Posted on 09/24/2019 1:31:48 PM PDT by C19fan
The B-52H fleet, already nearly 60 years old, has been the recipient of a steady but slow stream of upgrades to keep the planes useful. The Air Force is now committing to flying the bomber into the 2050s, a feat that will require even more improvements.
The U.S. Air Force ordered 102 B-52H bombers during the Cold War, with the first planes delivered in May 1961. The old eight-engined warhorse has been in continuous service ever since, flying combat missions over the former Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Afghanistan. The Air Force plans to keep flying the remaining 76 B-52Hs through 2050, with some almost certainly flying until 2061. The B-52H will be the longest serving warplane in history, serving longer than the newer B-1B and B-2A bombers.
(Excerpt) Read more at popularmechanics.com ...
USS Constitution (1797-)
Buffs’ may not be your father’s plane but could be your grandfather’s.
I once toured a B-52 in Orlando in the 1980s and can attest first hand that it is roomy and sturdy. At the time, the area still had a local SAC wing that was tasked with being ready for nuclear war missions. Several avionics panels were therefore obscured by canvas curtains and guarded by MPs with sidearms.
Currently reading “The Last Stand at Khe Sanh” right now, and Buffs are prominently mentioned. When the NVA started the siege, there was a 3000 meter distance from the base limit on B-52 bombing missions, and though I am not all the way through, I wonder if they changed it over time. Tactical could obviously get closer...
I wouldn’t want to be on the receiving end of a Buff strike, no doubt.
I loved the stories of our POW’s in Hanoi jumping up and down yelling with joy and the B-52’s rained down the bombs (even while scared to death...it was just worth it!) while the guards cowered in abject fear!
I recall someone said “That was American power!”
I think, as I remember, you are reading one of the best accounts of what happened at Khe Sanh.
I think they did get closer but not by much.
We were the last combat troops (101st Airborne) in I Corps and south of Kee Sanh. We had turned over Fire Bases and most of our artillery to the ARVN. The B-52’s bombing north and west of us was a beautiful sound.
Enjoy the book.
Regards-
Thanks very much...thanks for your service, and...welcome home.
Thank you and thank you for your service.
On a related note...I was looking for something on YouTube last night and came across the author of “Last Stand” doing a two hour lecture on Khe Sanh. There was something that stuck out, and it was his assertion (accurate, IMO) that there was a lot said about Khe Sanh that simply wasn’t accurate.
One thing that he talked about was an author, the guy who wrote the book “Dispatches” (Name is Herr I think) which is supposed to be one of the top 100 non-fiction accounts of war.
The author of “The Last Stand at Khe Sanh” (Gregg Jones) said that “Dispatches” WAS an amazing first hand account of the war in Vietnam, the writing was very powerful, etc. and his first hand account from his visit to Khe Sanh during the siege is a literary tour de force, especially his account of two Marines (Day Tripper and Mayhew) there that people have talked about for years.
Jones said that he saw an interview a few years back where an interviewer asked Herr about it and “how did you ever find two guys like that” and Herr admitted he just made them up. Now, in his “defense” Herr claims never to have said it was journalism, that it was a story, but...that kind of smells fishy a bit to me. It was treated by many as “non-fiction” and apparently he never spoke up because nobody asked him directly.
He also takes issue with the common and unchallenged assertion by Giap that he had no intention of capturing Khe Sanh, that it was all a “diversion”. Gregg Jones feels that is a self-serving spin by someone badly defeated in the same sphere the North was defeated in the Tet Offensive, and thinks it does a disservice to unthinkingly accept that from an aging Giap.
Well the Sixties and Seventies had some strange cultural dynamics, that is for sure.
Michael Herr (”Dispatches” author apparently was a strong contributor to the scripts for “Apocalypse Now” and “Full Metal Jacket”...which kind of says something to me.
Thanks for sharing that. There was/is a lot of revisionist history regarding that war.
Once we got off the helicopters and there were some reporters who had been allowed on base. They started out asking us leading questions and we were tired and had no time for that kind of BS. Two of our guys chambered rounds and the reporters backed off. Other guys, including me told them to go F themselves.
“Great maintenance troops and depot maintenance help keep the BUFF flying. In earlier days, many were on ground alert and not accumulating a lot of hours.” [Skybird, post 28]
“I once toured a B-52 in Orlando in the 1980s and can attest first hand that it is roomy and sturdy. At the time, the area still had a local SAC wing that was tasked with being ready for nuclear war...” [Rockingham, post 43]
USAF aircraft maintenance is superior to all other service components. Along with Boeing’s design & construction standards, it helps explain the B-52H’s longevity. Not bad for what was originally an interim design, a stopgap system.
Early B-52 operations actually piled on flight hours more quickly than later ones. Strategic Air Command kepts some aircraft on airborne alert until 1968 (Operation CHROME DOME mounted sorties running to 24 hrs aloft). And training sorties regularly went past 13 hours. This changed some after the oil crunches hit in the 1970s: training sorties were reduced some, to 8 to 11 hours.
Lots of cruising under conditions that did not stress the airframe much; this changed some as low-level training became the norm after the 1960s. The B-52 isn’t considered a high performance machine: limited bank angles and maneuvers keep G loadings low.
Rockingham may be confusing crew accommodations with other interior spaces. In actuality the bomber’s crew compartments - pressurized for high altitude flight - are small compared to airliners and airlifters. There is no place to stand fully erect, save at the base of the ladder leading from the lower deck to the upper deck. Applies to crewmembers even of the shortest stature.
The rest of the fuselage is more capacious, though a good deal of it (more than 100 ft of the fuselage is behind the crew compartment) is occupied by wheel wells for the retracted main undercarriage, fuel tankage, and electronic components. Spaces behind the rear main wheel wells are cavernous.
The B-52 Rockingham toured in the 1980s at Orlando had to have been visiting from some other base. SAC closed down its bombardment wings in Florida (McCoy and Homestead) in the 1960s. Orlando International uses the facilities of what had been McCoy AFB.
I crewed B-52Gs and Hs in the late 1970s, and the B-1B in the late 1980s. At other times, I performed operational tests on both aircraft, and a great many other military systems. Spent lots of time crawling through and around B-52s.
“USS Constitution (1797-)” [JohnBovenmyer, post 41]
USS Constitution doesn’t go into action now.
B-52Hs do.
“...with proliferation of high tech weapons even among goat humpers, is it a wise investment to extend the aircraft’s longevity?” [buckalfa, post 11]
The Air Force, Joint agencies, and other offices within the national security establishment conduct tests, simulations, and studies to determine of the B-52H is still effective and capable of performing is assigned missions (an activity carried out by all armed services for all systems, in compliance with public law, on an ongoing basis). Like many other DoD actions, results are not often disclosed to the public.
If deficiencies are discovered, actions are taken to remedy or counteract them. These cover a wide range: changes in procedures, tactics, planning, equipment modifications/ upgrades, new systems are just some of the options.
The B-52 is equipped with more sophisticated, more capable defense systems than many smaller, faster, more maneuverable warplanes.
The general public is under the impression that smaller, higher-performance warplanes (F-18, F-15, F-22 etc) are better at avoiding or evading modern air defense systems than larger aircraft like the B-52 or the B-1. The impression is wrong.
It was not even true during American involvement in Southeast Asia, when US forces sustained high loss rates among the “fast movers.” Electronic defense experts from Strategic Air Command did offer assistance but were turned away by senior leaders in Tactical Air Command.
The blunders and the outcomes of those days are still being ignored by the fighter pilotry, who have been attempting to kill it with silence and distract citizens with their braggadocio, ever since.
Hahahahahahahah...love it. Leading questions indeed.
For people with your experience, seeing the Media as it exists today must be fairly anger inducing.
I’m almost 69 years old and you’re sure right.
You are correct that the end of the Vietnam War led to the removal of B-52s from McCoy. With my recollection chastised, corrected, and refreshed, I think my tour of the B-52 was in that time frame when I returned home from college on break. I vaguely recall local news coverage to the effect that the open house for long-secret areas like the nuclear bunkers and front line aircraft at McCoy was a way for SAC to say goodbye to the Orlando area.
Crawling around inside B-52s, I can imagine that you saw a few odd things. My closest comparison is as a teen poking into and crawling around inside an old Navion airframe that my father was restoring. Tasked with eliminating wasp nests, I was armed with a can of insect spray, a flashlight, a small hand broom, and a rag. Somehow, I never got stung -- and my father still owns the Navion, nicely restored and a little older than even the B-52.
She still is commissioned and has an official navy crew of 60. Her functions now are mainly ceremonial, like the aforementioned McClellan saddle, and the various services bands. However ceremonial functions are important to the military and its esprit de corps so she remains of significant value to the navy even though her lethality has deprecated.
Come to think of it, the smaller USCGC Eagle is even more actively in service, and although much younger than the Constitution is still older than any of the B52s.
“[USS Constitution]...still is commissioned...mainly ceremonial, like the aforementioned McClellan saddle, and the various services bands...she remains of significant value... USCGC Eagle is even more actively in service...” [JohnBovenmyer, post 56]
News coverage of the recent state visit by the Australian Prime Minister showed a number of units passing in review; one was a formation of Redcoats, in 1780-vintage uniforms.
Eyeing their march-off, it occurred to me that shot for shot, a smoothbore flintlock musket is just as lethal today as it was 240 years ago. But we’ve relegated them to ceremonial and historical activities. They’d not meet with much success on today’s battlefields.
While the Eagle does perform training functions, only USCGA cadets and OCS candidates sail on her. If tall-ship operation were as critical as you imply, the Cost Guard would put enlisted recruits through the same training.
The Eagle was built at the same time as some of the aircraft in the Air Force Heritage Flight. But the former is officially government funded while the latter is not.
Are you telling the forum that a technology centuries old is more important to the military establishment than a technology dating back only a couple generations?
“The B-52 was plenty roomy compared to fighters and the small civilian aircraft that I was familiar with...the end of the Vietnam War led to the removal of B-52s from McCoy...I vaguely recall local news coverage to the effect that the open house for long-secret areas like the nuclear bunkers and front line aircraft at McCoy was a way for SAC to say goodbye...My closest comparison is as a teen poking into and crawling around inside an old Navion airframe...I was armed with a can of insect spray, a flashlight, a small hand broom, and a rag. Somehow, I never got stung — and my father still owns the Navion...” [Rockingham, post 55]
Your description of wasp-nest hunting captivated. Bug spray was an inspiration; could have used it while poking about derelict airframes and museum artifacts. Now I’m mildly chagrined I never thought of it.
My apologies - I cannot recall where I dug up the termination year of 1968 for bomb wing basing at McCoy. Later searches date it to 1974.
Fret not about dates. Realignment and closure activities are inherently chaotic and muddled. A truth I forgot: all the more embarrassing, as I served on the merger team when Strategic Air Command stood down in spring 1992. And my Society of SAC life member number is only a couple places beyond the seniority cutoff for “founding members.” The times were neither fun nor pretty.
Bombers have crew spaces of larger dimensions only in comparison to light aircraft, and fighters. Fighters are routinely back on the ground before a bomber crew accomplishes all the mandated system checks - even on a training sortie.
My guess is that you’d judge the B-52H crew compartment less congenial if you’d been aboard one of our special sorties. Up to nine people were assigned: six primary crew plus an extra for each station (usually instructors) - with all the requisite flying gear, survival gear, flight publications, and documentation. I chanced to be on board when our crew set a time/distance record in early 1980, for the H model. Moderately taxing.
I knew that Orlando still had B-52s after 1968 because I remember the terrible crash in a local neighborhood had occurred in 1972. Supposedly, that crash and local covetousness for full use of McCoy helped to influence SAC's decision to close most of their base operation there. Orlando's rapid growth as a tourist destination would have been impossible without full civilian and commercial use of McCoy.
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.