User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/6/2015 9:52:35 PM EDT
[#1]
Page 2 SAC is back
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2015 9:57:10 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No shit. A 44 hour month makes my back hurt thinking of it. Ive done a 9.2hr mission in the 47 so far. That was a LONG fucking day... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
44 hours is a heck of a month in my neck of the woods. No shit. A 44 hour month makes my back hurt thinking of it. Ive done a 9.2hr mission in the 47 so far. That was a LONG fucking day... My longest rotary wing mission (MH-53) was 14 hours airborne. Longest duty day was 26 hours with 22 flight hours (longest leg was only 8 hours). Talk about being wore out! Felt like an over cooked noodle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2015 10:13:48 PM EDT
[#3]
Got offered a ride in one during the cold war. 12 hour mission in a helmet strapped to a seat...no thanks! Kind of wish I did it now, how many people can say they've been in a BUFF? Oh well, got to refuel lots of them though. Almost had a mid-air with one on a radio-silence mission, they went over the top of us, sounded like a freight train, still not sure how close they actually got as we were in heavy clouds with extremely limited visibility.
When did they get rid of the Tail Gunner,I almost cross-trained into that AFSC instead of in-flight refueling (Boomer). |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2015 10:41:32 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
probably because the last longest mission was 43 hours and the staff planners were jones'n for an MSM. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
44 hours at 500 knots. 25,000 nautical miles, roughly. For the experts in airpower, they really seem to have some fucked up plans. Did they go through DTS for the routing? There has to be more to the scenario. Power projection. I think its cool as hell of a mission. Agreed, but what specific mission scenario the crew was training for is what interests me. Perhaps it's simply a case of "because fuck you", but I'm not counting on it. probably because the last longest mission was 43 hours and the staff planners were jones'n for an MSM. I know you're being sarcastic, but I'd of thought such a milestone would have already been accomplished back when SAC was still around (before McPeak fucked up the USAF more than anyone thought was humanly possible). Which reminds me; I really despise that fucker. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2015 11:01:54 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Engine turbine oil? Any way to replenish it or doesn't use that much? Tank Capacity: 10.23 Gallons Unavailible Quantity: 1.59 Gallons Available Quantity: 7.10 Gallons 20% Availible Quantity in Tank at all Times: 2.96 Gallons Consumable Quantity: 5.68 Gallons |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/6/2015 11:08:33 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I know you're being sarcastic, but I'd of thought such a milestone would have already been accomplished back when SAC was still around (before McPeak fucked up the USAF more than anyone thought was humanly possible). Which reminds me; I really despise that fucker. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Power projection. I think its cool as hell of a mission. Agreed, but what specific mission scenario the crew was training for is what interests me. Perhaps it's simply a case of "because fuck you", but I'm not counting on it. probably because the last longest mission was 43 hours and the staff planners were jones'n for an MSM. I know you're being sarcastic, but I'd of thought such a milestone would have already been accomplished back when SAC was still around (before McPeak fucked up the USAF more than anyone thought was humanly possible). Which reminds me; I really despise that fucker. This one is the record. In a demonstration of the B-52s global reach, on 16–18 January 1957, three B-52Bs made a nonstop flight around the world during Operation Power Flite, covering 39,165 km (21,145 nm, 24,325 statute miles) in 45 hours 19 minutes (536.8 smph) with several in-flight refuelings by KC-97s. The 93rd Bomb Wing received the Mackay Trophy for their accomplishment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 4:50:55 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This one is the record. In a demonstration of the B-52s global reach, on 16–18 January 1957, three B-52Bs made a nonstop flight around the world during Operation Power Flite, covering 39,165 km (21,145 nm, 24,325 statute miles) in 45 hours 19 minutes (536.8 smph) with several in-flight refuelings by KC-97s. The 93rd Bomb Wing received the Mackay Trophy for their accomplishment. dumbasses should have done 2 more hours and broke the record. airpower. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 5:45:26 AM EDT
[#8]
Australia as an ally? None better. They stuck by us in Vietnam.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7LAo9klSRk |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 6:00:55 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
China sees your old ass bombers and counters with old ass Chengdu J-7's. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Hello China. China sees your old ass bombers and counters with old ass Chengdu J-7's. Or updated Badgers 
With very nasty fangs 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 6:52:12 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why in the world are we training with Australia?  Aussies were with me in Afghanistan. Don't remember seeing you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 7:40:46 AM EDT
[#11]
44hrs in a BUFF, fuck that
19hrs from Minot to Guam was enough for me, granted I was nursing a case of food poisoning on that ride, and I still didn't use the shitter 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 7:44:23 AM EDT
[#12]
Tindal was one of many RAAF strips up there in the Northern Territory built during WW2. Most still exist. I visited one a long time ago and remember kicking around mangled aircraft bits.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 7:46:12 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Waste of fuel...we know we can do it...they know we can do it...whats the purpose... training... Hot Aussie girls...now that's a worthwhile trip  You don't shoot ammo when you practice at the range? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:07:58 AM EDT
[#14]
I scanned the article but didn't see it: How many tanker missions did it take to keep these guys in the air 44 hours?
Thanks, |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:10:19 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I scanned the article but didn't see it: How many tanker missions did it take to keep these guys in the air 44 hours? Thanks, 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:11:24 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Long range bombers are the battleships of modern combat - they look neat but other weapons severely outclass them. More like the first rate sailing ships than a battleship. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:12:00 AM EDT
[#17]
In order to guard against surprise nuclear attack, America's Strategic Air Command maintains a large force of B-52 bombers airborne 24 hours a day. Each B-52 can deliver a nuclear bombload of 50 megatons, equal to 16 times the total explosive force of all the bombs and shells used by all the armies in World War Two. Based in America, the Airborne alert force is deployed from the Persian Gulf to the Arctic Ocean, but they have one geographical factor in common - they are all two hours from their targets inside Russia.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:13:04 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
50+ 60+ years and still getting the job done. Amazing.  FIFY. My great-uncle, who flew B-24s in WWII, was among the first Buff pilots. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:16:00 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In order to guard against surprise nuclear attack, America's Strategic Air Command maintains a large force of B-52 bombers airborne 24 hours a day. Each B-52 can deliver a nuclear bombload of 50 megatons, equal to 16 times the total explosive force of all the bombs and shells used by all the armies in World War Two. Based in America, the Airborne alert force is deployed from the Persian Gulf to the Arctic Ocean, but they have one geographical factor in common - they are all two hours from their targets inside Russia. For more than a year, ominous rumors have been privately circulating among high-level western leaders that the Soviet Union had been at work on what was darkly hinted to be the Ultimate Weapon, a Doomsday device. Intelligence sources traced the site of the top secret Russian project to the perpetually fog-shrouded wasteland below the arctic peaks of the Zhokhov Islands. What they were building, or why it should be located in such a remote and desolate place, no one could say. Vaguelly related. Some asshole really hates the AF. http://ciceromagazine.com/features/figure-out-the-air-force-airpower-nuclear-weapons-and-the-next-generation-bomber/#comment-61755 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:18:37 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why in the world are we training with Australia? Hammermil post. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:23:03 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
 PGS could hit the same target in less time and the crew would be home by 5 for dinner with the family. Long range bombers are the battleships of modern combat - they look neat but other weapons severely outclass them.It still demonstrates a real capability that a potential enemy must defend against.... and that sort of defense uses a lot of resources that a potential enemy has to divert. Look at the ETO in WWII. The big bombing raids didn't so much destroy the German industrial base as they bled the Luftwaffe dry through attrition. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:24:02 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Vaguelly related. Some asshole really hates the AF. http://ciceromagazine.com/features/figure-out-the-air-force-airpower-nuclear-weapons-and-the-next-generation-bomber/#comment-61755
Geez, they let just anyone publish nowadays, don't they?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:28:26 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Geez, they let just anyone publish nowadays, don't they? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Vaguelly related. Some asshole really hates the AF. http://ciceromagazine.com/features/figure-out-the-air-force-airpower-nuclear-weapons-and-the-next-generation-bomber/#comment-61755
Geez, they let just anyone publish nowadays, don't they? Click bait. Not much more. Take a sensational headline and throw it out there to get people to react. The author is famous for stunts like that. No research, no logic. Not even good writing. Just muck raking for the sake of it. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:29:05 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It still demonstrates a real capability that a potential enemy must defend against.... and that sort of defense uses a lot of resources that a potential enemy has to divert. Look at the ETO in WWII. The big bombing raids didn't so much destroy the German industrial base as they bled the Luftwaffe dry through attrition. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
PGS could hit the same target in less time and the crew would be home by 5 for dinner with the family. Long range bombers are the battleships of modern combat - they look neat but other weapons severely outclass them.It still demonstrates a real capability that a potential enemy must defend against.... and that sort of defense uses a lot of resources that a potential enemy has to divert. Look at the ETO in WWII. The big bombing raids didn't so much destroy the German industrial base as they bled the Luftwaffe dry through attrition. Why would you defend against bombers if you can't defend against missiles? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:49:18 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For more than a year, ominous rumors have been privately circulating among high-level western leaders that the Soviet Union had been at work on what was darkly hinted to be the Ultimate Weapon, a Doomsday device. Intelligence sources traced the site of the top secret Russian project to the perpetually fog-shrouded wasteland below the arctic peaks of the Zhokhov Islands. What they were building, or why it should be located in such a remote and desolate place, no one could say. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
In order to guard against surprise nuclear attack, America's Strategic Air Command maintains a large force of B-52 bombers airborne 24 hours a day. Each B-52 can deliver a nuclear bombload of 50 megatons, equal to 16 times the total explosive force of all the bombs and shells used by all the armies in World War Two. Based in America, the Airborne alert force is deployed from the Persian Gulf to the Arctic Ocean, but they have one geographical factor in common - they are all two hours from their targets inside Russia. For more than a year, ominous rumors have been privately circulating among high-level western leaders that the Soviet Union had been at work on what was darkly hinted to be the Ultimate Weapon, a Doomsday device. Intelligence sources traced the site of the top secret Russian project to the perpetually fog-shrouded wasteland below the arctic peaks of the Zhokhov Islands. What they were building, or why it should be located in such a remote and desolate place, no one could say. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ff5ACn3LV0 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:51:47 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why would you defend against bombers if you can't defend against missiles? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
PGS could hit the same target in less time and the crew would be home by 5 for dinner with the family. Long range bombers are the battleships of modern combat - they look neat but other weapons severely outclass them.It still demonstrates a real capability that a potential enemy must defend against.... and that sort of defense uses a lot of resources that a potential enemy has to divert. Look at the ETO in WWII. The big bombing raids didn't so much destroy the German industrial base as they bled the Luftwaffe dry through attrition. Why would you defend against bombers if you can't defend against missiles? Why would you not? "Well, we can't stop all the missiles so we might as well just give up." |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 11:52:53 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why would you defend against bombers if you can't defend against missiles? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
PGS could hit the same target in less time and the crew would be home by 5 for dinner with the family. Long range bombers are the battleships of modern combat - they look neat but other weapons severely outclass them.It still demonstrates a real capability that a potential enemy must defend against.... and that sort of defense uses a lot of resources that a potential enemy has to divert. Look at the ETO in WWII. The big bombing raids didn't so much destroy the German industrial base as they bled the Luftwaffe dry through attrition. Why would you defend against bombers if you can't defend against missiles? To be fair, the B-52 has EWAR capabilities which could be handy to stage. There is more to it then just blowing up stuff on the ground. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:01:45 PM EDT
[#28]
Sounds like a long, cramped ride. As old as those are, I bet they stink too. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:08:26 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SAC is back All bark and no bite though.... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:14:19 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why would you not? "Well, we can't stop all the missiles so we might as well just give up." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
PGS could hit the same target in less time and the crew would be home by 5 for dinner with the family. Long range bombers are the battleships of modern combat - they look neat but other weapons severely outclass them.It still demonstrates a real capability that a potential enemy must defend against.... and that sort of defense uses a lot of resources that a potential enemy has to divert. Look at the ETO in WWII. The big bombing raids didn't so much destroy the German industrial base as they bled the Luftwaffe dry through attrition. Why would you defend against bombers if you can't defend against missiles? Why would you not? "Well, we can't stop all the missiles so we might as well just give up." Because its expensive and a waste of time. You can't stop ANY of the missiles (we can only stop a dozen or so). You can spend a 100 billion dollars on defending against a threat that simply won't be used. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:15:14 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To be fair, the B-52 has EWAR capabilities which could be handy to stage. There is more to it then just blowing up stuff on the ground. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
PGS could hit the same target in less time and the crew would be home by 5 for dinner with the family. Long range bombers are the battleships of modern combat - they look neat but other weapons severely outclass them.It still demonstrates a real capability that a potential enemy must defend against.... and that sort of defense uses a lot of resources that a potential enemy has to divert. Look at the ETO in WWII. The big bombing raids didn't so much destroy the German industrial base as they bled the Luftwaffe dry through attrition. Why would you defend against bombers if you can't defend against missiles? To be fair, the B-52 has EWAR capabilities which could be handy to stage. There is more to it then just blowing up stuff on the ground. If you need an EWAR platform, procure accordingly. The true JSF isn't the F35, its the F18G. That's how joint is supposed to work. One service procures, all services use. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:15:42 PM EDT
[#32]
Amazing aircraft.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:16:48 PM EDT
[#33]
If they could retrofit the B-52s to skip the atmosphere, the entire mission could be done in 4 hours or so. It'd be a big ass aircraft for that kind.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:17:07 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To be fair, the B-52 has EWAR capabilities which could be handy to stage. There is more to it then just blowing up stuff on the ground. Don't confuse them. GD knows that. B-52 means carpet bombing, just like a B-24. Hell, that didn't do any good back then, it must be really irrelevant now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:20:05 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why in the world are we training with Australia? Do you ever post anything intelligent? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:20:16 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Don't confuse them. GD knows that. B-52 means carpet bombing, just like a B-24. Hell, that didn't do any good back then, it must be really irrelevant now. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
To be fair, the B-52 has EWAR capabilities which could be handy to stage. There is more to it then just blowing up stuff on the ground. Don't confuse them. GD knows that. B-52 means carpet bombing, just like a B-24. Hell, that didn't do any good back then, it must be really irrelevant now. I was actually just reading about their minelaying capabilities. Whoever thought of the Mk62-65 QuickStrike retrofit package to turn iron bombs into shallow-water mines is a damn genius. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:21:32 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Click bait. Not much more. Take a sensational headline and throw it out there to get people to react. The author is famous for stunts like that. No research, no logic. Not even good writing. Just muck raking for the sake of it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Vaguelly related. Some asshole really hates the AF. http://ciceromagazine.com/features/figure-out-the-air-force-airpower-nuclear-weapons-and-the-next-generation-bomber/#comment-61755
Geez, they let just anyone publish nowadays, don't they? Click bait. Not much more. Take a sensational headline and throw it out there to get people to react. The author is famous for stunts like that. No research, no logic. Not even good writing. Just muck raking for the sake of it. Looks like he writes a lot of stuff for that rag.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:22:48 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
0 cross country time. Took off from and landed at the same airport. Sorry guys, it's a 44 hour local.
TC P.S.--I worked with a guy who interviewed at the airline in the 1970's and wasn't going to get hired because all of his flights took off from and landed at the same place--Beale AFB. And he couldn't tell them what he flew or where he went. A guy in the flight office of the airline who did the same job when he was in the AF vouched for him. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
44 hours is 1 hour short of my semi annual minimums in the CH47. That is a hell of a logbook entry. 0 cross country time. Took off from and landed at the same airport. Sorry guys, it's a 44 hour local.
TC P.S.--I worked with a guy who interviewed at the airline in the 1970's and wasn't going to get hired because all of his flights took off from and landed at the same place--Beale AFB. And he couldn't tell them what he flew or where he went. A guy in the flight office of the airline who did the same job when he was in the AF vouched for him. should have included a picture of his astronaut wings ;-) |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:25:12 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Looks like he writes a lot of stuff for that rag.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Vaguelly related. Some asshole really hates the AF. http://ciceromagazine.com/features/figure-out-the-air-force-airpower-nuclear-weapons-and-the-next-generation-bomber/#comment-61755
Geez, they let just anyone publish nowadays, don't they? Click bait. Not much more. Take a sensational headline and throw it out there to get people to react. The author is famous for stunts like that. No research, no logic. Not even good writing. Just muck raking for the sake of it. Looks like he writes a lot of stuff for that rag.
Cicero seems like the Tinder of the publication world. It seems to fulfill a need, but I bet you feel dirty afterwards. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:26:18 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was actually just reading about their minelaying capabilities. Whoever thought of the Mk62-65 QuickStrike retrofit package to turn iron bombs into shallow-water mines is a damn genius. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
To be fair, the B-52 has EWAR capabilities which could be handy to stage. There is more to it then just blowing up stuff on the ground. Don't confuse them. GD knows that. B-52 means carpet bombing, just like a B-24. Hell, that didn't do any good back then, it must be really irrelevant now. I was actually just reading about their minelaying capabilities. Whoever thought of the Mk62-65 QuickStrike retrofit package to turn iron bombs into shallow-water mines is a damn genius. the B29 in the pacific was good for two things. minelaying and nuking. the rest was a waste. And it took, literally, the president to get the AAF to do minelaying. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:26:31 PM EDT
[#41]
Eh. MIRV'd it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:26:53 PM EDT
[#42]
Did they mention the 50,000 hours of maintenance required after the mission?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:27:24 PM EDT
[#43]
Holy crap...44 hours!
My longest flight on our C-141 was 21.5 hours. Even with a proper toilet, bunk, and the ability to walk around it was miserable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:27:49 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was actually just reading about their minelaying capabilities. Whoever thought of the Mk62-65 QuickStrike retrofit package to turn iron bombs into shallow-water mines is a damn genius. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
To be fair, the B-52 has EWAR capabilities which could be handy to stage. There is more to it then just blowing up stuff on the ground. Don't confuse them. GD knows that. B-52 means carpet bombing, just like a B-24. Hell, that didn't do any good back then, it must be really irrelevant now. I was actually just reading about their minelaying capabilities. Whoever thought of the Mk62-65 QuickStrike retrofit package to turn iron bombs into shallow-water mines is a damn genius. That means you have to get close to shore in contested airspace. I can't believe many B-52 pilots (or any other pilots) would relish that mission. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:27:52 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Did they mention the 50,000 hours of maintenance required after the mission? Well, the maintenance folk magically got there ahead of time on Quantas. If it takes 10 months, they'll get that bird up again! Where do we find such men? [salute] |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:28:57 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Easy entry. KBAD / KBAD 44hrs. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
44 hours is 1 hour short of my semi annual minimums in the CH47. That is a hell of a logbook entry. Easy entry. KBAD / KBAD 44hrs. KBAD / KBAD = NO Per Diem
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:29:08 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, the maintenance folk magically got there ahead of time on Quantas. If it takes 10 months, they'll get that bird up again! Where do we find such men? [salute] Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Did they mention the 50,000 hours of maintenance required after the mission? Well, the maintenance folk magically got there ahead of time on Quantas. If it takes 10 months, they'll get that bird up again! Where do we find such men? [salute] You wasted post 56,000 on this.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:29:55 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
FIFY. My great-uncle, who flew B-24s in WWII, was among the first Buff pilots. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
50+ 60+ years and still getting the job done. Amazing. FIFY. My great-uncle, who flew B-24s in WWII, was among the first Buff pilots. Holy shhit ! you are right: First flight: 15 April 1952 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:29:57 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was actually just reading about their minelaying capabilities. Whoever thought of the Mk62-65 QuickStrike retrofit package to turn iron bombs into shallow-water mines is a damn genius. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
To be fair, the B-52 has EWAR capabilities which could be handy to stage. There is more to it then just blowing up stuff on the ground. Don't confuse them. GD knows that. B-52 means carpet bombing, just like a B-24. Hell, that didn't do any good back then, it must be really irrelevant now. I was actually just reading about their minelaying capabilities. Whoever thought of the Mk62-65 QuickStrike retrofit package to turn iron bombs into shallow-water mines is a damn genius. B-52's can also carry the AGM-84 in an antiship capacity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/7/2015 12:31:56 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Funny, for many threat pilots, that's a good YEAR. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
44 hours is a heck of a month in my neck of the woods. No shit. A 44 hour month makes my back hurt thinking of it. Ive done a 9.2hr mission in the 47 so far. That was a LONG fucking day... Funny, for many threat pilots, that's a good YEAR. Can you explain this term for me? I know, it's probably a stupid question.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
