tippersteffi1 good comment. and Sir, thank you for your service. We need more like you.

tippersteffi1 I probably ran one of the simulators you trained in, either at Minot (railcar mounted on TDY) or at Castle back then and left the service in '73. Sounds like you flew the H-model more in the mid-70's. If I'm right, you missed all the fun dodging SAMs in D-models. Thank you also, for your service!

tippersteffi1 The Few The Proud & SAC 5th Heavy Bomb Wing BUFF Nuke Driver Cheers and Thank You For Your Service .. Had the unique experience to kiss the tarmac after stepping back over the red line at Why Not Minot LOL

Remember hearing about the '52 at Wurtsmith where at around 300 feet # 3 pylon blew off the aircraft? # 4 ingested debris, and IT shut down. No flaps, either! Flew around Lake Huron for about 12 hours, burning fuel. Landed with right full rudder and no flaps. Bruce K. Holloway, CIC of SAC, flew up next day from SAC HQ and awarded the pilot (a former enlisted airman) a DFC. Late 60's, if I remember correctly.

tippersteffi1 d

this thing guzzles 20th pounds an hour at cruise and at takeoff full weight 60th pounds per hour

@@terryvarta9306 it's also still an excellent weapon system. it has the highest mission ready rates and has the largest payload capacity of any bomber in our inventory. there has been some talk of replacing the aging power-plants with something more modern. the same airframe could do the same job with 4 much more modern and fuel efficient engines.

Had a look on the GE website and it looks like both their options seem good: The CF34-10 engines have a decent BPR (bypass-ratio) for heavy lifting at 5.4:1 which helps it pack a pretty good takeoff thrust of 20,360 pounds. It also guzzles a lot of gas too, but given that it's gotta pull a lot of plane along that's sort of to be expected. As well as that, it comes with a load of new electrical redundancy systems on board, very useful on a plane like that. That engine was based also off the CFM56 itself, and that family of engines has been going strong for ages. It would definitely be a very reliable engine. Option 2 is a bit of a record breaker, as GE are quick to point out, saying that it can travel a range of 8152 nautical miles. Plus, the lower specific fuel consumption and incredibly high overall pressure ratio would allow this engine to take a B-52 pretty much anywhere they wanted to go. It does, however, have a slightly higher BPR of 5.8:1, which is partly what helps with efficiency and also noise reduction, although does mean that the maximum thrust at takeoff is slightly lower at 18,900 pounds. This is still enough to make the B-52 fly though. This engine also comes with full "FADEC" or Full Authority Digital Engine Control, which would be a step up from even the other engine in terms of redundancy and helping to spot errors and possible malfunctions before they even happen. My personal opinion: - add the Passenger engines. They seem to be the slightly better option. - add to the stealth navigation system they have currently, where you use stars to navigate, and integrate the navigation system used on the B2 and (probably, but hey it's so highly classified literally nobody, not even the President knows) the B21 that allows it to take a photo of the ground beneath it and cross reference that with what is essentially a more advanced google maps to find its location (it might not be able to use GPS; satellites could be gone.) To find an accurate position. But, if the system is damaged then the current system is tried and tested for at least 5000 years. Probably more like 50,000. - i put something here about AESA (Active Electronically Scanned Array) radar here but it seems like that's already going on with upgrades. It's a sort of phased array (a kind of array similar to the ones now being used with 5g systems, where lots of transponders send a signal in the same direction to increase the amount of "radar" that goes in that direction and minimise the number of outside sources. Like shining 5 torches at the same thing.) That would be very good at spotting missiles and threats to the aircraft, and tracking them. Much more advanced than the current systems. But that said, it also appears that the B21, the secret successor to the B2, could also be really effective here. The new planes will be able to (probably? Nobody really knows.) Fly higher and faster than the older B2s, especially since the B2s were designed to fly slightly lower than they really should. (Actually they were re-designed. It cost a billion dollars and 2 years setback. THEN they realised it was a bad idea.) The only other thing we know about the B21though is that about 100 are gonna be built, they might be vaguely triangle-shaped, and also may or may not be a plane that may or may not be able to fly. (jk although with how much they keep this under wraps we really don't know anything.)

@@terryvarta9306 - its a bomber, it wasn't built to be a health clinic so who cares how much fuel it guzzles.

@Bernard de Fontaines I've never heard of that one - and as far as I'm aware, there aren't even any engines that can get close to that speed, at least at normal altitudes. The fastest thing we can get right now is the Russian Zircon missile, which goes at 5300mph (but as I'm from the UK I'd call it 8500km/h), or about Mach 7. That's about twice the speed of the SR71 Blackbird, the fastest plane ever made. it does this through a two-stage propulsion system, with the first stage getting it to Mach 1 and the second stage accelerating it further using a ramjet. (ramjets have to be going at a certain speed to actually work, otherwise the oblique shockwaves wouldn't form in the first place and it would give too much air to the engine) . If we were to accelerate a bomber to Mach 12 to 15, it would need to be much more advanced than this - with technology we do not currently have. However. That is all assuming it flies within the height limits of a conventional bomber, or about 50,000ft (15km) . A bomber at higher altitudes, such as the ones you suggested, would definitely be out of the atmosphere, and thus be able to accelerate to much higher speeds. As well as that, a bomber at 120 miles (193km) would not even really need to carry bombs, simply firing a metal rod down at the Earth with enough velocity from that altitude could already be devastating, and would have little to no long lasting effects, unlike some conventional explosives. Because of this, I can see exactly why this would be attractive for military development; although this does not really cover the issues, which I'll say here: - You will need to use rocket engines - the very thing that is allowing you to speed up this much is also the thing that will cause you to become much less fuel efficient. No air means you will need rocket engines, and also you will need to carry extra oxygen so they can burn. - The overall payload of this aircraft will become much less than any other bomber. You can see this with the U2 spy plane that flew at comparable altitudes, and it can only carry a payload of about 2200kg (5000Ib), which is peanuts compared to the 32000kg of the B52. - Especially with modern radar phased arrays, this will actually make the plane easier to detect (if the plane is flying at lower altitudes, then the curve of the Earth actually protects it from being detected with radar or other detection). Flying at higher altitudes means this plane will be seen long before it can drop anything. - The project would have a huge cost - while the US has a huge military budget, this system simply would not work because it would take up a significant chunk of the military budget, while not really providing anything more than we already have. However! There is a different super-secret project, the B-21. it is rumoured to be the successor to the B-2 stealth bomber, and might fly much higher and faster than the B-2, although not quite that high or fast. I do say "might", however, as nobody really knows if it will. The B-52-G, for instance, was actually slower than the B-52 due to the upgraded radar jamming systems actually making it less aerodynamic! - so all we can guess right now is that it is a plane and it may... ..or may not be able to fly, and probably looks somewhat like a B-2.

Gung Ho Vids A buddy of mine who was in my High School Graduating Class of 1975 went to the Air Force Academy at Colorado Springs. At our 10 year reunion in 1985 he was a Captain and a SAC Pilot in a B52 that was built in the same year as we were born (1957). I learned a lot about SAC from him and I've been a DoD employee at an Aerospace Plant for the last 35 years. He left SAC after a few years and went from the USAF to the Army. Last time I saw him he was a Cobra Pilot in North Germany. He said that flying the B52 was like driving a long haul truck and being on constant alert was both monotonous and sometimes terrifying if an aerial refueling went "bad". I don't think most people know how hard and arduous a B52 crewman has it. It's sure not like driving a milk truck as a lot of people think... Thanks for posting the great vids!

randy109 Thanks for the good comment.

+randy109 Hi! I too was a DoD employee over 30 years too. I worked for DoD as well as all the branches of military. Lots of time at Air Force Systems Command, AFPRO DET plants, (like you), DLA, DCAA, FAA etc, (total military and DoD=38 years) Retired now, so much respects to you. Take care.

+randy109, My uncle was a B52 pilot during Vietnam.

+StellarBlue1 9

I was an engine man assigned to a KC-135 mobility team in 67. I still have some some photos of refueling a F-106 Dart near Alaska.

dbn52 That's a great story. The B-17 is an historic WWII bomber that helped win the war with Germany, and was crewed by very brave men. The casualty rate of B-17 crews was high, a lot of them were shot down and lost, thus the bravery... the men knew what they were getting into when they flew a mission. But they went into combat nonetheless. You should be proud of your Father-In-Law. I am, and thanks for your comment.

+Billy Callanan Thanks for the comment and for serving.

+Helene S. Cricket, did u served in the u.s air force ? if yes thanks for your service to our country.

Stationed at Barksdale in the seventys. I still wear a SAC patch.

Billy Callanan: I have never heard a satisfactory explanation as to the shortening of the vert. stab. post-D. What's the scoop?

Didn't need all that vert stab, so it got shortened.

my brother was a crew chief on a B52 from the mid 70s till the late 80s. in 78 i joined him at ELLSWORTH AFB S.DAKOTA. i was a cop working out in the missile field which gave me a 3 day on 6 day off schedule. many a time during my off period i would go out with my brother (ssgt. john hayley) to work with him on his assigned bird (tail number 1016) i grew to love that big ugly flyin f--ker as we referred it to. once i was given the honors of running the engines up. my god the power those planes have! i was pushing on the brake peddle as hard as i could as that entire plane was shaking and shuddering as if it were a toy in a dogs mouth being slung from side to side and up and down. as long as i live (im 64 now) i will always look back on that experience as one of the greatest in my life. my brother sadly passed away back in 2015 from a diabetic coma but i think that was the closest we have ever been. to whom ever cares for 1016 today, please give her a pat next to the crew chiefs tag on its body n tell her it was from john n his lil brother wes.

Videospotter - Planes & Travel oo

Yes, like a big pipe organ !

before ANY of them were born. the B52 has it's maiden flight in 1952

@@andrewdonohue1853 and had design plans beginning right after wwii with the Boeing 462

I was crew chief during operation Arc Light 68 & 69 tdy to Guam from Westover AFB. Actually got to sit a few missions over Nam. Loved this aircraft. My Buff was a D model.

VIETNAMVET Katz I spent 18 mos. to the day! at Andersen. Shipped out to ZI on 11-1-70. Was an OMS guy for some time on the D-series Model. I still remember the numbers on those tip tanks: 100, 067, 066, 103, 677, 699, 601, etc, etc. Yes, they were old already, they had many issues...but overall: what a magnificent aircraft. I just turned 70 this month, and the BUFF will always be my FAVORITE airplane. Towards the last 6 months in Guam, I became a Crew Chief as a lot of Airmen were going back home on "early outs". Great memories!!! REF

Minh Phúc Đỗ Trần were you alive during the war?

Minh Phúc Đỗ Trần- Your grandfather was a good man, thank him for his service.

Salute thoes engines sound like phsycopaths i bet that jet must of whacked off

98cebu I was working contraction outdoors, Conway rd when they flew that beast in for the last time. Did a fly by, all eight roaring! What a beautiful sound!

Love the F-4s!

Whish I could go for a. Ride

I betcha you found the Vulcan Cockpit a tight squeeze compared with the luxury of freedom to move in the B52 cockpit. I was in the RAF and was fortunate enough to get a flight in this magnificent aircraft while the B52s were in England for competition against our Victor Bombers (converted to air-to-air refueler) in the mid - late 1970s. One of the best aircraft I've had the privilege to fly in thanks to the USAF.

@@trfmamurphy9885 Yes sir, the Vulcan was a real tight squeeze. :) The Vulcan was a beautiful aircraft. While stationed in England, I watched them do touch-and-goes several times.

C.D. Sutherland Thanks for that... B-52 = BUFF = Big Ugly Fat Fucker. Stop by anytime.

+Jack Boren Thank You. Very good comment.

Long live the buff

Our specific mission was Deterrence...and we performed it well.

In fact the oldest of remaining operational Tu-95s we built in 1983.

Only reason the Bear exists is because it was an updated version of our B29....but still impressive

Not sure what all was stationed there, but we saw the tankers, B47, B52, C130 (or some variants) some fighters and the Angles that day. I know they did refueling training there at some point, as a friend of my dad's was stationed there. And we used to see ships from Wright Pat coming in too. What I do know is that it was an amazing time to be a kid! When I was in my teens, I used to play music at Air Haven for base social events. Being on the base at night was a very cool thing for me. Always felt like something was going to happen any minute!

the1realanalogman rickenbacker is a warehouse and distribution center now, no flying allowed... you'll wake the neighbors..

I was a B-52 crew chief and did 2 tours over Vietnam called ARC LIGHT in 68 & 69. Flew out of Guam and Utapao in Thailand. This is one of the greatest aircraft ever built. These things definitely paid for itself 10 times over. Viet Cong feared the B-52 more than any other weapon because they never heard or saw us coming

I was stationed at NKP way north from you guys.

Especially when they’re in their final approach to land.

Came back 7 years later to comment that the spool up sound at 1:19 still is the absolute best

+Jason White Slim Pickens rides the A bomb.

+Gung Ho Vids I thought that one was supposed to be a hydrogen bomb? It's been a very long time since I watched it.

Chris Baker Yea it probably was an H bomb. Still classic scene.

+Jason White or: How "I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb" ;)

-Sp00k- and

Hey my dad was a navigator for B-52’s as well. He was at Mather AFB in the SAC squadron. We could hear the engines running all the time day or night in the early mid-60’s. it was the life to live on base. And the Air Shows. We were Air Force Brats. Great memories. This is great to see what my dad saw when he was flying in this huge bird.

Th3uNn3rV3d I would say the USAF got its money's worth on the B-52. I grew up during the Vietnam war, about 4 miles south of an airbase. I must have watched 15-20 B-52s a day fly right over our house. That was back in the days when kids mostly played outside. We got used to the roar - great memories.

+Th3uNn3rV3d I was stationed at March AFB in 1970/71, if that's what you mean. There were several other bases that started with an M, Mather for one. Which one were you near? March was 22nd Bomb Wing Headquarters. Back then it was Strategic Air Command that flew the bombers. On the headquarters building was a sign "Peace Is Our Profession". One of our pilots had his flight jacket embroidered with that on the back and below it in parenthesis he had them put "War Is Just a Hobby".

Chris Baker Minot AFB. 5th Bomb Wing. in the 90's/00's there were only two COTUS Airbases that were home to the Buff. Barksdale and Minot.

+Th3uNn3rV3d Whats up Fire Dawg! I was at Minot from 97-99, I think I was on B Shift with TSgt Richard as AC. I had some good times there. I wish I would have stayed to see the New Station.... I PCS to Honduras in March of 99

+That 1 Infidel I was thinking the same about the wings.

+Rusty White The longer the wingspan; the larger the payload capacity. Weight is distributed.

+Shawn Lucas still creates a huge moment on the base of the wing.

+R.Mariano FYI, when the wing/body tanks are fully loaded, the wingtips sit about 3ft off the ground. On takeoff roll, the wings start to move up and at liftoff have raised about 18ft to level with the top of the fuselage, i.e., 21ft off the ground, shortly after liftoff, the wings raise another 10ft for a total of 28ft wingtip deflection! The flexible wing actually makes the aircraft much softer to fly when experiencing turbulence, especially during long low level flights 200-300ft above ground during the hot summer months. Every crewdog I knew still carried a barf bag along on these flights . . . . just in case!!

not much on this earth more Beautiful

+Chris Baker Good info from an old school guy. Thanks!

Amazing aircraft. I remember often driving past March AFB & seeing them lined up, so many years ago, during the Cold War. At least I think they were B-52's...

You would not believe the overall size of the Bomb Navigation system in the B-52 dating back to 1961. The 'computer' system was mechanical/electrical and the entire system was distributed in about dozen 'black boxes' throughout the aircraft, and each of them was a couple feet square. I expect that was replaced with a system you could 'hold in your hand' with the advent of the computers of today! Amazing, and thanks for a great video!

Chris Baker I worked on these at Edwards AFB in CA. Radios were replaced with ARC-164 UHF units. I worked communications on all assigned aircraft. Tail number 0050 is still flying today.

H

jesterd14 I thought that was what the Rangers were for.

and far away....

gimi boss2 Yes the H model