Re:The Air Force is having to reverse engineer parts of its ...
by Jtsummers on Wednesday March 03, 2021 @03:41PM
(#26334146)
I had to check, it's not as ancient as some other bombers with B-2 first flight occurring in 1989. I met a pilot who flew on the same B-52 as his father, and his grandfather had flown some of the first B-52s. This was in the 00s, about 15-18 years ago.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The Air Force is having to reverse engineer parts of its ...
by aphextron on Wednesday March 03, 2021 @03:58PM
(#26334422)
It's impossible to overstate how long these things have been in service. The oldest B-52 airframes still in active service were built longer ago than the first flight of the Wright brothers was when they were built.
Re:The Air Force is having to reverse engineer parts of its ...
by rstupek on Wednesday March 03, 2021 @04:35PM
(#26334938)
And likely to be in service for another 30 years. A 100 year airframe
Re:The Air Force is having to reverse engineer parts of its ...
by koalahedron on Thursday March 04, 2021 @01:28PM
(#26346150)
I worked at Boeing Wichita (which is no more), and an engineer told me that the B-52 was getting heavier over time because the old wires weren't removed for avionics upgrades. Of course, they were always trying to put one over on me as a newbie (I worked on avionics S/W in Ada for the tankers).
He also said a big problem was the expense of doing a modern engine upgrade. Anyone know if they ever re-engined it? Was he joking again?
Having one of these fly over my apartment on Rock Rd. was a dish rattler--I used to see B-2s every once in a while too (fairly loud too, IIRC).
Re:The Air Force is having to reverse engineer parts of its ...
by koalahedron on Thursday March 04, 2021 @10:57PM
(#26352479)
20 years later, looks like they are taking RFPs for re-engining:
[PDF] https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11413
I guess he was right about the engines.