Never understood why you would put a nuclear reactor on-board an aircraft, aside from the obvious benefits of practically unlimited fuel, the disadvantages out weigh it by far in my opinion. Crew fatigue plays a big part on the ability of an aircraft, just because you have unlimited fuel doesn't mean the crew has unlimited energy. Then there's the big one of radioactive fallout if the plane get's damaged, any higher than 10,000ft and you have a very serious problem on your hands. All in all I would not want a nuclear plane flying in my airspace.
Really cool plane.
Fun fact.
This plane actually flew with a nuclear reactor on board as an experiment making it the first ((and only)) Nuclear powered plane.
Not the only. The Soviet Tupolev Tu-95LAL flew from 1961 to 1969.
The only reason I did not mention it though is because it was not known if it ever flew on pure Nuclear power. Unlike the B-36
Never understood why you would put a nuclear reactor on-board an aircraft, aside from the obvious benefits of practically unlimited fuel, the disadvantages out weigh it by far in my opinion. Crew fatigue plays a big part on the ability of an aircraft, just because you have unlimited fuel doesn't mean the crew has unlimited energy. Then there's the big one of radioactive fallout if the plane get's damaged, any higher than 10,000ft and you have a very serious problem on your hands. All in all I would not want a nuclear plane flying in my airspace.
You pretty much summed up why the program was scrapped.
True... Someone get me on the defence board already, I will save your country from uselessly throwing money at really silly projects!
And cut down politicians commissions? NEVER!
Of course not! Same goes for The EU :3
I like strategic bombers. all strategic bombers, but especially those last prop bombers. Here's to you B-36 and your blend of props and jets!
This inspires me to try and make a B 36 model for IL-2 1946.
If only I had the time :(