Author Topic: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress  (Read 8568 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline S.M.A.

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 132,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,515
USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« on: December 09, 2015, 13:38:17 »
ANOTHER B52 incarnation that will serve beyond the 2050s?

Source: Diplomat

Quote
The Case for the Centuryfortress: Defining the B-52J
By Col Mike “Starbaby” Pietrucha
December 09, 2015

It seems increasingly likely that there will be a B-52 flyby for the retirement of both the B-1 Lancer and the B-2 Spirit. The venerable bomber, which first flew in 1952, remains the primary component of the USAF’s bomber force for both nuclear and conventional missions. Lacking the stealth of the B-2 and the speed of the B-1, the B-52 remains a frontline combat aircraft because of its exceptional range, unmatched versatility, and flexible payload options. It is debatable whether today’s aviation industry could re-create an airplane with this essential mix of capabilities, but a fully modernized B-52, in combination with the new Long Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B), would provide the USAF with an asymmetrical advantage over both China and Russia that neither is likely to match. Far from being obsolete, the Stratofortress could well serve into the 2050s, making an updated bomber well worth the effort and expense, and ushering in the B-52J Centuryfortress – the 21st century bomber.

< Edited >

A modernized B-52 would improve on the airplane’s basic attributes to better meet these standoff requirements. The objectives of a whole-aircraft modernization would be to extend the service life of the aircraft and adjust to the advances made by adversary systems since the initial design. Under the J proposal, the refitted bombers would receive several upgrades:

    A replacement of the ageing TF-33 turbofans with modern, low-maintenance turbofans derived from regional jet designs
    Installation of a modern AESA radar to provide broad area maritime surveillance, ship identification, situational awareness and standoff weapons employment
    Weapons certification upgrade, including JDAM-ER, JASSM-ER, Standard Missile derivatives and antiship weapons
    Certification of NASA’s 25,000-lb. Aerospace Vehicle Pylon as an option in place of Heavy Stores Adapter Beam for Pegasus derivatives.
    Upgrade of communication systems to include Link-16, Iridium, BLOS communications and to provide the baseline for integration into Navy Integrated Fire Control (NIFC).
    Modernization of ESM and EA systems to provide both passive detection and self-projection jamming against the threats capable of addressing a stand-off platform
    Aircraft upgrades, including improved cooling, high-capacity electrical generation, glass cockpit, addition of an APU, removal of excess weight and RVSM compatibility
    Upper Wing Skin replacement (if necessary)

At the end of the conversion, all remaining B-52H could receive the refit, resulting in around 82 B-52J total aircraft inventory.
Our Country
--------------------------------
"A leader is best when people barely know he exists, when his work is done, his aim fulfilled, they will say: We did it ourselves."   - Lao Zi (老子)
-------------------------------------------
"Courage is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm."
- Winston Churchill

Online mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 422,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,216
    • The job.
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2015, 14:33:07 »
"Far from being obsolete, the Stratofortress could well serve into the 2050s, making an updated bomber well worth the effort and expense, and ushering in the B-52J Centuryfortress – the 21st century bomber."

I like the quote below.  :)

The long rifle was the great weapon of its day … today this B-52 is the long rifle of the air age.

-Gen Nathan Twining, March 18, 1954
Get on the bus. Take a ride with us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2lSGnPl-ww

Offline YZT580

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 16,330
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 488
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2015, 22:49:56 »
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33766644

Link is for an article in todays BBC magazine on the BUFF that is the americanized version of the buff

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 182,515
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,205
  • Freespeecher
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #3 on: December 10, 2015, 04:26:46 »
NBF has some more on the idea: http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/12/upgraded-b-52j-would-be-useful-partner.html

At this point, it almost would make sense to simply reverse engineer a B-52 and build brand new ones with these modifications already installed (although I sort of wonder if it wouldn't be better to replace the 8 engines with 4 larger turbofans from an actual heavy airliner like a 777 or 787 Dreamliner?). The B-52 is the ultimate example of early airpower theorists ideals of aircraft as flying artillery platforms, which is why it is still as relvant today as it was at the start of the Cold War.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline NinerSix

    is getting the itch to deploy.

  • Attitude re-adjuster
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 316,101
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,040
  • Car guy learning to drive
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #4 on: December 10, 2015, 10:42:55 »
NBF has some more on the idea: http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/12/upgraded-b-52j-would-be-useful-partner.html

At this point, it almost would make sense to simply reverse engineer a B-52 and build brand new ones with these modifications already installed (although I sort of wonder if it wouldn't be better to replace the 8 engines with 4 larger turbofans from an actual heavy airliner like a 777 or 787 Dreamliner?). The B-52 is the ultimate example of early airpower theorists ideals of aircraft as flying artillery platforms, which is why it is still as relvant today as it was at the start of the Cold War.

I just got a war boner at the thought of an AC-52 SuperSpooky, raining a cone of fiery death from 30k feet.

My apologies for the tangent.
The process is not the mission.

Online mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 422,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,216
    • The job.
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #5 on: December 10, 2015, 14:42:47 »
I just got a war boner at the thought of an AC-52 SuperSpooky, raining a cone of fiery death from 30k feet.

Reaches for Bombers B-52 DVD.  :)
Get on the bus. Take a ride with us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2lSGnPl-ww

Offline YZT580

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 16,330
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 488
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #6 on: December 10, 2015, 19:21:48 »
NBF has some more on the idea: http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/12/upgraded-b-52j-would-be-useful-partner.html

At this point, it almost would make sense to simply reverse engineer a B-52 and build brand new ones with these modifications already installed (although I sort of wonder if it wouldn't be better to replace the 8 engines with 4 larger turbofans from an actual heavy airliner like a 777 or 787 Dreamliner?).

You don't want to do that.  They would only screw it up trying to improve on it. 

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 54,430
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,558
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #7 on: August 01, 2016, 12:48:58 »
Plus a new type of non-nuke cruise missile for USAF bombers:

Quote
U.S. Bomber Force Preparing Computer-Killing HPM Cruise Missiles

The next time U.S. bombers are called into action against a major regional power, their open salvo of cruise missiles might include a new breed of microwave-energy weapon designed to systematically fry electronic devices such as computers, radars and radios.

Unlike the powerful “E-Bombs” that were used to electrically disable targets during the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and other types electromagnetic pulse weapons, these cruise missiles will travel at low altitudes along a predetermined path, firing down pulses of directed energy to wreak havoc on unshielded enemy electronics...

The technology has been in development for many years and was successfully used in 2012 during a live-fire demonstration that took out banks of computers at the Utah Test and Training Range.

Despite the obvious utility of this type of high-power microwave (HPM) weapon, the U.S. Air Force has been slow to adopt it as an operational capability, opting instead to keep it in the laboratory for further miniaturization and improvement.

The winds of change, however, are beginning to blow, as Raytheon’s Ktech group in Albuquerque, New Mexico, is put on contract to refurbish the remaining two unexpended test assets for additional “testing and training.” Now Air Force Global Strike Command says it is preparing for the inevitable introduction of this type of weaponry, which could be adopted as a niche tool over the coming 5-10 years.

The organization, responsible for training and equipping America’s 156-strong bomber force, says it is “pushing this technology through demonstrations and simulations to a level of maturity that will allow the transition to the warfighter.” An HPM cruise missile will likely be introduced first on the B-52, but the Boeing B-1B and Northrop Grumman B-2 “have not been ruled out as target platforms.” It is too early to establish an exact time line, “but we expect a fielded high-power microwave capability could be ready within the next 5-10 years,” it says..."
http://aviationweek.com/defense/us-bomber-force-preparing-computer-killing-hpm-cruise-missiles

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,110
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,831
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #8 on: August 01, 2016, 13:11:33 »




"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Online PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 877,005
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,184
    • Peacekeeper's Homepage
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #9 on: August 01, 2016, 13:54:39 »
Your stopwatch won't work unless its mechanical.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,110
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,831
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #10 on: August 01, 2016, 14:54:28 »


Happy?
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Oldgateboatdriver

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 91,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,779
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #11 on: August 01, 2016, 15:00:16 »
Allright. Now, Chris, why did you use a map of Stowe, Vermont?

Planning a little raid on the Von Trapp lodge, are you?

 [:D

Offline cupper

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 91,030
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,687
  • Nuke 'em 'til they glow, then wait until dark.
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #12 on: August 01, 2016, 15:26:00 »
So, the USAF is willing to keep a design from the late 40's flying, but keeps trying to kill the A-10. Guess the sexy looking ones get all the attention.  ;D
It's hard to win an argument against a smart person, it's damned near impossible against a stupid person.

There is no God, and life is just a myth.

"He who drinks, sleeps. He who sleeps, does not sin. He who does not sin, is holy. Therefore he who drinks, is holy."

Let's Go CAPS!

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,110
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,831
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #13 on: August 01, 2016, 17:15:37 »
Allright. Now, Chris, why did you use a map of Stowe, Vermont?

Planning a little raid on the Von Trapp lodge, are you?

 [:D

It is necessary to have a plan for every eventuality.  Just ask the Yanks. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Plan_Red
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,110
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,831
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #14 on: August 01, 2016, 17:23:59 »
So, the USAF is willing to keep a design from the late 40's flying, but keeps trying to kill the A-10. Guess the sexy looking ones get all the attention.  ;D

Same era as the B52



and less than 10 years later



But I can go you one better:



Built 4000 years ago on a design that was already in use 6000 years ago and is still, in its elements in use today.



Sometimes the function defines the form.

"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline cupper

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 91,030
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,687
  • Nuke 'em 'til they glow, then wait until dark.
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #15 on: August 01, 2016, 17:55:47 »
Just want to point out that 3 of the 4 items were Army equipment, which I find sexy. [:D
It's hard to win an argument against a smart person, it's damned near impossible against a stupid person.

There is no God, and life is just a myth.

"He who drinks, sleeps. He who sleeps, does not sin. He who does not sin, is holy. Therefore he who drinks, is holy."

Let's Go CAPS!

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 54,430
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,558
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #16 on: October 04, 2016, 12:30:38 »
Over half-century BUFF back:

Quote
USAF returns mothballed B-52 bomber to service

The US Air Force (USAF) has returned a Boeing B-52H Stratofortress strategic bomber aircraft to service that had been mothballed in the 'boneyard' at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base (AFB) in Arizona.

It took approximately 45,000 man-hours to restore 'Ghost Rider' to full operating capability after six years in the boneyard. (US Air Force)It took approximately 45,000 man-hours to restore 'Ghost Rider' to full operating capability after six years in the boneyard. (US Air Force)

The 55-year old aircraft, known as 'Ghost Rider' (tail number 61-007), was flown to its operating base at Minot in North Dakota on 27 September following a 19-month refurbishment by the 76th Aircraft Maintenance Group at Tinker Air Force Base (AFB) in Oklahoma.

With approximately 45,000 man-hours having gone into restoring the aircraft to full operating capability, 'Ghost Rider' will now join the 5th Bomb Wing of the Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC)...

At the height of its strength, the USAF B-52 forces comprised some 744 aircraft, although this number has been cut to just 76 (with 75 now in operation) in accordance with the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with Russia.
http://www.janes.com/article/64266/usaf-returns-mothballed-b-52-bomber-to-service




Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 54,430
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,558
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #17 on: October 04, 2016, 12:41:59 »
More forevering:

Quote
Outgoing U.S. Bomber Chief Sees Big Payoff In B-52 Engine Replacement
http://aviationweek.com/defense/outgoing-us-bomber-chief-sees-big-payoff-b-52-engine-replacement

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Online mariomike

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 422,155
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,216
    • The job.
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #18 on: October 04, 2016, 13:31:14 »
So lethal, yet so beautiful!

Great take-off. But, landing not so good...

Gets interesting at the 1:20 mark,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAWwe474YHk


« Last Edit: October 04, 2016, 14:48:20 by mariomike »
Get on the bus. Take a ride with us.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2lSGnPl-ww

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,110
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,831
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #19 on: October 04, 2016, 19:07:30 »
More forevering:

Mark
Ottawa

I see, amongst all the proposals for re-engining and upgrading the controls at least one call of "if it ain't broke don't fix it".

Those old engines and mechanical controls have seen generations of tubes, transistors, integrated circuits, PLCs and avionics come and go.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline jollyjacktar

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 131,032
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,450
  • My uncle F/Sgt W.H.S. Buckwell KIA 14/05/43 22YOA
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #20 on: October 04, 2016, 21:29:35 »
So lethal, yet so beautiful!

Great take-off. But, landing not so good...

Gets interesting at the 1:20 mark,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAWwe474YHk

Oh dear.  I feel for the owner...
I'm just like the CAF, I seem to have retention issues.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 54,430
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,558
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #21 on: February 06, 2017, 21:08:37 »
Re-engined after all? Eight not four?

Quote
US Air Force glides toward B-52 engine replacement plan

After years of deliberation over whether to buy new engines for the decades-old B-52 bombers, Air Force officials say they are closer than ever to making a decision.

For the past two years, Air Force Global Strike Command has worked with engine manufacturers and financial institutions to put together a business case assessment for replacing the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress’s eight Pratt & Whitney TF33 engines. That assessment shows that an initial investment in new propulsion systems can save maintenance and fuel costs in the long run, but the Air Force’s acquisition wing is still working on the best way to finance the effort, said James Noetzel, deputy chief of the B-52 weapon system team.

“I think we’re farther along than we’ve ever been in any other re-engine effort. I believe it shows a positive business case,” Noetzel said in a January interview. “The devil is in the details in getting all of these tribes lined up and agreeing to do it,” he added, referring to the Air Force, engine makers and financial institutions...

The service’s latest unfunded requirements list for fiscal year 2016 reveals the re-engining effort has become a bigger priority, with $10 million added for a B-52 risk-reduction study.

“I think this year will be the point of some decisions on how or if the program would go forward,” said Scot Oathout, Boeing’s director of bomber programs. “I think it all hinges on, in these fiscally challenging times, can we afford a program like this or can you come up with different ways of financing or paying for the program? So I think those discussions are going to be coming to a head during this year.”

The Air Force’s current thinking is to replace the TF33 with eight modern regional jet engines that hew closely to the size, weight and thrust of the original [CF-34? http://www.geaviation.com/commercial/engines/cf34/ h/t Steve Daly], thus minimizing any structural redesign to the B-52’s wings, Noetzel said. The service has issued two requests for information (RFI) to engine manufacturers, gleaning performance and technical information about potential options, which it then fed into its assessment...
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/us-air-force-glides-toward-b-52-engine-replacement-plan

Mark
Ottawa
 
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 185,110
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,831
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #22 on: February 08, 2017, 13:07:14 »
B52 - Arsenal Plane with Lasers.....

http://www.scout.com/military/warrior/story/1753354-air-force-laser-weapons-to-defend-b-52-bomber

Quote
Air Force Laser Weapons to Defend B-52 Bomber
Kris Osborn

Possibly using an externally-mounted POD with sufficient transportable electrical power, the Air Force Research Lab is already working on experimental demonstrator laser weapons able to bolt-on to an aircraft

Air Force scientists are working to arm the B-52 with defensive laser weapons able to incinerate attacking air-to-air or air-to-ground missile attack.

Offensive and defensive laser weapons for Air Force fighter jets and large cargo aircraft have been in development for several years now. However, the Air Force Research Lab has recently embarked upon a special five-year effort, called the SHIELD program, aimed at creating sufficient on-board power, optics and high-energy lasers able to defend large platforms such as a B-52 bomber.

“You can take out the target if you put the laser on the attacking weapon for a long enough period of time,” Air Force Chief Scientist Greg Zacharias told Scout Warrior in an exclusive interview.
Possibly using an externally-mounted POD with sufficient transportable electrical power, the AFRL is already working on experimental demonstrator weapons able to bolt-on to an aircraft, Zacharias added.

Given that an external POD would add shapes to the fuselage which would make an aircraft likely to be vulnerable to enemy air defense radar systems, the bolt-on defensive laser would not be expected to work on a stealthy platform, he explained.

However, a heavily armed B-52, as a large 1960s-era target, would perhaps best benefit from an ability to defend itself from the air; such a technology would indeed be relevant and potentially useful to the Air Force, as the service is now immersed in a series of high-tech upgrades for the B-52 so that it can continue to serve for decades to come. 


Defending a B-52 could becoming increasing important in years to come if some kind of reconfigured B-52 is used as the Pentagon’s emerging Arsenal Plane or “flying bomb truck.”....
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 86,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,593
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #23 on: February 08, 2017, 13:23:13 »
Frankly I would like the primary focus to be on delivering alot of cruise missiles. They can carry 20 ALCM or 8 Harpoon missiles,so the PRC might see these in the Pacific.

Offline CBH99

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 17,265
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 546
Re: USAF B52J "Century" Fortress
« Reply #24 on: February 08, 2017, 15:28:45 »
What are people's thoughts on simply building X number of new B-52's?

Instead of constantly upgrading the older platforms with new engines, new wings, structural programs, avionics upgrades, etc etc....why not just build a batch of new-build B-52's?

They wouldn't be all that expensive to build, especially compared to the F-35, B-2, etc.  And could potentially even be built using commercial means.  (Just my mind wandering here about possibilities)
Fortune Favours the Bold...and the Smart.

Wouldn't it be nice to have some Boondock Saints kicking around?