will the US ever replace the B52???
Discussion
Of course.
And why aren't there any?
Because all the proposed replacement aircraft were built in far fewer numbers. The two main projects were the B-1 (which was initially cancelled altogether and then reinstated) and then the B-2 which was built in tiny numbers.
The production run for the B-1 was 100 (not including the prototypes and test aircraft) and the production run for the B-2 was only 21.
And why aren't there any?
Because all the proposed replacement aircraft were built in far fewer numbers. The two main projects were the B-1 (which was initially cancelled altogether and then reinstated) and then the B-2 which was built in tiny numbers.
The production run for the B-1 was 100 (not including the prototypes and test aircraft) and the production run for the B-2 was only 21.
What was it for?
Orignaly it was the strong-arm muscle of SAC. It did stand the airborne deterrent patrols to hop over the borders to provide instant sunshine on The Red Menace.
It certainly showed it's abilities as a heavy bomber over Vietnam.
I was rwading an article last year about how the USAF had welded a Sniper designation pod onto a pylon on a wing between the engine pods, and could have it loiter over Afghanistan and if necessary rain laser designated smartbombs down onto the ground like hailstones.
Still a missed oppotunity for the ex-Nimrod to have filled it's long weapons bay and do the same.
I doubt that here will be a replacement, but I think it makes sense to keep updating it to maintain the capabilities.
Orignaly it was the strong-arm muscle of SAC. It did stand the airborne deterrent patrols to hop over the borders to provide instant sunshine on The Red Menace.
It certainly showed it's abilities as a heavy bomber over Vietnam.
I was rwading an article last year about how the USAF had welded a Sniper designation pod onto a pylon on a wing between the engine pods, and could have it loiter over Afghanistan and if necessary rain laser designated smartbombs down onto the ground like hailstones.
Still a missed oppotunity for the ex-Nimrod to have filled it's long weapons bay and do the same.
I doubt that here will be a replacement, but I think it makes sense to keep updating it to maintain the capabilities.
Skywalker said:
It certainly showed it's abilities as a heavy bomber over Vietnam.
And again 20 odd years later in '91 during Desert Storm and another 10 years later in Iraq and Afganistan.A BUFF is still a very useful big stick to have at your disposal, psycologically as well as operationally.
It still works.
That's a simple reason it's still in use and will still be flying in 2050.
The replacement was the going to be XB-70 Valkyrie, ie the range of the B-52 but supersonic.
But the development of the ICBM meant that model of warfare became obsolete.
What remained was the need for a heavy long range conventional bomber, for use once air superiority is attained and the B52 does that.
It still needs some new engines though.
That's a simple reason it's still in use and will still be flying in 2050.
The replacement was the going to be XB-70 Valkyrie, ie the range of the B-52 but supersonic.
But the development of the ICBM meant that model of warfare became obsolete.
What remained was the need for a heavy long range conventional bomber, for use once air superiority is attained and the B52 does that.
It still needs some new engines though.
ds'! Patton would be impressed.aeropilot said:
tight5 said:
first flight in 1952 !
are they trying for 100 years ?
I have heard from a friend who is ex-USAF that there are some in the USAF that would like to see that milestone achieved..... and with the disclosed proposed OSD already being pretty close to that, it may well happen.are they trying for 100 years ?
It would be great to see though.
rhinochopig said:
I guess it depends on whether their LEX studies are finding sufficient conservatism in life limiting components to do so. I can't imagine they live a hard life these days.
It would be great to see though.
AIUI the airframe was originally stressed for a "nuclear lob-bombing" mission profile from low level, so it's pretty damn sturdy.It would be great to see though.
rhinochopig said:
I guess it depends on whether their LEX studies are finding sufficient conservatism in life limiting components to do so. I can't imagine they live a hard life these days.
As long as the USAF have learnt their lesson and manage to keep maverick pilots like Bud Holland away from the B-52 fleet......Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff