Posted on 04/20/2017 6:03:49 AM PDT by C19fan
The Air Force is surging forward with a massive, fleet-wide modernization overhaul of the battle-tested, Vietnam-era B-52 bomber, an iconic airborne workhorse for the U.S. military dating back to the 1960s. Engineers are now equipping all 76 of the Air Force B-52s with digital data-links, moving-map displays, next-generation avionics, new radios and an ability to both carry more weapons internally and integrate new, high-tech weapons as they emerge, service officials said.
(Excerpt) Read more at scout.com ...
Considering the last one was built around 50 years or so ago, what percentage of each is original? Is the such a thing as an original b-52?
Just wondering.
It's about time! I've always said the problem with the B-52 was its limited payload. The standard B-52 loadout only includes eight AGM-84 Harpoon missiles, four AGM-142 Raptor missiles, fifty-one 500-pound bombs, thirty 1,000-pound bombs, twenty AGM-86C conventional air-launched cruise missiles (CALCM), twelve joint stand-off weapons (JSOW), twelve joint direct-attack munitions (JDAM), and sixteen wind-corrected munitions dispensers (WCMD). That's only 153 total.
I remember reading about a pilot who flew the same B-52 his grandfather flew.
We’ll meet again.
Don’t know where,
don’t know when...
I was just wondering if it was time to put the B52 back into production. Seems to me that we will be using them for the foreseeable future.
The AF is also looking at another engine upgrade.
In the case of aircraft, the usual rule is that everything can be replaced except the airframe itself and it's still the same aircraft. But, like you, I wonder how far that can be taken. If I have only the manufacturer's data plate left, can I build an airplane around it and call it the original? I need to check with my EAA buddies.
Weren’t there hundreds parked at Davis-Monthan? You might be able to make them airworthy again.
Any plane that will inspire Slim Pickens . . .
There was a conversation some time ago to re-equip the B52s with 747/777/787 type High bypass engines, replacing the 2 engine pods with a single HB engine. This was dropped in the argument that the 8 engine config.gave greater combat redundancy.
Interesting questions.
I think the s/n plate controversy arose over a Ferrari replica some decades back.
Was it the same car?
All were chopped up (under SALT 1 Treaty, I think)and left in 4-5 pieces, so the Russkies could verify their destruction via satellite.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/0a/eb/36/0aeb369a683640b30ed83ff1eed4e545.jpg
Doubtful. There are still a few intact, but most were intentionally destroyed as part of the SALT treaties with Russia.
All were chopped up (under SALT 1 Treaty, I think)and left in 4-5 pieces, so the Russkies could verify their destruction via satellite.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/0a/eb/36/0aeb369a683640b30ed83ff1eed4e545.jpg
Why? The range, climb benefits, less spare parts and greater reliability.
My choice would be the Pratt Geared Turbofan, the PW1133G/GA-JM, PW1130G-JM 33110 Pounds of thrust takeoff, 32780, continuous, per Wiki.
A bit less than their 34,000 lbs combined for the two old TF-33's, I am sure they can push it.
Looks at the TSFC, 0.78 lb/(lbf·h) for the TF-33, vs. an estimate of .35 ( CFM 56 - 15%, ) Pratt is claiming 15% lower TSFC than it's rivals, and I can find a published number for a TSFC pf .2975 estimated vs .78. Yeeeowzer...
Current inventory at the boneyard at Davis-Monthan:
http://www.amarcexperience.com/ui/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=118&Itemid=238
You have to look under the 28 sections, but we have more than 100 B-52s there.
put them back together and modify them to handle the MOAB.
People (politicians) should have been shot for that execution style!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.