yb-49 flying wing

[Forty Rod SASS 3935]

I just watched War of the Worlds again and had forgotten that the yb-49 was a jet powered prototype  version of a yb-39 prop driven wing.

 

It's still a good movie after all these years.

[Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967]

And a smokey booger on takeoff, too  

 

 

 

[Blackwater 53393]

Granddaddy to the B2 and great granddaddy to the proposed B21 that’s in testing now!!

[Subdeacon Joe]

3 minutes ago, Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 said:

And a smokey booger on takeoff, too  

 

 

 

 

I think that's a trademark of that era.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rip Snorter]

As a small boy in the late '40's, after the war,  I was living on the East Coast near a bunch of still active bases. I would swear I saw the prop version in the air.  I couldn't have known about it, and this having kicked up the memory, could find no reference to it ever being on the East coast.  Anyone know anything or have a good data source?

[Forty Rod SASS 3935]

19 hours ago, Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 said:

And a smokey booger on takeoff, too  

 

 

 

So are F-4 Phantom II jets.  Kerosene burners, but one of best combat planes of its era.

 

They pulled my fat out of the fire twice in 'Nam.

 

Also liked A-4s, LOCH choppers, Hueys of any configuration, and C-123 Providers too..

Edited February 27 by Forty Rod SASS 3935

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

If it Haden't been for Stewart Symington, we would have had B-49s instead of that dumb piston driven B-36.

 

As an aside, the B-36 on display in the National Museum of of the USAF is 40 feet "short."  They had to remove a 20 foot "plug" in front of the wing and behind the wing to fit that sucker in the "hangar."

Edited February 27 by Colorado Coffinmaker
Add a tid bit

[Injun Ryder, SASS #36201L]

Used to see this beauty flying while preparing for EOT in Norco. Prior to EOT, there would be an air show in the area and there would be many historical planes in the air over the range. Sadly, this plane and it's pilot were lost in 2019.

 

[Big Sage, SASS #49891 Life]

17 hours ago, Hardpan Curmudgeon SASS #8967 said:

And a smokey booger on takeoff, too  

 

 

 

I am a Northrop retired engineer and I worked on the B-2. Jack Northrop (the founder of Northrop Aircraft) and some of his bright engineers designed the original flying wing in the above picture. He was pretty frail and not expected to make it much longer when the company got permission to show him the B-2. It was a very emotional time for him. His original idea had come to fruition!  He passed away a short time later.

[Big Sage, SASS #49891 Life]

1 hour ago, Injun Ryder, SASS #36201L said:

Used to see this beauty flying while preparing for EOT in Norco. Prior to EOT, there would be an air show in the area and there would be many historical planes in the air over the range. Sadly, this plane and it's pilot were lost in 2019.

 

I worked on the restoration of it before it was given to the aircraft museum in Chino. 

[Forty Rod SASS 3935]

3 hours ago, Injun Ryder, SASS #36201L said:

Used to see this beauty flying while preparing for EOT in Norco. Prior to EOT, there would be an air show in the area and there would be many historical planes in the air over the range. Sadly, this plane and it's pilot were lost in 2019.

 

When I worked at McDonnell Douglas I met a dozen or so guys who were volunteering to restore that little darlin'.  They had to make a lot of parts from scratch because much of the paperwork had vanished over the years and the actual parts had "departed" too.

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

There were 35 Northrup YB-49s lined up at Northrup when Steward Symington killed the B-49 over Northrup's refusal to to merge with consolidated.  They were ALL just scrapped.  What a crime.

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

The thing I read about the YB-49 is that the original piston engine fairings are what gave it some measure of lateral stability, but keeping the engines cool was a major problem. They switched to the then-new turbojets, but lateral stability was worse. Even the addition of top and bottom vertical stabilizers couldn’t solve the problem, making its role as a stable bombing platform untenable with that era’s technology. 

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

Slim,

 

Partially correct.  The YB-49 exhibited a measure of adverse yaw.  The amount of adverse yaw only affected the bombing accuracy with dumb iron bombs.  One must remember pinpoint accuracy is not a requirement with Nukes.  Close Counts 🤪

[Big Sage, SASS #49891 Life]

3 hours ago, Colorado Coffinmaker said:

Slim,

 

Partially correct.  The YB-49 exhibited a measure of adverse yaw.  The amount of adverse yaw only affected the bombing accuracy with dumb iron bombs.  One must remember pinpoint accuracy is not a requirement with Nukes.  Close Counts 🤪

I worked on the B-2 and during flight testing similar instability was overcome by the flight computer.

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

4 hours ago, Colorado Coffinmaker said:

Slim,

 

Partially correct.  The YB-49 exhibited a measure of adverse yaw.  The amount of adverse yaw only affected the bombing accuracy with dumb iron bombs.  One must remember pinpoint accuracy is not a requirement with Nukes.  Close Counts 🤪

Sorta kinda/yes and no.  The Nagasaki bombing was “less” effective than Hiroshima because it was off target and terrain shielded industries they intended to destroy. Splitting hairs I know, but that’s the way it was judged at the time.
🤓

Edited February 28 by Abilene Slim SASS 81783

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

It's also a nuisance to realize, when dropping Dumb Bombs from high altitude, with adverse wind conditions, accuracy went out the window.  Atz why Gen. Curtis LeMay brought the B-29s down from 28,000 feet to 10 thousand and under.  The B-2 & B-21 counter adverse yaw with the "split" ailerons coupled with flight computers.  Plus, with today's modern "guided" munitions, adverse yaw is much less of a problem.

Edited February 28 by Colorado Coffinmaker
I hate Otto

[Forty Rod SASS 3935]

17 hours ago, Colorado Coffinmaker said:

Slim,

 

Partially correct.  The YB-49 exhibited a measure of adverse yaw.  The amount of adverse yaw only affected the bombing accuracy with dumb iron bombs.  One must remember pinpoint accuracy is not a requirement with Nukes.  Close Counts 🤪

"Missed it by thaaaat much"!  

                                                     

                                                    Maxwell Smart

[Stump Water]

13 hours ago, Big Sage, SASS #49891 Life said:

I worked on the B-2 and during flight testing similar instability was overcome by the flight computer.

 

IIRC is was in Ben Rich's book Skunk Works where I read that the F-117 can not fly without all of the corrections that are constantly being made by the flight computer.

[Big Sage, SASS #49891 Life]

Actually a lot of the new aircraft could not fly like they do without the flight computer. The development of the software for new air force planes that I worked on took longer to develop and cost a ton of the R & D dollars.  

[Stump Water]

On 2/27/2025 at 7:59 AM, Forty Rod SASS 3935 said:

So are F-4 Phantom II jets.  Kerosene burners, but one of best combat planes of its era.

 

In the 80's there was a series on the Discovery channel called Wings that profiled a different aircraft each episode.  In the episode about the F-4 they talked with one of the US aces that flew it in Vietnam.  He said they called it the "Smoke and Thunder Hog".  He also didn't speak to highly of the powers-that-be that decided that, in the beginning, the F-4 didn't need a cannon or machine guns.  He said, had he had either, he could have shot down 20+ Migs vs. the 5 that he did. 

 

 

[Colorado Coffinmaker]

Some times the "Clowns" that make key decisions actually don't have a clue.  Unfortunately, we're seeing that happen again.  Sad.

[Trailrider #896]

15 hours ago, Big Sage, SASS #49891 Life said:

I worked on the B-2 and during flight testing similar instability was overcome by the flight computer.

The YB-39 and YB-49, and the B-2 and B-21 are inherently unstable.  The difference with the B-2 and B-21 is the modern flight control systems, which weren't available for the YB's. Jack Northrop's designs were decades ahead of the needed technology.

 

3 hours ago, Colorado Coffinmaker said:

It's also a nuisance to realize, when dropping Dumb Bombs from high altitude, with adverse wind conditions, accuracy went out the window.  Atz why Gen. Curtis LeMay brought the B-29s down from 28,000 feet to 10 thousand and under.  The B-2 & B-21 counter adverse yaw with the "split" ailerons coupled with flight computers.  Plus, with today's modern "guided" munitions, adverse yaw is much less of a problem.

 

[J.D. Daily]

On 2/27/2025 at 7:36 AM, Colorado Coffinmaker said:

If it Haden't been for Stewart Symington, we would have had B-49s instead of that dumb piston driven B-36.

 

As an aside, the B-36 on display in the National Museum of of the USAF is 40 feet "short."  They had to remove a 20 foot "plug" in front of the wing and behind the wing to fit that sucker in the "hangar."

Without fly by wire technology a flying wing is a shitty gravity bomb truck.  They have a continuous yaw without computer controlled yaw dampers.  They don't have the fuselage to provide counter force to yaw.

 

On 2/28/2025 at 9:05 AM, Stump Water said:

 

In the 80's there was a series on the Discovery channel called Wings that profiled a different aircraft each episode.  In the episode about the F-4 they talked with one of the US aces that flew it in Vietnam.  He said they called it the "Smoke and Thunder Hog".  He also didn't speak to highly of the powers-that-be that decided that, in the beginning, the F-4 didn't need a cannon or machine guns.  He said, had he had either, he could have shot down 20+ Migs vs. the 5 that he did. 

 

 

The decision makers decided that the 2nd generation of jet on jet combat would be done a ranges beyond effective aircraft auto-cannon ranges and they trusted the air to air missiles reliability was better than what was shown in combat..  They never thought that air to are combat would ever be at ranges less than arming distance for missiles.  The F-8 Crusader introduced in 1957 is the last fighter to have an internal gun.

[Abilene Slim SASS 81783]

35 minutes ago, J.D. Daily said:

The F-8 Crusader introduced in 1957 is the last fighter to have an internal gun.

F-18, F-15, F-22 and others have Vulcan cannons. I believe the F4 was the last fighter to not have an internal gun. 

[Sedalia Dave]

Neither the F-35B or the F-35C have an internal gun. Only the F-35A

 

Several modern fighter aircraft built by other countries do not have internal guns.

Chinese J-20

MiG-25

TU-28

to name a few

[Sedalia Dave]

Fun Facts about the F-35 variants.

 

The gun on the F-35A is a joke. It only carries 180 rounds of ammo that only allows for a hair over 3 seconds of fire. How this will replace the A-10 for CAS is beyond me.

 

There is no gun on the F-35B because of the need to reduce its weight and make room for the lift fan.

 

The F-35C was overweight so the gun was removed as a way to improve carrier takeoff performance.

[Forty Rod SASS 3935]

On 2/28/2025 at 10:14 AM, Colorado Coffinmaker said:

Some times the "Clowns" that make key decisions actually don't have a clue.  Unfortunately, we're seeing that happen again.  Sad.

You means like th jokers that designed my Impala?