I worked on the assembly line and sealed the fuel tanks on number 4...glad to see she still exists...she was sure a beautiful ship when new and painted white
Hi Jeff, The one you worked on, 76-0174 (B-1A #4) is currently parked outside at the SAC museum near Lincoln, NE. The Bone in this video is prototype #3 (74-0160) which can be identified by the long spine on the dorsal fuselage.
@@Stepclimb Does this one have the dorsal spine? When we were on the B-1B CTF using B-1As as testbeds, one of them had the desert camo scheme and had the dorsal spine. Another was painted like this in European 1 scheme, with the dark grey and green colors. AV-2 was all white with the black Radome, crashed in 1984. Doug Benefield, chief test pilot from Rockwell, died in the capsule. Other 2 crew survived.
@@Stepclimb there were 4 b-1a prototypes b-1a airframe number one is at the usaf newport test facility in New York , it's just the forward fuselage . Airframe number 2 was lost over the mojave desert near Edward's afb in 1984 Airframe number 3 is on display at the wings over the rockies in denver Colorado Airframe number 4 is on display at the nebraska aerospace museum 1 , 2 and 3 had escape modules Airframe number 4 and all b-1b Lancers have ejection seats
Haha - been binge watching the plane tours for the last few days.. crazy how Matthew changed from next door „how’s the wife“ dad to literally hype Jesus
In 1986 I was there at Lowery AFB and did my 462X0 Aircraft Armament Systems Tech training in that very building. I have since visited Wings Over the Rockies and I can say that I am very glad and proud of the job they have done with preserving the old hangar and facilities. The upstairs classroom areas are now the admin offices and I can see where we had our initial tech training. Following that we were down on the floor and hands on an F-16A at the time to learn all about MAU-12s / MK-84s / TERs / B-61s / ACIUs and the SMS. So thankful for the chance of when I'm in Denver to go back to the place where it all began for me! Thanks! (Hahn AFB 50TFW 313th AMU - Lucky Puppies!)
I will probably never come to your museum, simply because it would be a hell of a costly trip for me... However I am very grateful that there is peoples like you that makes videos about these awesome aircrafts and keep them in (almost) complete and pristine conditions for the posperity. An enormous thanks from the bottom of my heart to all curators around the world and the teams maintaining those aircrafts.
rofl wow Matt looks so different without the additional hair and beard. I'm surprised this show is so new, the presentation style of the later shows seems like the kind of polish that takes longer to develop.
Ok....some issues with the video.... The first three, of which the museum has number 3, 74-0160....the offensive systems test aircraft....those three all had the crew capsule system.... Number 4, was completed to a modified design and had regular ejection seats.... The sand story is probably due to the aircraft needing to be ballasted for towing.... The "A" models didn't have the adjustable bay divider that is used on later aircraft....the rotary mechanism is only one of the ways they could carry weapons in the bays.... The missing instruments in the cockpit were removed for parts, not testing....the last time I went aboard her...sometime around '85 or maybe '87 she had been used as a parts source to support the ongoing development program....much of the cockpit was still intact then... The B-1 was not intended to deliver nukes in the same way as a B-52....the B-1s mission is/was to enter enemy airspace at low level...flying high subsonic around 600mph at 400 feet, then striking targets with SRAM s (short range attack missiles) and or cruise missiles, etc... The big difference between the A and B models is speed capability.... The A was equipped with variable air inlets, allowing top speeds of Mach 2...though only number 1 and 2 had working inlets.....B models have fixed inlets limiting speeds to around Mach1.5...
Absolutely agreed man - I always used to overlook this beauty, drawn to the usual stars sr71 and the Spirit for sure........but the more I learned, the more I s a w of her, there's a lot to capture your interest ! I love how smooth it's lines are 😎👍
I still remember being stood maybe 500 yards from the runway when a B1 took off with full afterburners. God damn that power was intense, the ground shook.
I came here for good intel, ended up looking at a great bird with an annoying host. He doesn't even tell the intricacies of the bird, everyone knows about the bomb bays so that's just damn normal. It could've been a great video had the host acted a bit maturely. Sorry but I'm disappointed.
Malamute Aerospace, my father was a navigator on the b1 in your squadron at Dyess during that same time frame. I grew up on dyess watching these take off and land
@@smithnwesson990 yes on practicing bomb runs with the TFR terrain following radar in a MOA airspace in UTah we used to get 200 to 800 feet agl but because of weight of fuel and bomb load pkus the MOA WAS 6000 ft MSL so we always had a high density altitude on a good day we could get Mach 1.07 to 1.11 never at low altitudes get above 1.30 plus you need all 4 throttles at mct maximum continuous thrust WITH AFTERBURNERS ON. So fuel littetally was being burned at 50,000 lbs per hour so we had like 20 mins of flight time inthat configuration. Sad though the BONES going away once he B3s in line. And it will go to ANG BASES in Georgia, Houston and California. They're keeping the B52 still on alert status with long range nuclear tipped ALCMs. Peace my friend. Go to Wings over the Rickies museum in Denver Colorado they have a B1 there you can ser everything including the 1988 era nuclear alert cockpit.
About the sand idea -- It might NOT be so crazy. They HAVE put ballast in planes to maintain the center of gravity. Modellers also put ballast/weights in models to keep them tipping over on their tails when model planes are tail heavy. The heavier section of the B-1 WOULD be towards the rear -- especially when the wings are in the swept back positions!
@@4dshow conventional refers to normal non-nuclear type bombs, and nuclear refers to nuclear bombs. In short it's either conventional OR nuclear, not both. Also I think he ment to say long range cruise missiles, not short range. But what do I know I'm just a cable guy that likes military shit
The B1-B is BONKERS. Empty Weight 87 Tonnes, max take off 216 tonnes. That's 129 tonnes of fuel and payload. So theoretically if you could make it fit you could strap a B52H under it and still have over 45 tonnes (about 100,000 pounds) of fuel. Nucking Futs. I bet some loony tries it now.
I was there for “fundys” tech school before f111 bomb/nav at Nellis AFB FTD. Remember the 3.2 beer and Everclear & 7up cans and my first Hawaiian pizza (pineapple). Memories.
I was at Disaster Prepardness school in 89 and the B1 was parked outside the hanger next to a GIANT mound of sand. CE was putting the sand in it. So yes...it is full of sand. Where it is exactly is anyones guess. Surprised you dont find any leaking out. So the rumor is solved !
One of the most under utilized aircraft in our inventory. The B1b is a beast even though it is subsonic. My next door neighbor was a pilot of this bird. I asked so many questions of him and he regularly declined to tell me any specifics of his missions. Loose lips sink ships. Carry on Major. 🇺🇸
' american B-1 lancers airplanes are the best top planes... B-1 lancer was first start made... ussr russia did copy steal to made cheap low classic tu-160
I remember going there in 2016 and being shown around a couple airliner cockpit mockups by a gentleman who seemed to have flown a lot of the aircraft on display and the exact bomber they had out front. Guy had some stories!!
im so old i remember when pres carter canceled it along with the mx missile. . my father read the ny times i clearly remember reading about it. i certainly remember when Reagan brought it back. now its long retired.
@Kilo: Just another massive money waste by the military. Since AIPAC basically owns Congress...the US taxpayer has spent hundreds of billions on Israel.
f4cphantom2 the aire planes are olddd And it used to be a run way and the make new veraions of the air planes that are modern i went there before so ya
@@jrftworth They've stripped parts from museum fighter planes, too. There was a big flack a few years ago about the Marines being hard up for parts for their F-18 fleet. It was reported they took parts off retired F-18s off the decks of RETIRED aircraft carriers like the Yorktown in South Carolina! What they take off won't compromise the integrity of of the museum plane but it's sad when they have to start playing scavenger outside of the Boneyard. They're supposed to taking parts off planes stored in Arizona, not museums and memorials! Well, the Marine Corps F-18 situation got improved this year... The US Navy retired its last active duty Legacy Hornets (the A-D models) from carrier use. (The US Navy will be flying Super Hornets for many more years... The length of carrier service for the Legacy Hornet was roughly as long as the F-14's service life, too.) NOT using those planes on carriers will lengthen their remaining service AND they can bail additional planes to the Marines for the Marines to use until they get more F-35s in service with the Marine Corps OR replace the Marine Corps F-18s with another plane! The USN is still using Legacy Hornets for training the reserve and Marine Corps units flying Legacy F-18s as well as aggressor squadron duties at Top Gun and other installations that have aggressor units.
Reminds me of what happened to British during the Falkland's war. The needed flying Vulcans and did not have any. The RAF went into scavenger hunt mode to get some back operational. I dont remember how many they got airworthy, but in the end there was only one missiom flown by a single bomber over the Falkland Islands. The Argentine government feared the British had many Vulcans and they would soon be bombing Argentina itself. This forced Argentina to make peace to give up sooner than they might otherwise.
Was curious that there was no discussion about the difference between the "A" and "B" model. There are significant differences between them. I am not an expert, but my understanding is that the "A" was designed for high speed, high altitude penetration, and the "B" was a complete re-design for low level penetration and is not capable of supersonic flight.
The B1-A was designed for high altitude, high speed flight to the target and then had low altitude penetration terrain following capabilities. It was later discovered that the A model did not have enough stealth built into the design. The B model reduced the sweep of the wings to reduce the signature which limited the high speed to Mach 1.3. Also, engine fan blades could be seen by radar so vanes were added to the inlets to deflect radar but further reduced the power and needed quartz heating rods to keep them from icing. Radar Absorbing Material (RAM) was added to the body and wings to enhance stealth at the cost of weight and added drag. The mission profile in 1972 (B1-A) changed over the course of 10 years when the B-1B was reintroduced.
Wish the view inside the ladder well had been videoed along with the interior of the area behind the front seats like other crew areas seats or compartments. The fuselage appears as though there may be other large spaces besides the cockpit...? Like the video!
If I'm correct when the program got started again the b-1b is the plane that went i to service. Interestingly the b-1a is supersonic while the b-1b is subsonic. That's what I've seen on a show. I could be wrong though.
B1A was a mach 2.1 machine! The B1B is also supersonic mach1.25. They changed something with the engine intakes and limited the airspeed. When Reagan saved the program and the plane was finally rolled out they seriously downplayed the speed. All had to do with kissing the Soviet's ass while slipping this monster through.
Lancer B1.It must have had smaller radar signituare Australia F 1-11 in Adelaide museum has had engines destroyed by a passing a steel pole through them
Thanks for the video, I came to Lowry AFB in 1962, stationed in the old Air Force Academy area. Worked on the B52 after I left there. i did pay a visit one days years later and went through Wings Over the Rockies, great place.
This was/is one of the finest aircraft this nation has ever produced, next to the B-52, "Buff." Google it as I don't use that language lol!! The B-1 on the deck at full power was something to behold! Screaming is about the only word I can use to describe this. Its RCS was small. REALLY small! Not stealthy but close. The navigation suite was a sight to behold. It pained me to see this stripped-down but hey, things are what they are. I would LOVE to come and see her! Those rotary Bombays were something to blow your mind in the day. (No pun intended). To think of its roll in a nuclear conflict still sends shivers up my spine. Such a beautiful bird. My 2nd all-time favorite aircraft in the world!!! Perhaps one day I will get a chance to get out there. Looking forward to this series!!! Thank you for posting this!!!!
My son and I took a trip here 2 years ago. This was his favorite plane. He was in awe to see a B1A Lancer. Thanks for making a great Father/Son memory. + he is high functioning autistic. He knows all the stats on the plane. He was in love with it.
OK, youtube is being weird. The first time I saw you was on the F14 video. SO PROFESSIONAL AND GREAT, with SPUD (you know who I am talking about). Tell the truth, that was probably the best interview ever in your life. The best part, NAVY not AF. Keep up the great work on all the HISTORY. There are channel out there that claim HISTORY, you prove your knowledge better. KEEP CHARGING BROTHER.
@@goodday381 Yeah all 4 prototypes... Comparing a Tu-160 and a B-1B is like comparing a tomato and an orange and concluding that because both are spherical, the orange surely copied the tomato's design
@@uzogsi well it is a copy. You would have to be blind to think not. Russian obsession with America led to the imitation. They have one main role and it is to bomb and leave as quickly or without being seen. Same fruit but one is plastic.
Thanks for the interesting video! I was under the impression that three (not two) of the four B-1As had a crew escape capsule. One B-1A (I think it was no.2, yours is no.3, right?) was lost in a flight accident, and the escape capsule worked so-so.
Confusing presentation of some pretty simple information. It had three "bomb" bays (1:38) to carry "missiles" (1:49) with a rotary launcher that would release "rockets" (1:59)? Well, which of the three was it, if they weren't "weapons" bays? The lower gross weight of the B-1 (2:29) allowed the B-1 to take off shorter because it was a higher gross weight airplane (2:38). Whuh? How is the engine exhaust the "business end " of the B-1 "BOMBER" (as in: it's business is to drop BOMBS)? Wouldn't the cockpit be the business end, or maybe the bomb missile rocket bays would be the "business middle"?
On another channel, they let slip that the current B1B aka "The Bone" has a $70K per Hour operating cost and approximately 14 hours of maintenance are needed for every actual flight hour. Its range is poor and its lack of stealth + high heat Sig make it easy pickin's for the SU-27 IR targeting system, aka 'Meatball'. I suggest you 3D print some fake avionics panels, controls, etc. to make the B1A more attractive for your visitors. Cheers.
@@mrmurphypiers1241 how fast is it now? O what's that it cant fly? Hmm doesn't sound that fast. The b1 is still flying and they still make parts for it now in 2020.
Very fortunate to see a B1-B at Ellsworth in 1989. We were in awe just walking around her, then the Captain giving us the tour said "Mind your head as you climb the ladder...." unbelieve experience. Do remember a little red toggle switch in the cockpit with "NUC" above it. Can anyone tell me if that was to do with Nuc.....? David
I was working in College Station, Texas back in 1997. I was a new private pilot and aircraft owner (1968 C172G) studying slowly for my instrument rating. I would often eat my lunch on a little overlook near Easterwood Field and listen to comms on my air band scanner. There is a lot to be learned from doing this. One sunny spring day I heard a call from an aircraft with call sign “Jayhawker xx” requesting low approach, and it was cleared as requested. Low approach to me meant practicing a balked landing and I had done that many times in training but I trained at Midland Airpark (KMDD) in Midland, TX so I hadn’t really used this call much. And the callsign was not your typical US N-number so I assumed it was military. It was! A few minutes passed before a B-1B Lancer did a low approach, lit the burners and went around. The crew did another low approach, lit the burners and then left, saying something like “That’s the sound of freedom!” And it was loud! Those big engines were incredible. So thanks to that crew for the show of force! I’ve never forgotten it.
This museum has some really great pieces in it's collection, but MY GOD the video docents are SO annoying and they get so many things wrong. It seems like with so many knowledgeable folks available, some of whom must surely have acquired some basic public speaking skills, that they could hire decent presenters.
Not sure if this history is correct but I’ve read the B-1a original design was for low altitude short duration supersonic and the b-1b design was for low altitude longer duration high subsonic flight. I’ve read conflicting info recently that the B-1a was only supersonic at high altitude and high subsonic max at low altitude and that the b-1b was at low altitude a higher subsonic capability then the B-1a? Not sure which it is. I believe the B-1b is capable of some amount of transonic ability at high altitude even if it’s stealthy air intakes are fixed vs the less stealthy adjustable air intakes of the B-1a better suited to supersonic high or low?
Hey! Who is that handsome dude that all the Colorado girls are talking about? Mathew!,,! You look so professional! Just like the rest of us aero phreaks. Very believable channel now.
The cost overruns in reality belonged to the Space Shuttle, North American Rockwell played games with the time cards and other expenses of the Shuttle, making it look like the B-1 had the cost overruns.
For me B1 is the most sexy bomber ever build. The design is a real top class. I would say it's a Maserati in the air. Anybody can tell me the future plan of B 1 from USAF ?
Please get rid of the music between the video scenes. It’s annoying and I have to keep adjusting the volume because it’s so much louder than your voice.
Your attempt at humor concerning the sand load out is insulting. You should be educating the public about your collection, hence you should know what your aircraft contain. Making a joke about not wanting to know is counter to your educational mission as a curator. Very disappointing!
I worked on the B-1A flight test crew at Edwards Air Force Base back in those days. It took a lot of prior work and long hours at both Lockheed and Northrop to get that great job. Stayed there until the new B--1B hanger and facility was finally built in Palmdale. Then we went over there to help the new people build the first B-1B. After that job was done the older great guys retired, and I found a cool job at Hill AFB on the complete rebuild and upgrades on the old F4 Phantom aircraft's. My favorite aircraft as a young boy growing up.
Cool video, but missing the some interesting things like the fact that B1A is supersonic where as B1B is not. Would be cool to see the difference between the 2.
@@mattmatt516 Yes, but if you read further you will see how much the speed was lowered from original plan. It can go supersonic, just barely but it might cause structural damage, so they dont do that. Even A380 can go supersonic in a dive :) B1B shape still permits that as a legacy of B1A, but B1B is optimized for low level high subsonic speeds. So yes it can go supersonic for very short time but risk is too high hence it is not flying supersonic.
They used to display the other intact B-1A prototype (the fourth and final B-1A built) at the National Museum of the USAF in Dayton, OH. Like many of the large planes displayed at the Museum, it was actually flown and landed on the base! I saw it in the late 1980s. There used to be complaints about the cost of the plane and the fact it wasn't being flown operationally. People just didn't understand it was a VERY different plane from the B-1B and you can't just re-engine the thing and put in a new radar! Structurally, it wouldn't hold up as well and had less range and was slower than the B-1B at low altitude! In the early 2000s, the fourth B-1A was disassembled and shipped by truck to the SAC Museum where it was reassembled and put on display. The National USAF Museum replaced that B-1A prototype with a retired production B-1B. The original B-1A was retired from flying in 1981. Parts of it at least ended up at Lowry AFB where it was used as a trainer. I don't know if any piece of it still exists. A shame the the first prototypes of plane designs are often destroyed or scrapped when no longer flown. It's one thing if they get destroyed in testing but the air arms are so casual about throwing away airframes they no longer think have any use! They did the same with the YB-52, the last surviving B-52 with a bubble canopy.
The sand he talked about is true. The sand is in the fuel tanks to ballast so it does not set down on its tail because the missing weight of the engines not being there.
