Reply With Quotewhat do the b1 in the back of the picture have fixed under? and what about the stealth is it reducing it?
There will never be another B-1 built. Don't know if you've ever watched any of the Pirates of the Caribbean movies, but the one where the two ships are going around the whirlpool. . .the soundstage the two ship were built on for shooting that scene is in Palmdale, CA. And was in the building where the B-1s were built. Needless to say, they don't build planes there anymore.Originally Posted by IconOfEvi
http://www.thesquarerigger.com/pirat...ribbean_3.html
what do the b1 in the back of the picture have fixed under? and what about the stealth is it reducing it?
I think you are referring to the Lockheed Martin Sniper Advanced Targeting Pod (ATP):
I'm not sure how it affects the RCS of the B-1, but I doubt they will be used on aircraft that are headed into an environment where they would be likely to encounter sophisticated air defenses. I believe it is accurate to say they will be employed when the aircraft is performing tactical missions.
With the pod, they will be able to employ some of the latest conventional munitions, like the laser JDAM.
B-1s have been used in Iraq and in Afghanistan, but I don't think B-1s with the targeting pod have been used in combat yet.
Edit: Oops, I was wrong: Sniper ATP-equipped B-1B has combat first (8/11/2008)
More info:
SB-14B adds versatility to B-1 (2/25/2012 )
FACT SHEET: B-1 Sniper Pod (pdf file)
Last edited by Lt-Col A. Tack; 06-03-2012 at 07:16 PM.
Best watched in HD
Two ways:
- First of all, each long-range bomber is either capable of launching nuclear weapons or not. This is called "nuclear combat code". A bomber that is not nuclear coded is automatically exempt from treaty provisions (as is with some B-52H and all B-1)
- Second of all, each nuclear coded bomber has a particular number of nuclear weapons it can be equipped with. By removing external pylons, you lower the number of nuclear weapons each bomber is equipped with.
So, hypothetically, lets say you have 2 bombers, each equipped for 18 nuclear missiles, of which 12 are stored externally and 6 are stored internally. So, 36 missiles in total. You you have to cut your nuclear arsenal in half to 18 missiles. You have two options: either 2 bombers with only internal carriage (12 missiles), or 1 bomber with both internal and external carriage (18 missiles).
It has been determined that is is better to have more bombers with less missiles, than more missiles with less bombers. Mostly because bombers are more expensive and can serve many roles, while nuclear missiles only have one limited role.
They have been. All remaining B-1 have been de-rated and cannot launch nuclear weapons any more.Why couldn't they just convert it for conventional weapons?
However, it's much easier to do now. Under old arms control provisions, a bomber not equipped for nuclear weapons is counted as carrying nuclear weapons. There were no conversion guidelines, so bombers had to be destroyed completely before they were no longer counted. Which is why B-1, Peacekeeper silos and Ohio class SSGN were counted long after they were converted
Today it is much easier: either it can, or it cannot.
One from the '80s...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qqu7h2Drzc
wtf? So we can't build any new ones? Do we have factories to make spares at the very least?
This is bad, very bad. Ancient B-52s that will have to be retired by 2050 (100 year-old bomber O_O)...and nothing to fill in the stop-gap. Are they insane?
They're down to about 60. The rest are in the boneyard in Arizona and will be cannibalized to keep the fleet going. If they have to they'll make new parts. A coworker was an engineer on one of the upgrades for the B-52 and had to make replacement parts. The drawings were dodgie so they had to reverse engineer the existing part and requalify it. Not a cheap way to support an aircraft.
Gotta love stupid talking heads.
Boy, you listen to the first minute or so and you have to ask if politicians have ever learned a goddamn thing about procurement.
Last edited by C.Puffs; 06-03-2012 at 07:33 PM.
Shameless plugs...
Maybe someday we'll see this as an option:
Electric Laser on a Large Aircraft Laser Weapon System
AFRL'S ELLA - Getting Electric Lasers Airborne, Posted by Graham Warwick 11:45 AM on Mar 17, 2010
B-1 to Demo Lethal Laser, Posted by Graham Warwick 6:48 PM on May 07, 2010
Although I may have some questions about the employment of a laser in a B-1, I think it'd be quite neat to see.
Great videos everyone!
After watching those, I wonder if even one piece of electronic equipment that we saw in those videos is still on the B-1s.
Another thing. I saw part of that episode where they mentioned the B-1R. That fictional employment scenario has always bugged me. Why are they using the B-1R as a missile truck and not as, well, a heavy bomber? Are we really worried about running into a horde of advanced enemy fighters where we'll need to launch a huge number of AMRAAMs at max range?
Wow, talk about a boondoggle.
I was long ago completely puzzled how a game company could somehow lose the source code to one of their old games during a reorganization.
Now that I know a bit more about industry, and seeing how common and easily this can happen, its insane. Having to reverse engineer your own stuff?!?! Its madness. It gets even worse with having to have a whole constantly moving research, development, and construction crew...the mere fact people are starting behind where we were decades ago on research is just crazy.
Oh it gets worse. They make a big deal about how "we don't need to make new ICBMs because we update the old". Well, I work with several people who've worked on that effort. To say it's a clusterfvck would be doing a disservice to the term. Imagine trying to work an area where drawings are so degraded they're illegible or missing altogether. Try to find out who worked on the area way back in the day so you can pick their brain and nobody knows who did the work. Monkeys and footballs. And it'll only get worse. Russia is doing it smart.
[QUOTE=Lt-Col A. Tack;6204712]Great videos everyone!
After watching those, I wonder if even one piece of electronic equipment that we saw in those videos is still on the B-1s.
QUOTE]
Looked like about 75% of the pilots' stations is still the same but the aft station is completely different. I didn't recognize a single piece of equipment for the aft station. A lot of the defensive equipment is still the same but some of better pieces of the A-models system were left out.
PBAR
Posting Permissions
