>>64437247
Because it isn't far from that. Saab A36 nuclear bomber wouldn't have looked like that at all. That thing doesn't even resemble any of actually studied aircraft configurations.
>>64437341
1. its retarded fan fiction
2. you have just as bad taste as retard who made that picture.
>>64437463
It is awesome until you realize how expensive it was and even more so when operating costs kick in. Projected cost of serial production aircraft would have been around 18 million in mid 60's, adjusted for inflation its about ten times as much today. For comparison, F-4 Phantom II at the time cost 2.4 million. Then we can get to operational costs, as it is pretty much same plane as SR-71 there we have actual numbers, from the time SR-71's were mothballed first time. Cost per flight hour in late 80's for SR-71 was 85k, that would be 230k per flight hour today. In addition to that annual sustainment costs for dozen active Blackbirds, 10 recon planes and two trainers, were in ballpark of 300 million per year, that would be over 800 million today.
It may have been worth it as weapons test bed for what would eventually evolve into AIM-54 Phoenix, general purpose high speed test vehicle for USAF and NASA and as coverup for A-12 and SR-71 programs.
