B-52H turns 50!

[Lonestar]

Plus, birds the size of Pelicans have a habit of getting sucked into it's engines. (it's a ground-skiming bomber)

[Transcend]

Since B-52 is so effective, why can't we build 500 more of them? They should be really cheap nowadays.

[joseph1944]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Koreans, Vietnamese, Laotians, Cambodians, Iraqis . . . not so many Koreans and Iraqis.

2.5 million Koreans died in the war, mostly from allied air raids.

The B-52H model was not built until 1960 and enter service May of 1961. Next month it will be 51 year old. Sorry, the last B-52H was completed in 62. Oh, no B-52 flew in Korea. The first B-52 Squadron was located with the 93 BW at Castle AFB, Atwater Calif. in 1954. The Korea war was over in July 1953. The summer of 58 I lived w/ my Aunt next to Castle and the B-52 flew over our place at about 500 to a 1000 ft. up and one day I saw the first B-52G fly because it was missing part of it tail. It must have been the Prototype.

2 million Vietanames died in the war, mostly from American air raids.

1 million Laotians died during their civil war, mostly from American air raids.

2 million Cambodians died in the war, mostly from American air raids.

etc.

If not killed directly by the air raids themsevles, then by the economic disruption (and in Cambodia, the inability of the government to cope with the disaster of US bombing led to the Khmer Rouge taking power).

It's an indiscriminate monster. It doesn't just kill people, it kills nations.


Yes, I realize the numbers don't add up. That's because lots of people were killed by other methods and other planes, but the Stratofortress was the important one.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Transcend
Since B-52 is so effective, why can't we build 500 more of them? They should be really cheap nowadays.

We have enough of them, so many that we have scrapped a bunch of them already. I bet it would cost a pretty penny to build one from scratch today though. As the number that can be cheaply kept flying dwindles I'm sure that we will look for a way to replace them. The fact that they are still useful says a lot about the design and workmanship of the B-52, but I am also sure that we could design a much better plane with many of the same characteristics (range / bomb load / durability) now. We will do so when we cannot rely on the 'free' B-52s we already have in our inventory.

[joseph1944]

Originally posted by Ecthelion
1 plane can cover an area that is 1 km wide?

Actually a cell of B-52s (3 Planes) can cover 1 mi. (1.6km) wide by 3 miles long (4.8km). A hole 15 feet deep and 25 feet across with 750 lbs bombs about 5 feet apart. Lots of new swimming pool.

[joseph1944]

Originally posted by Kyle
Saw an interview with an Air Force general; he said the current goal is to keep them in service until 2040. Quite amazing.

If it does stay in service that long, I will be 96 year old and the B-52 will have span my intire life. They started to design it in 1948, I was 4 year old.
Some of the pilot today are the Grandson of the first pilots.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Sprayber
The B-52 is a tool. Nothing more. A remarkable tool without a doubt, but in the end just a piece of equipment used by men in response to other men.

That's like saying a nuclear weapon is just a tool, or the gas chambers are just tools.

We're not talking about a weapon designed for use against other combatants. The B-52 was designed to be an indiscriminate killer on a mass scale. Civilians, military personal, it didn't matter.

It is impressive that the US has the technological ability and money to keep these aircraft flying after 50 years, but lets hide the fact that the B-52 sole purpose was to provide the US with a blunt instrument to kill civilians and military personal alike.

Five million or a million? It's all about the same.

[Felch]

Tingkai, if they run, they're Viet Cong. If they stand still, they're well disciplined Viet Cong. No civilians.

[Kyle]

Originally posted by Tingkai


That's like saying a nuclear weapon is just a tool, or the gas chambers are just tools.

We're not talking about a weapon designed for use against other combatants. The B-52 was designed to be an indiscriminate killer on a mass scale. Civilians, military personal, it didn't matter.

It is impressive that the US has the technological ability and money to keep these aircraft flying after 50 years, but lets hide the fact that the B-52 sole purpose was to provide the US with a blunt instrument to kill civilians and military personal alike.

Five million or a million? It's all about the same.

As any bomber of the day would've been. Not targetting civilians is a very recent concept in warfare. Today, the bomber is hardly a "blunt instrument to kill civilians..."

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Kyle
Today, the bomber is hardly a "blunt instrument to kill civilians..."

Really? And why do you say that?

[Asher]

Can we have a total for the number of deaths China's gunpowder invention caused?

Thanks.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Really? And why do you say that?

Maybe because they're mostly used to launch cruise missiles now? Cruise missiles are precision weapons, and are usually aimed only at military installations (hardly a "blunt" instrument).

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Tingkai


That's like saying a nuclear weapon is just a tool, or the gas chambers are just tools.

We're not talking about a weapon designed for use against other combatants. The B-52 was designed to be an indiscriminate killer on a mass scale. Civilians, military personal, it didn't matter.

Nuclear weapons are just another tool in the arsenal. As was the gas chambers. Why anyone would celebrate or vilify tools is beyond me. Talk about policy to your hearts content. But in the end they are all just tools. The problems lies in the people up at the top on both sides of a conflict. If they had to, they would order the use of sticks and stones to carry out their orders.

It is impressive that the US has the technological ability and money to keep these aircraft flying after 50 years, but lets hide the fact that the B-52 sole purpose was to provide the US with a blunt instrument to kill civilians and military personal alike.

Five million or a million? It's all about the same.

I don't think anyone hides the fact that the B52 is a weapon of war. Where did you get that from? Just because the US has found a machine that does its job reliably doesn't make them any different from those countries that find less efficent means.

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Asher
Can we have a total for the number of deaths China's gunpowder invention caused?

Thanks.

But Asher, how could one possibly use that to PREACH about the evil United States. One would have to wait up until the late 1700's to even get to the US. That's just not good for the congregation to hear.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Asher

Maybe because they're mostly used to launch cruise missiles now? Cruise missiles are precision weapons, and are usually aimed only at military installations (hardly a "blunt" instrument).

While they are used to launch cruise missiles, the B-52 is still used in a traditional carpet bombing role.