Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 6/22/2016 3:33:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/22/2016 3:34:42 PM EDT by Special-K]
http://warontherocks.com/2016/06/we-already-have-an-arsenal-plane-its-called-the-b-52/ From the above link:

Recently, we made an argument for an upgraded B-52J that explicitly recognized its utility as an arsenal plane. This upgrade proposal focused on recommending key component modernization so that the B-52 could assume the role of flying magazine. It also addressed the attractiveness of the B-52, largely because its airframe life is not in question for the next quarter century, even without structural modification. In execution, the arsenal plane might serve not only as a carrier for scores of weapons, but also as a battlefield network hub.

......

The B-52 has space. Not only does it have two massive external pylons, but it also has a single massive bomb bay. For the sake of visualization, the vast payload bay could accommodate a single MQ-1 Predator-sized aircraft with deployable airfoils. It has the wiring. The wing pylons have eight stations with modern fiber-optic wiring and recent modifications to the weapons bay bring a similar capability to the internal bomb bay. With limited modifications, the Arsenal B-52 offers the mass of fires desired from the concept. The aircraft is renowned as the platform of choice as a stable, easily modifiable launching platform. Existing suspension systems allow a B-52 to carry 20 long-range JASSM-ERs, 80 Small Diameter Bombs, 24 MALD-Js, and comparable numbers of similarly classed weapons. When no longer limited to the current Air Force inventory or the existing bomber paradigm, the Arsenal B-52 could bring twenty HAAWC torpedoes to the anti-submarine warfare (ASW) fight, 66 AMRAAMs to air-to-air combat, or a pair of weapons capable of reaching earth orbit. Equipped with six of the modified surface attack SM-6 missiles, the Arsenal B-52 could deliver a responsive penetrating weapon capability at substantially greater range than allowed by a launch from a surface ship. After all, the B-52 spends its energy getting the payload to altitude, giving its missiles more energy to spend going further, faster, or both.

......

Lastly, a B-52 carrying AMRAAMs may not possess the kinematic ability to pursue a neutral or even advantageous engagement with an enemy fighter. Shot ranges invariably favor faster and more agile aircraft, which can also pursue an aggressive launch-and-leave profile denied to the B-52. However, the Arsenal B-52 configured with air-to-air missiles during a defensive counterair (DCA) mission untethers the Eagles and Raptors from some defensive munitions. A 2009 report on the F-22 program by the Congressional Research Service stated, "The F-22A Raptor is the Air Force’s primary air superiority fighter, providing unmatched capabilities for air supremacy…and cruise missile defense…” Cued or operating autonomously (if equipped with a modern radar), the Arsenal B-52 can assume primary responsibility for cruise missile defense, particularly for island bases. An F-22 carries a maximum of six AIM-120 AMRAAMs, setting conditions in which even a four-ship formation of F-22s can shoot themselves dry against a large cruise missile wave without neutralizing enough of the inbound missiles to protect the base from damage. A single B-52 would be much harder to empty, freeing the fighters to move their combat air patrols forward in pursuit of the more important launching platforms.




I have always found this to be an interesting concept, and one that is again being studied. I rather liked the idea of using a modified 747, but I guess a B-52 would do.



-K

Link Posted: 6/22/2016 3:34:56 PM EDT
Link Posted: 6/22/2016 3:35:12 PM EDT
Arsenal planes are dumb. ICBMs do everything planes do, and better.

Except waste money to Lockmart.
Link Posted: 6/22/2016 3:53:11 PM EDT
Neato burrito excerpt from the article:

- "Equipped with six of the modified surface attack SM-6 missiles, the Arsenal B-52 could deliver a responsive penetrating weapon capability at substantially greater range than allowed by a launch from a surface ship."

I am reminded of John Stillon's 2015 CSBA report on future trends in air-to-air combat. A SM-6/B-52 flying behing F-22/F-35 isn't UCAS ahead of a stealthy flying wing with VLRAAM, but damn if it wouldn't be a neat step along a path to such a capability.
Link Posted: 6/22/2016 3:58:25 PM EDT
I thought the B1 was the preferred option for AIM-120 mass launches.

Shoot and scoot.

Link Posted: 6/22/2016 4:03:38 PM EDT
Dan Brown approves this message!
Link Posted: 6/22/2016 4:04:38 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By iwouldntknow:
Arsenal planes are dumb. ICBMs do everything planes do, and better.

Except waste money to Lockmart.
View Quote
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or ignorant and the problem is on the internet it's impossible to tell.
Link Posted: 6/22/2016 4:11:24 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Madcap72:
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or ignorant and the problem is on the internet it's impossible to tell.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Madcap72:
Originally Posted By iwouldntknow:
Arsenal planes are dumb. ICBMs do everything planes do, and better.

Except waste money to Lockmart.
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or ignorant and the problem is on the internet it's impossible to tell.

We should completely defund the Flying Club. As long as they don't have pilots, they can keep Cyber and Nukes.
Link Posted: 6/22/2016 4:11:44 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By iwouldntknow:
Arsenal planes are dumb. ICBMs do everything planes do, and better.

Except waste money to Lockmart.
View Quote



how are they at shooting down incoming missiles?

how are they at loitering and looking for targets of opportunity?

there's plenty of missions an ICBM cannot do, starting with conventional warfare.
Link Posted: 6/22/2016 4:13:39 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By dorobuta:



how are they at shooting down incoming missiles?

how are they at loitering and looking for targets of opportunity?

there's plenty of missions an ICBM cannot do, starting with conventional warfare.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By dorobuta:
Originally Posted By iwouldntknow:
Arsenal planes are dumb. ICBMs do everything planes do, and better.

Except waste money to Lockmart.



how are they at shooting down incoming missiles?

how are they at loitering and looking for targets of opportunity?

there's plenty of missions an ICBM cannot do, starting with conventional warfare.

There won''t be incoming missiles or targets of opportunity because we'll never fight a nuclear armed power.
Link Posted: 6/22/2016 4:18:16 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By iwouldntknow:
Arsenal planes are dumb. ICBMs do everything planes do, and better.

Except waste money to Lockmart.
View Quote


ICBM tactical warheads? That would be %10000 more expensive than planes.
Link Posted: 6/22/2016 4:19:46 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
I always like the 747 design retrofitted to hold a revolving cruise missile launching system, with a large magazine.

Clever, effective and cheap.
View Quote


HA!

The Air Force would find a way to take a brand new 100 million dollar 747 and make it cost 1.4 billion each.
Link Posted: 6/22/2016 4:24:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/22/2016 4:26:44 PM EDT by BullseyeAg]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RegularJoe58:
Dan Brown approves this message!
View Quote

I don'the know about Dan Brown, but Dale Brown certainly approves!

Flight of the Old Dog is one of my favorite books.
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 11:30:03 AM EDT
A B-52 did a flyover for today's Victory Day parade

Link Posted: 6/23/2016 11:37:40 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By robertmegar:


ICBM tactical warheads? That would be %10000 more expensive than planes.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By robertmegar:
Originally Posted By iwouldntknow:
Arsenal planes are dumb. ICBMs do everything planes do, and better.

Except waste money to Lockmart.


ICBM tactical warheads? That would be %10000 more expensive than planes.


Things like MRBM and IRBM would be excellent for this sort of thing, had we leadership with the balls enough to say "fuck a defunct treaty with a nation that no longer exists" and develop them again in modernized guise.

Arsenal plane concept is dumb.
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 11:39:36 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By iwouldntknow:
Arsenal planes are dumb. ICBMs do everything planes do, and better.

Except waste money to Lockmart.
View Quote


Their landings are generally a little sketchy.
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 11:42:09 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By iwouldntknow:
There won''t be incoming missiles or targets of opportunity because we'll never fight a nuclear armed power.
View Quote



Oh, I forgot we are at peace with North Korea, and that Iran will never get the bomb.

we will probably also get into some fights with China.

to make a blanket statement of "Never" is silly.
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 11:42:31 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By outofbattery:
A B-52 did a flyover for today's Victory Day parade

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13506998_10153873678403860_1856902412493874613_n.jpg
View Quote
Your pictures are going to require a new thread. Lets see them k thx
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 11:43:05 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Cpt_Kirks:
I thought the B1 was the preferred option for AIM-120 mass launches.

Shoot and scoot.

View Quote


That concept was called the B-1R. Think that one through for a second, the aircraft is called the "bone" because that's what you get if you spell out 1. And then they added an R to the end of that. I think someone was fucking with us.
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 11:44:56 AM EDT
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 12:38:52 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By outofbattery:
A B-52 did a flyover for today's Victory Day parade

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13506998_10153873678403860_1856902412493874613_n.jpg
View Quote


Now that's a hell of an interesting dynamic. Displaying a strategic asset at a parade of a foreign country. What was the local reaction?
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 12:49:33 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By retgarr:


Now that's a hell of an interesting dynamic. Displaying a strategic asset at a parade of a foreign country. What was the local reaction?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By retgarr:
Originally Posted By outofbattery:
A B-52 did a flyover for today's Victory Day parade

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13506998_10153873678403860_1856902412493874613_n.jpg


Now that's a hell of an interesting dynamic. Displaying a strategic asset at a parade of a foreign country. What was the local reaction?


How is the B52 a strategic asset?

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 12:54:33 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By retgarr:


Now that's a hell of an interesting dynamic. Displaying a strategic asset at a parade of a foreign country. What was the local reaction?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By retgarr:
Originally Posted By outofbattery:
A B-52 did a flyover for today's Victory Day parade

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13506998_10153873678403860_1856902412493874613_n.jpg


Now that's a hell of an interesting dynamic. Displaying a strategic asset at a parade of a foreign country. What was the local reaction?


An ally that borders our most dangerous and reviled enemy.
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 12:58:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/23/2016 1:04:29 PM EDT by outofbattery]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By retgarr:


Now that's a hell of an interesting dynamic. Displaying a strategic asset at a parade of a foreign country. What was the local reaction?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By retgarr:
Originally Posted By outofbattery:
A B-52 did a flyover for today's Victory Day parade

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13506998_10153873678403860_1856902412493874613_n.jpg


Now that's a hell of an interesting dynamic. Displaying a strategic asset at a parade of a foreign country. What was the local reaction?




I'm pretty sure anybody,well who isn't a North Korean or some other dreadful thing,who looks up and sees a B-52 pretty much universally goes "WHOA!"

Especially consider that this is 100% of the Estonian Air Force's jets.All both of them.


Strykers were the parade too,you can see them in the the background of 1st picture:

When they did the Independence Day parade within rock throwing distance of Russia,they were flying big US flags. I'm not sure if anything needs read into that one way or the other,in regard to showing Russia that Americans are right there or perhaps it was to tone down a bit or other though,to not give Russian trolls "see,now you're occupied again".
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 1:00:56 PM EDT
Why do we need an arsenal plan when we already have lots of bombers that can launch hurt. Thousands of stand offs alone, let alone JDAMs.
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 1:01:51 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By retgarr:


Now that's a hell of an interesting dynamic. Displaying a strategic asset at a parade of a foreign country. What was the local reaction?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By retgarr:
Originally Posted By outofbattery:
A B-52 did a flyover for today's Victory Day parade

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13506998_10153873678403860_1856902412493874613_n.jpg


Now that's a hell of an interesting dynamic. Displaying a strategic asset at a parade of a foreign country. What was the local reaction?


What was the Russian reaction?
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 1:11:25 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:


What was the Russian reaction?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Originally Posted By retgarr:
Originally Posted By outofbattery:
A B-52 did a flyover for today's Victory Day parade

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13506998_10153873678403860_1856902412493874613_n.jpg


Now that's a hell of an interesting dynamic. Displaying a strategic asset at a parade of a foreign country. What was the local reaction?


What was the Russian reaction?


I believe it was this...
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 1:14:53 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By RegularJoe58:
Dan Brown approves this message!
View Quote


Old Dog ftw!
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 1:16:38 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:


What was the Russian reaction?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Originally Posted By retgarr:
Originally Posted By outofbattery:
A B-52 did a flyover for today's Victory Day parade

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13506998_10153873678403860_1856902412493874613_n.jpg


Now that's a hell of an interesting dynamic. Displaying a strategic asset at a parade of a foreign country. What was the local reaction?


What was the Russian reaction?



Russian reaction to BALTOPS and Poland's Anakonda exercises was typical "warmongering NATO dangerously threatens peace" etc. NATO sent out a neat pic of the B-52 with American and Polish F-16s,German Eurofighters and Swedish Gripens.Anakonda had forces from Finland and Sweden in addition to 22 NATO countries,obviously Russia's method of keeping Finland and Sweden away from NATO via bellicosity is working great...

Link Posted: 6/23/2016 1:27:16 PM EDT
B1-R.

The pure genius of frat boy/Archer-esk humor that is the flying BoneR requires that this happens. The unofficial slogans and jokes write themselves.

Link Posted: 6/23/2016 1:55:12 PM EDT



Link Posted: 6/23/2016 2:04:54 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Madcap72:
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or ignorant and the problem is on the internet it's impossible to tell.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Madcap72:
Originally Posted By iwouldntknow:
Arsenal planes are dumb. ICBMs do everything planes do, and better.

Except waste money to Lockmart.
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or ignorant and the problem is on the internet it's impossible to tell.

I think its the latter. After all, consider his username.
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 2:08:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/23/2016 2:10:02 PM EDT by azeppelinfan]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By outofbattery:



Russian reaction to BALTOPS and Poland's Anakonda exercises was typical "warmongering NATO dangerously threatens peace" etc. NATO sent out a neat pic of the B-52 with American and Polish F-16s,German Eurofighters and Swedish Gripens.Anakonda had forces from Finland and Sweden in addition to 22 NATO countries,obviously Russia's method of keeping Finland and Sweden away from NATO via bellicosity is working great...

http://www.newsweek.pl/g/i.aspx/680/0/newsweek/636016200408921839.jpg
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By outofbattery:
Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
Originally Posted By retgarr:
Originally Posted By outofbattery:
A B-52 did a flyover for today's Victory Day parade

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13506998_10153873678403860_1856902412493874613_n.jpg


Now that's a hell of an interesting dynamic. Displaying a strategic asset at a parade of a foreign country. What was the local reaction?


What was the Russian reaction?



Russian reaction to BALTOPS and Poland's Anakonda exercises was typical "warmongering NATO dangerously threatens peace" etc. NATO sent out a neat pic of the B-52 with American and Polish F-16s,German Eurofighters and Swedish Gripens.Anakonda had forces from Finland and Sweden in addition to 22 NATO countries,obviously Russia's method of keeping Finland and Sweden away from NATO via bellicosity is working great...

http://www.newsweek.pl/g/i.aspx/680/0/newsweek/636016200408921839.jpg



That's sexy right there.
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 2:14:18 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
I always like the 747 design retrofitted to hold a revolving cruise missile launching system, with a large magazine.

Clever, effective and cheap.
View Quote


I would imagine you could build a drone version much cheaper. Without a crew you could make it cheaper and smaller while carrying a larger payload.
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 2:40:44 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bettendorf:
Your pictures are going to require a new thread. Lets see them k thx
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bettendorf:
Originally Posted By outofbattery:
A B-52 did a flyover for today's Victory Day parade

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13506998_10153873678403860_1856902412493874613_n.jpg
Your pictures are going to require a new thread. Lets see them k thx

Specifically the formation.
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 2:42:00 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 100garand:


I would imagine you could build a drone version much cheaper. Without a crew you could make it cheaper and smaller while carrying a larger payload.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 100garand:
Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
I always like the 747 design retrofitted to hold a revolving cruise missile launching system, with a large magazine.

Clever, effective and cheap.


I would imagine you could build a drone version much cheaper. Without a crew you could make it cheaper and smaller while carrying a larger payload.
Lol
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 2:44:52 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By USAF77:
Why do we need an arsenal plan when we already have lots of bombers that can launch hurt. Thousands of stand offs alone, let alone JDAMs.
View Quote
The B-52 already carries those things and is a bomber.

The Air Force needs to understand that they themselves are saying the BUFF will be around another twenty five years and upgrade it as such. Their linked proposal for a J model isn't that revolutionary. New motors, new jammers, new radar, new avionics, and RVSM are all things that should be done already as sustainment efforts.
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 2:48:50 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:
The B-52 already carries those things and is a bomber.

The Air Force needs to understand that they themselves are saying the BUFF will be around another twenty five years and upgrade it as such. Their linked proposal for a J model isn't that revolutionary. New motors, new jammers, new radar, new avionics, and RVSM are all things that should be done already as sustainment efforts.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:
Originally Posted By USAF77:
Why do we need an arsenal plan when we already have lots of bombers that can launch hurt. Thousands of stand offs alone, let alone JDAMs.
The B-52 already carries those things and is a bomber.

The Air Force needs to understand that they themselves are saying the BUFF will be around another twenty five years and upgrade it as such. Their linked proposal for a J model isn't that revolutionary. New motors, new jammers, new radar, new avionics, and RVSM are all things that should be done already as sustainment efforts.



Ha! In our in a few of our SIM problems were set up so you'd get a plan going then a non-RVSM BUFF comes and fucks it all up
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 2:52:35 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 100garand:


I would imagine you could build a drone version much cheaper. Without a crew you could make it cheaper and smaller while carrying a larger payload.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 100garand:
Originally Posted By DK-Prof:
I always like the 747 design retrofitted to hold a revolving cruise missile launching system, with a large magazine.

Clever, effective and cheap.


I would imagine you could build a drone version much cheaper. Without a crew you could make it cheaper and smaller while carrying a larger payload.

As long as the Air Force has no pilots, it's ok. If they don't have pilots, their culture will change, and they'll supply on demand CAS to everyone regardless of their position on the priority of fires.
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 2:56:42 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Star_Scream:



Ha! In our in a few of our SIM problems were set up so you'd get a plan going then a non-RVSM BUFF comes and fucks it all up
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Star_Scream:
Originally Posted By SmilingBandit:
Originally Posted By USAF77:
Why do we need an arsenal plan when we already have lots of bombers that can launch hurt. Thousands of stand offs alone, let alone JDAMs.
The B-52 already carries those things and is a bomber.

The Air Force needs to understand that they themselves are saying the BUFF will be around another twenty five years and upgrade it as such. Their linked proposal for a J model isn't that revolutionary. New motors, new jammers, new radar, new avionics, and RVSM are all things that should be done already as sustainment efforts.



Ha! In our in a few of our SIM problems were set up so you'd get a plan going then a non-RVSM BUFF comes and fucks it all up
Frankly they should be looking ahead and putting in autothrottle while they are at it.
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 3:05:52 PM EDT
What's the least number of hours on one? And how many do we have left?

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile
Link Posted: 6/23/2016 4:09:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/23/2016 4:10:06 PM EDT by SamuelAdams1776]


Link Posted: 6/23/2016 4:18:32 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By outofbattery:




I'm pretty sure anybody,well who isn't a North Korean or some other dreadful thing,who looks up and sees a B-52 pretty much universally goes "WHOA!"

Especially consider that this is 100% of the Estonian Air Force's jets.All both of them.
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13507149_10153873678233860_2868545430526909686_n.jpg

Strykers were the parade too,you can see them in the the background of 1st picture:
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13512232_10153873678638860_6754170310669549187_n.jpg
When they did the Independence Day parade within rock throwing distance of Russia,they were flying big US flags. I'm not sure if anything needs read into that one way or the other,in regard to showing Russia that Americans are right there or perhaps it was to tone down a bit or other though,to not give Russian trolls "see,now you're occupied again".
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By outofbattery:
Originally Posted By retgarr:
Originally Posted By outofbattery:
A B-52 did a flyover for today's Victory Day parade

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13506998_10153873678403860_1856902412493874613_n.jpg


Now that's a hell of an interesting dynamic. Displaying a strategic asset at a parade of a foreign country. What was the local reaction?




I'm pretty sure anybody,well who isn't a North Korean or some other dreadful thing,who looks up and sees a B-52 pretty much universally goes "WHOA!"

Especially consider that this is 100% of the Estonian Air Force's jets.All both of them.
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13507149_10153873678233860_2868545430526909686_n.jpg

Strykers were the parade too,you can see them in the the background of 1st picture:
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y86/mossie500/13512232_10153873678638860_6754170310669549187_n.jpg
When they did the Independence Day parade within rock throwing distance of Russia,they were flying big US flags. I'm not sure if anything needs read into that one way or the other,in regard to showing Russia that Americans are right there or perhaps it was to tone down a bit or other though,to not give Russian trolls "see,now you're occupied again".


I think I'd fly this one


Top Top