North American Rockwell / Boeing B-1 Lancer

[jsport]

Given the rapidityof AESA development cutting back on a radar may well be a pause for future advances.

Miniature munitions are happening but longer range and the requirement for deeper ground/steel/concrete penetration munitions will assure replacing the B-1+2 ,will take a long time.

 

[Scott Kenny]

The precision and reduced size of weapons would seem to make a large bomber unneeded.

Ignoring nuclear weapons, there's still a need for heavy bunker busters and long range missiles. Both of which are big and bulky, and usually need to be carried en masse.

With long-range missiles, B-52s with LRSO or AGM-158 carry 20 while best-guess for B-21 is 8. So you'd need 2.5x as many B-52s to carry the same load.

And of course there's the fact that B-21s carry half the load of a B-2. (Maybe 3/4, but heavy bunker busters only half.)

The B-52 will be around for what, another 30 years of it does finally get new engines and electronics.

Which means that we need to start planning the replacement in less than a decade.

 

[NMaude]

Part two of the Rockwell B-1 story has been uploaded onto YT:

The B-1 Lancer was a highly innovative design, capable of high-speed, low-altitude flight and potentially could have been a vital buttress to the United States Nuclear Triad. But as we discuss in this second part of the B-1 story, post the Vietnam War, military spending was very much at the forefront of turbulent economic times. New President Jimmy Carter had to make a crucial decision about the future of the B-1.​

Buy The Supersonic BONE: A Development and Operational History of the B-1 Bomber by Kenneth P. Katz at The Aviation Show Bookshop. 10% of each sale supports the show.
UK: https://uk.bookshop.org/a/16621/97813...https://www.youtube.com/redirect?ev...kshop.org/a/16621/9781399020299&v=PDsv29T6LjA
US: https://bookshop.org/a/111804/9781399...https://www.youtube.com/redirect?ev...shop.org/a/111804/9781399020299&v=PDsv29T6LjA

0:00 Introduction to the B-1 Bomber
0:37 Technical Features of the B-1
8:45 Initial Findings and Performance
12:08 Political Context and Controversy
14:55 The Rise of Cruise Missiles
16:04 The B-1's Uncertain Future
17:16 President Carter's Final Decision

 

[martinbayer]

No, I meant a new-production aircraft that was a supersonic cruise missile carrier, like the B-1A and Tu-160 were designed to be.

But yes, I do think that we're looking at retiring half the B-1s, then the B-2s, and then the rest of the B-1s.

So, some B-52s might actually become candidates for one hundred years of active service? And yes, this is an actual non-rhetorical question.

 

[Scott Kenny]

So, some B-52s might actually become candidates for one hundred years of active service? And yes, this is an actual non-rhetorical question.

Possibly, it'll be really close.

IIRC the life-limiting part is the upper wing skins, it isn't cost-effective to replace those huge panels. But they age out at 37,000 hours or so. There was a whole poster/image showing the life limits, IIRC it was posted in 2016. Average B-52 life at the time of the poster was ~21,000hrs. So, 16k hours life remaining. Average 350 hours a year means 45 years and a bit life remaining from 2016. Which brings us to 2061 or 62 for the last year of the Buff.

 

[NMaude]

Here is part 3 of the B-1 Story:

A new president brings a new future to the B-1 Lancer program as the Reagan rearmament program sees development of the B-1 accelerated. The concurrent development and production brings its own headaches as the Lancer matures in time for a twenty year period of constant operations over Afghanistan and Iraq.​

-----------------------------------------------------
0:00 The B-1's Resurrection
4:10 Reagan's Military Buildup Begins
6:15 Key Changes in B-1 Development
8:47 The B-1's Entry into Service
11:35 Concurrency and Its Challenges
15:53 The Cold War Ends: A New Mission?
18:31 The B-1's Transformation in the 1990s
20:25 The B-1's Role in Modern Conflicts
22:19 Adapting to a New Warfare