Can the B-52 Reach 100?

[Robert Cooper]

Just reading a report that Boeing is working on a contract worth up to $11.9 billion for a wide range of upgrades to bring the 50-year old B-52 fleet into the 21st century. The way they are going the old lady could fly well into her 100th year!

Bob C

[obgraham]

Just sheer economics. I understand that it is far cheaper, per bomb tossed, to use a B52, compared to a B1 or a B2, or even Hornets/Strike Eagles.

Especially since now you just zip-tie the GPS device onto the old dumb-bomb.

[500N]

"Possibly Justin Bieber as Col. 'Bat' Guano...."

Anyone but him.

[Tankertrashnav]

Jack Nicholson, surely. Although at 76 he may present the make-up people with a bit of a problem!

Actually thinking about it he's perfect for General Jack D. Ripper

[reynoldsno1]

Tests of ILS started in 1929 - I'm sure we will see a 100 yr old aircraft flying down a 100 yr old navigation system .... somewhere in the world.

[fltlt]

Supposedly the word from Boeing is that "structural integrity/cycles" is not an issue.

[Robert Cooper]

According to GlobalSecurity, the limiting part for the economic service life of the B-52 is the upper wing surface, which will supposedly last between 32,500 and 37,500 hours. Using that as the limit, they anticipate that high-time airframes should start being retired in 2030, medium-time frames in 2040, and the required number of frames can no longer be sustained by 2044, though some of the lower-time frames could theoretically operate to 2050 or beyond. The last would theoretically be retired only 8 years short of the type flying for a century.

Bob C

[dat581]

Is it possible to transfer the upper wing surfaces from a B-52 sitting in the boneyard assuming the recycled skins have a worthwhile amount of life left?

[500N]

Re the "upper wing surface",

1. Can they not replace it ?

2. I wonder if they mothballed some aircraft and preserved them
and then restarted using them at a later date and as dat said about
those in the bone yard ?

[GreenKnight121]

Thanks to START there are few B-52s in the boneyard... most were brute-chopped into pieced and left for a specified amount of time so Sov/Russian satellites could photo them for confirmation.

Most of what is left are excess -H models... and it was those in worst shape/highest hours that were "retired" in previous years. These will have been stripped for parts for those in service.

[ORAC]

Pretty comprehensive paper looking at the various factors which apply.

THE B-52 CAN IT FLY UNTIL 2050? (http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA391712)

.....Consequently, without additional evidence to support further extensions in service life resulting from additional Structural Integrity Program studies, the B-52H Weapons System Master Plan, the Sustainability Roadmap, and from longer-term studies on future threats, this author does not support a B-52H bomber phase-out beyond 2030.

[Heathrow Harry]

It has to be a lot cheaper just o fit a completely new wing than go through the horrors of a replacement programme for the complete aircraft

[Martin the Martian]

Not too many years ago Rolls-Royce were proposing fitting RB.211s to the B-52; I'm still surprised that the USAF have not yet gone with four modern turbofans on the Stratofortress.

[MPN11]

Wouldn't be the same without the smoke trails on takeoff.

You're no fun! ;)

[Not_a_boffin]

It has to be a lot cheaper just o fit a completely new wing than go through the horrors of a replacement programme for the complete aircraft

MRA4 anyone?

[Heathrow Harry]

I wasn't suggesting giving the job to BAe :rolleyes::rolleyes:

[sandiego89]

"I wasn't suggesting giving the job to BAe"

Nice Harry :D

Surely the BAE fix would be to rip out everything that works, replace it with dubious modified pieced together gear- for only double the price and years of delay!

Long live the BUFF!

[BEagle]

Surely the BAE fix would be to rip out everything that works, replace it with dubious modified pieced together gear- for only double the price and years of delay!

You do 't bungling Baron Waste o' Space a disservice! Only double the price??

Quite why anyone, unless seduced by 't Baron's backhand bribes*, would trust BWoS to deliver anything on-time and/or on-budget is beyond me....

BAE Systems was at the centre of a Serious Fraud Office investigation into allegations that it made corrupt payments totalling £6bn to Saudi royals to secure the al-Yamamah arms deal.

The company was suspected of bribing ruling Saudis through a network of front companies and offshore slush funds.


And yet the Royal Navy is expecting 't Baron to deliver a couple of aircraft carriers which actually float??. Brave assumption that....:uhoh:




*alleged - but see http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/insight/article1206819.ece..... :rolleyes:

[SASless]

There is a Lanc that is getting a bit long in the Tooth....and i am sure that are DC-3's still out earning a living.

[Eclectic]

Pity the RAF can't buy a squadron as a cost effective way of delivering ordnance. And with strategic reach.
Stick one in Ascension to shut the Argies up.

[Argonautical]

I once asked a B-52 pilot at an airshow what he thought about the then proposal to re-engine them with 4 large turbofans. He was not impressed. His words were something like... losing 1 out 4 on take off would be real bad. Losing 1 out of 8 on take off, ain't so bad.

[maxred]

BAE Systems was at the centre of a Serious Fraud Office investigation into allegations that it made corrupt payments totalling £6bn to Saudi royals to secure the al-Yamamah arms deal.

The company was suspected of bribing ruling Saudis through a network of front companies and offshore slush funds.


Really stupid question time.

Did anyone actually serve some time for the alleged crimes and discrepancies? Or did they all just receive increased bonuses?

alleged but see https://thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/...06819.ece...

[Basil]

it made corrupt payments totalling £6bn to Saudi royals to secure the al-Yamamah arms deal.
When in Rome . . . .