B-52 Pic (BIG)....

[jnuts]

since it's a big pic, I didn't put it in the war sticky...

http://www.af.mil/news/Mar2003/32203117.shtml

B-52s strike Iraqi targets
by Tech. Sgt. Jason Tudor
457th Air Expeditionary Group Public Affairs
03/22/03 - OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM (AFPN) -- Bomber aircraft from this deployed location participated in their first strike operations March 21 and continue to pound targets in the U.S. Central Command theater of operations in a coalition effort to disarm the Iraqi regime.

KC-135 Stratotankers and KC-10 Extenders from across the U.S. European and Central Command theaters of operations provided the needed fuel to the bombers.

As aircrews taxied from this location and took to the air, they held small American flags out the window. Maintenance, supply and other airmen pumped their firsts and waved as the 159-foot bombers rolled by.

As a B-52 nicknamed Iron Butterfly lifted off the runway here on its way to Iraq, Senior Airman Dustin Karas, one of the crew chiefs for that bomber, pumped his fist and announced his excitement over the roar of the engines.

"There's no better feeling!" he said following more than three hours of pre-flight checks. "It's Unbelievable!"

 

[Testosterone boy]

Seems that we got pretty good at designing bombers during WWII. They have not seen fit to replace what is almost a WWII design. It is safe to say that it was designed from the knowledge gained during that war.

I understand it is slated to be our main bomber for several more decades. Wasn't the last group built in 1962? The H model?

 

[jnuts]

I understand it is slated to be our main bomber for several more decades. Wasn't the last group built in 1962? The H model?

The H models were built in 60 and 61

 

[KAYNE]

Seems that we got pretty good at designing bombers during WWII. They have not seen fit to replace what is almost a WWII design. It is safe to say that it was designed from the knowledge gained during that war.

I understand it is slated to be our main bomber for several more decades. Wasn't the last group built in 1962? The H model?

YOU KNOW YOU REALLY ARE FUCKING STUPID. THEY REFIT THEM EVERY FEW YEARS AS THEY SEE FIT. SAME THING WITH THE HELO'S. DAMN MAN.





KAYNE

 

[Baoh]

Mechanized birds of prey. Very impressive.

 

[CAESAR7]

nice pic

 

[HANSEL]

Thats intimidating

 

[jnuts]

A very manly airplane...

Kinda like a 57 Chevy....

 

[skaman607]

Possibly the best plane ever built, over 40 years and it is still a mainstay of our airforce.

 

[Testosterone boy]

A very manly airplane...

Kinda like a 57 Chevy....

I would agree. Seems to work just fine.

 

[sermon_of_mockery]

dude learn how to resize your pics.

 

[jnuts]

dude learn how to resize your pics.

it's a link.......

 

[chesty]

They are in the process of extending the life of the major airframes and looking into replacing the engines with more efficient ones. Possible cfm56's like they have done with the KC-135's.

The main problem will be the fatigue life on the critical components and on how cost effective it will be to replace/reanalyze to ensure they have the life left in them for the proposed future use.

 

[Testosterone boy]

They are in the process of extending the life of the major airframes and looking into replacing the engines with more efficient ones. Possible cfm56's like they have done with the KC-135's.

The main problem will be the fatigue life on the critical components and on how cost effective it will be to replace/reanalyze to ensure they have the life left in them for the proposed future use.

Makes some sense but I would not know how to greatly increase the efficiency of the engine. Jet engines are remarkably simple and have changed little. I wonder how much more efficiency they are claiming?

 

[chesty]

Well, let's just say that the difference between what is currently on the B-52 compared to the VFM56 is like a 1920 engine compared to a modern day engine! Mileage, reliability, power, etc all up by factors of 10 and more.

Jet engines are quite complex in reality. Take the difference between hi-bypass and low-bypass. Hi bypass has great thrust and great range, while low-bypass has greater thrust and power, but much lower range. The hi-bypass are huge where the low-bypass are much smaller.

Jet fighter engines are low-bypass, passenger jet engines are hi-bypass.

 

[Testosterone boy]

Well, let's just say that the difference between what is currently on the B-52 compared to the VFM56 is like a 1920 engine compared to a modern day engine! Mileage, reliability, power, etc all up by factors of 10 and more.

Jet engines are quite complex in reality. Take the difference between hi-bypass and low-bypass. Hi bypass has great thrust and great range, while low-bypass has greater thrust and power, but much lower range. The hi-bypass are huge where the low-bypass are much smaller.

Jet fighter engines are low-bypass, passenger jet engines are hi-bypass.

Maybe. My brother was an airplane mechanic and thought the engines were damn simple. That is my "background."

 

[jnuts]

No bitching about size.... I'm just posting the link....

 

[Testosterone boy]

Thanks.....that is one cool photo. B2 definitely has more sex appeal.

How does the bomb carrying capacity compare to the B-52?

 

[jnuts]

The B-2 carries more.

 

[KAYNE]

Thanks.....that is one cool photo. B2 definitely has more sex appeal.

How does the bomb carrying capacity compare to the B-52?

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/weapons/index.html


ALL THE INFO YOU NEED ON ANY OF THE WEAPONS THE COALITION OR IRAQ HAS IN ITS ARSENAL.




KAYNE

 

[XBiker]

Ask any VC or NVA soldier what he feared the most (as well as the towel heads from 90-91)when fighting america? Carpet bombing from a B-52.

 

[Testosterone boy]

Yea....carpet bombing would scare a lot of people.

That B-2 looks damned expensive! How many do we have vs. funcional B-52's? Do we still mothball B-52's at that base in Nevada? I thought some could be rejuvenated if need be.