XB-70 Questions

[KJ_Lesnick]

Was running out of tankers and forward-basing ever considered a worry?

[PR19_Kit]

If the UK was considered a 'forward base', no.

The SAC rotated their tanker squadrons over here on a TDY basis all the time, and I've seen three generations of them flying into and out of Brize Norton while I lived in the Oxford area. That's KB-50s, KC-97s of all sorts and the KC-135.

[KJ_Lesnick]

So, forward basing isn't a concern...

The questions that now come into play are

I: WS-110

A: Was the early WS-110 proposal designed to use aerial refuelling?

B: Why did they believe the XB-70 would be vulnerable to missile attack

• The aircraft was capable of speeds of at least Mach 3 (probably 4) and altitudes of at least 75,000 feet (and potentially 95,000 feet) and could pull 2-3g at altitude
  
• Speed and altitude aren't the only factors, maneuverability is a major issue
  
• The aircraft was to possess ECM of presumably excellent capability
  
• This would greatly impede the ability to lock on, maintain a lock, or hit the plane
  
• North American was working on reducing the IR signature
  

..

II: WS-125

A: Would the resistance to the XB-70 and a desire to switch entirely to missiles (which seems partially out of technological advancement, and mostly out of a desire to cut funding at any cost) have been mitigated in any significant degree by....

1: Canceling WS-125 in 1956 when it was determined that it would be an unfeasible strategic bombing platform
..

• The Soviet Nuclear Bomber hoax hadn't appeared until 1958
  
• This aircraft though it could stay in the air for weeks, could only do supersonic speeds for an extended dash similar to the early WS-110 specifications
  
• WS-110 would be able to stay airborne for a lengthly period of time by the use of aerial tankers
  
• The B367-80 had been flying since 1954; the KC-135 was getting ready to fly and would do so in late '56
  

..
2: Canceling WS-125 in 1957 after it was realized it was possible for a conventionally powered aircraft to achieve continuous supersonic cruise
..

• WS-125 early on wasn't capable of doing this
  
• With aerial refueling, protracted deterrence would be do-able
  
• The Soviet Nuclear Bomber hoax hadn't appeared until 1958
  

..
B: Could WS-125 have been cancelled?
..

• Even though the nuclear-bomber hoax hadn't appeared until 1958 there was elaborate technological competition between the US and USSR
  
• The USAF had a pathological obsession with nuclear powered aircraft
  
• The ANP program and USAF were uncoordinated in their leadership
  
• Could the ANP program and USAF leadership have been forced to cooperate provided somebody up to and including the President in a position of power forced the issue?
  

..
Provided
..

• Nuclear aircraft propulsion, nuclear radiation shielding research had been allowed to continue at experimental and proof of concept phases
  
• Convair had built at least one proposal based around a two-engined aircraft with a single reactor powering it