US Air Force excludes nuclear bombs from B-52H Stratofortress arsenal


US strategic bombers B-52H Stratofortress are no longer carriers of the nuclear bombs B61-7 and B83-1 given weapon withdrawn from the armament of the bomber according to the new instructions of the US Air Force.


Excluded (nuclear bombs) B61-7 and B83-1 from the authorized B-52H weapons

- stated in the instructions of the Air Force 91-111 called "Safety Rules for US Strategic Bombers."

According to the instructions developed by the Air Force, the only nuclear weapons that are allowed for use by B-52H bombers are AGM-86B air-launched cruise missiles with the W80-1 nuclear warhead. In the future, it is planned to replace the AGM-86B with a new cruise missile made using stealth technology developed as part of the Long Stand Off Off or LSRO program.

The US Air Force command explained that the removal of nuclear bombs from the armament of strategic B-52N bombers was dictated by their vulnerability against the backdrop of new air defense systems. The entry of a bomber with air bombs into the air defense zone is likely to lead to its loss. Therefore, the V-52N in nuclear and non-nuclear equipment will be used only as a launch pad for launching long-range cruise missiles outside the air defense zone.

Earlier it was reported that the US Department of Defense decided to extend the operational life of the strategic bombers B-52 to 2050. At the same time, it is possible that, with an appropriate modernization, the Stratospheric Fortress and after 2050, will remain the key bomber of the US Air Force.

According to reports, the US Air Force has 58 Boeing B-52H strategic bombers.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

15 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. lucul 14 January 2020 18: 10 New
    • 6
    • 4
    +2
    The US Air Force command explained that the removal of nuclear bombs from the armament of strategic B-52N bombers was dictated by their vulnerability against the backdrop of new air defense systems. The entry of a bomber with air bombs into the air defense zone is likely to lead to its loss.

    Yes, you sho?
    Just got it now? )))
    1. Abbot 14 January 2020 19: 20 New
      • 2
      • 3
      -1
      The US Air Force command explained that the removal of nuclear bombs from the armament of strategic B-52N bombers was dictated by their vulnerability against the backdrop of new air defense systems.
      Congratulations! The Pentagon received official recognition that Russian air defense is the best in the world. Hooray!
  2. Observer2014 14 January 2020 18: 12 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    It’s quite logical. And for people who are minimally versed in these issues and. it’s quite clear why subsonic. A plane glowing on radars like a Christmas tree. It is deprived of this weapon.
    1. YOUR 15 January 2020 03: 40 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      This is true. His image intensifier reaches 180 square meters. It’s hard not to notice. Even in difficult jamming environments.
      In Vietnam they were knocked down quite successfully and they tried to fly along the explored routes where, according to them, there was poor air defense. But in the end, they went to Hanoi where the air defense was weak by default.
  3. rocket757 14 January 2020 18: 16 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Plan, plan ... it all depends on the circumstances.
    Who would have known that such an aircraft would fly for so many years, and not stand in a museum?
    1. Observer2014 14 January 2020 18: 29 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Quote: rocket757
      Plan, plan ... it all depends on the circumstances.
      Who would have known that such an aircraft would fly for so many years, and not stand in a museum?

      So this means the demand for this aviation platform. It is fashionable that I spoke out now. And in Russia in Russia I know three such platforms. .Be 12 .Tu 95. Il 38 For example. Yes, the parents of many modern pilots were not in the project when the cars on which they fly already flew laughing So we will be fair in this matter.
      1. rocket757 14 January 2020 18: 33 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        If you add the CORN, then there will be a kit!
  4. Losharik 14 January 2020 18: 16 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    Afraid to lose? And they’re doing it right .. Piracy in the sky is already dangerous, the wrong time has come.
  5. AVA77 14 January 2020 18: 45 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Perhaps this is knocking out money for the modernization of the B61-7 and B83-1. They’ll file it under some sort of missile, which is again suspended on the same B-52N.
  6. knn54 14 January 2020 21: 37 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    It seems that they do not believe in the reliability of the bombs themselves. Yes, and the remaining resource of the bombers for a long period continuously flying along the borders with the USSR is not too large.
  7. Sergey Averchenkov 14 January 2020 21: 41 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Excluded? Sorry, but I don’t have confidence in this.
  8. Kerensky 14 January 2020 21: 55 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Found a software vulnerability?
  9. Victor March 47 14 January 2020 22: 33 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Abbot
    The US Air Force command explained that the removal of nuclear bombs from the armament of strategic B-52N bombers was dictated by their vulnerability against the backdrop of new air defense systems.
    Congratulations! The Pentagon received official recognition that Russian air defense is the best in the world. Hooray!

    And my congratulations. But on a different occasion. Since 1950, from the war in Korea, they finally realized that it was impossible to get through any air defense systems of the USSR-Russia by any bombers.
    1. voyaka uh 15 January 2020 00: 13 New
      • 5
      • 1
      +4
      "no matter what the bombers are." ///
      -----
      B-2 remain carriers of atomic bombs.
      The new B-21s, which are being prepared for production, will be carriers of atomic bombs.
  10. Sergey Averchenkov 15 January 2020 00: 16 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Well this is stupid ... hoping for a statement is even more stupid ... today they said, tomorrow they backtracked.