Military Review

70 years in the service: Eagle vs. Bear

51

Looking ahead, I will say a few things. Yes, B-52 is not an “Eagle” at all, it is a “Fortress in the Stratosphere”, but symbols still play a certain role for our story, so let the “Stratofortress” be an “Eagle”, especially since the eagle is a symbol of the USA , the same as a bear - a symbol of Russia.


And it’s impossible not to write about the Bear, they are practically the same age, so first we’ll talk about the American plane, then the Soviet-Russian one, and then there will be a separate result of the service of both machines, approaching a century and a half life for two.

Agree, they are worth it.

So, B-52 "Stratofortress".

70 years in the service: Eagle vs. Bear

At the beginning of work on the creation of the B-52, there was nothing so “over the top”: the usual order for the development of an aircraft that would have to replace the B-36 from the Convair company, which, frankly, did not work out.


Yes, the B-36 entered history as the largest American aircraft, but its design, especially the mixed power plant, which consisted of piston and turbojet engines, was very far from perfect.

Therefore, Boeing simply decided to create a new aircraft, no one, most likely, even in their wildest dreams, could imagine that the car would take part in so many conflicts, last so many years and outlive all the creators.

It all started back in 1946, when the Peacemaker B-36 was just going to be tested. How they felt that it would not be long to serve him. The following parameters were announced: a range of 8 km, a bomb load of 000 tons, a flight altitude of 4,5 km, a speed of 10 km/h at an operating altitude of 700 km.

Boeing easily won the competition and received a contract to build a model. In the end, the company already had quite a decent experience in creating such aircraft: the Flying Fortress B-17, the Super Fortress B-29 became the most worthy representatives of the class of long-range heavy and strategic bombers of their time.

The union of the atomic bomb and the B-29 became a new step in the military doctrines of the two countries, the USA and the USSR, where the same B-29, but in the Soviet copyright Tu-4, was put into service. At the time the development of the B-52 began, this aircraft (B-29) became the only means of delivering atomic bombs to the territory of a potential enemy.


Piston aviation was nearing its sunset. Boeing made a bet on a plane with turbofan engines, and did not lose. More than 30 different combinations of wing geometries and power plant were considered, as a result, using the experience of the former German aircraft designers Vogt and Goetert, they settled on a long swept wing and eight turbojet engines under it.

In October 1948, Boeing submitted the final version of the bomber project, which received model number 464-49 with eight JT3 turbojets. The aircraft had a takeoff weight of 150 tons, could carry a combat load of 4,5 tons and had a range of 4 km. The estimated maximum speed was 930 km / h. In March 910, a new contract was signed with Boeing for the construction of two prototype aircraft.

The first flight of the XB-52 prototype took place on April 15, 1952. This moment must be taken as a starting point in the life of the aircraft.


The first flight of the serial B-52A took place on August 5, 1954, and the aircraft began to enter service from June 1955. The first planes went to training academies, and from June 1956 B-52Cs began to equip combat units.

It so happened that the resource included in the design made it possible not only to replace the outdated B-36 for a while, but to become the only until recently US strategic bomber capable of solving the tasks inherent in this class of aircraft, namely the delivery of strategic ammunition to targets on enemy territory.

In general, the life of the B-52 was successful in terms of various adventures. The aircraft was used not only for its intended purpose, but also as a carrier of numerous experimental space vehicles (HL-10, M2F3, X-24), from which the Space Shuttle program was later grown, the B-52 was carried by the unmanned reconnaissance aircraft Lockheed D- 21, it tested engines for the Boeing 747 and Lockheed C-5.


But the first truly historic event was the release of the first hydrogen bomb from the B-52 in May 1956.

The B-52 stamped records that more than illustrated the capabilities of this machine:
- in November 1956, a non-stop flight over the North Pole with a length of 27 km was completed;
- in January 1957, three B-52s made a group flight around the world, flying 45 km in 19 hours and 39 minutes;
- In January 1962, the B-52 set a flight range record without refueling, flying 20 km in 168 hours and 22 minutes.


Naturally, bombers carried regular service. The planes were constantly on duty in readiness, made sorties on combat patrols, and by 1991, a total of B-52s had flown more than 6,5 million hours. 71 aircraft were lost in various incidents.

In 1991, President George W. Bush ordered the B-52 to be removed from duty in a state of readiness for a nuclear strike in connection with the collapse of the USSR.

However, up to this point, the aircraft managed to take the baptism of fire, and actually fight.

Of course, the B-52 was not used for its intended purpose. Yes, the plane was created as a strategic bomber, operating with free-falling nuclear bombs. There were no other types of weapons at that time. Naturally, he did not possess high accuracy, since there was no other way of pointing, except for optical sights. However, the power of atomic and nuclear bombs was quite forgiving of some deviation from the point of attack.

The first combat use of the B-52 occurred during the Vietnam War of 1965-1973 as a high-altitude bomber with conventional bombs.


The aircraft showed its very high efficiency. In the 52 years of the war, B-7s made almost 126 sorties, as a result of which the North Vietnamese army suffered great damage. B-000 gunners shot down 52 Vietnamese MiG-2 fighters in sorties. US Air Force losses amounted to 21 bombers: 30 were shot down by anti-aircraft missiles, 16 fighters, the rest were lost as a result of flight accidents, including through the fault of the damage received.

The "scorched earth" tactics carried out by the United States with the help of the B-52 caused a sharply negative assessment of the entire world community. But many years later, despite being equipped with radar sights, in operations in the Persian Gulf and Iraq, the B-52 was used exclusively for carpet bombing.


If we talk about the place of the B-52 in American strategy, then the aircraft was a head taller than the B-29, flew twice as fast and about a third higher. However, already in the sixties, progress began to make its own adjustments. Anti-aircraft missile systems appeared, which made the height at which the B-52 flew not as safe as we would like.

In October 1959, an S-75 air defense system with a Chinese crew (but under the guidance of Soviet specialists) at an altitude of 20 meters was shot down by a reconnaissance RB-600D of Chiang Kai-shek's army. In May 70, an American U-1960 reconnaissance aircraft was shot down over Sverdlovsk. In October 2, a similar aircraft was shot down over Cuba. In general, the level of capabilities of the S-1962 was demonstrated on November 75, 16, when an American reconnaissance balloon was shot down by an air defense system at an altitude of 1959 meters. Rockets were firmly in use and flights, even at very high altitudes, ceased to be a safe matter.

American developers did not sit idly by and improved the capabilities of the B-52. To break through the air defense of the USSR at high altitude, the aircraft received ADM-20 "Quail" target missiles and North American GAM-77 / AGM-28 "Hound Dog" guided cruise missiles, the last word in engineering at that time. The GAM-77 could carry a warhead weighing 750-800 kg for a range of 1100 km at a speed of Mach 2,1. The QUO was simply terrible, about 1850 meters, but the presence of a thermonuclear warhead neutralized this. Target missiles were supposed to take on the blows of Soviet missiles, taking them away from the aircraft.

In addition, the prospects for "training" the B-52 in low-altitude flight were seriously considered. The program gobbled up more than $200 million, strengthened the wing mounts and even replaced the wings themselves on many aircraft, but everything worked out partially. The 190-ton aircraft could fly at altitudes up to 300 meters at a speed of 600 km / h, but this required huge efforts from the pilots and more fuel for the engines.

As a result, the B-52 was used exclusively as a high-altitude bomber.



LTH B-52B

Wingspan, m: 56,39
Aircraft Length, m: 47,73
The height of the aircraft, m: 14,64
Wing area, м2: 371,6

Weight, kg
- empty aircraft: 74 426
- normal takeoff: 123 377
- maximum take-off: 190 508

Engines: 8 x Pratt & Whitney J57-P-19WA turbojet engines with a thrust of 4 kgf / 762 kgf on afterburner with injection of a water-methanol mixture

Maximum speed, km / h: 1014
Cruising speed, km / h: 842
Combat radius of action, km: 5 780
Max. rate of climb, m / min: 1450
Practical ceiling, km: 14417

Crew, prs: 6

Armament:
- four 12,7 mm M3 machine guns or two 20 mm M24A1 cannons
- bomb load - 19 504 kg


Tail machine gun mount 12,7 mm

The next step in the development of steel B-52G / H


The first flight of the new aircraft took place in 1958. It really was a very radically redesigned B-52B.

The design of the wings was redesigned to increase the volume of fuel tanks, more powerful J-57-43W engines were installed (as in the E and F models), and the tail machine gun mount began to be controlled remotely. The aircraft received new navigation equipment and new sights, plus the Kwail electronic warfare system.

B-52G and B-52H - the first specialized missile carriers weapons. It was on these aircraft that the AGM-28 appeared. It was supposed to make the B-52 aeroballistic missiles GAM-87 "Skybolt", but the missile was not put into service.

In the seventies, B-52G / H began to be equipped with Boeing SRAM missiles with a W-69 nuclear warhead (100 Kt). The missiles could hit targets at ranges up to 160 km. The aircraft could take on board 8 missiles in the cargo hold in a special drum set, and another 12 missiles could be hung on external nodes. The missiles were intended to destroy enemy air defense centers, clearing space for aircraft with nuclear bombs on board.


In 1971-1977. All B-52G/H aircraft were equipped with the AN/ASQ-151 optoelectronic surveillance system, which significantly increased the combat capabilities of the aircraft at night, as well as when the enemy used nuclear weapons (television equipment, in combination with special curtains, prevented pilots from being blinded during a nuclear attack). explosion).

In 1985, part of the B-52G aircraft began to be equipped with NAVSTAR satellite navigation system receivers. At the same time, ALCM cruise missiles began to enter service, which, in principle, could attack targets without entering the enemy’s air defense coverage area. The missiles were intended primarily for air defense objects, after the suppression of which a breakthrough followed, followed by a blow with free-falling bombs or SRAM missiles.

The nineties brought bombers new AGM-86B missiles with nuclear warheads from Boeing. The ammunition load was all the same 20 missiles, 8 in a drum launcher inside the fuselage and 12 on external hardpoints. At the same time, the B-52 was armed with AGM-86C cruise missiles equipped with non-nuclear warheads. The armament set was supplemented with AGM-129 stealthy strategic cruise missiles (4 missiles on a drum launcher in the fuselage and 12 more missiles on external hardpoints).

Some of the B-52Gs were converted to carry Harpoon anti-ship missiles. "Harpoons" were attached only to the external hardpoints. Accordingly, the B-52G could carry 12 anti-ship missiles, or instead of the Harpoons, it was supposed to use Israeli-developed AGM-142 Raptor high-precision guided missiles.

With the end of the Cold War, reductions in the B-52 fleet began. The maximum number of B-52s in the ranks of the Strategic Command was in the 60-70s of the last century. Then the UK had more than 600 aircraft. But during the eighties, a significant number of B-52 bombers of the B, C, D, E and F series were withdrawn from service.

By the beginning of 1992, when it became clear that the USSR had practically collapsed, 254 B-52 aircraft remained in service with the US Air Force (159 B-52G and 95 B-52H), of which 33 B-52G were equipped to carry conventional bombs and RCC "Harpoon".

In August 1993, the destruction of 350 B-52 aircraft began at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona in accordance with the START Treaty signed earlier with the USSR.



By 1994, 130 B-52 units remained in the US Air Force, but even that was not the end. As a result of all the reductions and disarmament, 85 aircraft remained in the strategic aviation. Another 20 aircraft are in reserve.

Basically, these are B-52H, built in the early 60s of the last century. However, the US Air Force Command plans to keep the bombers in service until the turn of 2040.

Most of the aircraft correspond to the B-52N modification and are non-nuclear carrier aircraft. 18 vehicles have been modified to carry and use Harpoons, 10 aircraft are armed with AGM-142 cruise missiles.

All bombers are equipped with the ICSMS non-nuclear weapon release control system from universal hardpoints. The system provides the use of a very wide range of modern high-precision weapons: JASSM missiles, JDAM, JSOW and WCM guided bombs.

But of course, nuclear weapons can be hung on any of these aircraft.


In general, only the fuselage, wings and engines remained from that B-52. Instead of cannons, the AN / ALQ-172 (V2) electronic warfare system appeared in the tail unit, the aircraft is equipped with a GPS satellite navigation system, but the satellite system is combined with an inertial navigation system that can duplicate the satellite one in the event of failure in the event of a nuclear war. The SPN/GEANS INS is based on laser gyroscopes, which is considered today to be a very advanced navigation system.

The optical-electronic sighting and surveillance system was replaced with a new AN / ASQ-151, which includes a forward-looking thermal imaging system and a new-generation surveillance television system. All information boards and indicators are changed from orange-red to blue-green to enable pilots to use MXU-810/U "Mark-4" type night vision goggles.

In our time, Boeing plans to modernize the avionics of the B-52N aircraft using elements of the equipment of the latest civil aircraft of its production. Multifunctional LCD displays and new universal weapon hardpoints should appear in the cockpits.

But all this is only possible if the US Congress approves the cost of modernizing all 66 bombers that will serve until 2040.

There is, however, one problem: engines. It is known that United Technologies, which owns this brand today, is not able to launch the production of Pratt & Whitney J57-P-43WВ engines for many reasons. The engines available on decommissioned aircraft somehow support the existence of the B-52, but their resource is dwindling before our eyes.

Allies came to the rescue of the Americans, who had signed their own impotence. Rolls-Royce agreed to provide its Rolls-Royce RB211-535E engines to power each B-52 with four of these engines, which, by the way, are used by Boeing 747s. The engine is not new, but there is simply no other in the foreseeable today.

The takeoff thrust of the RB211 is 19 kgf, while the thrust of two TF-400s is only 33 kgf. Thanks to the increased efficiency of British engines, the range of the B-15N without refueling will increase from 300 km to 52 km. Takeoff and landing distances will also be reduced.

The Boeing 757 was chosen as a donor for power elements (pylons and engine nacelles), which was discontinued in 2004, but which still flies.


In fact, we are accustomed to the image of the B-52 as something ancient and archaic. Say, all he can do is throw out a mountain of bombs and create a lunar landscape somewhere.

In fact, the B-52 is still relevant today, since it can carry not only free-fall bombs, but also quite modern missile weapons.


The practice of flying B-52 aircraft with nuclear bombs on board made them a source of very increased danger in peacetime. In two cases, the disasters were very real: in 1961, a B-52 with two nuclear bombs on board crashed near Goldsboro (USA), in the same year a B-52F with two thermonuclear bombs on board crashed near the city of Yuba City in California , and in 1966, another aircraft with four atomic bombs fell into the sea after a collision with a tanker near the city of Palomares (Spain). The bombs were brought to the surface after a long, difficult and costly rescue operation using deep submersibles.

A counter question arises for sure: why then was the B-52 used, like the B-29, that is, for carpet bombing, at the level of the Second World War?

Everything is simple. To answer this question, you just need to look at the list of countries against which this aircraft was used.

Vietnam. 1965-1973
Iraq + Kuwait. 1991.
Iraq. 1996, 1998 and 2003.
Yugoslavia. 1999.
Afghanistan. 2001 - 2021.
Syria. 2016.

As you can see, there were no countries that had an air defense system capable of resisting massive NATO air strikes. The exception is Vietnam, in which the United States lost 30 B-52 aircraft, the successes of other countries are more than modest. In Iraq, one B-52 was officially lost from the actions of the Iraqi side and 6 aircraft were damaged.

That is, there was no particular need to use expensive high-precision weapons. When Operation Desert Strike required strikes on power plants, two B-52s did it quietly with 12 cruise missiles.
By the way, in Syria, Russian aviation was also not particularly zealous in the use of high-precision weapons, operating mainly with conventional free-falling bombs.

The goal, you know, justifies the means spent on it. So a carpet of ordinary cheap high-explosive bombs can be, if not more effective than cruise missiles, then much cheaper.

So today, 70 years after its first flight, the B-52 is not an archaism that is living out its life because the US design idea has completely degraded. No, there is a certain degradation, there is nothing to even argue about, but in 1952 the B-52 was indeed ahead of its time in many ways.

And even today, after 70 years, despite a decent number of problems associated primarily with age and physical fatigue of the structure, this is a combat aircraft. Able, under certain conditions, to fulfill the task of a nuclear strike in the specified area.


You can brush it off in the "hurray" style. Say, what is there, the Americans use the ancient artifact from hopelessness. Ancient does not mean "incapable". Do you know the ancient Su-24? Very ancient? And we no longer have a cruiser on the Black Sea. Roughly the same and B-52. Yes, it is old, but if necessary, this aircraft will definitely qualify for combat missions.

I will also say a very sacramental phrase: there was such a time. There were many very smart, talented and ideologically oriented people on both sides of the ocean. Who firmly believed that some were defending a democratic, while others were defending a communist future. And these people created simply masterpiece planes and ships, rockets and Tanks. It was not a business, it was a real struggle for your "tomorrow".

That is why such aircraft as the B-52 and Tu-95 were obtained. Therefore, now neither the United States nor Russia can even come close to creating something further. The people were different.


LTH B-52G

Wingspan, m: 56,39
Aircraft Length, m: 48,03
The height of the aircraft, m: 12,40
Wing area, м2: 371,60

Weight, kg
- empty aircraft: 76 405
- normal takeoff: 137 272
- maximum take-off: 221 352

Engines: 8 x Pratt & Whitney J57-P-43WW turbojet engines with a thrust of 5 kgf each (080 kgf with afterburner)

Maximum speed, km/h: 1
Cruising speed, km / h: 842
Ferry range, km: 12
Combat radius of action, km: 6 600
Max. rate of climb, m/min: 1 661
Practical ceiling, m: 14 326

Crew, prs: 6

Armament:
- four 12,7 mm M3 machine guns
Bomb load up to 22 680 kg

A total of 744 B-52 aircraft of various modifications were built, of which 71 aircraft were lost as a result of flight accidents. The last B-52H, serial number 61-0040, left the factory on October 26, 1962.
Author:
51 comment
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. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 8 July 2022 05: 14
    0
    Eagle vs Bear
    Here the crocodile could not resist the bear. (Film "Ushakov")
    1. NIKN
      NIKN 8 July 2022 12: 02
      +6
      I like how his engines start all at the same time ... The time to take out from under the blow is significantly less than others, almost like a fighter.
      1. TreeSmall
        TreeSmall 8 July 2022 17: 09
        -1
        I like how his engines start all at the same time ...

        good
        I didn't even think it was...
        I thought in such a cow there is a compressor.
  2. Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 8 July 2022 05: 22
    +2
    That is, there was no special need to use expensive high-precision weapons. When, as part of Operation Desert Strike, it was necessary to strike at power plants, two B-52s were calmly done with the help of 12 cruise missiles.

    I see a contradiction.

    Do you know the ancient Su-24? Very ancient? And we no longer have a cruiser on the Black Sea.
    And what kind of news is this, doesn’t the author want to say that “Moscow” was sunk by aviation ?! There are reasonable doubts about the guilt of the RCC.
  3. Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 8 July 2022 05: 33
    -16
    Ancient does not mean "incapable". Do you know the ancient Su-24? Very ancient? BUT we no longer have a cruiser on the Black Sea.
    Would you like to rave? The cruiser was sunk by specialists from NATO, anti-ship missiles from NATO. There is no other way. Why are there planes here? fool Did NATO anti-ship missiles launch dill with SU? "Sit down, I'll open it myself..."
    And you have the task of washing the black cable .... request Excuse me....
    1. kristAl
      kristAl 8 July 2022 06: 05
      +5
      Would you like to rave? The cruiser was sunk by specialists from NATO, anti-ship missiles from NATO. There is no other way. Why are there planes here? Did NATO anti-ship missiles launch dill with SU? "Sit down, I'll open it myself..."
      And your task is to wash the black cable .... Sorry ....

      So about the fact that the cruiser was sunk by the Su-24 and there is no word in the article. Here is a different message - a 79-year-old cruiser, in terms of combat effectiveness, is compared with a 70-year-old aircraft. And as practice has shown, if a cruiser with limited modernization could not influence the course of the conflict, then the SU-24s are still coping with the tasks
      1. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 8 July 2022 08: 24
        -1
        Quote from kristal
        And as practice has shown, if a cruiser with limited modernization could not influence the course of the conflict

        With anti-ship missiles as the main weapon, he could not.
  4. Mikhail Drabkin
    Mikhail Drabkin 8 July 2022 05: 34
    +5
    Thank you Roman!
    Organization, technical details, illustrations, style - at a high level.
  5. kristAl
    kristAl 8 July 2022 05: 44
    -11
    For good, also shake out the holders for missiles from a pair of Tu-95s and adapt them for cast iron, otherwise we can’t destroy the fortifications of ukrov, and there are no fortifications for a couple of spans
    1. SincerityX
      SincerityX 29 September 2022 13: 37
      0
      That is, you propose to turn strategic bombers into trucks? It is easier to equip ILs 76e with a bomb bay. And cheaper.
  6. Grossvater
    Grossvater 8 July 2022 06: 06
    +3
    As always, tongue-tied, with numerous typos and errors. And, it is very interesting, what kind of "turbofan engines" were installed on the B52?
    1. Reklastik
      Reklastik 8 July 2022 09: 50
      +2
      And, it is very interesting, what kind of "turbofan engines" were installed on the B52?
      Yes, and also this:
      The takeoff thrust of the RB211 is 19 kgf, while the thrust of two TF-400s is only 33 kgf.
      - what does TF-33 have to do with it, I didn’t understand at all from the text.
      1. TreeSmall
        TreeSmall 8 July 2022 17: 21
        +4
        - what does TF-33 have to do with it, I didn’t understand the text at all

        102 B-52Hs (Model 464-261) with TF33-P-3, then with TF33-PW-3/103
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 8 July 2022 10: 54
      +7
      Quote: Grossvater
      And, it is very interesting, what kind of "turbofan engines" were installed on the B52?

      And what do you want from an article that says that before the AGM-86B, "one and a half" received some ALCM missiles? wink
      Although ALCM is the name of the entire program (and the class of missiles - Air Launched Cruise Missile), according to which the AGM-86 family was developed. And it was the AGM-86B that was the first ALCM to enter service. And her ancestor AGM-86A status operational never received and was used only for flight tests.
      1. TreeSmall
        TreeSmall 8 July 2022 17: 58
        +1
        And it was the AGM-86B that was the first ALCM to enter service.

        To be fair, KS-1: "Comet" (MiG-15)



        If we consider a long range of 140-160 km of course request
        The Americans had a McDonnell GAM-72 / ADM-20 Quail for 650 km, but without a charge

        The experience of its operation, in fact, gave rise to the American CRBD.

        And her ancestor AGM-86A operational status

        In January 1977, a decision was made on its mass production ...
        but she was nailed, in mid-1977, by the JCMP project
        In January 1977, the AGM-86A was cleared for full-scale production, but this was not to be, because 1977 saw another drastic change in the direction of the ALCM program.


        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 8 July 2022 23: 31
          +3
          Quote from TreeSmall
          To be fair, KS-1: "Comet" (MiG-15)

          You are right - I unsuccessfully shortened the sentence. Should be:
          And it was the AGM-86B that was the first ALCM ALCM projectthat entered service.
          Quote from TreeSmall
          The Americans had a McDonnell GAM-72 / ADM-20 Quail for 650 km, but without a charge

          So the ALCM project just grew out of Quail.
          First there was the Quail decoy. Then the Yankees decided to stick decoys in the same drum as SRAM drums - and the SCAD project was born. But the Air Force's Wishlist grew - and they decided to make a false strike out of a false target, so that it would not only divert air defense to itself, but also destroy air defense systems at greater ranges than SRAM. They took the SCAD project as a base, to which they screwed a nuclear warhead and TERCOM, since the INS was not enough. The resulting "false strike target" was renamed the ALCM project. And as a result, they got the AGM-86A ALCM, which "killed" its parent SCAD - since in the presence of a shock ALCM, a decoy with a similar radius of action was not needed.
          But the Air Force wanted more - and the ALCM project got a version of the ERV with an increased range. Which did not fit into the B-1 bomb bay, so shamanic dances began around the new CD.
          Quote from TreeSmall
          In January 1977, a decision was made on its mass production ...
          but she was nailed, in mid-1977, by the JCMP project

          More precisely, the AGM-86А was killed by its own version of the ERV - an improved extended-range AGM-86А, during the modernization of which naval developments were used under the SLCM project (the future Tomahawk). Which the fleet shared during the JCMP program - the unification of the naval and aviation KR. SLCM "as a whole" did not suit the Air Force, but the engine and navigation system came to the yard.
          Well, the AGM-86A was finally killed by the rejection of the B-1, which removed the Procrustean restriction on the ERV path - the length of the B-1 bomb bay. After that, the Air Force finally abandoned the "stock" AGM-86A in favor of the ERV version, which became the AGM-86B.
          1. TreeSmall
            TreeSmall 9 July 2022 04: 03
            +1
            AGM-86A was killed by her own

            Not ... she was killed by what I wrote.
            And the name of her (him): UNIFICATION / ECONOMY / MANAGERS.
            Nabiulins, Siluanovs and Grefs won (although they were American. The essence does not change!
            Engineers were eaten by lice. And they always eat: because he is $ (it doesn’t matter, let ₽, € ...), a piece of paper will send the world)
            In principle, +/- US engineering finished then
            Well, the AGM-86A was finally killed by the rejection of the B-1, which removed the Procrustean restriction on the ERV path -

            Something else was also proposed there, of which 18 vs 12 fit ... yes, on an external suspension. but! Even Biden (when he had a mind), in those days, it was clear: B1-? (in any form), with an external or internal suspension of weapons, CANNOT OVERCOME the USSR's air defense.
            Before Gorbachev, for sure ... there are already “agreements” gone request
        2. merkava-2bet
          merkava-2bet 8 July 2022 23: 55
          +2
          The Americans had a McDonnell GAM-72 / ADM-20 Quail for 650 km, but without a charge

          Actually, this is a bait trap, greatly increasing the survival of the bomber.
          1. TreeSmall
            TreeSmall 9 July 2022 04: 05
            +1
            In fact, this is a trap-bait, strongly

            In my opinion: I hinted at it in Russian, in black, in white!
            No?
        3. merkava-2bet
          merkava-2bet 8 July 2022 23: 59
          +3
          The experience of its operation, in fact, gave rise to the American CRBD.

          Wrong conclusion, before that there were other programs and system North American GAM-77/AGM-28 "Hound Dog"
          1. TreeSmall
            TreeSmall 9 July 2022 04: 13
            +2
            I do not argue, but still
            ks-1 and GAM-72/ADM-20 Quail were EARLY!
            I, in fact, only to the remark of a colleague: about the first WB CRBD!
            Otherwise, you will roll me into the swamp "Mistel-1 (2,3,4)" yes
            1. merkava-2bet
              merkava-2bet 9 July 2022 09: 10
              +4
              Touche venerable. A little carried away.
              1. TreeSmall
                TreeSmall 9 July 2022 12: 38
                +3
                drinks
                Truth is born in disputes
    3. TreeSmall
      TreeSmall 8 July 2022 17: 27
      +2
      turbofan engines "were installed on the B52?

      Power plant: Eight Pratt & Whitney engines TF33-P-3/103 turbofan

      ☝️Turbofan engine ☝️in popular literature is usually called a turbojet bypass engine (TEF) with a high (above 2) bypass ratio.
  7. mmaxx
    mmaxx 8 July 2022 06: 32
    +3
    Yes... One would like to say with an Odessa accent: "Now they don't do that anymore."
    Beautiful aircraft.
  8. ycuce234-san
    ycuce234-san 8 July 2022 07: 25
    0
    In general, only the fuselage, wings and engines remained from that B-52.


    The "changer", apparently, (when it does appear) will be initially adapted to the super-tough Antarctic conditions - the entire middle and the entire end of the 21st century will be a battle for the Arctic and for the unshared pie of fossils - Antarctica.
  9. Sergey Aleksandrovich
    Sergey Aleksandrovich 8 July 2022 08: 46
    +3
    Not people were different, but motivated people differently. If the motivation to work is diligently reduced to zero, then there will be no result, respectively.
  10. Non-fighter
    Non-fighter 8 July 2022 09: 39
    +1
    Rolls-Royce agreed to provide its Rolls-Royce RB211-535E engines to power each B-52 with four of these engines, which, by the way, are used by Boeing 747s. The engine is not new, but there is simply no other in the foreseeable today.

    And the "pyrotechnic launch" function has been preserved? This is when the engine is started by a pyrotechnic checker, which spins the turbine without external sources.
  11. Knell wardenheart
    Knell wardenheart 8 July 2022 09: 57
    -6
    All these 70-year-old relics that caught I.V. Stalin at the time of design are products of dubious value. By proxy or third world countries - to your health. In a major war, it is practically a disposable product, unlike a ballistic missile, which has a huge EPR and quiet running. At base points, this is very good. conspicuous bandura, which is also important. And also, unlike a ballistic missile, the plane will carry a crew - which will have to die over the pole or the ocean, that is, these people at "hour X" will actually be kamikaze. The potential of these products in a retaliatory or retaliatory strike is negligible; in the First Strike concept, they will also be one of the most unmasking cooking factors. They fly for a long time, they are found far away, leaving the base points will definitely not be able to be hidden.

    At the time of designing + several decades, these were good, suitable cars - but then interceptors, long-range air-to-air missiles, surface-to-air missiles, long-range radars, satellite reconnaissance came, and their existence should have ended if not for the various conflicts where there were we need bomb carriers against not too sophisticated opponents. But maintaining dozens of these relic vehicles today is IN MY VIEW a waste of money and the talent of their crews. Inside conventional conflicts, they all already have a niche, inside unconventional they will simply be suicide bombers.
  12. ares1988
    ares1988 8 July 2022 10: 20
    +8
    Roman, as always, surprises with the level of his competence in the matter. It turns out that he has the Turks F-15 Eagle, it turns out, they rivet under license. Then 8 Stratofortress engines will be changed to 4 from the 747 Boeing. And here's how it really is:
    As a result of a tender, the US Air Force has chosen to reengineer its fleet of B-52H bombers with an engine proposed by Rolls-Royce under the military designation F130, which is a variant of the commercial BR725 engine used on the Gulfstream G650 business jet.

    Now each B-52H bomber is equipped with eight TF33-P-103 engines manufactured in the first half of the 1960s. It is planned to remotorize all 76 available B-52H bombers with the replacement of eight old TF33-P-103 engines on each with eight new ones with the maximum preservation of the design of the engine nacelles. In total, it is planned to purchase 650 new F130 engines (608 engines for remotorization of 76 aircraft and 42 spare engines).
    Source: https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4403529.html
  13. iouris
    iouris 8 July 2022 10: 25
    +2
    Repeated publication of the same figure in the text cannot be considered normal practice. In addition, figures, as a rule, are numbered, and references to the figure are made in the text. These are the requirements of the relevant standard.
  14. Fitter65
    Fitter65 8 July 2022 14: 11
    +5
    According to the first lines, it is clear whose opus, to comment on this work somehow in scrap. Yes, I don't see the point. But by this, sinful, I could not pass.
    A total of 744 B-52 aircraft of various modifications were built, of which 71 aircraft were lost as a result of flight accidents.
    Here’s the novel, honestly, if you yourself don’t understand what a flight accident is, then at least look at Wikipedia.
    Aviation accident - an event associated with the flight operation of an aircraft, which resulted in the death or serious injury of any person (persons), significant damage or loss of this aircraft.
    As a rule, among aviation accidents there are:
    accidents - incidents without human casualties;
    disasters with human casualties.
    Moreover, in the description of flight accidents, the point is not indicated as downed by enemy fire. And as you know, the losses in Vietnam amounted to
    ....Boeing B-52 Stratofortress
    - Air Force: 48 aircraft in the years 1965-1973;
    According to other (official US data) data, the losses amounted to: 31 aircraft, 17 of them shot down in military operations, 1 decommissioned due to military injuries, 11 crashed in flight accidents, 1 decommissioned due to non-combat damage and 1 burned down at the airport in Japan.
    You "explain" the difference - they were shot down in hostilities and lost in flight accidents. Well, for those who wish, I can recommend the "originals" of this "summary".
    http://www.airwar.ru/history/locwar/vietnam/b52/b52.html
    http://www.airwar.ru/enc/bomber/b52.htm
    http://www.airwar.ru/enc/bomber/b52g.html
    1. TreeSmall
      TreeSmall 8 July 2022 17: 06
      -2
      Well, for those who wish, I can recommend the "originals" of this "summary".

      is it so bad?
      recourse
      Inspired by:
      1. Fitter65
        Fitter65 9 July 2022 00: 39
        +3
        Quote from TreeSmall
        is it so bad?

        Well, not so bad, closer to not so good ...
        1. TreeSmall
          TreeSmall 9 July 2022 04: 20
          +2
          Philosoff, you however.
          However: 7 hours ago I was chewed about Roman in a telegram, with 100% evidence.
          Incl. ATP for vigilance.
          True, they told me: he is like urine off a duck's back. Grefomansky syndrome, so to speak yes
          1. Fitter65
            Fitter65 9 July 2022 08: 29
            +3
            Yes, I have been trying for more than a year to prove to him that he is a complete layman in aviation. But I got tired, and therefore I don’t even read his articles about aviation. I’m just giving people a link to real articles about airplanes, which, passing through the roman editorial office, at best remain a summary, but with roman glitches, but in a constant presentation. bullshit. Where, when replacing a single wheel with double wheels, the diameter of the landing gear will decrease. Or the Focke-Wulf company produces aircraft for the Kaiser during the First World War .... And so on and so forth. although he stopped writing about tanks. after his article about "Valentine", where he screwed up so much that people all over the country simply spat on monitors so much that they could see him. Tankers are lucky. Stopped talking about tanks. write. But we aviators, no. laughing laughing drinks
            1. TreeSmall
              TreeSmall 9 July 2022 12: 35
              +2
              But we aviators, no.

              Kara you flyers.
              It's not clear what.
              But it's not so scary.
              Ryabov Kiril impresses me here. Fall asleep with letters, crush with looped paragraphs .. usually: in 2 minutes - I'm going to sleep.
              1. Alexey RA
                Alexey RA 9 July 2022 16: 10
                +5
                Quote from TreeSmall
                Ryabov Kiril impresses me here. Fall asleep with letters, crush with looped paragraphs .. usually: in 2 minutes - I'm going to sleep.

                Only Damantsev, only hardcore!
                The abbreviation sits on the abbreviation and drives with the abbreviation. smile
                1. TreeSmall
                  TreeSmall 9 July 2022 16: 14
                  0
                  Did not met. Where can you see? Recommend?
                2. Fitter65
                  Fitter65 10 July 2022 04: 15
                  +1
                  Quote: Alexey RA
                  Only Damantsev, only hardcore!
                  The abbreviation sits on the abbreviation and drives with the abbreviation.

                  Everyone has their own "favorite aftyr". laughing laughing drinks
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 9 July 2022 11: 43
        +2
        Quote from TreeSmall
        is it so bad?

        Spawn this did not happen, and again the same thing. ©
        Commentary listing the originals of the next article in the discussion of the creations of this author has already become traditional. smile
        1. TreeSmall
          TreeSmall 9 July 2022 12: 36
          0
          Well, at least the admins are not angry.
          And so the guns write. You and your colleague explained that the blunders also seemed strange. So don't read.
  15. AC130 Gunship
    AC130 Gunship 8 July 2022 17: 23
    +1
    It is very unlikely that 8 engines will be changed to 4.
    Purely from the point of view of electrics and other systems in the aircraft. Each engine has its own generator, which provides 1/8 of the energy consumed by various aircraft systems. Jumping from 8 to 4 engines is like redesigning a plane from scratch. Nobody will do this. Also, in fact, how to make a twin-engine IL96
  16. Alf
    Alf 8 July 2022 19: 02
    +1
    A very durable car. In Vietnam, from the S-75, he raked, having lost the entire keel, but still reached home.
    1. merkava-2bet
      merkava-2bet 9 July 2022 00: 53
      +5
      This is not Vietnam, but tests at low and criminally low altitudes, due to turbulence, the keel was torn off, there is a documentary about this, and the coloring of the fuselage itself speaks of this.
      1. merkava-2bet
        merkava-2bet 9 July 2022 01: 19
        +5
        Here is a photo from those tests.

  17. Brain_
    Brain_ 9 July 2022 04: 22
    0
    The people were different.

    The grass is greener and the beer is thicker.
    1. SincerityX
      SincerityX 29 September 2022 14: 16
      0
      For some reason it seems to me that thick beer is unlikely to be tasty. Although kvass with honey will probably turn out to be an interesting combination.
  18. Castro Ruiz
    Castro Ruiz 12 July 2022 09: 55
    0
    A good article, although with some errors / ignorance, but the author is a plus.
  19. T90
    T90 19 August 2022 09: 30
    0
    Very interesting, very high-quality photos, do more similar articles
  20. SincerityX
    SincerityX 29 September 2022 13: 31
    0
    And these people created simply masterpiece planes and ships, missiles and tanks. It was not a business, it was a real struggle for your "tomorrow".

    I am such a person, at least I was, I was a dreamer, a romantic and an inventor. I proposed inertial engines, I offered block engines with a slotted nozzle, which is part of the mechanization of the wing. But all this was fucking unnecessary, judging by what they answered me. If you want specifics, the Tsags named after Zhukovsky answered me. Some grandfather yelled at me into the phone that I was suggesting nonsense and this is impossible. Apparently because it did not fit into his picture of the world of the level of LAG aircraft.