Military Review

B-52 Stratofortress will last 100 for years

63
The US Air Force intends to upgrade the strategic bombers B-52 Stratofortress and extend their service life to 2050 year, reports The Drive.




Thus, the B-52 will be the first in stories by plane, whose lifespan would be nearly a century - the first time he took to the air in 1952.

The modification has already received the designation B-52J, but the main work is still to come, said Lance Reynolds, program manager for the life cycle of bombers.

The main innovation in the upgraded aircraft will be jet turbines. They are more economical than the previous ones by 20% and are capable of delivering at least 400 kilovoltampers to the on-board electrical grid to power the digital machine control system. Work will be carried out on 60 bombers.

Another long-felt need is a “glass” cockpit for pilots. Today, the crew has to collect information from numerous dials. The exceptions are two small multifunctional monitors installed in the cockpit over the past decade. Replacing analog devices will reduce the burden on pilots, improve on-board system diagnostics, information exchange, navigation and guidance.

May be upgraded and airborne protection complexes. Another innovation could be a “smart” bomber for placement in the internal compartments of the aircraft of different types of high-precision weapons.
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com
63 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Dormidont
    Dormidont 29 August 2018 13: 56
    -1
    Let's hope that not only a hundred years, but years do not fly by, and everyone will be wrapped up
  2. Yrec
    Yrec 29 August 2018 13: 58
    -6
    Complete heresy. I'm afraid the States themselves will not survive until 2050, not like their heroin carriers.
    1. Jack O'Neill
      Jack O'Neill 29 August 2018 13: 59
      +7
      And what / who threatens the States that you question their existence before 2050-g?
      1. Fungus
        Fungus 29 August 2018 14: 03
        -8
        Everything can be. May not survive until 2050. You never know what. Tsunami, volcano, earthquake, war, etc.
        1. Jack O'Neill
          Jack O'Neill 29 August 2018 14: 06
          +10
          This is from the "if only, if only" level. wink
          1. Ros 56
            Ros 56 29 August 2018 15: 41
            -2
            This is from the "if only, if only"

            No, not like that. The namesake, do you remember Putin what kind of pike you caught, and so on the principle - by the pike command, according to my desire, climb the states to your island and do not shine. bully
      2. sabakina
        sabakina 29 August 2018 15: 22
        -1
        Quote: Jack O'Neill
        А what / who is threatening to the statesWhat do you question the existence of them until 2050?

        Scientists say Yollukstone. No, did not hear?
      3. Ezekiel 25-17
        Ezekiel 25-17 29 August 2018 16: 21
        -2
        States threaten themselves and will die from themselves ...
    2. Random
      Random 29 August 2018 14: 57
      +6
      Quote: Yrec
      the States themselves will not survive until 2050, not like their heroin carriers.

      Based on "what" did you make such a .. "mind-blowing conclusion"? belay
      Inspired by the slogan from "distant childhood" about ... "the imminent collapse of capitalism"? wassat
      1. bessmertniy
        bessmertniy 29 August 2018 15: 21
        -2
        America faces a color revolution. Having trained on such revolutions around the world, they can quite arrange an exemplary at home. wassat
  3. Jack O'Neill
    Jack O'Neill 29 August 2018 13: 58
    +9
    Veteran pensioner still serve.
    This, by the way, suggests that the machine is very successful. 100 years in the service!
    In 2050, from the original B-52, only the airframe and name will remain.))
    1. Fungus
      Fungus 29 August 2018 14: 01
      -12
      The machine just did not succeed.
      1. Jack O'Neill
        Jack O'Neill 29 August 2018 14: 10
        +8
        Extending the service life suggests otherwise.
        It's like the old and kind grandfather M2, who is fighting 30's!
        1. dzvero
          dzvero 29 August 2018 15: 17
          +6
          "In the absence of a stamp, they write in simple".
          The B-52 (like the Tu-95) is the pinnacle of the development of subsonic bombers of the late 40s using a new generation of engines. By the way, it is very rare to get successful cars at the intersection of generations. The USA, like the USSR, had much better models ... but ... it turned out like the T-34 - inferior in reliability, quality of production, equipment, etc. of the German four (and not only), in aggregate recognized as the best WWII tank. So with the B-52 - more advanced, faster, etc. peers have dropped out of the distance, and he is "more alive than all living things" in terms of the totality of parameters. So Gribok is right - the plane was not very successful and no one originally planned to keep it in service for 100 years. As well as M2 - how many programs there were, but in any way it was impossible to create a new machine gun that surpassed Browning in all respects.
          The possibility of modernization in the 21st century is the merit of the American aircraft design school of those times. And now ... Indians write software, Mexicans work on the assembly under the supervision of Chinese engineers, and designers - a hodgepodge from around the world. And as a result, Zumwalt does not go, the F-22 and F-35 pilots are suffocating, and until recently the aircraft themselves could not shoot a cannon and launch rockets ... A systemic crisis, chtoli?
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 30 August 2018 01: 10
            0
            "And as a result, the zumwalt does not go, the pilots of the F-22 and F-35 suffocate" ////
            ---
            You only read the news of 3 years ago?
            Two Zumvolts at sea, the pilots no longer choke - they solved the problem.
            Every year - a new Burke and a new submarine.
  4. Victor_B
    Victor_B 29 August 2018 14: 14
    +6
    They will fly with our TU-95MS.
    Ours are also being modernized.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 29 August 2018 14: 28
      +7
      Quote: Victor_B
      They will fly with our TU-95MS.
      Ours are also being modernized.

      Our younger: the release of the new B-52 was discontinued 20 years before start serial production of Tu-95MS.
      1. bobba94
        bobba94 29 August 2018 21: 51
        -1
        They are the same age. The difference is about 3-4 years.
  5. Elephant
    Elephant 29 August 2018 14: 34
    +3
    20 percent will be more economical new engines. That's cool! We would have such indicators for the modernization of aircraft.
    1. igorbrsv
      igorbrsv 29 August 2018 14: 40
      0
      And that it prevented him from flying somewhere.
      1. Random
        Random 29 August 2018 15: 05
        +4
        Quote: igorbrsv
        And that it prevented him from flying somewhere.

        The presence of more economical engines allows you to take less fuel and more B / C - this is the axiom of "long aviation" soldier Moreover, when the B-52 and Tu-95ms need to take a lot, they hang everything on .. "hedgehogs", and this is an increase in KLS and as a result, a decrease in the tactical radius of action soldier
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 29 August 2018 15: 27
          +4
          Quote: Random
          The presence of more economical engines allows you to take less fuel and more B / C - this is the axiom of "long aviation"

          In normal equipment, yes. And in the strategic everything depends only on the capacity of the revolver and the places on the pylons.
          Quote: Random
          Moreover, when the B-52 and Tu-95ms need to take a lot, they hang everything on .. "hedgehogs", and this is an increase in KLS and as a result, a decrease in the tactical radius of action

          And they have nowhere to go - more than nests on the revolver, rockets in the bomb bay can not be crammed. smile
          1. Random
            Random 29 August 2018 15: 44
            +1
            Quote: Alexey RA
            In normal equipment, yes. And in the strategic everything depends only on the capacity of the revolver and the places on the pylons.

            In ANY equipment wink in any, but with a special warhead it will fly even further than on "old engines" wink
            Although the B-52 already has "opportunities within reach" and so ... above all praise wink -On the night of January 16-17, 1991, US Navy aircraft made the longest sortie in the history of aviation.
            The Americans try to use any military operation as a kind of exercise. Desert Storm was no exception in this regard.
            B-52 raids on Iraq from European or Arab air bases from a military point are not something outstanding, another thing is a raid from an aerodrome located on the continental United States. Seven B-52G bombers from 596 Squadron, 2nd Bomber Wing took off from Burksdale AFB. Louisiana. After 17 hours of flight, the Boeing crews fired 31 AGM-86C cruise missiles at eight targets located in the Mosul area. All vehicles returned safely to Barksdale, the sortie lasted 34 hours. soldier
            Quote: Alexey RA
            And they have nowhere to go - more than jacks on a revolver, rockets in the bomb bay can not be crammed

            So everywhere and everywhere and on all types, and especially on those where there is structurally no r / o or there is, but ... "masenky" laughing drinks soldier
        2. sabakina
          sabakina 29 August 2018 15: 27
          -1
          They were already trying to get into it engines from a Boeing. Nifiga did not work.
          1. Random
            Random 29 August 2018 17: 40
            0
            Quote: sabakina
            They were already trying to get into it engines from a Boeing. Nifiga failed

            We tried the same "vpendyurt" in the Tu-22M3 engines NK-32, series 2, and what ....? wink
  6. seregatara1969
    seregatara1969 29 August 2018 14: 37
    +4
    to power the "digital" generator for 400 kW - such digital consumers are not weak
  7. _Kotegpushisteg_
    _Kotegpushisteg_ 29 August 2018 14: 41
    -3
    evil s save taxpayer money good stupid people don’t understand that they’ll fall apart soon and we’ll overload them as a result of a cunning multi-step bully
  8. san4es
    san4es 29 August 2018 14: 45
    +7
    Another innovation could be a "smart" bombing for placement in the internal compartments of the aircraft of various types of precision weapons.
    Barksdale’s 2nd Ammunition Squadron Nuclear Assault Team is preparing a common strategic Rotary Launcher (CSRL) for the B-52 bomber ...
    1. sabakina
      sabakina 29 August 2018 15: 45
      +1
      Sanya. pruvet! As I understand it, 9 CDs on one drum. Or will there be two drums? Will the glider pull?
      1. san4es
        san4es 29 August 2018 16: 06
        +5
        Quote: sabakina
        ... 9 CD on one drum. Or will there be two drums? Will the glider pull?

        hi ... there will be them 10! laughing ... I don’t know Slav, the reconnaissance group will return - I’ll write soldier

        1. GibSoN
          GibSoN 29 August 2018 22: 16
          +1
          It flies on the video almost like a fighter .. For all my life, I have never seen live that IL-76 would give such rolls ...
          1. Svetlana
            Svetlana 30 August 2018 11: 55
            +1
            USAF 61-0026: Moments Before Crash
            replenished ..
          2. Random
            Random 30 August 2018 15: 35
            0
            Quote: GibSoN
            The video flies almost like a fighter.

            There is such a science ... aerodynamics, which explains, on the basis of what laws and physical principles, an apparatus that is heavier than air can take off from the earth and fly wink
            And RLE testers "write" ... with sweat and blood, and any "thoughtless hussarship" or desire to "show something", as a rule, ends like this ... crying

            Quote: GibSoN
            For all my life, I have never seen live that IL-76 would give such rolls ...

            Have you been to the "river"? wink soldier
  9. Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 29 August 2018 14: 51
    0
    And then the body will pull? How is metal fatigue resistance? laughing tongue wassat
  10. JD1979
    JD1979 29 August 2018 14: 57
    0
    A logical and only correct decision, based on the fact that this is the only carrier-weapon system to which the term can be applied: strategic. And which is in a position to complete the assigned tasks. The B-1B and B-2 are simply very long-range aircraft, without the ability to carry strategic weapons, although with the introduction of the LRASM-ER the situation has improved slightly. And there are no prospects for having a new strategic system either. For some reason, the developers are not able to make working machines, without the addition of "limited combat capability" and without the need to finish them for 10-15 years.
    1. Random
      Random 29 August 2018 15: 18
      0
      Quote: JD1979
      B-1B

      Quote: JD1979
      just planes with a very long range, without the ability to carry strategic weapons

      Sorry, but how is it? belay request
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 29 August 2018 15: 29
      +2
      Quote: JD1979
      B-1B and B-2, just very long-range aircraft, without the ability to carry strategic weapons

      Well ... this couple can carry nuclear bombs. laughing
      In general, of course, the funny picture is that the expensive invisible and supersonic missile carrier cannot be carried by strategic ALCMs.
    3. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 29 August 2018 15: 32
      0
      "B-2, just planes with a very long range, without the ability to carry strategic weapons," ////
      ----
      They themselves are a strategic weapon. Why strategic weapons still have strategic weapons?
      1. JD1979
        JD1979 29 August 2018 15: 37
        -1
        Quote: voyaka uh
        They themselves are a strategic weapon. Why strategic weapons still have strategic weapons?

        Ahahahahah))) the case when "did not shmogla". B-2 flew to the target .... and screaming BANZAI !! fell on it))) a one-time bomb for 2 lard of greens))).
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 29 August 2018 15: 48
          +1
          He has dozens of precision bombs in his belly. Dumped and returned to his native Texas.
          1. JD1979
            JD1979 29 August 2018 16: 06
            -1
            He has tens of tons of expensive garbage in his belly, which will arrange a grandiose fireworks display at the site of the fall of this disposable product. For those who are not in the subject. This plane is absolutely useless as a "beaver" and the loss of even one such plane threatens to drop the US reputation to the level of the Mariana Trench. No one will allow him to dump his cargo, especially when trying to use it against a country that has an adequate air defense system. Or do you think it was created to bomb the Bedouins in the desert? I have the same situation with the B-1B - there is an airplane, but there are no weapons other than bombs (with one exception), or do you think the p * ndos from a good life suddenly rushed to convert it into a low-altitude one and stuff it with electronic warfare systems? Strategists are only carriers of weapons and only half of the system, the second half is actually the wearable load, without which the aircraft has only strategic range. Probably in the USSR and present-day Russia, they sit in the design bureau of id * ots and make useless RCs that allow them to save the plane, launching the "cargo" far beyond the border of possible interception by the air defense system.
            .... did not know that in one of the most warring countries and one of the most combat-ready armies there are such ignoramuses ... in the era of the open Internet ....
            1. Random
              Random 29 August 2018 17: 23
              0
              Quote: JD1979
              This is the same situation with B-1B - there is an airplane, but there are no weapons except bombs

              What "planet" are you from? or Appeared? belay
              Quote: JD1979
              Probably in the USSR and present-day Russia, they sit in the design bureau of id * ots and make useless RCs that allow them to save the aircraft, launching the "cargo" far beyond the border of possible interception by the air defense system.

              Axes are also launched ... "far beyond the possible interception by an air defense system." and WHAT? wink
              Only Toporov is several dozens of times more than the X-101, and the carriers are the same? wassat
              Quote: JD1979
              This plane is absolutely useless as a "beaver" and the loss of even one such plane threatens to drop the US reputation to the level of the Mariana Trench

              in August 2008 we "lost" the Tu-22M3 and WH? Peshkov was shot down on a Su-24M in Syria, who flew on a DB on an airplane with practically no BKO (by the way, to this day) and WH ... who and where lost what reputation? request
              Quote: JD1979
              in the era of the open Internet ....

              Ah ... everything is clear ... keep up the good work ... wassat
              1. NN52
                NN52 29 August 2018 17: 57
                +1
                Sergei
                And where, for comparison, do you mention the Tu 22M shot down in Georgia, and even more so Peshkova?
                And it seems that at that stage in Syria and at the height at which Su 24 went and go, from whom did he have to put KO? And most importantly, where is this farm to stick everything to him? Could you tell?
                And reputational losses for amers, this is how important it is for them ....

                And I think that when 1B was taken out of the strategists, he became just an expensive toy that you need to stick somewhere ...
                1. Random
                  Random 29 August 2018 18: 06
                  0
                  Quote: NN52
                  And here, for comparison, you mention the Tu 22M shot down in Georgia,

                  Exclusively in the context of the fact that the Tu-22M3 is a plane as a bomber, it IS USELESS, except that it is against the Papuans.
                  And Peshkova, the kingdom of heaven to him, recalled in aggregate that he would show the SILENCE OF the leaders who commanded the aviation groups soldier
                  On any plane or helicopter, if he is a military man, then a priori he must have a BKO. Here they have it ... and here we have .... only that ... crying
                  And stick it into the Containers .. on the inverter just 2 suspension nodes (well, like on MR-ke) wink
                  Quote: NN52
                  And reputational losses for amers, this is how important it is for them ..

                  And here I am .. "naive" all waiting for us to have this! drinks
                  1. NN52
                    NN52 29 August 2018 19: 02
                    +3
                    Sergei
                    Did you fly it? (we will not be attached to modifications ..) Why such a dislike for this type?
                    And recent news about launches of the Kyrgyz Republic with carcasses? And the modernization that has begun? (There is no need to talk about DZ, neither you nor I know for sure ...)
                    And what, amers all sides have KO?
                    And Peshkova in total, pzhl for the future, you don’t need to remember that (I’m surprised by this slang from you ..). He is an example of heroism and self-sacrifice (already on earth).
                    And what do you want to stick in containers? Ala Khibiny? From heat ???
                    1. Random
                      Random 30 August 2018 16: 01
                      +1
                      Quote: NN52
                      Did you fly it? (we will not be attached to modifications ..) Why such a dislike for this type?

                      Why "not love"? belay I just call "things" by their proper names! soldier
                      Quote: NN52
                      And recent news about launches of the Kyrgyz Republic from the carcasses? And the modernization that has begun?

                      In my time it was the usual "combat work" according to the BP plan for the KBP YES soldier and 22nd and 15th (who will "get it") regularly 3-4 times a year (both from the wing and from the belly) wink
                      Quote: NN52
                      And Peshkova together, pzhl for the future, you don’t need to remember that (I’m surprised by such a slang from you ..)

                      Why not? .. It is necessary to "keep silent" about those who .. "plan" and "develop" such VOs? am
                      What "goblin" were Zinov and Rzhavitin doing in the sky of South Ossetia from the 929th GLITs on the Su-24MR? am
                      Who "planned" a patrol route over the territory occupied by the bearded at an altitude ... where everything is shot from the "slingshot", for a pair of Su-25s Major Filopov? am
                      Quote: NN52
                      And what do you want to stick in containers? Ala Khibiny? From heat ???

                      There is such a battle formation — a layered battle formation, in which air cover fighters are in a certain order, which, among other things, monitor the air situation.
                      In addition to this, there is also such a "thing" as AWACS planes, well, and many more all kinds of chips wink
                      Here are the Americans, at least without Hawkeye and Growler, well, or something like that they don’t fly out at all ... and here ??? request
                      Quote: NN52
                      He is an example of heroism and self-sacrifice (already on earth).

                      Yes ... they are all dead HEROES ... or maybe it would be better if they would become HEROES, but ... ALIVE? soldier
              2. JD1979
                JD1979 29 August 2018 23: 01
                0
                Quote: Random

                Quote: JD1979
                This is the same situation with B-1B - there is an airplane, but there are no weapons except bombs
                What "planet" are you from? or Appeared?

                With the same as you, only I didn’t hear something that Lancera was on arms until recently, the KR providing launch and destruction of a target outside the fighter aircraft interception zone, not to mention air defense, if you share it or poorly.

                Quote: Random
                Axes are also launched ... "far beyond the possible interception by an air defense system." and WHAT?
                Only Toporov is several dozens of times more than the X-101, and the carriers are the same?

                Axes are also launched far by whom? .... oh! is it really a B-52! But what about Lancer and Spirit? But they turn out to be not armed with these missiles, which is an unexpected for some ... with airplanes on the avatar.

                Quote: Random
                in August 2008 we "lost" the Tu-22M3 and WH? Peshkov was shot down on a Su-24M in Syria, who flew on a DB on an airplane with practically no BKO (by the way, to this day) and WH ... who and where lost what reputation?

                Yeah ... here medicine is alas powerless, to compare the loss of the Tu-22 .... abandoned for reconnaissance from hopelessness ... Su-24M - a front-beaver who fell into a classic ambush without cover ...
                With a possible failure from the loss of some Spirit, "fsego" for only 2 lard and advertised as a super-duper unbreakable ... which, in order to hit the target with freely falling AB of the target (which will be worthy of the costs and potential losses of sending a strategist and which will usually be in the depths of the territory) must go through all the air defense echelons of a well-covered object and go over it ... Maybe I don't understand something, but over the object it can be shot down not only by an ultra-modern system with sophisticated radars, but even simple as ax system with an optical channel with a probability of 101%

                Quote: Random
                Ah ... everything is clear ... keep up the good work ...


                It’s exactly with you that everything is clear, you couldn’t even read open sources and think about what you read, but you didn’t read everything there, but I have an opinion. Well, to comprehend the information, these are not smiles in batches to sculpt after every three letters.
                1. Random
                  Random 30 August 2018 16: 17
                  0
                  Quote: JD1979
                  Axes are also launched far by whom? .... oh! is it really a B-52! But what about Lancer and Spirit? But they turn out to be not armed with these missiles, which is an unexpected for some ... with airplanes on the avatar.


                  Kindergarten .. "in progress"?
                  WHERE you saw what I wrote ... "aviation media" belay ? And that "there are also sea and underwater .. have not heard .. have not? am
                  Have you heard that Lancer has long been armed with the 158ER and is using them? wassat Last time, by the way, on April 14, 2018, on targets in Syria.
                  And this hour stands at the El-Udeid airbase, in Qatar, ready for immediate use of 24 pieces wink
                  Quote: JD1979
                  Yeah ... here medicine is alas powerless, to compare the loss of the Tu-22 .... abandoned for reconnaissance from hopelessness ... Su-24M - a front-beaver who fell into a classic ambush without cover ...

                  Each Tu-22M3 is equipped with OK and FC means, both day and night, for reconnaissance by the method of passing route photography and performing the results of monitoring b / m soldier
                  There is no Tu-52M22R in the 3nd guards regiment soldier
                  So you already decide ... then you ...."hopelessness", then ... "no cover" ... but what about the reputation? lol
                  In general, continue further ... "study" .. "completely open sources" ...., do not forget ... fellow
        2. Random
          Random 29 August 2018 15: 49
          0
          Quote: JD1979
          disposable bomb for 2 lard greens))).

          The intensity of the Stratofortress sorties is evidenced by the information released by the commander of the multinational forces, General Neil Schwarzkopf: on January 26, B-52 dropped 412,7 tons of bombs, on January 29 - 285,7 tons, and on January 20 - 426,3 tons. After the fact, the Americans calculated that The US Air Force Strategic Aviation aircraft accounted for 29% of the total bomb load of 82 tons (the mass of only free-falling bombs), "scattered" by MNF aviation over Iraq and Kuwait.
          Those. if the "simple and intelligible" -the main weapon of the B-52 is not expensive cruise missiles, but banal free-fall bombs in conventional equipment. soldier
          1. JD1979
            JD1979 29 August 2018 23: 10
            0
            Quote: Random
            Quote: JD1979
            disposable bomb for 2 lard greens))).
            The intensity of the Stratofortress sorties is evidenced by the information released by the commander of the multinational forces, General Neil Schwarzkopf: on January 26, B-52 dropped 412,7 tons of bombs, on January 29 - 285,7 tons, and on January 20 - 426,3 tons. After the fact, the Americans calculated that The US Air Force Strategic Aviation aircraft accounted for 29% of the total bomb load of 82 tons (the mass of only free-falling bombs), "scattered" by MNF aviation over Iraq and Kuwait.
            Those. if the "simple and intelligible" -the main weapon of the B-52 is not expensive cruise missiles, but banal free-fall bombs in conventional equipment.


            And again, "Chukchi is not a reader - a Chukchi writer". If you have already ripped out the phrase, read the entire text and understand the meaning ... I understand there that you are not at all aware of which of the three strategists in service with the United States is worth 2 lard.
            1. Random
              Random 30 August 2018 16: 25
              +2
              Quote: JD1979
              And again "Chukchi is not a reader - a Chukchi writer"

              Young man .. it was you who took everything out of context and now you are trying to .. "jump off", because "climbed into ... at the most .. I can not" lol
              First you prove that the bombers do not carry strategic weapons, and you ... such fool ... I try to explain that the "strategy" is determined by the "POSSIBILITY OF DELIVERY" "the cargo to a certain" depth "(range) - tactical, operational-tactical and strategic.
              Then it is shown that, besides the KR with SBC, airplanes can also carry many bombs with SBC, which are strategic weapons.
              well and so on ..... in general, further "explanation" I consider a useless exercise and a waste of time hi
              1. JD1979
                JD1979 30 August 2018 23: 36
                -1
                Quote: Random
                Young man .. it was you who took everything out of context and now you are trying to .. "jump off", because "climbed into ... at the most .. I can not"
                First, you prove that bombers do not carry strategic weapons, and to you ... to such ... I try to explain that the "strategy" is determined by the "POSSIBILITY OF DELIVERY" "cargo to a certain" depth "(range) - tactical, operational-tactical and strategic ...
                Then it is shown that, besides the KR with SBC, airplanes can also carry many bombs with SBC, which are strategic weapons.
                well and so on ..... in general, further "explanation" I consider a useless exercise and a waste of time

                Young man .... yes you all continue to rave ... Context? So which beaver costs 2 lard? And where does the B-52 and its intensity of departures? Still a writer?
                You are trying to explain to me what you yourself understand at the "finger to the sky" level. You still do not see the difference between a demonstration bombing of the desert and work on a target covered by air defense echelons. According to you, there is a very high probability of flying over and dropping bombs .... it is incurable, accept.
        3. Random
          Random 29 August 2018 15: 54
          +1
          Quote: JD1979
          disposable bomb for 2 lard greens)

          The actual combat load of the B-2 is within 18 tons:
          - 80 free-fall 500-pound bombs Mk.82
          - or 16 atomic bombs B-61 wassat
          - or 36 cluster munitions of the CBU line
          - or 12 large-caliber bombs JDAM (ersatz-kit GPS, which turns conventional ammunition into high-precision weapons)
          - or laser-guided 8 guided bombs with a GBU-27 Paveway III (calculated weight 907 kg).
          1. JD1979
            JD1979 29 August 2018 23: 21
            0
            - bombs
            - more bombs
            - and more bombs
            What is the chance of a B-2 armed with such "smart and beautiful" bombs, not only to bomb out, but at least to see in sight the coveted object of attack, which is covered ... albeit not the most modern ... let's take the S-300PMU and BUK -M1? So is he disposable in that case, or will he return to Texas?
            1. Random
              Random 30 August 2018 16: 27
              0
              Quote: JD1979
              What is the chance for a B-2, which is armed with such "smart and beautiful" bombs, let alone bombing,

              Very good, since the US Air Force NEVER, after Vietnam, sends only "naked" and barefoot "bombers ... this is just our way ..." can " soldier
      2. Random
        Random 29 August 2018 15: 46
        +1
        Quote: voyaka uh
        They themselves are a strategic weapon. Why strategic weapons still have strategic weapons?

        It's just that the author of the post was mistaken in the term "strategic weapon" wink ...it happens drinks
      3. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 29 August 2018 16: 03
        +2
        Quote: voyaka uh
        They themselves are a strategic weapon. Why strategic weapons still have strategic weapons?

        They - Carriers strategic weapons.
        And, in order not to risk the carrier, it is better not to bomb the cast iron NWS (with an air defense breakthrough and fly over the target), but to throw the ALCM with the NWS from a distance of two to three thousand kilometers from the target.
  11. Ros 56
    Ros 56 29 August 2018 15: 55
    +3
    Oh, our An-2 has been flying since the 48th year, seventy years this year. And the lining - duralumin, percale - was covered with enamel before, now I do not know, but also some kind of nitro-lacquer. And restored Po-2s have been celebrating their 90th anniversary, in general they were wooden.
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 30 August 2018 09: 43
      0
      Tu95 is not much younger ... I think that 100 years will also serve.
  12. engineer74
    engineer74 29 August 2018 17: 05
    +3
    B-52 also raised the retirement age, we are not so offended! sad
    I wonder what his life cycle cost accumulate over 100 years? The new B-2, by chance, is not cheaper? recourse However, probable partners always considered money well ...
  13. Felix
    Felix 29 August 2018 18: 15
    -1
    But I wonder if we will hear the groans of the local oppositionists about "rusty planes falling apart on the fly", or is it all ours, dear, primordial?
  14. anjey
    anjey 29 August 2018 18: 49
    -1
    B-52 Stratofortress will last 100 for years
    With such an aviation development strategy, it was possible to keep the first Wright brothers aircraft in the Air Force US to the present day in service laughing
  15. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 30 August 2018 09: 42
    0
    So will there be 4 turbojet engines or will they leave 8 pieces?