Will the CAF ever fly a B-52?

[agent86]

Hi all,
the other day I was daydreaming(Must have been at work)and this worthless thought came to mind.When the U.S.A.F. finally retires the B-52
(if ever in our lifetimes!)What do you suppose the chances are of a private organization such as the CAF or similar operating one?and if it ever did come to pass,which model would you prefer to see fly?
..........oh well,just wondered................Tim............................



"What me worry?"

[RMAllnutt]

Even in pre-9/11 days, I'd say the answer would have been categorically, NEVER, EVER, EVER,... so you don't have to guess what the answer would be today! It's too big a liability if something went wrong, or if it got into the wrong hands. Oh well, at least there's a possibility that an avro vulcan might fly again.

Cheers,
Richard

[Don Martin]

As we all know, It wont happen(look at the Ft. Worth B-36 trouble), and with nothing left flying but "H" models thats even limited. BUT, if it somehow did become a reality, a nice early "G" model with dummy Hounddogs under the wing would be sharp! Or a "D" with the industrial size tip tanks. Ya just gotta love that SAC Anti Flash White!:prayer:

[Scott Rose]

Personally I would love to see a B-52 warbird, perhaps paired up with a warbird Tu-95 Bear. Now that would be a site. Rediculasly expensive to operate though.

[mrhenniger]

Personally I would love to see a B-52 warbird, perhaps paired up with a warbird Tu-95 Bear. Now that would be a site. Rediculasly expensive to operate though.

There was talk about re-engining the B-52s. One possibility was to replace the 8 engines with 4 engines of a modern design. It would not be difficult in terms of thrust, as new designs have very good thrust, much more than two of the old engines. In fact i think there was a concern that there could be too much thrust (structural concern).

Anyway... By the time they B-52Hs are retired they could be B-52Is with much more efficient engines with a good spares supply as compared to the current engines.

But then the engines are only part of the issue. Imagine have to tackle corrosion issues in the wing of a B-52... Yikes!

Mike

[TimAPNY]

Does anyone think that USAF will ever stop using them?

[Randy Haskin]

Given the SALT and START treaties, I don't see it happening ever. That's the REAL issue, and not operating cost.

[Scott Rose]

Does anyone think that USAF will ever stop using them?

Probably not. They are the grunts of the bomber force. As long as they can fly they will be used. I wouldn't be surprised if they decided to re-spar them and fit the big turbofans on them. Though it might look a little funny. And with the absurd cost of new bombers it's doubtful a new, multi enginned, large bomb capacity bomber will be developed.

[Don Martin]

The last article I read about the lifespan of the BUFF(Popular Mechanics I think) stated the USAF planned to fly the B-52 at least until they are into there 70's. And the re-engine question was only a question. Talk about long in tooth! And can you just picture the wrinkles and skin sag!

[dj51d]

While I would love to see a B-52 fly as a warbird, I just can't see it happening. Assuming you could ever clear the paperwork, restoration from de-milled condition would be incredibly complicated and expensive. The operating cost of such a machine would likely be too high for any flying museum to afford without a MAJOR sponser. Randy Haskin makes a good point about the treaty implications, I hadn't thought of that angle.

[bdk]

There was talk about re-engining the B-52s. One possibility was to replace the 8 engines with 4 engines of a modern design. It would not be difficult in terms of thrust, as new designs have very good thrust, much more than two of the old engines.

The USAF came to Boeing Long Beach a couple of years ago to discuss the possibility of retrofitting C-17 nacelles onto B-52's.

Drat! Timed out again... Scott!