Warbird Information Exchange

Last weekend I went to the NMUSAF to meet with David Austin, who worked at North American Aviation and x-rayed the welds on all three (!) Valkryies. David hadn't seen the Valkyrie in over 50 years and we had an enjoyable talk about his job and his time at NAA. Hope it's of interest here:

https://youtu.be/s8IeQJtObRc

_________________
Donate to support WIX here:

http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/donate.html

Thank you for that...

Three of 'em? Do tell...

In the late 70's I worked with several guys who had worked on the XB-70. They told me how hard it was working with new materials and how it was hard to solve the leaking fuel tank problems.

I did acquire this XB-70 related gem about 25 years ago.

Likely referring to AV-3 the third aircraft, S/N 62-0208 which was in the early phases of construction when cancelled. It was never completed. Some references indicate it would have been designated at the YB-70, and it had some refinements from the first 2 aircraft, including perhaps most noticeably canards that were angled a bit from the horizontal.

A/V-3 was also supposed to be the first with an actual bomb bay and space to install the offensive and defensive systems. The first two vehicles had test equipment bays near where the bomb bay would've been, but they were smaller in size and didn't have doors, only bolt-on panels.

Yes, the third XB-70 construction had begun but just barely when it was canceled. David said he did some weld inspection on it though, which was a surprise. He mentioned that the 2nd Valkyrie was far superior to the first because they had learned so much in terms of fabrication on the first that it made it much easier to build the second.

_________________
Donate to support WIX here:

http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/donate.html

Yeah, according to everything I've read, the 2nd one was a much better airplane. It didn't shed panels and stuff at M3, which the first one (apparently) did.

Not only panels but paint. I just read one of those references that the times XB-70 shedded lots of paint and looked terrible after the high speed runs was traced to too much paint to make it look good for VIPS and visiting politicians. Anyone who has ever painted rocks (yes really) shined brass and painted ships and things that didn't need painting due to a VIP visit can relate.

A much thinner, better single coat was found best on the XB-70

And on everything else. Many military airplanes have this problem from the factories. The government inspectors think that since the government is paying a lot of money for the plane it should have a heavy coat of paint and be very smooth. The engineer will always tell you that the increased paint weight offsets any gains from the smoothness. You have a half inch gap between the wing and flap and yet the inspector is concerned about artifacts smaller than the head of a pin.

Somewhere, deep within all the Area 51 sites that dot the internet, I read some speculation that parts for the third XB-70 were "repurposed" into a Top Secret "Mothership" out of Area 51. The mothership was presumably used to launch other rockets or aircraft.

Always thought it was interesting, and perhaps not outside the realm of the possible. I've never seen any conclusive info on how much or how little of the third XB-70 was constructed. Also, no idea what happened to whatever was there (scrapped, stored, spirited away in the night)?

Anyway, something fun to think about.

This article mentions some sightings of XB-70-ish aircraft far away from Edwards or Area 51. Who knows...

https://www.airspacemag.com/military-av ... 29/?page=1

_________________
Donate to support WIX here:

http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/donate.html