• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

B-21

MTShaw

Full Member
Reaction score
194
Points
580
The B-21 will be revealed to the public on Dec 2nd.


I hope this is not out of place on a Canadian forum.
 
The B-21 will be revealed to the public on Dec 2nd.


I hope this is not out of place on a Canadian forum.
Not when it might have links to NORAD/Continental defenc/se….
 
B-1 - Gone (1974)
B-2 - Gone (1989)
B-21 - Coming on line (TBD)

B-52 - here, now and forever..... (1952)

Global Strike Command has said in the last few years it intends to devote its finite manpower and fiscal resources to a two-bomber force—the B-21 and B-52—and retire the B-1 and B-2, which have recorded middling mission capability rates in recent years.


My money says the CH-47 and the UH-60 designs will age just as well as the B-52
 
B-1 - Gone (1974)
B-2 - Gone (1989)
B-21 - Coming on line (TBD)

B-52 - here, now and forever..... (1952)

Global Strike Command has said in the last few years it intends to devote its finite manpower and fiscal resources to a two-bomber force—the B-21 and B-52—and retire the B-1 and B-2, which have recorded middling mission capability rates in recent years.


My money says the CH-47 and the UH-60 designs will age just as well as the B-52
The B-52X Salute and flyby on the retirement of the USS Enterprise-D
9xottuhh19n21.jpg
 
i have read the US plans on flying the B 52 into the 2050's, built in 1962. obviously well maintained, but I am surprised an airframe this old is still plugging away. any insight from the air force maintainers on how they manage this????
 
i have read the US plans on flying the B 52 into the 2050's, built in 1962. obviously well maintained, but I am surprised an airframe this old is still plugging away. any insight from the air force maintainers on how they manage this????
I am NO expert but I think the airframe may have been overengineered - built a bit more robustly than other aircraft. When the B 52 was designed I THINK (just my thought here) the standard was for this thing to fly for extended hours and fly very far. Thus you have to have a tough airframe.

But like you said we need an aircraft maintenance type to weigh in.
 
I am NO expert but I think the airframe may have been overengineered - built a bit more robustly than other aircraft. When the B 52 was designed I THINK (just my thought here) the standard was for this thing to fly for extended hours and fly very far. Thus you have to have a tough airframe.

But like you said we need an aircraft maintenance type to weigh in.
Also a bit of Ship of Theseus thrown in too
 
First Flight - 1957

boeing-707-derivatives-850x567-1-849x283.jpg



Everything else in the air is an improved 707 - meaning it is made more quickly, cheaper and better.... Right?

The B-52 and 707 both came out of Boeing's shops.
 
I am NO expert but I think the airframe may have been overengineered - built a bit more robustly than other aircraft. When the B 52 was designed I THINK (just my thought here) the standard was for this thing to fly for extended hours and fly very far. Thus you have to have a tough airframe.

But like you said we need an aircraft maintenance type to weigh in.
It was designed to take some ground AA large cal fire and missile shrapnel and still be able to deliver the goods...
 
Back
Top