# Why did the Convair YB-60 fail?



## Lucky13 (Apr 16, 2018)



Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Capt. Vick (Apr 16, 2018)

Look at how thick the wing is at the root as opposed to the 52, that might be a good place to start.


----------



## tyrodtom (Apr 16, 2018)

I was just a little bigger than a B-52, and could carry a bigger payload.
But the B-52 beat it into the air by a few days, and on basically the same power was about 100 mph faster.
That poor speed showing probably doomed it.


----------



## T Bolt (Apr 17, 2018)

The B-52 was a jet from the start while the YB-60 was a piston engined aircraft converted to jet. There were a lot of attempts at that back then and none of them worked out.


----------



## Graeme (Apr 17, 2018)

Convair's YB-60 was well and truly rejected by the USAF...

*"After flight test cancellation, Convair vainly attempted to convince the Air Force to continue interest in the YB-60. Convair even offered to complete the remaining B-36s on the production line as B-60s without charging the Air Force any more money. This proposal was turned down. Convair then tried to convince the Air Force that the YB-60 could be used as an experimental test bed for turboprop engines. This proposal was also rejected. Convair even considered trying to adapt the YB-60 as a commercial jet airliner. Nothing came of this idea either. There was even some consideration of using the YB-60 as a test vehicle for the proposed nuclear-powered X-6. This idea went nowhere as well" (Joe Baugher).
*
Looking at the timeline - the last B-36J was rolled outta the factory on the 14th August 1954. It's not saying much for the YB-60 that the USAF preferred to continue that piston B-36 production rather than accept "free" jet conversions proposed by Convair.

Some of the problems encountered...


----------



## Graeme (Apr 17, 2018)

Something I was unaware of - The YB-60 had a large tail-wheel...

Reactions: Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Graeme (Apr 17, 2018)

And something else I ever noticed before. Well known photo below - but according to a recent article in Air Classics what the censor's scissors failed to cut from the original was the outline of a Hydrogen Bomb test shape seen at the bottom left in the background...

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Capt. Vick (Apr 17, 2018)

I have seen a construction photo that showed at least one of the prototypes with the 20 mm turrets installed.


----------



## drewwizard (Apr 17, 2018)

From what I read, it wasn't just the exterior design, but the electronics, flight controls, etc which were obsolete. The turbo prop version was a nice try. The russian TU-95 bear is still in use because of the efficiency of the turbo props. Just the noise they generate. Personally I thought the YB-60 was a much better looking aircraft. although I would have liked to see the flying wing with a extension on the front and a canard. That would have been highly efficient, and stable.


----------



## johnbr (Jun 17, 2018)

e YB-60’s first flight was three days after that of the Boeing YB-52 Stratofortress. In testing, it was 100 miles per hour (161 kilometers) slower than the B-52 prototype, despite using the same engines. A second B-60 prototype was cancelled before completion, and after 66 flight hours the YB-60 test program was cancelled. Both airframes were scrapped in 1954, with the second prototype never having flown.

The Convair YB-60 was 171 feet (52.121 meters) long with a wingspan of 206 feet (62.789 meters) and overall height of 60 feet, 6 inches (18.440 meters). The wings were swept at a 37° angle. It had an empty weight of 153,016 pounds (69,407 kilograms) and gross weight of 300,000 pounds (136,078 kilograms).

The prototype jet bomber was powered by eight Pratt & Whitney Turbo Wasp YJ57-P-3 turbojet engines. The J57 was a two-spool, axial-flow turbojet developed from an experimental turboprop engine. It had 16-stage compressor section (9 low- and 7-high-pressure stages), 8 combustors and a 3-stage turbine section (1 high- and 2 low-pressure stages). The YJ57-P-3s were rated at 8,700 pounds of thrust (38.70 kilonewtons), each. The YJ57-P-3 was 183.5 inches (4.661 meters) long, 41.0 inches (1.041 meters) in diameter and weighed 4,390 pounds (1,991 kilograms). These were the same engines used in the YB-52, and were similarly mounted in four 2-engine nacelles below the wings.
Maximum speed was 0.77 Mach (508 miles per hour, 818 kilometers per hour) at 39,250 feet (11,963 meters) and the combat ceiling was 44,650 feet (13,609 meters). The YB-60 could reach 30,000 feet (9,144 meters) in just over 28 minutes. Takeoff required 6,710 feet (2,045 meters) and 8,131 feet (2478 meters) were required to clear a 50-foot (15.24 meters) obstacle. Maximum range was 8,000 miles (12,875 kilometers) but the combat radius was 2,920 miles (4,699 kilometers) with a 10,000 pound (4,536 kilograms) bomb load.

The maximum bomb load was 72,000 pounds (32,659 kilograms). Defensive armament consisted of two M24A1 20 mm autocannon in a remote-controlled tail turret. The second YB-60 retained the upper forward and lower aft retractable gun turrets of the B-36, adding eight more 20 mm cannon.

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## johnbr (Oct 24, 2018)



Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## vikingBerserker (Oct 25, 2018)

I think the only real advantage the YB-60 had was the commonality of a lot of the parts with the B-36. I do agree it was a better looking aircraft IMHO.


----------



## johnbr (Oct 25, 2018)



Reactions: Informative Informative:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## ktank (Jan 4, 2019)

T Bolt said:


> The B-52 was a jet from the start while the YB-60 was a piston engined aircraft converted to jet. There were a lot of attempts at that back then and none of them worked out.



SAAB J-21 as an exception?


----------



## johnbr (Jan 23, 2019)




----------

