Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Boeing, BAE Systems Team for U.S. Air Force B-52 Stand-Off Jammer Proposal
Boeing.com ^ | August 29, 2005 | Staff

Posted on 08/29/2005 12:37:20 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last
To: antiRepublicrat

They plan to keep it in service until atleast 2040 I think. Probably longer


21 posted on 08/29/2005 3:57:17 PM PDT by Righty_McRight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ZOOKER
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.

Actually, I was under the impression (from other threads here at FR) that our other strategic bombers - the B-1B and B-2 - both had significantly larger weapons capacities than the B-52. Obviously they're both stealthier and the B-1B, at least, is much faster. The only reason I'd assume the B-52 is around is it must be much, much cheaper to operate than either of the more "modern" options.
22 posted on 08/29/2005 5:25:05 PM PDT by Turbopilot (Nothing in the above post is or should be construed as legal research, analysis, or advice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JRios1968
due to START treaty requirements

Why do we still comply with the terms of such Cold War treaties? The other party to the treaties no longer exists, and its successor state couldn't afford a large military buildup even if it wanted to. We're the only ones restrained by that nonsense.
23 posted on 08/29/2005 5:26:48 PM PDT by Turbopilot (Nothing in the above post is or should be construed as legal research, analysis, or advice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Turbopilot
The only reason I'd assume the B-52 is around is it must be much, much cheaper to operate than either of the more "modern" options.

Well we only built 100 B-1B's, and we only have 20 B-2's. There are about 94 B-52H's left. It is cheaper to continue using the B-52's than to build more B-1's or B-2's. The B-52 is still useful if we have air supremacy, and it is also configured to carry lots of Harpoon antiship missles, so it can be used as a long range antiship platform.

24 posted on 08/29/2005 5:54:59 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (France is an example of retrograde chordate evolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Prophet in the wilderness
Actually, what helped Boeing was the fact that in the late 1940's Boeing worked up its final B-52 proposal based on a then-new Pratt & Whitney turbojet engine, the J57. Rated at 10,000 lb. thrust, Boeing calculated the type of plane they could have powered by eight of these new engines and the result made a LOT of people in the Pentagon really happy because 1) they now had a plane that could cause most of the bombload of the B-36 Peacemaker but fly at B-47 speeds and 2) the plane's unrefuelled range made it possible to base the B-52 in the continental USA and fly all the way to the Soviet Union with only one mid-air refuelling, another thing really attractive to the Pentagon brass.
25 posted on 08/29/2005 9:31:44 PM PDT by RayChuang88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson