book at Amazon, but I imagine any decent
bookstore could get a copy (mine came from a local Borders).

http://www.amazon.com/Valkyrie-North...4232631&sr=1-3


See my message 14/10/08 15:37

Flight Of The Valkyries - 001index.jpg (0/1)

:-)

--
Patrick R7