Boeing, BAE Systems Team for U.S. Air Force B-52 Stand-Off Jammer Proposal

Boeing.com ^ | August 29, 2005 | Staff

[Paleo Conservative]

If you want on or off my aerospace ping list, please contact me by Freep mail not by posting to this thread.

[antiRepublicrat]

Installed in 2012? Hasn't the B-52 set a world record for longest airplane in continuous military service yet? At this rate, it could go for 100 years total.

[Yo-Yo]

Why turn a BUFF into a standoff jammer? There must be many other more cost effective airframes to do this with, including de-mothballing the EF-111A.

[whd23]

BAE bump

[Paleo Conservative]

Why turn a BUFF into a standoff jammer? There must be many other more cost effective airframes to do this with, including de-mothballing the EF-111A.

They don't have the range of the B-52. These jamming aircraft in some cases will fly along side B-52 strik missions. By having an EB-52H, the flight characteristics of the jamming plane will be the same as for the bombers so there won't be a problem with it being too fast or too slow and not being able to stay with the bombers. Too bad the USAF won't take some B-52G's restore them to flying condition, reengine them, and put the jamming electronics in them.

[ZOOKER]

I tend to agree. The B-52 is slow and leaves a huge radar signature. Its engines are obsolete, inefficient and no longer in production. Replacement engines must be scavenged from the Arizona desert and rebuilt, and how many are left?

Its saving grace is its huge weapons bay - it can lay a carpet of dumb bombs or loose an armada of stand-off missiles. If we don't need it for that, we don't need it at all anymore.

The AF has several EW aircraft in inventory, why not use them?

[Salgak]

Why ? Power and "legs". With the Bomb Bay freed up, as well as a sizeable part of the Bomb/Nav compartment, you can stuff a LOT of ECM gear. And as is today, the B-52 is capable of putting out over a megawatt of jamming power. Imagine what it could do with upgrades. . .

Now, add the huge fuel tanks of a -52 . . .and you have a standoff jammer you can send ANYWHERE on the planet from a US Base. . .non-stop.

Hello, EB-52 "Megafortress". . . .

Now, if they'd only put a real toilet in the jet. . . they've been PROMISING it since 1956. . . .

[Paleo Conservative]

I tend to agree. The B-52 is slow and leaves a huge radar signature. Its engines are obsolete, inefficient and no longer in production. Replacement engines must be scavenged from the Arizona desert and rebuilt, and how many are left?

There are huge numbers of TF-33 turbofan engines in storage. Besides the B-52H, they are used on the KC-135E and the C-141. Since the C-141's are rapidly being decommissioned, there are lots of engines available.

[Sparky1776]

The B-52 is already a great standoff jammer (if need be).

[ryan71]

B-52 Airframes should be used for bombing.

I thought a "stand off jammer" (SOJ), did not go in with the strike package. It loiters at a safer distance, detects and evaluates radar threats then uses AECM against those threats.

I'm surprised Boeing is not looking at a 707, 737, etc. airframe. That would give the Air Force the equipment capacity, range, and longevity they need.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

Here is a nickname for ( SOJ ) Stand - O - Jamma (or ) Stand - O - Jammer ( weapons, radar and communications jammer ).

[Paleo Conservative]

B-52 Airframes should be used for bombing.

I thought a "stand off jammer" (SOJ), did not go in with the strike package. It loiters at a safer distance, detects and evaluates radar threats then uses AECM against those threats.

But going to and from the target area, they need to be able to stay with the bombers. The 767 is a slower plane than the B-52. It's a lot cheaper to convert a B-52 that's already paid for to use as a jammer than to buy a new commercial airframe. If the number of airframes available for bombing duties is a problem, some of the B-52G's could be refurbished to serve as as electronic warfare platforms.

[ryan71]

If they go through the trouble (and expense) of refurbishing a B-52, it needs to carry bombs. Would you refurbish an Iowa BB to be an oiler?

I don't believe a B-52 is faster than a com air. Is a B-52 supersonic? Nope.

Besides, a SOJ does not have to be stationed with or fly wing tip to wing tip with the bomber.

[JRios1968]

Too bad the USAF won't take some B-52G's restore them to flying condition, reengine them, and put the jamming electronics in them.

Unfortunately, the G-models that still survive have a date with the Davis-Monthan AFB "aircraft chopper", due to START treaty requirements.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

It means, it will be in operational service in 2012 on all of the B-52s ( but, we can only guess, that if they can get their hands on a few operational units, they will use them as soon as they can if they were to go to war ) , and yes, the B-52 has the longest continuous service life of any airplane in the world.
The air force expects to keep them in service until 2045.
I was just watching a program about the B-52 last week on the History Channel on ( Modern Marvels ) it's amazing aircraft, and history.
Boeing meet with a Air force representative in ( I think, 1948 or 49 ) and the air force representative was not happy with the proposal that Boeing first offered.
The Air force representative told them they had just 2 days to come us with some kind of proposal that the US military and air force wanted and was happy with.
So the 4 man team from Boeing rented a hotel room, and spent 48 hours coming up with some kind of proposal.
While 2 men from the Boeing team sat in the hotel room working on the drawings for the new heavy bomber, they didn't notice that the other 2 men went out some were and then came back with some balsa wood from a hobby shop near by and started to weddle the balsa wood into some kind of form of a plane ( in the show ( Modern Marvels ) they said the man who made who sculpted planes out of wood was the best in the world at the time ).
They managed to come of with a design of a very heavy bomber for the US air force that they were happy with.
It is a very interesting story how they ( Boeing ) came us with the design of the B-52.

[Paleo Conservative]

If they go through the trouble (and expense) of refurbishing a B-52, it needs to carry bombs.

Many of the B-52H's are being modified to drop JDAM's. With the ability to destroy large numbers of targets with one sortie, the effectiveness of each bomber is much greater than it was 10-15 years ago. The airframes are expected to last till at least 2045, and the cost to configure already paid for B-52's is a lot less than buying a new airframe for the mission.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

And the man who they interviewed on Modern Marvels said, that the B-52 was one ( if not , THE ONE ) of the most cost effective, and best value programs the US tax payers got for their money, the best Bang for the Buck.

[Northern Yankee]

tend to agree. The B-52 is slow and leaves a huge radar signature. Its engines are obsolete, inefficient and no longer in production.

They sure look intimidating when they're coming at you.

Served at K.I. Sawyer back in the 70's, and we loved to watch them do touch and goes.

The sound of Freedom never sounded better!

[Zuben Elgenubi]

Good link to the TR-33 Here.

Didn't know it's related to the famous J57.