Wall Street Journal 1/25/2021

[3WE]

Alternate title: B-52, it keeps going and going...

Quote = Evanie: Obsolete, blah blah blah...

Sometimes, I would love to fly a bomber over his house...real low...maybe even drop a load of nutritious animal manure to build the soil in his flower beds.

B 52.JPG (140.5 KiB) Viewed 11220 times

[Gabriel]

With the progress that the radars, SAM missiles and fighter/interceptor technology has made since the 60's, and the zero stealth capability of the B-52, what are the chances that a B-52 could drop bombs over a Chinese target without being shot down first.

[3WE]

With the progress that the radars, SAM missiles and fighter/interceptor technology has made since the 60's, what are the chances that a modern bomber could make it to a Chinese target without HAL, MCAS, UAS, Autopilot mismanagement, relentless pull ups or etc. bringing it down first?

Another way to look at it...

[Not_Karl]

With the progress that the radars, SAM missiles and fighter/interceptor technology has made since the 60's, what are the chances that a modern bomber could make it to a Chinese target without HAL, MCAS, UAS, Autopilot mismanagement, relentless pull ups or etc. bringing it down first?

Another way to look at it...

What about low morale caused by reduced lavatory size affecting crew attention/concentration?

[monchavo]

With the progress that the radars, SAM missiles and fighter/interceptor technology has made since the 60's, and the zero stealth capability of the B-52, what are the chances that a B-52 could drop bombs over a Chinese target without being shot down first.

Speculation: I think it's possible that this could happen once. It would, of course, be interpreted as an act of war, and they wouldn't get very far into the mainland, but an under-protected target close to "international airspace" could indeed be attacked.

[elaw]

Can't B-52s also deliver cruise missiles?

[flyboy2548m]

Can't B-52s also deliver cruise missiles?

Affirmative.

[Gabriel]

Can't B-52s also deliver cruise missiles?

Affirmative.

Oh, ok. That'd me more, hmmm... interesting.

[Verbal]

In fact, the B-52H is getting a new lease on life. From wikipedia:

In 2018, the USAF proposed another plan to re-engine the B-52, known as the Commercial Engine Re-engining Program (CERP). A request for proposals was planned for mid-2019, with service entry by 2024. Possible contender engines to replace the TF33 including the General Electric CF34, the General Electric Passport, the Pratt & Whitney PW815 and the Rolls-Royce BR725. On 23 April 2020 the USAF released its request for proposals for 608 commercial engines plus spares and support equipment, with the plan to award the contract in May 2021.

The 70+ aircraft that receive the new engines are anticipated to serve another 40 years, making them a century old when they are finally retired.

[elaw]

Haven't they been talking about re-engining those things for about 30 years?

[Gabriel]

Haven't they been talking about re-engining those things for about 30 years?

Well, perhaps it is time already then.

I wonder if the modernization will aslo include a new cockpit with a magenta line (or was that already done in a previous tier?)

[elaw]

There's also some news on what I think we all agree is the most important aspect of any aircraft: https://www.military.com/daily-news/202 ... omber.html

[Not_Karl]

I wonder if the modernization will aslo include a new cockpit with a magenta line (or was that already done in a previous tier?)

As long as it does Not_include MCAS or reduced lavs...

[3WE]

Again and again- what the hell is wrong with aeroengineers?!?!?!?!?

1. No crapper and 2. No door. It’s a BOMBER for Chinnamasta’s sake.

Public physical punishment for Gabriel and coworkers!!!!!

[Not_Karl]

Again and again- what the hell is wrong with aeroengineers?!?!?!?!?

1. No crapper and 2. No door. It’s a BOMBER for Chinnamasta’s sake.

Public physical punishment for Gabriel and coworkers!!!!!

A bomber does Not_need a crapper. Just open the bays and drop the "bombs"...

[elaw]

A bomber does Not_need a crapper. Just open the bays and drop the "b]bombs[/b]"...

But to 3WE's point... from the article, it sounds to me like the aircraft in question does have a crapper. It just doesn't provide any privacy, as the aircraft was intended to be crewed only by persons of a gender that stereotypically does not require privacy.

[Gabriel]

But to 3WE's point... from the article, it sounds to me like the aircraft in question does have a crapper.

Exactly.

It just doesn't provide any privacy, as the aircraft was intended to be crewed only by persons of a gender that stereotypically does not require privacy.

Rather, it was intended to be crewed by a single gender, at a time where there was a strong correlation between gender and what was between the person legs.

[3WE]

Can't B-52s also deliver cruise missiles?

Oh, the ironing.

[3WE]

Interesting video.

***BUT***what dumbass aero engineer designed the “remove before flight” thingie on the long rope?

https://fb.watch/3nIW1hoTBD/

[Not_Karl]

***BUT***what dumbass aero engineer designed the “remove before flight” thingie on the long rope?

Theories:
It was glued by a prankster.
The video was a Benny Hill sketch.

[3WE]

Exactly.

Wrong.