It looks strange from the outside. It feels downright unnatural the first time from inside. My first flight in the jump seat looking across the pilots body at the runway went against every piloting instinct I had from flying "normal" airplanes. It is pretty impressive though to watch the pilots look out the side and still scan the panel.I second that opinion, it is pretty weird to see a B-52 landing that way - seemingly all wrong, yet perfectly under control.
@TomcatViP @Trident, Love it! I was going to make some joke about normal pilots nodding their craniums vertically and BUFF pilots diagonally. The chameleon is brilliant, hats off gentlemen.I guess that's how you can easily differentiate a B-52 pilot from its copilot: the exaggerated aperture of their Left/Right eyes.
The final B-52 bomber rolled off a Boeing Wichita, Kansas, assembly line in June 1962. Now some 60 years later, that same factory will make parts for the new engines slated for installation on the wings of the still-flying B-52. Spirit AeroSystems, the company that now owns those one-time Boeing hangars, will make engine pylons and nacelles for the new engines, the company said in a statement. Each B-52 has eight engines, and the Air Force intends to replace 608 engines in all.
There are I think exactly eleven, at least one of which I think is beyond repair. But to maintain the current strength they have and will refurbish an airframe. I believe this happened as recently as 2-3 years ago.Thanks mate. I am pretty sure there are no more airframes in the boneyard fit for retrieval so I suppose that is that.
The March 2022 list is up on the website, 11 airframes in inventory:The regeneration center in Tucson actually has a list of available airframes; I think you can actually directly read from the Air Force itself how many are available rather than trusting the interwebs and I think it is something in the 10-12 range. I remember finding the site and seeing elven were in storage but one had been parted out or otherwise taken apart such that it could not be restored to flight, but I'm going from memory.
Who says the two roles are mutually exclusive? Back in the day SOJ needed new engines, new generators, CONNECT, MALD-J and the SOJ suite, all the enablers except SOJ are now on the way. The new EW proposed station really didn't do much to the offenders downstairs. Now, nothing about this has been said publicly, but it makes me wonder if that might make a come back quietly some time in the future.The monster Stand-Off Jammer (SOJ) EW suite? I'd guess not, since they will need the Js as standoff missile shooters instead.
Generally I agree with your take and for shorter wavelengths all of the above makes a whole lot of sense. Where I would disagree is that the BUFF will still stand off to launch MALD's of all flavors, JASSM's and hypersonic cruise missiles (with multi-SMO all three on the same mission). All will be back far enough from any AAD systems. The SO of SOJ is also stand off, the old thought was to have something that would target the longer wavelengths/EW radars that would need large, heavy pods that a Super Bug or UAV couldn't carry. Again the idea was to stand off like for shooting MALD/JASSM/CALCM back in my day.I get the impression the USAF has decided that it will use UAVs for jamming going forward, either small disposable types like MALD-J/X or whatever the "attritable" coponent of NGAD ends up being. In any case I can't see them employing B-52s for the role; it's a non-replaceable, limited fleet that they would want to keep out of HARM's way...
Did you sneak in a reference to a certain mishap there?I get the impression the USAF has decided that it will use UAVs for jamming going forward, either small disposable types like MALD-J/X or whatever the "attritable" coponent of NGAD ends up being. In any case I can't see them employing B-52s for the role; it's a non-replaceable, limited fleet that they would want to keep out of HARM's way...
I've seen the model hung from the ceiling at the Boeing Wichita plant, turns out there wasn't enough rudder authority for the 757 engines to work, outboard pod clearance was a problem as well. There was a proposal to go 757 engines inboard and CFM56's outboard, but that was a non-starter.Huh…I thought I had seen a model on TV of a B-52 with only four wider engines. Landings too tricky for that. This looks very doable.
As if the CG isn't already going back with the newer engines, unless of course there's a bunch of ballast...Of course you could strengthen or replace the B-52 aft fuselage, which would then up the cost [much] further (NRE + new structures validation + flight test program - what could possibly go wrong?). And then, the added weight would shift the C.G. aft, impacting weapons carriage and fuel loading and probably impacting payload...
Wow, eight birds for the CTF, damn. When we were there we just got balls 36 for CONNECT and SOJ. Life was good with two.
The BR725 has a mixer at the back of the duct, helps with noise and a bit with drag