North American Rockwell / Boeing B-1 Lancer

[mkellytx]

Thanks for the info! I perhaps incorrectly remembered the GBU-38 discussion I had with Calvin; it was years ago. Wish him well if you are in contact; I met him on TankNet but haven't seen him there for a year or so.

I never really knew him well, just ran into him a few times in the hallways in the squadron, chatted and knew who he was. How many, GBU-38's can a 10 by carry is an academic discussion these days, since a rotary can carry up to 16 or mix and match with 2000 lb class weapons.

 

[Josh_TN]

Thanks for the info! I perhaps incorrectly remembered the GBU-38 discussion I had with Calvin; it was years ago. Wish him well if you are in contact; I met him on TankNet but haven't seen him there for a year or so.

I never really knew him well, just ran into him a few times in the hallways in the squadron, chatted and knew who he was. How many, GBU-38's can a 10 by carry is an academic discussion these days, since a rotary can carry up to 16 or mix and match with 2000 lb class weapons.

I had seen a photo where they were carried that way as a test (they looks like they were slightly staggered on the rotary position) but I didn't know that upgrade/carriage was fleet wide. Thanks again.

 

[mkellytx]

Thanks for the info! I perhaps incorrectly remembered the GBU-38 discussion I had with Calvin; it was years ago. Wish him well if you are in contact; I met him on TankNet but haven't seen him there for a year or so.

I never really knew him well, just ran into him a few times in the hallways in the squadron, chatted and knew who he was. How many, GBU-38's can a 10 by carry is an academic discussion these days, since a rotary can carry up to 16 or mix and match with 2000 lb class weapons.

I had seen a photo where they were carried that way as a test (they looks like they were slightly staggered on the rotary position) but I didn't know that upgrade/carriage was fleet wide. Thanks again.

NP, Libya was the first time that mod was used IIRC. Pretty sure there's something on the AF webpage about it if the archives go that far back...

 

[MAMA CASS]

Has the B-1 ever been named "Excalibur"? I could swear I saw somewhere that the B-1A was named that but have never been able to track it down. Trying to find the source of this "memory".

Excalibur was a name given to a alert aircraft. It was the nose art 1986-1990 Dyess AFB.

 

[mkellytx]

Thanks for the info! I perhaps incorrectly remembered the GBU-38 discussion I had with Calvin; it was years ago. Wish him well if you are in contact; I met him on TankNet but haven't seen him there for a year or so.

I never really knew him well, just ran into him a few times in the hallways in the squadron, chatted and knew who he was. How many, GBU-38's can a 10 by carry is an academic discussion these days, since a rotary can carry up to 16 or mix and match with 2000 lb class weapons.

I had seen a photo where they were carried that way as a test (they looks like they were slightly staggered on the rotary position) but I didn't know that upgrade/carriage was fleet wide. Thanks again.

Josh_TN,

Here's a few pictures to give you an idea of GBU-38's on a 10 by and on the rotary adapter. The first are 10 bys and the later are on rotaries. All pictures from the AF, either AF website or the Eglin wing.

 

[aonestudio]

U.S. Air Force proves B-1’s quickly deploy capabilities

On Monday, the U.S. Air Force press release said that Global Strike Command kicked off the new Bomber Task Force deployment structure. The statement noted the U.S. Air Force has shifted the primary defense focus to preparing for future potential conflict against peer threats in alignment with...

defence-blog.com

 

[Josh_TN]

@mkellytx; thanks!

 

[mkellytx]

@mkellytx; thanks!

Sure thing, pictures explain things far better than words.

 

[RavenOne]

Anyone for a gunship version?? As Boeing has some plans lol

cheers

B-1B Gunship: Boeing's plan to run big guns on the Lancer

The B-1B Lancer has long served as America's only supersonic heavy payload bomber, but for a time, Boeing considered extended its life as a high-speed

www.sandboxx.us

 

[Deleted member 18851]

Anyone for a gunship version?? As Boeing has some plans lol

cheers

B-1B Gunship: Boeing's plan to run big guns on the Lancer

The B-1B Lancer has long served as America's only supersonic heavy payload bomber, but for a time, Boeing considered extended its life as a high-speed

www.sandboxx.us

Had a few patents filed, but nothing is (or was) really planned beyond a concept and associated patents.

 

[Josh_TN]

Unless someone displays that AFRL has terminated morphing wing technology dev (a type VG) one would have to beg to differ.

Warping wings are a replacement for control surfaces (eg flaps,ailerons,elevators), not a method for changing the geometry of the wing. The only swing wing in production is arguably the Tu-160, and 'in production' seems like a bit of a stretch. And that production, to extent it occurs, happens because the infrastructure for the aircraft was left intact making a restart possible, as opposed to the expense of a brand new bomber design. No new designs use VG and you never will see a new one again.

 

[sferrin]

B-1B bomber demo brings Air Force a step closer to carrying external hypersonic weapons - Stripes

 

[FighterJock]

View attachment 644664

B-1B bomber demo brings Air Force a step closer to carrying external hypersonic weapons - Stripes

Smart, very smart. I see the B-1B in the picture is carrying a JASSM on the external pylon, though I wonder how long it will be until we see the first hypersonic weapons on the B-1B? Not long I hope.

 

[sferrin]

 

[TomcatViP]

A lot of takeoff and landings, some with simultaneous departure of two B-1 from parallel runways.

View: https://youtu.be/dyKiSNfbNfQ

 

[rooster]

View attachment 644664

B-1B bomber demo brings Air Force a step closer to carrying external hypersonic weapons - Stripes

Naive question: why is it carrying a jasm externally? Surrogate data?

 

[mkellytx]

View attachment 644664

B-1B bomber demo brings Air Force a step closer to carrying external hypersonic weapons - Stripes

Naive question: why is it carrying a jasm externally? Surrogate data?

Instrumented test rounds are already in inventory, AGM-158 is already an integrated store on the OAS, the Sniper pylon is already wired with all the connections to make everything talk, not to mention 5075 is a test birds so there's probably plenty of orange wire in that pylon. Finally, pretty sure the old ALCM dual pylons are long gone and most certainly not compatible with a -1760 interface.

 

[FighterJock]

View attachment 644664

B-1B bomber demo brings Air Force a step closer to carrying external hypersonic weapons - Stripes

Naive question: why is it carrying a jasm externally? Surrogate data?

Instrumented test rounds are already in inventory, AGM-158 is already an integrated store on the OAS, the Sniper pylon is already wired with all the connections to make everything talk, not to mention 5075 is a test birds so there's probably plenty of orange wire in that pylon. Finally, pretty sure the old ALCM dual pylons are long gone and most certainly not compatible with a -1760 interface.

The ALCMs were never carried externally on the B-1B due to the START-1 treaty with Russia in the early 1980s. Though the capability was there should the need arise, but it never was.

 

[sferrin]

View attachment 644664

B-1B bomber demo brings Air Force a step closer to carrying external hypersonic weapons - Stripes

Naive question: why is it carrying a jasm externally? Surrogate data?

Instrumented test rounds are already in inventory, AGM-158 is already an integrated store on the OAS, the Sniper pylon is already wired with all the connections to make everything talk, not to mention 5075 is a test birds so there's probably plenty of orange wire in that pylon. Finally, pretty sure the old ALCM dual pylons are long gone and most certainly not compatible with a -1760 interface.

The ALCMs were never carried externally on the B-1B due to the START-1 treaty with Russia in the early 1980s. Though the capability was there should the need arise, but it never was.

Still need to build new pylons though.

 

[mkellytx]

View attachment 644664

B-1B bomber demo brings Air Force a step closer to carrying external hypersonic weapons - Stripes

Naive question: why is it carrying a jasm externally? Surrogate data?

Instrumented test rounds are already in inventory, AGM-158 is already an integrated store on the OAS, the Sniper pylon is already wired with all the connections to make everything talk, not to mention 5075 is a test birds so there's probably plenty of orange wire in that pylon. Finally, pretty sure the old ALCM dual pylons are long gone and most certainly not compatible with a -1760 interface.

The ALCMs were never carried externally on the B-1B due to the START-1 treaty with Russia in the early 1980s. Though the capability was there should the need arise, but it never was.

Well aware of this, back in 2004/2005 I escorted the Russian START inspection team on their inspection of Dyess. They verified the pylons were disabled by, "A process equivalent to welding," and that the bulkheads were in the center location in the forward bay.

The black boxes to operate ALCM were never procured and other systems are now in that space, so the Bone never could use them, but got some nice souvenirs from the Russian Colonel for the lost weekend. They always seemed to pick the weekend of Taste of Abilene for the Dyess inspection...

 

[Josh_TN]

It seems unlikely to me that the money can be found to refurbish the pylon capability. Look how long it took to get around to the CONNECT upgrade on the B-52s, and that I assume is a much easier process since it is an internal, centralized bay rather a half dozen different connections to the outside of the aircraft. I also wonder what the range and ceiling restrictions would be if you loaded two dozen AGM-158s on the inside and then started dragging down the airframe with external stores on top of that (presuming you only load external stores when the inside is full).

 

[mkellytx]

It seems unlikely to me that the money can be found to refurbish the pylon capability. Look how long it took to get around to the CONNECT upgrade on the B-52s, and that I assume is a much easier process since it is an internal, centralized bay rather a half dozen different connections to the outside of the aircraft. I also wonder what the range and ceiling restrictions would be if you loaded two dozen AGM-158s on the inside and then started dragging down the airframe with external stores on top of that (presuming you only load external stores when the inside is full).

Exactly, I worked CONNECT in the 2005-8 timeframe and remember sending 0036 to Wichita for modification, but that was cockpit displays and data links. That said, you are also correct that -1760 in the bay was a proposal during that same timeframe. The Bone community was definitely better at lobbying and getting their upgrades, but my hunch is B-21's would be on the ramp at EL by the time any new pylon got there...

 

[Josh_TN]

I thought the 1760 upgrade was part of CONNECT; my mistake.

 

[mkellytx]

I thought the 1760 upgrade was part of CONNECT; my mistake.

No worries because CONNECT was linked to SOJ, it's easy to get all those programs mixed up, the latter relied on the former to work. That was another case where the Bone got their data links before the BUFF got theirs...

 

[fightingirish]

Never knew, that a prototype of the Rockwell B-1A Lancer had a retractable FLIR turret.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1352084159536226306

View: https://twitter.com/clemente3000/status/1352084159536226306?

Dear members or mods,
if this post is in the false topic, please let me know, so I can delete or move this post to a more suitable topic like the topic AMSA Program & B-1 Bomber projects.

 

[Boxman]

Never knew, that a prototype of the Rockwell B-1A Lancer had a retractable FLIR turret.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1352084159536226306

View: https://twitter.com/clemente3000/status/1352084159536226306?

Dear members or mods,
if this post is in the false topic, please let me know, so I can delete or move this post to a more suitable topic like the topic AMSA Program & B-1 Bomber projects.

Here's an - albeit low resolution - photo from the San Diego Air & Space Museum (SDASM) Archives of the Electro-Optical Viewing System (EVS) turret posted at Flickr.

https://flic.kr/p/7WACzT

View: https://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/4555988269/sizes/o/

 

[Ronny]

Never knew, that a prototype of the Rockwell B-1A Lancer had a retractable FLIR turret.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1352084159536226306

View: https://twitter.com/clemente3000/status/1352084159536226306?

Dear members or mods,
if this post is in the false topic, please let me know, so I can delete or move this post to a more suitable topic like the topic AMSA Program & B-1 Bomber projects.

Here's an - albeit low resolution - photo from the San Diego Air & Space Museum (SDASM) Archives of the Electro-Optical Viewing System (EVS) turret posted at Flickr.

https://flic.kr/p/7WACzT

View: https://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/4555988269/sizes/o/

Why they removed it for the sniper-XR though, such a shame

 

[Grey Havoc]

The B-1B was supposed to be a low cost interim bomber to be built relatively quickly, so they cut a lot of corners that they probably really shouldn't have. Regarding the decision to procure the Sniper-XR pod itself in the 2000s (not solely for the B-1 fleet it should be noted), from the late '80s up until around the late 2000s, podded sensor, Electronic Warfare, and other such systems for combat aircraft were popular, at least among the bean counters, because it was believed they would be less expensive to procure, and more economical to maintain in the long term, than having organic sensor, EW, etc. suites integrated into every front line aircraft. It was also thought that systems could be easily moved around between different aircraft, meaning only a few pods would need to be purchased overall (of course, the proponents of podded systems tended to forget about little things like combat attrition). Needless to say, things didn't quite work out the way they thought they would.

 

[Firefinder]

I have two things that just pop up in my twitter feed earier.
Apperantly the B-1 also had a fix wing design to get it even cheaper.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1355516511683833863

View: https://twitter.com/clemente3000/status/1355516511683833863


and have an image of the Proto B-1s escape capsule.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1355584144554815490

View: https://twitter.com/clemente3000/status/1355584144554815490

 

[flateric]

slightly higher res

 

[bobbymike]

Repairing Broken Bones | Air & Space Forces Magazine

A smaller fleet, fatigue tests and continuous depot repairs should keep B-1s flying until the B-21 joins the force.

www.airforcemag.com

 

[mkellytx]

Why they removed it for the sniper-XR though, such a shame

It was never installed in the first place, this is more like the 1970's AN/ASQ-151 system installed on the G&H model than Sniper which is more for low level navigation than targeting. Completely different than Sniper.

 

[mkellytx]

The B-1B was supposed to be a low cost interim bomber to be built relatively quickly, so they cut a lot of corners that they probably really shouldn't have. Regarding the decision to procure the Sniper-XR pod itself in the 2000s (not solely for the B-1 fleet it should be noted), from the late '80s up until around the late 2000s, podded sensor, Electronic Warfare, and other such systems for combat aircraft were popular, at least among the bean counters, because it was believed they would be less expensive to procure, and more economical to maintain in the long term, than having organic sensor, EW, etc. suites integrated into every front line aircraft. It was also thought that systems could be easily moved around between different aircraft, meaning only a few pods would need to be purchased overall (of course, the proponents of podded systems tended to forget about little things like combat attrition). Needless to say, things didn't quite work out the way they thought they would.

Pods are almost as old as LGB's, the big step up with LANTIRN was podding the TFR, but nothing we didn't already know... Sniper was the next gen TGP side of the original LANTIRN. The Bone got Sniper in 2007 because half the time they were called to provide CAS they couldn't drop due to lack of secondary confirmation. Sniper fixed that and allowed it to lase for LGB's. I was part of the test accel and got to play with the flight hardware in the SIL, it was pretty good kit.

 

[aim9xray]

Quick question - why did they swap sides on the Sniper pylon mounting? (The Sniper & pylon were mounted on the left side of the fwd weapons bay on the test install on a/c 075 and on the right side on the production installation.)

 

[mkellytx]

Quick question - why did they swap sides on the Sniper pylon mounting? (The Sniper & pylon were mounted on the left side of the fwd weapons bay on the test install on a/c 075 and on the right side on the production installation.)

You're guess is as good as mine. It was always on the right side when I was around, off course it's been over 13 years since I was around, so things change.

 

[fightingirish]

Here a B-1A prototype with nuclear protection shields on the cockpit windows.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1363622465033953280

View: https://twitter.com/clemente3000/status/1363622465033953280?

 

[sferrin]

Heh. I'd read about the self-darkening ports like. .. back in the 80s but hadn't seen anything about them since then. They're like the auto-darken welding hoods you can get. Speaking of long-forgotten details (to me) does the B-1B have the button on the back of the nose gear that the crew can hit on their way to the cockpit that starts all four engines?

 

[Josh_TN]

I think the B-2 was originally designed with same. I’d love to know if the it was retained, though since the B-1 was denuclearized I can’t imagine the capability was maintained.

 

[quellish]

I think the B-2 was originally designed with same. I’d love to know if the it was retained, though since the B-1 was denuclearized I can’t imagine the capability was maintained.

They both do, I took photos of the big red buttons years ago.

 

[flateric]

I think the B-2 was originally designed with same. I’d love to know if the it was retained, though since the B-1 was denuclearized I can’t imagine the capability was maintained.