WARPLANES: B-1B Gets Upgrades, Work, But No Respect

StrategyPage ^ | August 25, 2005

[spetznaz]

The U.S. Air Force is betting lots of money on its B-1B bomber, an aircraft that was the victim of many cancellation attempts, and the butt of many jokes because of that. But in the end, or at least as of today, the B-1B turned out to be a good investment. The B-1B carries more bombs than any other American heavy bomber. It can also move fast (about 1,500 kilometers an hour) if it needs to, and is stealthy. The B-1B played a major role in the 2001 campaign in Afghanistan, where eight of them dropped 40 percent of the total bomb tonnage. In Iraq in 2003, eleven B-1B's, four B-2A's and 28 B-52H's were used. These 43 aircraft flew some 500 missions, and were responsible for dropping a third of the bombs that hit targets during the campaign. More importantly, these heavy bombers were able to circle up there for hours, waiting for the ground troops to call for another smart bomb. Even though the B-1B costs, compared to the B-52, twice as much per hour to operate, it carries more bombs, and has a longer useful life than the B-52s (which are twenty years older).

Most of the B-1Bs equipment is 1980s vintage. So the air force has been investing in upgrades, upgrades that make the B-1B better at doing what it does best. The 67 B-1Bs (on active duty) are being equipped with much improved fire control systems. This allows them to use the latest smart bombs (like JASSM and SDB), and makes it possible for the B-1B to use smart bombs to hit moving targets (ships or land vehicles.) B-1Bs have gotten radar, cockpit and other upgrades as well.

The major reason for investing money in the B-1B is because, despite all the attention, and cash, given to the new F-22 and F-35, it’s the B-1B that will do most of the work in any future war. Congress has been so impressed with the B-1B that they have been pressuring the air force to activate the B-1Bs that were deactivated. The air force doesn’t want to do this. For one thing, it would cost over $150 million, each, to bring those aircraft back to active service (upgraded equipment must be installed, and other components refurbished or replaced). Moreover, as the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns demonstrated, you don’t need many B-1Bs to get the job done.

The air force budget is already under tremendous pressure because of the senior leadership wanting to get the F-22 and F-35 into production, and built in large numbers. But the generals know they would be in big trouble if another war came along and they did not have a dozen or so B-1Bs ready to go. It’s more likely the absence of F-22s and F-35s would not be noticed. But the B-1Bs would definitely be missed. The air force is likely to cut purchases for the new JSASSM cruise missile (which is having development problems), before it does anything to the B-1B (which can carry 24 of these missiles) upgrade budget. The JASSM is only needed if there is an opponent with a modern air defense system to hit. At the moment, only China qualifies, and only in places. Another bomber weapon having some problems is the SBD (the 250 pound Small Diameter smart Bomb). The B-1B can carry over a hundred of these, which would be real handy in a future war. The air force may sacrifice JASSM to keep the SDB alive, and ready for use in B-1Bs. The B-1B is a lot easier to use than the B-2 (with its hard to maintain “radar absorbing” skin.) The B-1B may not have gotten much respect over the years, but when there’s a war, it always gets the call.

[spetznaz]

It has always puzzled me how the B-1B has never received the star treatment given to the B-52 and the B-2. Anyways ......

[spetznaz]

[marmar]

I loaded nukes on the B1.....never was my favorite AC. I personally like the Warthogs. I am glad that Ellsworth was saved from the chopping block.....

[SteveMcKing]

I wonder if the B-1B will be modified so that no pilot is on board.

[Paleo Conservative]

I've heard about proposals to sell Australia about ten B-1B's to partially replace the F/A-111's. Has anything come of them?

[Flightdeck]

I respect the Bone

[Paleo Conservative]

If you want on or off my aerospace ping list, please contact me by Freep mail not by posting to this thread.

[stboz]

Saw one coming out of Edwards last year. He was honkin' on it. Impressive.

[konaice]

The airforce is always looking for the next plane, and only begrudgingly accepts some of the star performers.

They have consistanly tried to kill the Warthog, which is the most efficient aircraft against mechanized infantry or tanks. Two of these (they work best in pairs) can decimate entire divisions.

[ladtx]

My eldest was one of the first to drop bombs on Baghdad from a B1. He loves that airplane, can't say that I blame him.

[tophat9000]

The "Bone" rules

[F15Eagle]

Love the B-1. Walked underneath one (didn't get the tail number) about 10 years ago. Beautiful. And I love that push-button start on the nosewheel. She could be warming up and going through diagnostics as the crew was scrambling aboard. I don't know if they ever actually used it though.

[Publius6961]

Little Kid BUMP!

[spetznaz]

Congrats for your son.

[RJS1950]

You have to understand the problems the plane had at the beginning of it's deployment. I stationed at Ellsworth when the first B1's arrived and was on airborne command post alert in the alert facility when the B1 crashed on approach a few hundred yards from our facility. Before the first plane ever arrived it was known for leaking fuel (excessivly) and had other problems that grounded the fleet from time to time. When the first planes went on nuclear alert there were strict rules that the fire engines had to be present when the engines had to be fired up and in most cases they were moved around using a yuke (towbar/tug). We felt fortunate that our EC135 was the priority mission on the pad and that we would be halfway down the runway before the B1s could start engines if the alert force was launched.

That being said, those problems were worked out and it is a pretty damned good plane to augment the buff fleet (a real bomber to the old-timers). The B2, impressive looking, but the wrong bomber at the wrong time. My impression was always that it was a result of 1990s generals with 1940s brains.

Bottom line, the big problems that originally plagued the B1s tainted its reputation.

[A.A. Cunningham]

The fact that they were all grounded during Desert Storm didn't help.

[hattend]

The JASSM is only needed if there is an opponent with a modern air defense system to hit. At the moment, only China qualifies,

Need more JASSMs...lots and lots of JASSMs

[ASA Vet]

Do we need 18 more to destroy the remaining 90%?

[Conservative Firster]

The TU-160 "Boneski"

The original B-1B

[teacherwoes]

"has a longer useful life than the B-52s (which are twenty years older)"

The average age of the B-52 fleet is 41 years.

[Donald Meaker]

B-1B is a great plane, especially a few days after the start of the war, after the B-2 has kicked in the door.

A great fast and low complement to the stealthy and high B-2A. It can also do a lot of the cruise missle work that the B-52 can do in the early days.

[concentric circles]

Can't have a thread about the B1 without a salute to Airman and former Congressman Bob Dornan. After Jimmy Carter killed the B1 program in '77, Dornan was instrumental in bringing it back to life. As a former F-86 and F-100 pilot, he was later given the honor of taking the stick of the B1-B Lancer, the aircraft he helped place in America's arsenal. Of course he is now, and forever after, known as "B1 Bob."

[A.A. Cunningham]

The last H model, the only ones still flying, was delivered on 26 October of 1962. Average age is nearly 43.

[TomasUSMC]

84 bombs internally and 24 bombs under the wings. Each bomb weighed 500 pounds. Thats 108 five hundred pounders.

That is what a B52 can and did do in Nam. Let me see the B1 do that.

IN other words the B1 was not a great leap forward. If on the other hand it had the capacity to bring 108 500lb munitions to the party at supersonic speed, then you would have had a big improvement.

If we built the B52, 9 years before we put 12 men and 2 SUVs on the MOON, I would expect the next bomber to be able to carry more, carry it faster and carry it farther. Especially if The B-1B became operational in 1986 , 17 years AFTER man walked on the moon. AND, 22 YEARS after the B-70 Valkyrie strategic mach THREE bomber flew.

So if we had a bomber flying Mach 3 in 1964 and another bomber carrying 108 500lb munitions way don't we get something that can fly, lets say mach 4 with 150 500lb munitions in 1986? Instead we get the B1.

Hey the B1 is good. But we could have done a lot better.

Ready on the left Ready on the right, all ready on the firing line.....

[Prophet in the wilderness]

The B-1B is another one of Reagan's great legacies.

[F14 Pilot]

I liked their non-stop missions over Iraq in late 90s

[Prophet in the wilderness]

Maybe they can sell those 12 B-1B's that are deactivated to Australia.
I was watching ( Mail Call ) on the military channel, and Gunny's show was about the B-2 , and a few B-2's were stationed in Guam.
With the supposed sale of the B-1B's to the Aussies, and a few B-2's stationed in Guam , I wonder why they are stationing these planes over there ? can anyone guess ?

[ASOC]

Blame the non-use in GW1 on the Ruuuskis - the USSR was still, well, the USSR back then - and the B1 was designed as a nuke carrier, as such, the old Soviet did not want to see it flying the edges of its borders.

Not too many in the aviation press were ever impressed with the B1 EW defense suite - self-jamming is the term used I believe - tho it may be better now.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

They had Paul Tibbits ( Grand son of Paul Tibbits who flew the Enola Gay over Japan ) ( Paul Tibbits the 4 th ) on the show Mail Call.
He is flying the Stealth Bomber, and he said his grand father told him while he was alive was, that, it was not just the technology that won the war ( WWII ) , it was every one coming together and working together for a common cause and objective.
After I heard him say that, it just reinforced what you, and I and others here on FR already knew, that, that is what the Liberals, Democrats, our enemies that we are fighting around the world would want us to do, is to be splintered, fractured, and not all joining together as a team, and coming together and fight for a common cause, just like what Cindy Sheehan is doing now, causing us to lose our will to fight, to cause distention, devision.

[tanknetter]

The fact that they were all grounded during Desert Storm didn't help.

It wouldn't have mattered. At the time the B-1B was tasked to the nuclear deterrant/SIOP mission. There was only one (ONE!) set of racks for conventional bombs, which was out at Edwards where conventional weapons integration testing was only just starting.

People tend to forget that the B-52Hs ("Cadillacs") didn't go to Desert Storm either ... it was the older G models that went.

[JRios1968]

The average age of the B-52 fleet is 41 years.

Try 44 years. The only B-52s left, the H-models, stopped being made in 1961.

[tanknetter]

84 bombs internally and 24 bombs under the wings. Each bomb weighed 500 pounds. Thats 108 five hundred pounders.

That is what a B52 can and did do in Nam. Let me see the B1 do that.

IN other words the B1 was not a great leap forward. If on the other hand it had the capacity to bring 108 500lb munitions to the party at supersonic speed, then you would have had a big improvement.

The B-52Ds with the "Big Belly" mods to carry that many bombs left service in the early 1980s. The BUFFs currently in service can carry 51 500lb bombs ... 24 externally, 27 internally.

What the B-1B "brings to the party" is a stealthy (not fully stealth, but significantly better than the original B-1A, not to mention the B-52) radar profile and an ability to truly hall a** on the deck (multiple Red Flags have shown that NOTHING can catch a B-1B at speed on the deck) with a pretty respectable bomb load.

While modern mission profiles have B-1s operating at medium altitudes, the extra speed permits a faster transit to the target area. Operating from a place like Diego Garcia or Guam, this translates into a B-1B getting over target hours before a B-52 could. In fact, the USAF is considering a major upgrade for the B-1B (called the B-1R) that would reengine the planes with F-22 engines, conferring true supercruise capability.

[JRios1968]

They had Paul Tibbits ( Grand son of Paul Tibbits who flew the Enola Gay over Japan ) ( Paul Tibbits the 4 th ) on the show Mail Call. He is flying the Stealth Bomber, and he said his grand father told him while he was alive was, that, it was not just the technology that won the war ( WWII ) , it was every one coming together and working together for a common cause and objective.

Brig Gen Paul Tibbets, USAF-Retired, first commander of the 509th Composite Group, precursor to today's 509th Bomb Wing, which flies the B-2 Spirit, is still very much alive and kicking.

[JRios1968]

In fact, the USAF is considering a major upgrade for the B-1B (called the B-1R) that would reengine the planes with F-22 engines, conferring true supercruise capability.

Also, a proposal has been in the books for a while, to re-engine the venerable B-52 BUFF, by removing the 4 dual-engine pods and replacing each pod with a single CFM-56 high-bypass engine, like those on the KC-135R.

[Othniel]

A relative of mine worked on them at Edwards. Every so often they would buzz over the housing areas. Very impressive plane, especially with the ground-following radar and other equipment that made it a fast cruiser. Awesome piece of aircraft. Carter was such a short-sighted boob to cancel them; and I think the AF is better for Reaganus Maximus stepping in and resurrecting it.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

Thank you for the information, I was not sure if he was still alive.
I thought he died of cancer a few years ago.

[JRios1968]

No problem...easy assumption to make, seeing how by now he's in his late 80's or early 90's. General Tibbets, like General Curtis LeMay, is a hero to today's Air Force.

[Paleo Conservative]

Also, a proposal has been in the books for a while, to re-engine the venerable B-52 BUFF, by removing the 4 dual-engine pods and replacing each pod with a single CFM-56 high-bypass engine, like those on the KC-135R.

I'd read that the proposed reengining for the B-52 was for the Rolls Royce RB.211 engines used on the 757.

[Paleo Conservative]

People tend to forget that the B-52Hs ("Cadillacs") didn't go to Desert Storm either ... it was the older G models that went.

The first B-52H didn't see combat till Afghanistan in 2001.

[yhwhsman]

the USAF is considering a major upgrade for the B-1B (called the B-1R) that would reengine the planes with F-22 engines, conferring true supercruise capability.

Awesome!!!

I had the great pleasure of seeing a B1 do a flyover at an airshow here in Nebraska in 93/94. It was the planes last flight before retirement. The pilot first did a slow beauty pass with wheels down and wings forward. Then he came back, wings back, went vertical over the airfield, and lit the afterburners. Watching that beautiful girl disappear straight up in seconds was truly a pants-wetting experience.

[JRios1968]

I'd read that the proposed reengining for the B-52 was for the Rolls Royce RB.211 engines used on the 757.

You may be right. I had heard about the CFM-56's, but this is from a few years ago. I had also heard the RB.211 being mentioned for the C-5 re-engine effort.

[Paleo Conservative]

The most powerful CFM-56 engines available would only give the B-52 the same thrust it has now (8 x 17,000) but with half the engines (4 x 34,000). The RB.211 has over 43,000 pounds of thrust. It would be like having the thrust of ten of its current engines. This would drastically improve its runway performance. New engines would greatly decrease the amount of engine maintenance needed and increase range.

The C-5's will be reengined with General Electric CF6-80-C2 engines similar to those used on the 747-400 and Air Force One.

[JRios1968]

The trouble with giving the BUFF more power would be the stress on the wings, IMO. Of course, more power could easily translate into higher payload, but IIRC that is also limited by the airframe. The CFMs are smaller than the RBs, and I think that was supposed to help the stress on the airframe and wing spars.

[Thebaddog]

Is that like the old Plymouths with the push button transmissions?

[spetznaz]

I know what you are saying. One of the good things to come out of 9-11 was how everyone came together as one for several weeks. The cohesion was powerful and real, and people simply became Americans. Party affiliations, ethnic heritage, social strata placement ....all that was left by the wayside, and everyone came together as one unit. Sadly it did not last long, but while it lasted it was amazing.

And I agree. WW2 was not won due to technology, but because of the wills of the men and women who forged this nation, from their hearts outward, into a vanquisher of foes. The Axis really had no chance once things got going among the Allies (even though the Germans had a better tech standpoint for most of the war). As the Samurai used to say, what makes a warrior is not in his katana and wakizashi (long and short swords), but in his heart. A True Warrior, whose weapon is in his heart and will (spirit), can vanquish many foes while armed with no visible weapon.

What makes America great is not its wealth, or even its power and influence, but it's spirit. The ephemeral beat that makes people here believe that every dawn gives rise to a better day, and that one's destiny is truly in one's hands. The precepts of freedom, and justice, for all. And the strive to surge forward towards, for lack of a better phrase, 'manifest destiny.'

The moment the last spark of all that ebbs away then you will see the fall of America. Just as Rome, and a myriad other empires, fell, rot has to come from within. Never from without. That which is without only contributes to the final toll, the last death knell. But it is the internal rot that consumes a nation. And the United States is a unique country. However anything unique has to be taken care of, propagated, and protected. For you can be certain that if lax hands take over it will surely be given away (not taken ....some things can only be wasted by giving them away).

Choose.

Spetz!

[GBA]

She's a beauty! Gotta love the Bone!

[GBA]

I agree with what you've said. I would add that it is America's spirit as well as her principles that make her great. America is strong and hopefully enduring because its principles are firmly rooted in the Judeo-Christian beliefs and ethics our founding fathers brought here and based our Constitution upon. If those principles are forgotten and/or abandonned, the rot begins, the spirit will die and America will join history's other fallen empires.

[thedilg]

(I personally like the Warthogs)

God bless you. It takes a very discerning eye to make that choice. I am a retired fighter pilot. however, I fully supported the A-10 when it was hated by the corporate AF in its gestation period. I ended up in charge of the A-10 armament development and production for 5 years.

Recently, I was asked to write a book about fighters. I am doing this. Naturally, the Close Air Support mission is an important part. I am in need of someone to provide a critical overview. Would you like to look over my efforts?

Godspeed, The Dilg

[chilepepper]

ha ha, didn't fool me... those are clearly vastly different planes. see, the cockpit windows are different...

[ALOHA RONNIE]

.

The Value of the B-2:

...At the start of the Iraq War a complety mad North Korean Dictator who was busy nuke-rattling at BUSH...

...was forced to go literally underground for 40 days & 40 nights...

...in response to BUSH suddenly stationing 8 threatening B-2 Bombers on the relatively nearby island of Guam.

Walk softly, but carry a big B-2 Stick..?

.