Ken777
Topic Author
Posts: 9024
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Sat Oct 02, 2010 10:12 pm

Interesting article on upgrading the B-52s.

Quote:
The nation's fleet of nuclear-ready Boeing B-52 bombers, the bulk of which are here at Barksdale Air Force Base, will get almost $12 billion in upgrades and modernization over the next eight years, the Department of Defense announced this week.
Quote:
With no new bombers on the drawing boards, with a limited number of B-2 Spirit bombers and less-capable B-1 Lancers relegated to non-nuclear missions, the B-52 is expected to serve at least another 30 years under current Air Force planning.
http://www.shreveporttimes.com/artic...B-52-bombers-to-get-12B-in-support

The interesting part for me is that we can upgrade the B-52 to last another 30 years, but the KC-X program is so urgently needed.
 
dl767captain
Posts: 1206
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 8:51 am

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Sat Oct 02, 2010 10:14 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
ut the KC-X program is so urgently needed.

Ya I'm a little confused by this also
 
ebj1248650
Posts: 1517
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:17 am

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Sat Oct 02, 2010 10:58 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
With no new bombers on the drawing boards, with a limited number of B-2 Spirit bombers and less-capable B-1 Lancers relegated to non-nuclear missions, the B-52 is expected to serve at least another 30 years under current Air Force planning.

The B-52 is superior to the B-1B? In what way?
Dare to dream; dream big!
 
nomadd22
Posts: 1566
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:42 pm

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:27 am

Quoting ebj1248650 (Reply 2):
The B-52 is superior to the B-1B? In what way?

I assumed it meant less capable than B-2s.
Anon
 
silentbob
Posts: 1538
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2006 1:26 pm

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Sun Oct 03, 2010 4:50 am

Quoting ebj1248650 (Reply 2):

Payload would be my guess
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:25 pm

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
The interesting part for me is that we can upgrade the B-52 to last another 30 years, but the KC-X program is so urgently needed.
Quoting dl767captain (Reply 1):
Ya I'm a little confused by this also

I agree. There is no reason the KC-135Es cannot be upgraded to last for another 30+ years.

Quoting ebj1248650 (Reply 2):
The B-52 is superior to the B-1B? In what way?
Quoting nomadd22 (Reply 3):
I assumed it meant less capable than B-2s.
Quoting silentbob (Reply 4):
Payload would be my guess

No, they did mean the B-1B is less capable than either the B-52H or B-2A. All of the authencation and arming equipment for nukes on the Bones have been removed, making it an only 'conventional munitions' truck airplane. To put this equpment back into the Bone will cost billions as new equipment has to be designed and tested before it is approved. That process will take 10-15 years and by then all the B-1Bs may be retired.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 9869
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Sun Oct 03, 2010 5:08 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
No, they did mean the B-1B is less capable than either the B-52H

I thought the B1-B had a much greater bomb load than the B-52, with it's smaller crew, speed and lower radar cross section shouldn't it be the better bomber. I realise it's range isn't as great but isn't that why the airforce have people like you?
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6409
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:57 pm

Does somebody know what upgrades are going to be done on the Buffs?

$12 billion, that's roughly $140 million per plane. That's roughly the same as the price of an all new aircraft of similar size and payload/range capability, for instance an A340-300. (Maybe not a good comparison, I know that those two plane are optimized for very different tasks, but anyway - it does give a picture of the magnitude of this program).

It cannot be only "life extension". It has to be a lot more than that, something about new and advanced weapon systems.

Does it include re-engining? But even if it does include new engines, then there has to be a lot more than that.

Is it known to be classified information?
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 10997
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Mon Oct 04, 2010 10:11 am

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 7):
prebennorholm

As far as I know, it is for new avionics, new bomb/nav system, and ECM improvements. There is no reengine program approved for the B-52H.

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 6):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
No, they did mean the B-1B is less capable than either the B-52H

I thought the B1-B had a much greater bomb load than the B-52, with it's smaller crew, speed and lower radar cross section shouldn't it be the better bomber. I realise it's range isn't as great but isn't that why the airforce have people like you?

It does have a bigger bomb load than the B-52, however, most times one of the 3 bomb bays carries an extra fuel tank. Yes, the Bone does air refuel, but in the SIOP it uses a lot of tankers, about one more than the B-2, B-52, or FB-111 per mission.
 
nomadd22
Posts: 1566
Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:42 pm

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Mon Oct 04, 2010 11:37 am

Quoting prebennorholm (Reply 7):
$12 billion, that's roughly $140 million per plane. That's roughly the same as the price of an all new aircraft of similar size and payload/range capability, for instance an A340-300. (Maybe not a good comparison, I know that those two plane are optimized for very different tasks, but anyway - it does give a picture of the magnitude of this program).

That $12 billion is also for 8 years of support for the fleet. Not minor expense.
Anon
 
Flighty
Posts: 7651
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Mon Oct 04, 2010 1:30 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 5):
I agree. There is no reason the KC-135Es cannot be upgraded to last for another 30+ years.

But that wouldn't fit in with Boeing's Sales plans... I mean, the Pentagon. I mean, oh darn I confused them again.  
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Mon Oct 04, 2010 1:39 pm

Quoting Flighty (Reply 10):
But that wouldn't fit in with Boeing's Sales plans...


For some reason I can't open the referenced article. Does it say Boeing has already won this contract or is it out for bids?
 
TheSonntag
Posts: 4296
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 7:23 pm

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Mon Oct 04, 2010 11:24 pm

So 30 more years of TF-33 engines? Wonder if any of the designers of that engine is still alive...
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Tue Oct 05, 2010 1:21 am

Quoting silentbob (Reply 4):
Payload would be my guess
Quoting 474218 (Reply 11):
Does it say Boeing has already won this contract or is it out for bids?

Yeah, don't think anyone not named Boeing got a shot on this handout....

http://www.ktbs.com/news/25256420/detail.html

Quote:

B-52s To Get $12 Billion In Upgrades
The Pentagon has awarded a $12 billion contract to help modernize B-52 weapons systems over the next eight years.

The majority of the Air Force's fleet of the bombers are located at Barksdale Air Force Base.

The contract was awarded to Boeing.

The Air Force also announced that its cyberwarfare unit is now fully operational at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio.

Barksdale was a favorite to get cyber command before it went to Texas. Barksdale now has command over the nuclear arsenal.
 
RaginMav
Posts: 335
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 5:22 am

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Tue Oct 05, 2010 2:41 pm

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 13):
Barksdale was a favorite to get cyber command before it went to Texas. Barksdale now has command over the nuclear arsenal.

Completely off topic... Barksdale didn't get Cyber command? My home town Offutt AFB was in the running, and we were dissapointed to see it go to Barksdale... and now I find out it went elsewhere!?!?

Back on topic: The USAF will need a bomb truck for the next 30 years, no doubt, and I think it's a good thing they are keeping the BUFFs properly equipped. $140 million per plane for modernization and 8 years of support actually doesn't sound that bad to me. I can't believe I just said that!
 
bhill
Posts: 1299
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 8:28 am

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Thu Oct 07, 2010 6:46 pm

I think it's a great deal...keep in mind all of the training costs on a new airframe for both flightdeck and ground support staff.
Carpe Pices
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3939
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Thu Oct 07, 2010 8:33 pm

Quoting RaginMav (Reply 14):
Back on topic: The USAF will need a bomb truck for the next 30 years, no doubt, and I think it's a good thing they are keeping the BUFFs properly equipped. $140 million per plane for modernization and 8 years of support actually doesn't sound that bad to me. I can't believe I just said that!

I really wonder what the are doing for the upgrades? The C-5M upgrade costs less and includes new engines. Of course, the C-5 doesn't face the same hazards but that seems like a lot of cash for electronics only.
What the...?
 
cosmofly
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 3:36 pm

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Thu Oct 07, 2010 9:22 pm

Quoting RaginMav (Reply 14):
The USAF will need a bomb truck for the next 30 years

With total control of enemy air space, wouldn't it be cheaper to buy used 747 and modify them to do the job? Long term operating cost will also be cheaper.
 
Sinlock
Posts: 1631
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2000 12:55 am

RE: B-52 Bombers To Get $12B In Support

Fri Oct 08, 2010 12:31 pm

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 13):
Yeah, don't think anyone not named Boeing got a shot on this handout....

I'm sure people said the same thing about Lockheed when the C-130 AMP program was out for bid back in 2000....... It went to Boeing.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 8 guests