Military Review

Flying Network Hub - B-52 bomber

52
According to the "Popular Mechanics", Boeing specialists upgraded one of their B-52 bombers, turning it into a support point for the CONECT (Combat Network Communications Technology) combat system. In the future, it is planned to upgrade the 76 aircraft.




The bomber received a system of broadband access to the satellite network. He maintains constant communication with the Ministry of Defense and various staffs, which makes it possible to carry out instant corrections of mission plans, obtaining the necessary data at high speed, and also remotely monitor “intelligent weapon».

It is worth noting that the updated B-52 is not equipped with the most modern equipment. In particular, fortified keyboards and trackballs are used, since, according to US officials, touch screens do not have the required degree of reliability.

Photos used:
http://www.popmech.ru/
52 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. jjj
    jjj 29 May 2014 12: 20
    +13
    Button - it is always more reliable than the sensor. So the Americans admitted that the Russians were right
    1. Gxash
      Gxash 29 May 2014 12: 26
      +6
      We must actively develop cyber units in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. The Americans won how many goals they decided to do - they will have to be put under their control! Well, either block the transmitted information from them, or change the goals and their coordinates. Let their precision weapons fly in them ...
      1. BYV
        BYV 29 May 2014 12: 39
        +7
        Hope all Windows hardware?
        1. Bodrov
          Bodrov 29 May 2014 13: 13
          +7
          Quote: BYV
          Hope all Windows hardware?

          On Windows Vista))))
          Will fly distribute Wi-Fi, take pictures on Instagram, and send spam))
          1. Starover_Z
            Starover_Z 29 May 2014 13: 56
            +2
            Quote: Bodrov
            On Windows Vista))))
            Will fly distribute Wi-Fi, take pictures on Instagram, and send spam))

            And it will also allow brave American warriors not to get bored between sweeps, but to drive network shooters, increasing combat training and skills!
    2. ZU-23
      ZU-23 29 May 2014 12: 40
      +1
      Quote: jjj
      Button - it is always more reliable than the sensor. So the Americans admitted that the Russians were right

      I agree, tomorrow I should receive a touchscreen (touch screen) for a broken smartphone. And one of the first bomber will fall to the ground from our air defense laughing .
      1. andj61
        andj61 29 May 2014 12: 57
        +2
        Quote: ZU-23
        And the bomber is one of the first to fall to the ground from our air defense.

        In my opinion, it will fall much earlier - immediately after the use of nuclear weapons.
        All this - for warfare with a knowingly weaker enemy. What satellite networks are there during the global nuclear war! In the case of the use of nearby nuclear weapons with an electromagnetic pulse alone, all microcircuits will burn out.
        1. ZU-23
          ZU-23 29 May 2014 13: 09
          0
          Quote: andj61
          In my opinion, it will fall much earlier - immediately after the use of nuclear weapons. All this - for warfare with a obviously weaker enemy. What satellite networks are there during the global nuclear war! In the case of the use of nearby nuclear weapons with an electromagnetic pulse alone, all microcircuits will burn out.

          Yeah, yes, so the satellites will extinguish them and that’s all for the airplane, so the price is worthless.
        2. clidon
          clidon 29 May 2014 18: 32
          +1
          And for the use of nuclear weapons, the Americans have completely different weapons. Actually, like us, buying, for example, the Mi-28, or do not think that we are throwing money down the drain - "after all, in a nuclear war it will not be of much use."
          1. Vladislav
            Vladislav 29 May 2014 20: 56
            0
            Not all that glitters is gold! Not every mess comes out in a nuclear war! You still say that we do not need helicopters, and not only!
    3. The comment was deleted.
  2. silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 29 May 2014 12: 20
    +3
    Long-lived in its class ... The next round of modernization is taking place ... But the armament has not changed much over the past two decades.
    1. Orc-xnumx
      Orc-xnumx 29 May 2014 12: 29
      +3
      Long-liver, like the Tu-95.
      1. zadorin1974
        zadorin1974 29 May 2014 13: 05
        +4
        The problem is that they have about fifty cars in flight condition, the rest are donors. Not so long ago there was an analytical program about nuclear weapons in the USA and their delivery vehicles. So, not everything is so cloudless in the country of mattresses, especially in the nuclear sphere (which B- 52)
    2. bif
      bif 29 May 2014 13: 27
      +1
      Quote: silberwolf88
      Longevity in its class

      "...In the future, it is planned to “upgrade” another 76 aircraft... "The United States does not have 76 B-52s capable of flying in on its own ... and if we consider that the repair of the still" alive "is carried out at the expense of the" cannibalism "of other B-52s, then in the future they will be ... but there will not be them soon.
  3. Ingvar 72
    Ingvar 72 29 May 2014 12: 21
    +5
    It is urgent to develop and develop anti-satellite systems and missiles. Without US satellites, like a grandmother without glasses.
    1. Dazdranagon
      Dazdranagon 29 May 2014 12: 22
      +7
      Quote: Ingvar 72
      It is urgent to develop and develop anti-satellite systems.
      - The S-500 must hit near space objects! hi
      1. Dangerous
        Dangerous 29 May 2014 12: 36
        +1
        Why ours do not put A-135? They cover only Moscow. Or is it stipulated by some kind of agreement?
      2. The comment was deleted.
        1. Dazdranagon
          Dazdranagon 29 May 2014 12: 43
          +2
          Each side pledged to have no more than two missile defense systems (around the capital and in the area where the launchers of intercontinental ballistic missiles are concentrated) ... Later, in July 1974, under the additional protocol to this Treaty, it was allowed to have only one such system ... - ABM agreement with the United States of 1972. hi
          1. spech
            spech 29 May 2014 13: 24
            +2
            ABM Treaty with the United States of 1972

            duck the United States seems to have come out of it.
      3. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 29 May 2014 13: 51
        +2
        Quote: Dazdranagon
        - The S-500 must hit near space objects!

        From the land is expensive. It seems that there were developments of an anti-satellite missile for the MIG-31, it will be much cheaper. hi
        1. Dazdranagon
          Dazdranagon 29 May 2014 15: 59
          +1
          Quote: Ingvar 72
          anti-satellite missiles for MIG-31
          - Yes, somehow I found the information. But the question was that the MIGi-31 will soon have to be written off ... And who there, our military, knows what they have prepared! wassat
    2. Nayhas
      Nayhas 29 May 2014 12: 32
      +6
      Quote: Ingvar 72
      Without US satellites, like a grandmother without glasses.

      The USA has a powerful fleet of reconnaissance aircraft, which no country has. The most advanced inertial navigation systems that will compete with satellite navigation in the future. Now answer the question, what will Russia represent without its constellation of satellites?
      1. Rus2012
        Rus2012 29 May 2014 12: 41
        +2
        Quote: Nayhas
        Now answer the question, what will Russia represent without its constellation of satellites?

        You yourself answered your own question - to create the "Most advanced inertial navigation systems" ... or systems that can replace satellite navigation. Theoretically and practically - these are visible ...
      2. Ingvar 72
        Ingvar 72 29 May 2014 13: 57
        +2
        Quote: Nayhas
        Now answer the question, what will Russia represent without its constellation of satellites?

        We are less attached to satellites than the US Army. But this is certainly not a reason not to develop their means of communication and navigation. but our attempts are for some reason completely accidental laughing fail.
        However, it is possible that deliberate sabotage is to blame. This RIA Novosti said the chairman of the commission to investigate the causes of the accident, the first deputy general director of TsNIImash Alexander Danilyuk.
      3. basmach
        basmach 29 May 2014 20: 21
        +2
        You don’t have to say that you don’t understand. Any inertial guidance system has the property of accumulating errors, which leads to a rather significant deviation. Correction is used to eliminate such errors (astro correction, control points of the route in the Kyrgyz Republic for the analysis of the Earth's surface, satellite and so on). So inertial s-we can not compete with satellite in any way, these satellites serve as an addition to inertial.
        1. VAF
          VAF 29 May 2014 21: 37
          0
          Quote: basmach
          . Any inertial guidance system has the property of accumulation of error, which leads to a rather significant deviation.


          Yes, but ... not to the essential. But with the advent of laser gyroscopes in systems and in general ... without platform ICs, where certain accelerations (we will not trump technical terms) are no longer measured by accelerometers ..... errors. Which are correct " they are called "as" residuals "have not large values ​​at all, which does not lead to significant errors in navigation and the arrival of the product to the target, and if at the final stage active guidance and target acquisition is provided. then here is a" super correction "for the entire system. this principle is implemented in Kaira (but not very well) and in Platan (just very cool) wink
          But the fact that accuracy by satellite and purely by inertia is a big difference. Here you are absolutely right good +! drinks
          1. basmach
            basmach 29 May 2014 22: 23
            0
            Good gentleman, I have already written, there is no need to talk about what you do not understand. At least I studied PrNK "Kaira" at the school, but served as an engineer PrNK-54 (Su-17M4). I am typing especially for you - "Theoretical foundations. Acceleration is the rate of change of speed, and speed is the rate of change of position. Measuring the acceleration of movement, you can calculate the speed by integrating it. By integrating the speed, you can determine the current position (coordinates) of the aircraft or vessel. Thus , the inertial navigation system is a dead reckoning system. Acceleration is a vector quantity that has not only a numerical value, but also a direction. Therefore, a sensor system that determines acceleration must measure both its magnitude and its direction. One of the disadvantages of inertial navigation systems is the fact that they need to be adjusted (set) not only in speed and location, but also in spatial position (orientation relative to a given base, for example, the horizon). A big drawback of the inertial navigation system is that its error accumulates over time. This is due to the integrating action the system itself. The speed is calculated by integrating the acceleration, and the constant acceleration error is converted into a continuously increasing speed error. The main cause of error in a mechanical gyroscope is friction in moving parts. Backscattering damages the operation of the laser gyroscope, i.e. scattering of the laser beam by the surfaces of mirrors and by gas molecules encountered in the path of the beam. Backscattering distorts the spot pattern so that it rotates with the body. Eliminating and minimizing backscatter requires the utmost precision in the design and manufacture of laser gyroscopes. “That's short. In general, learn the materiel.
    3. andj61
      andj61 29 May 2014 13: 03
      +3
      Back in the 80s, we had programs for destroying satellites in various ways - both with ground and air missiles, and space combat stations (Almaz-Salut), and by launching high-speed clouds of space debris (bolts, nuts, balls - into the corresponding orbits) for destruction; foil - to impede the work of strangers and protect their companions.
  4. Yellow white
    Yellow white 29 May 2014 12: 22
    0
    I understand everything, "fulcrum", "smart weapon", the 21st century in the yard ...
    But how stripes like to fight at a distance, Schaub away and we were not hooked ...
    By and large bzduny!
    1. Orc-xnumx
      Orc-xnumx 29 May 2014 12: 33
      +2
      If you can do this, and not fill up with corpses, then "so" is certainly better.
    2. bulvas
      bulvas 29 May 2014 12: 34
      +3
      Quote: Black and White
      But how stripes like to fight at a distance, Schaub away and we were not hooked ...


      It is reasonable.
      We also need to learn this way.

      It is one thing to defend your country, and another - geopolitical tasks to solve thousands of kilometers from your land




    3. Nayhas
      Nayhas 29 May 2014 12: 34
      +1
      Quote: Black and White
      I understand everything, "fulcrum", "smart weapon", the 21st century in the yard ...
      But how stripes like to fight at a distance, Schaub away and we were not hooked ...
      By and large bzduny!

      According to your logic, the use of long-range sniper rifles, for example, is a sign of "bzdunism"? Weak one on one in the field on fists?
  5. kostyan77708
    kostyan77708 29 May 2014 12: 33
    +1
    you need to create an orbital grouping under the guise so that at one point they beat all the satellites to hell, dazzle them and then go quietly and finish off with shovels, so as not to spoil the environment
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 29 May 2014 12: 36
      +1
      Quote: kostyan77708
      you need to create an orbital grouping under the guise so that at one point they beat all the satellites to hell, dazzle them and then go quietly and finish off with shovels, so as not to spoil the environment

      By shumok how is it?
  6. sanja.grw
    sanja.grw 29 May 2014 12: 37
    0

    Something strange, because they always pursued only high technology, they even developed a pen to write in space and swelled millions for an invention, while ours still write in space in pencil without putting a dime, but they left the buttons
    1. Altona
      Altona 29 May 2014 13: 29
      0
      Quote: sanja.grw
      Something strange, because they always pursued only high technology, they even developed a pen to write in space and swelled millions for an invention

      ________________________
      What's the strangeness then? The plane is "pumped" in the style of steam-punk and old school ... Such a hard hard version ... laughing
  7. crambol
    crambol 29 May 2014 12: 38
    +2
    Quote: Black and White
    But how stripes like to fight at a distance, Schaub away and we were not hooked ...
    By and large bzduny!


    It’s time to wean our sack of soup cabbage, my dear! You probably know how our communication system has shown itself during the events in Georgia?
  8. mig31
    mig31 29 May 2014 12: 45
    0
    I know this without amers from my own experience, better than a toggle switch and lever nothing was invented ...
  9. jovanni
    jovanni 29 May 2014 12: 46
    +2
    Useful things should be adopted and improved.
  10. Yellow white
    Yellow white 29 May 2014 12: 50
    0
    Yes, all this is clear!
    Nobody slurps cabbage soup!
    I meant that A.M.E.r., for the whole of his history, has been fighting like this for a short time, on a foreign land, with the wrong hands, while they themselves are sitting away ... attacked to explain ..
  11. Fantazer911
    Fantazer911 29 May 2014 12: 57
    +1
    I’m happy for the star-strikers, the next one they drank bobs and budgets, as they clung to their values ​​and more, here it will be a penny bucks worth without gold, then all millionaires at once will become poor.
  12. kostyan77708
    kostyan77708 29 May 2014 13: 00
    0
    Nayhas (2) RU Today, 12:36 ↑ New

    Quote: kostyan77708
    you need to create an orbital grouping under the guise so that at one point they beat all the satellites to hell, dazzle them and then go quietly and finish off with shovels, so as not to spoil the environment

    By shumok how is it?

    Well, like dual-purpose satellites, we launch it, and only launch it with special weapons on board, our scientists have already come up with something (I immediately say that these are just my thoughts, I don’t have any idea about launching satellites and preparing them, etc. ), such as a container with balls from bearings, which during an explosion will smash everything to dust in orbit
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 29 May 2014 13: 28
      +1
      Quote: kostyan77708
      Well, such as dual-purpose satellites, we launch after all, and only launch with special weapons on board

      What orbit? Do you realize that there are satellites that fly 200 km to LEO, and there are also to GSO at 30 km? Try to imagine that people are using airspace no further than 000 km above the ground. in height, i.e. roughly speaking, a thin layer of air 15 km thick. with the circumference of the earth (15 thousand km.). Are there any problems with detecting and destroying aircraft? Undoubtedly. And in space, everything is an order of magnitude larger and as much more complicated. The bike about the "bucket of bolts" is designed for a gray audience that is incapable of thinking, do not be like ...
  13. muginov2015
    muginov2015 29 May 2014 13: 04
    0
    We must make sure that they take orders from our satellites, while not knowing about it.
  14. Tolerast
    Tolerast 29 May 2014 13: 11
    +2
    I wonder what his ESR is? Such a bandura, in theory, should "sparkle" like a Christmas tree.
    1. andj61
      andj61 29 May 2014 13: 25
      +3
      Quote: Tolerast
      I wonder what his ESR is? Such a bandura, in theory, should "sparkle" like a Christmas tree.

      About 100 sq.m. This is probably the most noticeable military aircraft.
      1. Tolerast
        Tolerast 29 May 2014 13: 28
        +1
        Thank you. Thought so.
  15. Palladium900
    Palladium900 29 May 2014 13: 26
    -1
    The Serbian military, in March 1999, managed to destroy the most "secret" aircraft of the US Air Force - the F-117A. The machine, worth 50 million dollars (and billions were spent on the development of "stealth technology"!), Was shot down by a Serbian anti-aircraft missile system with the brand "Made in USSR". American stealth aircraft were invisible only to their radars. Our radars detected them perfectly. But the Americans kept quiet about this, because they sold these "flying coffins" like stealth planes at immodest prices ...
    1. clidon
      clidon 29 May 2014 19: 30
      +1
      Do not write nonsense - the F-117 made so many successful flights that one can only envy. Moreover, in the most dangerous conditions of use. And yes, except for the US Air Force, these secret machines were not supplied anywhere "at immodest prices" then.
  16. FlyEngine
    FlyEngine 29 May 2014 14: 26
    +1
    Quote: Starover_Z
    And it will also allow brave American warriors not to be bored between sweeps, but to drive network shooters, increasing combat training and skills!

    Drive shooting and bald)
  17. Juborg
    Juborg 29 May 2014 14: 30
    +1
    The last B-52 was produced in 64. They are older than the oldest Russian "Bear". The Boeing failed to modernize their engines, the skeleton could not support their weight, plus only one cruise missile was included. I think all these bells and whistles will not save amers. Our air defense will draw them on approach.
    1. clidon
      clidon 29 May 2014 19: 34
      +1
      In my opinion it’s no secret to anyone that they will shoot outside the air defense range. The machines are reliable, they fly themselves and fly and are going to fly until 2040.
  18. kostyan77708
    kostyan77708 29 May 2014 14: 30
    -1
    FlyEngine RU Today, 14:26 New

    Quote: Starover_Z
    And it will also allow brave American warriors not to be bored between sweeps, but to drive network shooters, increasing combat training and skills!

    Drive shooting and bald) each other)))))
  19. Vlad Gore
    Vlad Gore 29 May 2014 14: 42
    0
    Quote: bif

    "... In the future, it is planned to carry out an" upgrade "of another 76 aircraft ..." The United States does not have 76 B-52s capable of flying in on its own ... and if we consider that the repair of the "still alive" is carried out due to the "cannibalism" of other -52, then in the future they will be ... but they will not be soon.


    Russia needs to offer assistance to the Pentagon in recycling. lol
  20. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 29 May 2014 14: 53
    +2
    They are ahead of us in this area, unfortunately. How much money was secured, but there is almost no sense. Only in the paratroopers what is less happening.
  21. Sinbad
    Sinbad 29 May 2014 15: 06
    +1
    Here is another work for Russian hackers. Have fun guys, play airplanes, the Pentagon did for you.
  22. Ajent cho
    Ajent cho 29 May 2014 16: 11
    0
    b-52 bomber

    But haven't they all been shot down over Vietnam? Sorry, sorry ... Well, nothing, still to come.
  23. abc_alex
    abc_alex 29 May 2014 16: 16
    +1
    It is a pity that we do not have a sane Tu-95 modernization program. Even if PAK-DA does happen, is it really impossible to use the "Bears" wisely?
    1. clidon
      clidon 29 May 2014 19: 35
      +1
      They are also slowly being modernized. But so far, the technology has not reached such "hubs". Hopefully we'll master it in the foreseeable future.
      1. VAF
        VAF 29 May 2014 21: 45
        0
        Quote: clidon
        They are slowly modernizing too.


        Yes, yes! drinks But only very, very .. slowly. Some courts are for the only one and that ... the future of the Tu-95MSM .... eh..managers, managers .... the "product" of state corporations crying