Another Russian plane this week, the Myasischev M-50 Bounder:

According to the FAS link above, little is known about this plane's performance, though one referenced commenter noted that the M-50 was "an outstanding failure which revealed an embarassing lack of understanding of the problems of high-speed flight."

(Be sure to check out the other exhibits at AXLs Plane Gallery, where I found these images).

Posted by: JohnL at 09:54 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 74 words, total size 1 kb.

Behold the Sukhoi Su-34 "Fullback:"

Posted by: JohnL at 10:59 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 13 words, total size 1 kb.

This week's cheesecake helping is the XB-70 Valkyrie:

Posted by: JohnL at 10:31 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 16 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Ahh, yes, one of the bombers I wished we had built. If Airframe #1 still exists, I wonder if it could be retrofitted for further tests, especially with Spaceship 1 technology. Then again, the B-70 and F12A would have been interesting to see in training Lysander

Posted by: Lysander at December 13, 2004 01:02 PM (ShW/G)

2 Silly me. I had to go and look up "F-12," forgetting about the SR-71 development history. I'll be featuring the Blackbird (with appropriate background on the A-12/F-12 interceptors) in a future cheesecake post.

Posted by: JohnL at December 13, 2004 11:29 PM (gplif)

3 This plane was a "hot and high nuclear bomber" advocate's dream. Unfortunately, it was only worth the cost as long as we really needed to drop a nuclear bomb on a target with an airplane, and as long as it was less vulnerable than conventional bombers. Both ended up not being true, as the Cold war ended about a decade later, we already had more ICBMs than nuclear-capable bombers, and the Soviets developed high-altitude capable SAMs as the development for this was ending. It is one heck of an impressive aircraft however. Unfortunate that airframe #2 was lost in that accident.

Posted by: NF at December 14, 2004 11:31 AM (d9qCZ)

4 Simply the most beautiful airplane ever built.

Posted by: Timothy Sandefur at December 16, 2004 10:24 AM (fLlQ8)

5 John - The F-12 to SR-72 conversion was beautiful - makes most forget it's origins. Given the B-52/B-1/B-2's varied resurgence as a conventional bomber, I wonder if the B-70 could hack being both a spaceplane and a tactical conventional bomber. Lysander

Posted by: Lysander at December 19, 2004 10:50 PM (ht9UE)

6 Lysander, Good question -- I think stealth technology is more important than speed these days. Even without stealthing, we send in the electronic warfare and attack planes first to take out air defenses and achieve air supremacy, so even old B-52 Buffs can bomb with relative impunity. Not sure what we would need a Mach 3 bomber for (other than because we can do it -- America, F--k yeah!) Re spaceplane: the B-70 does look somewhat like the NASP conceptual designs I remember seeing from the eighties.

Posted by: JohnL at December 19, 2004 11:08 PM (gplif)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

This week's serving is yet another X-plane, the Bell X-5. This was the first plane to have a variable-angle wing, making it the forebear of the F-111, F-14, and B-1 aircraft (which will likely make future appearances here):

Posted by: JohnL at 10:37 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.