The Martin B-57G; Laid the Groundwork
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 сен 2024
- I always thought the Canberra a very good looking aircraft...until...
Sources for this video can be found at the relevant article on:
militarymatter...
If you like this content please consider buying me a coffee or else supporting me at Patreon:
ko-fi.com/edna...
/ ednash
Want another way to help support this channel? Maybe consider buying my book on my time fighting ISIS:
amzn.to/3preYyO
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.
The 'warthog with syphilis' comment caused coke to shoot from my nose, I can't tell if these tears are from pain or laughter now
It's why i no longer drink coke when watching Ed's videos.
You having a cheeky stripe or five there la, gowed! 😂😂
I haven't watched a RUclips video whilst snorting a naughty G or two for ages. At least you chose a great channel to do so.
@@localbodit helps keep the ADHD in control
Maybe snort like a hog! Damn it, Ed! That’s why I love British humor!😂
My departed Uncle built these in the US. He always said that the true beauty of the B-57 was on the insides.
My mom says the same about me!
Ed, the Canberras are still at the Davis Monthan AFB boneyard. About 12 years ago, NASA went there and pulled 63-13295 out of mothballs and resurrected her to active flight status, joining two of her sisters. They are all designated as WB-57's now. All three conduct weather experiments for NASA, flying through hurricanes and typhoons and taking measurements.
Just had a quick look on maps, dated 2023. I see 6 at coordinates 32.16147226988309, -110.83774611028473 . Also wondering what are the planes to right of the B-57's with the rather large wingspan?
@@68Boca I'm pretty sure those three acft are the RB/EB-57D variant.
@@American_Jeeper NASA flies three RB-57 articles redesignated as WB-57, so the long winged birds would be the NASA type.
Crazy that a 1944 proposal resulted in an aircraft still flying eighty years later. Then again, B-52s eventually will be sorted by carbon dating...
@@68Boca The AMARC inventory list shows 2 B-57Es, 5 EB-57Bs and 4 WB-57Fs soaking in the sun.
@@francoissouchay3887 The three WB-57F's are located at the Johnson Space Center Tail Numbers 926, 927, 928).
The ones at Davis Monthan AFB are mothballed, so it stands to reason in my mind that they are part of the 21 built as RB/EB-57D's, which have a slightly shorter wingspan (32m) than the WB-57F's that NASA uses (37m).There is a fourth NASA WB-57F at Davis Monthan (Tail Number 925), but its wings have been partially dismantled.
T/N 927 started her life out as a B-57B (original T/N 53-3918). In 1964 she was rebuilt as RB-57Fs by General Dynamics, and was given the new T/N 63-13295. She was retired in 1972 and mothballed until 2011, when she was completely dismantled and rebuilt by the Sierra Nevada Corporation at Centennial Airport, Colorado. Her Wright J65 turbojets were replaced with Pratt & Whitney TF33 turbofans, which were double the thrust of the original engines.
Following her restoration, her first flight as T/N N927NA was in 2013.
During 1971-72 I was an intel debriefer at Ubon and debriefed the B-57G crews from 13th Bomb Squadron. My memory is that the crews loved the airplane and were enthusiastic about their mission over the Trail. I think it was a beautiful airplane. I also remember B-57Gs teaming up with the C-130A Blindbat flare dropping mission over the Trail. I also spent some time as Ops NCO for Blindbat.
To very good aircraft that did a job , thank you for your service . From an ex-RAF serviceman .
Welcome home!
Really cool to see! My landlord was the bombardier in his b-57G, sadly I've only been able to find so much info on them and such, most I've gotten really has been from him. I'm going to show him this!
He really enjoyed the video.
Another example of technology shared across the pond that paved the path of success.
The B-57G definitely laid the groundwork for the PaveTack F-111G and the TRAM A-6E Intruder both laser-guided systems that served well in Desert Storm.
The bubble canopy gives it that Gloster Meteor look
The Canberra was a bigger Meteor from day one…
The Meteor is the Canberra's daddy.
I worked at RAE Bedford when they were still operating Canberras for radar research. The pilots loved flying them. The ETPS pilots flew all the types we had, so one day they were flying us around in the BAC 1-11 and the next they were flying a Canberra or Tornado.
I remember as a kid and i saw this when one day driving some where a Canberra of RAE came from behind and flew straight down the road that we was driving . The wing tips were over the the edge of both sides of the road and the noise and vibration was incredible . Obviously as a kid in the back seat i heard then was vibrated and also the shadow of this aircraft passed by us and went in front . I was excited by this and loved it but the RAE had to apologise to the general public for scaring vehicle drivers . Apparently it was testing some thing but they never said what . Made my day and every one of the family that was in the car , we was used to fast jets at low level doing their thing and to be fair liked it .
Excellent video, Ed. This is where you really shine. Not just doing aircraft overviews (there's lots of channels for that), but bringing in the tactical and strategic background as well. Few channels have your personal experience with military systems and their use.
Your funny cut-in's are getting better and better Ed 🙂
In field studies in Vietman, it was determined that they were flying to high (3,000' or more) for the 20mm guns to be effective. The guns would break windshields and penatrate body work but would not put the truck out of action.
One story about the B-57, or actually the RB-57( undergoing development at Martin's at the time), was when one of the bombers flying out of the Baltimore plant flew over the capitol without identifying itself. It caused a real flap as no fighter in the area could fly high enough to intercept it.
My father worked at Glen L Martin from 1938/9 to 1963, mostly the PBM, P5M programs.
I think that's an incorrect conclusion. Altitude should have no bearing. It's more likely the result, or lack of result, from the general effectiveness of 20mm on something as simple as a truck. Sure, in WW2 fighters were strafing the heck out of German trucks, but that was a somewhat different circumstance. Often they were using .50cals that could easily put hundreds of rounds into a target in one or two seconds. Far more likely to cause critical damage or worse if incendiary rounds were used. Couple this with the inability of the Germans to repair or recover the vehicle made it effective.
Even at the high rate of fire of the Vulcan at night and high speed, I would expect maybe half a dozen hits and less if they were only letting off judicious bursts. ( in the video he mentions 20 trucks for 4,000 rds. : 2 sec bursts, but at what flying speed?).
A few explosive hits on a steel frame truck with an iron engine aren't going to put it out of action for long, if at all. These aren't aluminum frame aircraft, or vulnerable jet planes that every square foot is vital. The frame likely won't be damaged. Replacing some tires and an engine accessory or two, the truck is back in business. The Vietnamese wouldn't care about cosmetics of a few holes here and there.
The more modern 30mm has a square of more explosive capability coupled with the use of depleted uranium that more or less melts the steel. They use a mix of HE and AP to achieve effectiveness.
I don't doubt the study was done, they just arrived at an incorrect conclusion.
The problem with emphasis on the Ho Chi Minh trail is that the majority of the supplies came by sea. The most effective force against these supplies was the US Coast Guard.
The Australian airforce flew the Canberra in Viet Nam. The Australians were so accurate that if forward air controllers knew they were available the Canberras would be used first. If just one bomb was not within the target area the crew would have to go step by step with other officers from the squadron to find out why.
I was a FAC in 'Nam and can vouch for the Canberra's incredible accuracy. The downside, however, was the long time between bomb passes as the 'Berra had to fly a large "racetrack" pattern that could take five to six minutes between drops. That was fine for pre-planned strikes on known and fixed targets like storage areas, but worthless for highly mobile events like troops in contact.
I have no idea what the facts there are BUT its certainly pretty plausible .......
Boats have good darrying capacity, lots of places to hide amongst the deltas etc
Yet - maybe because of the coverage during the War - the Ho Chi Min Trail has acquired near mythic status.
Another terrifically researched and presented video. Thanks, Ed!
Right mission, wrong platform. Go fig. But very ambitious application and development of technologies! Glad to see the C-17 and C-130 being touted to carry pallets of smart munitions to be deployed between cargo runs! Thank you for your excellent research and reporting! Never disappointed here. Cheers!
Charlton Heston could well have caught sight of the RAF's Canberra T.17, you know. They used to take off over our school from RAF Watton, and I loved them - warts and all. Great video, as always.
The Canberra is one of my favourites, and as it was part of our inventory in the RAAF, seeing highly successful service in Vietnam. I have seen one on a semiregular basis, parked just within the International air shows grounds, held in Melbourne. It is a particularly astonishingly small aircraft, very much bellying its 9 ton weight. I can certainly see its appeal to so many air forces of the world, in particular the USAF, who needed a craft with such unique abilities; both high altitude and high transonic speed. A real rip-snorter for reconnaissance, and bombing.
I remember seeing B57s at Otis AFB in the late 60s when I was around 8-9 years old. My dad had security clearance and would sometimes let me sneak out to the flight line and watch all the activities happening. Busy time.
Constellations with the big radomes, B57s, F106s scrambling to intercept Soviet Bears off the coast as they flew on down to Cuba. You don't realize at 8 the implications of what's happening around you. You just think it's really cool. Those were the best times with my dad.
Thank you for your service.
Lt. Colonel Joe ONeill, USAF
RIP
Thanks for a great informative video!
Nash: "...looks like a warthog with syphilis."
Me: "That's a bit extreme there Ed don'tcha think?"
sees pic at 8:50
Me: "Oh...how dreadful. I stand corrected."
Great video! I agree with you - the Canberra is exceptionally easy on the eyes, although comparing the B-57G to a syphilitic warthog might be just a tad overkill, LOL. I think that one of the (possibly overlooked?) advantages of the big & slow gunships was the amazing light show they'd put on with tracers & cannon shells. It's one thing to know there's an aircraft overhead in the darkness dropping bombs, but it's a whole 'nother can of hurt when "Puff the Magic Dragon" starts blowing up your comrades with an actual stream of visible tracer fire you can see coming from the night sky getting closer... and closer... and...
Ed I love your Vids and Channel, There used to be a Canberra gate guard At the Wroughton Military Hospital always loved driving by it
"Tropic Moon I-III" are such cool designations, though
For me, the early RAF and RAAF Canberra with it's unusual hemispherical bubble canopy, glazed bomb aimer's nose, clean wings and silver finish was the most attractive of the type. Although, I do have a soft spot for the PR.9 with its quirky offset canopy and clean lines. It's getting on for 20 years since I watched WJ680 perform an impeccable aerobatic routine at Avalon in Victoria. TFP
PR-9's i think might be the longest serving Aircraft in the RAF , yes i know the BBMF are still serving aircraft to a point but the PR-9 was the longest operational as far as im aware . occasionally worked with Canberra's when i was at RAF Wittering and some other stations . Was always amazed at the so many different variants that there was . I thought it was bad enough that we have four different types of Harrier at RAF Wittering , plus then the Navy variants that would come in .
👍👍, many thanx Ed.
Compliments for the impressive amount of research done on this one.
Excellent video Ed, thanks.
Anyone notice the picture of the NVA trucks. All had only one headlight. The right side (driver's side) was the only one installed. The NH Air National Guard flew them. They would fly out over the ocean than try to penetrate American airspace.
I worked on many B-57 types from 1961 through 68. including the prototype G model.
The electronic equipment fitted to the stoofs (S-2gs), was later fitted to the P2-v Neptunes of TRIM (Trails, Roads, Interdiction, Method) aircraft which substituted an M-61 Vulcan cannon in a tail turret in place of the MAD (Magnetic Anomaly Detection) gear, they were modestly successful. Until being replaced by Canberras and AC series aircraft.
Thinking further one initial modification to a couple of Canberras was the sensor suite, with an M-61 in a trainable turret in the bombay.
I think that early photo of the B-57 with the dark/muted livery is beautiful.
This is a very interesting topic and a well made video about it , thank you.
My dad was in the back seat of the c model used for atmospheric testing for nuclear weapons. The breathing wing bomber. Had filters built in to the aircraft to capture the elements left over from thermonuclear weapons. The plane flew so high that the pilot and my dad had the helmets and compression gear on. Almost as high as the U2.
Took off from Greece and flew over what is now the Ukraine and landed in the Netherlands. And back again.
It has a charming practicality to its look.
100% with you on the looks Ed. Great airplane
What an excellent vid - great!
Ed, your wry comments throughout makes this video that much more entertaining!
I don't remember the G model, but one of my AFROTC instructors did fly many successful truck-busting missions in an AC-130. He even had a chance to take out some NVA helicopters one night, but a Marine AA unit on the DMZ didn't get the word and lit him up. After evading the Marines, the mission was scrubbed. Oh, how he wanted to paint some helicopter silhouettes on his plane.
Has anyone else here ever sat in an EE Canberra's cockpit? It's a bit of a nightmare, and for some reason, it kept those stupid trigger brakes the British persisted with for too long
It helps if your hobby's potholing of course.
"warthog with syphilis"... How elegant! 🤣
The Heston clip was INSPIRED!
The 'tough guy' presentation style gets in the way of facts.
Some comments about the EE Canberra developed and served well into this century would have enriched contextual knowledge.
The vertical tail fin seems fairly small compared to other aircraft.
Excellent.
Interesting, never heard of that variant of the B-57. Can you do a video on the RB-57F variant? Thanks for all the great work!
1:17 😂😂😂😂 I'm dyin over here. Thanks Ed now my side hurts lmmfao 😂😂😂😂
Excellent point, also noted elsewhere, that the B57G program served to sort out night attack technology that could be used on other aircraft.
Fascinating video - and the camouflaged G gets my vote for the best-looking Canberra. And another for being a good fusion of airframe, sensors and weapons.
This is the best thing I ever saw.
TY 🙏🙏
Yes the long canopy improves it !
No matter for which reason a plane fails, or even succeeds, usually valuable lessons are learned, technology pushed further and jobs created.
And even the biggest failures can leave behind a heritage of successful offspring build upon the information gathered and knowledge gained.
3:10 all the lorries only have one headlight...?
If you see 8 headlights in the distance, how many trucks would you usually count?
Used to be called ‘the Bosnian Motorbike’ :)
@@FirstDagger ;-) no flies on the NVA...
Great video!
A great interesting video Mr.Ed.Did the B57G retain its better airworthiness with deployed Gattling cannon?Have a good one.
In spite of its odd look (which I find attractive in a kind of ugly duckling kind of way) RESPECT for the progenitor of a new form of what must have been hell for the enemy.
Combined with the gunship it must have had a significant effect on the behavior and morale of those doing supply runs.
@Cancer McAids True, very true. But it still likely modified their behavior and weighed on their minds.
They still bested the U.S. with their adaptability and drive for certain.
What a waste overall, though. I wish my country had learned to not interfere with sovereignty.
If they had some patience to develop it enough, it would had been a brutally effective FAC/CAS/BAI platform, however they got rid of the "foreign" aircraft in favour of the stuka/sturmovik inspired A-10.
Is it just me or does anyone else think that the below-photo of the B-57G with the two white squares visible reminds them of Wallace, from the "Wallace and Gromit" films?
Interestingly, this was originally Britain's first jet bomber. Lengthening the stubby wings was a smart move. The EE Canberra
and the Hawker Harrier were the only foreign-designed planes the US ever adopted, both were British..
Not going to lie the pave gat sounds absolutely awesome as you have a turreted m61 gun with over 4000 in an aircraft capable of 500 miles an hour.
I think without the night vision equipment this could have been a nasty close support aircraft
_"That which is seen cannot be unseen."_ Poor B-57. To abuse such a dependable, reliable workhorse like that is shameful. Somebody notify the Aircraft Cruelty Society!
@7:28 They should have called this the B-57S... for Super Squirrel. I mean look at the nose underside shot here!
I agree with your opinion of the Canberra's looks, except that buttah face version with the wonky cockpit on one side.
Saw a "long wing" at KAF in '12.
"we need this high tech aircraft", "sounds expensive why?", "guys with bicycles", "why didn't you say so..."
It’s amazing at 68 I can remember that snoopy was XV208 😂
The B-57G isn't plug ugly! It's almost as cute as a cuttlefish. From some angles. If you squint.
Wait...which "Charlie" was more upset about it?
Very interesting.
2:25 "... that all-encompassing canopy ...". The canopy on the US version houses both the pilot and the other crew-member, whereas on the British version only the pilot can see very much outside the aircraft. There were British versions with fighter style canopy, but, unlike the US ones, they were offset to port in order to offer the pilot a better downward view.
This is a new plane for me. Having laser guided bombs on the wings and a 20mm Vulcan turret on a jet would be pretty cool. It'd be interesting if the vulcan could function as anti missle defence like Phalanx and it also had radar seeking missles for SAM hunting.
So now I'm wondering if the ac-130 gunships can do that...
Would be interesting to hear the cost per truck destroyed . How many millions verses a few thousand trucks ?
PAVE GAT sounds like a perfect aircraft for cosplaying as the Millennium Falcon doing the trench run at the end of A New Hope... the turbo lasers turrets just look a bit more like Charlies driving trucks
Despite the comparative failure of that particular exercise, the Canberra's record isreally remarkable, considering the design originated from the mid-140s, and, as others point out, the WB-57's still working for NASA.
I recall reading an article by a former B-57 WSO about missions with a pilot who would turn off his nav. lights and haul the machine into a turm immediately after breaking ground, to avoid the VC gunners lurking on the runway centre-line just outside the wire. Someback-seaters wouldn't fly with him, but the tactic seems justified.
I've heard it said that Martin wouldn't believe that the photo of their long wing was unnecessary even when shown a photo of it taken from 100000 ft higher by a PR9
sorry my fingers were running ahead of my brain there
Gaijin plese. 7:30 Were those bombs the GBU-12 or earlier types?
the G model looks exactly how a ground attack plane should look like, it would look more gracious with a longer radome like a Phantom but that's one of the best looking jets of all times
The equipment was too bulky for the F-111? I worked on the EF-111A. I can't see how even primitive LLTV would be too bulky for an A-model Aardvark's weapons bay.
You have no idea how large that bomb bay is. I worked on the F-111 and the B57. The 57 had way more room.
May I suggest, the Jowl? Jowler?
Curious if the B-57”G” could have been retrofitted with a 30mm Avenger cannon that is used on th A-10. Seems to be plenty of room for at a glance. 🤔
It'd be interesting if you could do a bit about the Canberra's use in the African bush wars. I know they were used there but no much about how effective they were.
The British and the American Canberra's served together in Vietnam. USAF with B-57s, the RAAF with Canberra.
Can Ed do a video of the various RAF weirdo nose versions of the Canberra please?
Considering the aircraft built immediately prior to Canberra
It wonders me a bit how come the Hustlers or B47s were not used as bombers during the US War in Vietnam and SE Asia?
He touched on it in the video. Both were purpose built for high speed nuclear bombing, the B-58 supersonic. The B-47 an early jet, was relatively slow, low range meaning little loiter time and not configured for level bombing. Although it had considerable weight capacity, that was for one or two internal nukes. I don't believe it's cutting edge wings could handle wing racks. Plus maintenance on first generation, almost two decade old engines was probably prohibitive.
The B-58 was still state of the art with one primary mission, supersonic penetration and delivery of nukes, likely one way.
They also seemed two-minded between using up old stuff and trying out state of the art high tech. For example, they sent the latest wonder-waffen M-551 Sheridan, but not the M-60.
Probably a mix of reluctance to use up first line equipment standing off the Russians, actually letting them know what it could or could not really do and wanting to find out outselves.
@@chriskortan1530 Thank you.
"warthog with syphilis" are yu trying to make me pee myself laughing because you almost succeeded
@2:34 "myopic focus" hahahahaha well said.
Now there's an unprepossessing physiognomy.
Is it just me... or does this seem like a stretched out CF -100 ? With more added ... I wonder if some design features were related ? Can anyone offer any insight on that ?
The licence for Canberra paid for the development of the lighting
There's an irradiated Canberra at RAAF wagga.
The Canberra is among the finest British aircraft designs.
You always end up with the equipment you wish you had in the last war.
Beaten by bicycles. Some of which didn't even have pedals
My favourite sort of aircraft, imagine flying this over tribal Pakistan and giving them a roost up the khyber
Did you forget about the AC-47?
That was not a trail, that was the freeway! ,😁
I think you're being a little harsh. With those cheek pouches, buck teeth and boopable snoot, there's a real chipmunk vibe going on here. Alvin would be proud.
I was in the military and I remember the cloud of smoke from the starter cartridges and the unique sound the engines made as they spooled up.
I believe they was a high altitude spy model that appeared to have almost doubled the wing span of the standard B-57
I dunno about the longer wingspan part, but, the B-57 did have an unusually high service ceiling (around 60k feet I think?) at a time when jet fighters and SAMs struggled to reach that altitude. So even though it wasnt really built for it, it did become a useful spy aircraft. It essentially laid the groundwork for the U-2, which was a purpose built aircraft for a similar flight regime.
Due to its high altitude performance, NASA was one of the last operators of the B-57 as a high altitude research aircraft.
I am not sure if a NASA WB - 57F was involved in the recent balloon provocation incident. It would not surprise me.
Any info on if/Hoge many of these were lost over Vietnam. Also, I believe we lost a few of them while spying over China. Anyone having info on this, please reply. Thanks
A single B-57G was lost on the first combat mission. Pilot (who was squadron commander) & GIB bailed, pilot rescued immediately, GIB next morning. Rumors that it actually collided with an OV-10. An AC-130 made sure there was nothing left of the downed aircraft. There was another hit by ground fire. The crew chief found the damage next day.