User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:26:46 PM EDT
The B-52 has only been able to carry smart weapons on its external pylons, with its internal weapons bay being relegated to nuclear and dumb bombs, as well as some older cruise missiles. Now, the iconic 60 year old Stratofortress is finally getting a new 'smart' rotary weapons rack and other upgrades that will more than double its smart weapons punch.
You could say that the B-52's empty weapons bay has been the most under-utilized real estate in the entire USAF. Even as the B-52's utility morphed over the decades (from a nuclear interdiction option, to a carpet bomber, to a nuclear cruise missile carrier, to a conventional cruise missile carrier, to a smart bomb lobber, to a precision close air support platform) the big bomber's cavernous belly has become more and more of an empty afterthought. Although having the B-52 lug its smart bombs on its large inboard weapons pylons has not kept it out of the fight, this configuration has hurt the gas guzzling behemoth's fuel economy and range and has left great potential on the table, especially in an age of anti-access warfare and advanced standoff weaponry. Link to more 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:29:19 PM EDT
[#1]
Just how long are those airframes going to last?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:30:51 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Just how long are those airframes going to last? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:32:31 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Just how long are those airframes going to last? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:33:15 PM EDT
[#4]
I still think we should retire the damn things.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:34:05 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Just how long are those airframes going to last? they could last to about 2050 in usable terms.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:35:17 PM EDT
[#6]
Just a bunch more weapons that will only be released if:
1. It is in support of SF 2. There is a super qualified JTAC on the radio 3. There is an opportunity to tie up airspace and prevent the use of GMLRs or Excalibur 4. There is absolutely no SAM or air threat |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:35:35 PM EDT
[#7]
I thought the fucking ACRE of real estate (if you have ever stood inside that HUGE ass bomb bay, you KNOW what I mean) could all handle smart bombs.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:36:39 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I still think we should retire the damn things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:37:06 PM EDT
[#9]
Love shack?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:37:09 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I recall reading something in one article about replacing the old engines with new turbofans that said based on non-wartime flight hours and training, they could last to about 2050 in usable terms. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just how long are those airframes going to last? they could last to about 2050 in usable terms. damn, a hundred years? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:38:17 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just how long are those airframes going to last? There are some projections putting them at 100 year service lives. They're nearly 60% of the way there already... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:38:45 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To spend money on what other platform? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I still think we should retire the damn things. F35!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:39:07 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To spend money on what other platform? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I still think we should retire the damn things. Nothing can touch their endurance or bomb load. Keep upgrading and flying the BUFF until orbital bombing becomes cheap. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:39:32 PM EDT
[#14]
It works.
Make more of them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:40:04 PM EDT
[#15]
in before megafortress
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:41:47 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nothing can touch their endurance or bomb load. Keep upgrading and flying the BUFF until orbital bombing becomes cheap. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I still think we should retire the damn things. Nothing can touch their endurance or bomb load. Keep upgrading and flying the BUFF until orbital bombing becomes cheap. Except the B-1, and B-2.  Endurance is an idiotic thing to brag about in the age of aerial refueling.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:42:29 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just a bunch more weapons that will only be released if: 1. It is in support of SF 2. There is a super qualified JTAC on the radio 3. There is an opportunity to tie up airspace and prevent the use of GMLRs or Excalibur 4. There is absolutely no SAM or air threat Joint as fuck. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:43:28 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: damn, a hundred years? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Just how long are those airframes going to last? they could last to about 2050 in usable terms. damn, a hundred years? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:46:31 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If I recall correctly, about that. But, I do seem to remember that figure being based on peacetime flight hours. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just how long are those airframes going to last? they could last to about 2050 in usable terms. damn, a hundred years? peace or war, it represents a lot of time at altitude, a lot of decompressions and recompressions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:47:09 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To spend money on what other platform? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I still think we should retire the damn things. How about modern artillery since you can't drive it away with an AK pointed skyward and some tracers. Plus, you don't need a JTAC and permission from someone a thousand miles away to use it...and you can adjust without having the guy on the other end of the radio run out of gas and go home. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:47:56 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How about modern artillery since you can't drive it away with an AK pointed skyward and some tracers. Plus, you don't need a JTAC and permission from someone a thousand miles away to use it...and you can adjust without having the guy on the other end of the radio run out of gas and go home. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I still think we should retire the damn things. How about modern artillery since you can't drive it away with an AK pointed skyward and some tracers. Plus, you don't need a JTAC and permission from someone a thousand miles away to use it...and you can adjust without having the guy on the other end of the radio run out of gas and go home. Not important, that's why we canceled crusader. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:48:12 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just how long are those airframes going to last? Non fighter airframes have a much longer life span than the smaller agile stuff. I went on a C5 last year that was built in. 1969. Worked fine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:49:39 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Non fighter airframes have a much longer life down than the smaller agile stuff. I goes on a C5 last year that was built in. 1969. Worked fine. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just how long are those airframes going to last? Non fighter airframes have a much longer life down than the smaller agile stuff. I goes on a C5 last year that was built in. 1969. Worked fine. still I am amazed that DC3s and Buffs are still flying today. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:49:48 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
damn, a hundred years? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just how long are those airframes going to last? they could last to about 2050 in usable terms. damn, a hundred years? It won't be the only airframe to make it that long. We had the AMC commander stop by our base and he gave a talk after drill. This was right after the Wright Brother's 100th anniversary and he commented that our jets when they retire would be like walking out to the flight line that day and seeing a row of Wright Fliers sitting on the apron. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:50:18 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I thought the fucking ACRE of real estate (if you have ever stood inside that HUGE ass bomb bay, you KNOW what I mean) could all handle smart bombs. It's only 28x6 feet, hardly an acre. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:50:38 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not important, that's why we canceled crusader. Must....not....make....thinking........strategically.........comment. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:52:38 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I still think we should retire the damn things. I'm sure the F-35 is up to the task. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:55:32 PM EDT
[#28]
 Got the T shirt |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:56:26 PM EDT
[#29]
Would that airframe benefit much from anti-vortice winglets?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:57:45 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Would that airframe benefit much from anti-vortice winglets? What it would most benefit from is new engines. Every time we determined it wouldn't be worth it we roll right past the return on investment point and keep going. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 10:59:27 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Non fighter airframes have a much longer life span than the smaller agile stuff. I went on a C5 last year that was built in. 1969. Worked fine. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just how long are those airframes going to last? Non fighter airframes have a much longer life span than the smaller agile stuff. I went on a C5 last year that was built in. 1969. Worked fine. Say what? Eta You edited it. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:01:32 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To spend money on what other platform? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I still think we should retire the damn things. Paladin PIM and HIMARS for the close fight, and a line of GLCMs for the mid range fight. The B2 and B52 can make up the difference. Quoted:
Quoted:
Would that airframe benefit much from anti-vortice winglets? What it would most benefit from is new engines. Every time we determined it wouldn't be worth it we roll right past the return on investment point and keep going. This. The last time they did the study they used maintenance costs that were extremely optimistic. They've gone up about 1,000% since then. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:01:54 PM EDT
[#33]
They better get started on procurement of its replacement, they only have 35 years. If they shoot for 2020 they might have a working model in time.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:04:21 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There are some projections putting them at 100 year service lives. They're nearly 60% of the way there already... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Just how long are those airframes going to last? There are some projections putting them at 100 year service lives. They're nearly 60% of the way there already... That is amazing to consider. Has any military weapon ever seen frontline service for 100 years ?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:04:46 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
still I am amazed that DC3s and Buffs are still flying today. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just how long are those airframes going to last? Non fighter airframes have a much longer life down than the smaller agile stuff. I goes on a C5 last year that was built in. 1969. Worked fine. still I am amazed that DC3s and Buffs are still flying today. DC-3s don't - in general - undergo the kind of stresses that a B-52 does, since the DC-3 isn't pressurized. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:10:51 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A 100 year service life. That is amazing to consider. Has any military weapon ever seen frontline service for 100 years ? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just how long are those airframes going to last? There are some projections putting them at 100 year service lives. They're nearly 60% of the way there already... Has any military weapon ever seen frontline service for 100 years ? The M2 will be there in a few years. The M1911 already hit that mark. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:11:11 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
DC-3s don't - in general - undergo the kind of stresses that a B-52 does, since the DC-3 isn't pressurized. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just how long are those airframes going to last? Non fighter airframes have a much longer life down than the smaller agile stuff. I goes on a C5 last year that was built in. 1969. Worked fine. still I am amazed that DC3s and Buffs are still flying today. DC-3s don't - in general - undergo the kind of stresses that a B-52 does, since the DC-3 isn't pressurized. that has got to be a lot of stress never the less, what with the landings and take offs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:11:42 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A 100 year service life. That is amazing to consider. Has any military weapon ever seen frontline service for 100 years ? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just how long are those airframes going to last? There are some projections putting them at 100 year service lives. They're nearly 60% of the way there already... Has any military weapon ever seen frontline service for 100 years ? The spear. The bow. The horse...... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:13:30 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Paladin PIM and HIMARS for the close fight, and a line of GLCMs for the mid range fight. The B2 and B52 can make up the difference. This. The last time they did the study they used maintenance costs that were extremely optimistic. They've gone up about 1,000% since then. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I still think we should retire the damn things. Paladin PIM and HIMARS for the close fight, and a line of GLCMs for the mid range fight. The B2 and B52 can make up the difference. Quoted:
Quoted:
Would that airframe benefit much from anti-vortice winglets? What it would most benefit from is new engines. Every time we determined it wouldn't be worth it we roll right past the return on investment point and keep going. This. The last time they did the study they used maintenance costs that were extremely optimistic. They've gone up about 1,000% since then. Paladin PIM is meaningless with a 39 caliber tube. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:14:50 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Paladin PIM is meaningless with a 39 caliber tube. I would have bought the PzH2000, but I was not consulted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:15:12 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A 100 year service life. That is amazing to consider. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Just how long are those airframes going to last? There are some projections putting them at 100 year service lives. They're nearly 60% of the way there already... That is amazing to consider. Has any military weapon ever seen frontline service for 100 years ? M-2 50 Cal. Machinegun. ETA: Way slow and off by a couple of years.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:15:51 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The spear. The bow. The horse...... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just how long are those airframes going to last? There are some projections putting them at 100 year service lives. They're nearly 60% of the way there already... Has any military weapon ever seen frontline service for 100 years ? The spear. The bow. The horse...... The Long Land Pattern musket and its derivatives, all .75 caliber flintlock muskets, were the standard long guns of the British Empire's land forces from 1722 until 1838 when they were superseded by a percussion cap smoothbore musket. The British Ordnance System converted many flintlocks into the new percussion system known as the Pattern 1839 Musket. A fire in 1841 at the Tower of London destroyed many muskets before they could be converted. Still, the Brown Bess saw service until the middle of the nineteenth century. Per Wiki |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:17:27 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just how long are those airframes going to last? I wonder if the skin is the only original parts? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:17:35 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would have bought the PzH2000, but I was not consulted. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Paladin PIM is meaningless with a 39 caliber tube. I would have bought the PzH2000, but I was not consulted. About half the cost of Paladin PIM. Ugh, I weep for my adopted branch |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:19:32 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I wonder if the skin is the only original parts? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just how long are those airframes going to last? I wonder if the skin is the only original parts? Alot of the skin has been replaced. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:20:06 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
that has got to be a lot of stress never the less, what with the landings and take offs. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
DC-3s don't - in general - undergo the kind of stresses that a B-52 does, since the DC-3 isn't pressurized. that has got to be a lot of stress never the less, what with the landings and take offs. Pressurization and depressurization cycles are a much bigger stress. Even in the past few years they haven't been having nearly as manny as an airliner gets. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:20:36 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would have bought the PzH2000, but I was not consulted. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Paladin PIM is meaningless with a 39 caliber tube. I would have bought the PzH2000, but I was not consulted. I watched a show on discovery or some other channel about those, the multiple round simultaneous impact fires from a single gun was kick ass. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:22:06 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
About half the cost of Paladin PIM. Ugh, I weep for my adopted branch Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Paladin PIM is meaningless with a 39 caliber tube. I would have bought the PzH2000, but I was not consulted. About half the cost of Paladin PIM. Ugh, I weep for my adopted branch I weep no more. I've transferred into a different branch as a part timer. That said, the wisdom of replacing the turret, then replacing the hull underneath it is lost on my when the maneuver guys are doing everything they can to get away from the Bradley. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:22:24 PM EDT
[#49]
I just spent an entire day trying to find a drag chute sling for it. We have 1, made in 1979.
I've canned all the CSD/Gen's from an aircraft to keep the another one MC. Some shops such as E/E are down to 2 person a shift. I don't want more or new planes. I just want parts/equipment/personnel and facilities to maintain them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/16/2015 11:22:43 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I watched a show on discovery or some other channel about those, the multiple round simultaneous impact fires from a single gun was kick ass. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Paladin PIM is meaningless with a 39 caliber tube. I would have bought the PzH2000, but I was not consulted. I watched a show on discovery or some other channel about those, the multiple round simultaneous impact fires from a single gun was kick ass. MRSI is kind of cool but range would have to be somewhat limited. The real advantage is in the range that the long gun gives. |
|
|
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.
