You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Home Front: Tech
Megafortress, anyone?
2004-07-28
U.S. Air Force officials are working to introduce an electronic-warfare (EW) version of the B-52 bomber as soon as possible. Service officials are reworking current budgets to accelerate the development and fielding of an under-wing electronics pod that can precisely jam enemy radars over long distances. An initial purchase of 12 pods, along with modifying 16 B-52s to carry them, would take place in the 2005 budget, with a follow-on request the following year to buy an additional 24 pods and modify another 60 aircraft. Only the B-52 can carry a pod big enough to pack in the electronics gear necessary to complete the mission. B-52s will have to be extensively modified to put out enough power through a wing pylon to do the job. A larger pod also has an advantage, since designers can build larger antennas to more effectively perform jamming and other tasks rather than trying to cram them into a smaller space for a pod designed to be carried by a fighter. Fighters don't have excess electronic power to spare, either. With four crew positions, the B-52 also carries enough people to effectively manage electronic warfare attacks against advanced air defense missile systems being sold and deployed by Russia.
Plus, they were paid for a long time ago.
Since the B-52 presents one of the largest radar returns of any U.S. military aircraft in service, putting high-powered jamming equipment on the plane is a logical step. The B-1B and B-2 were designed from the ground up with lower radar cross-sections for enhanced survivability and they would be much larger targets with external EW pods. The new EW pod would be able to deceive enemy radars in several ways, including altering radar return signals to change a penetrating aircraft's speed, range, and location. It would be able to produce false targets and actively generate signals to partially or completely cancel out radar returns. EB-52s would also be capable of carrying cruise missiles with high-power microwave (HPM) warheads to scramble surface to air missile system computers. Initially, the aircraft would use HPM versions of the newer, stealthy JASSM missile and the older, battle-tested Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missile (CALCM). Later, the EB-52 would carry a number of smaller-sized MALD missiles carrying HPM warheads. The baseline MALD missile is roughly 90 inches long, 6 inches in diameter, with a wingspan of 25 inches and weighs in at 89 pounds at launch. Using a miniature turbojet engine, MALD can fly more than 460 kilometers and costs around $30,000 per missile. For comparison, the JASSM missile is 168 inches long, weighs in at 2250 pounds, and costs around $400,000 per unit. It was designed to carry a 1,000 lb warhead to a range of of at least 320 kilometers — Doug Mohney
Posted by:Steve

#18  Back in the day when we were worried about the Sovs streaming Backfires down the UK-I-G gap to shoot up convoys I always wondered why the BUFF could not of been fitter with the radar from a F-14 and a bomb bay and wing pylons full of missles.
Posted by: cheaderhead   2004-07-28 11:28:01 PM  

#17  My point is a basic military axiom: why have a passive device when you can have (another) weapon?

In a serious war, a B-52 is ineffective as a bomber. But as (one of the few) airships that *could* carry a *devastating* air-to-air or air-to-ground weapon like a laser or CPB, making it absolutely a king of battle, it could guarantee air superiority for anything else we fly.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2004-07-28 10:01:00 PM  

#16  If they are going to keep the Buff they need to give them new engines. Those planes should be using 4 turbofans instead of 8 turbojets.
Posted by: remote man   2004-07-28 7:56:44 PM  

#15  Retire the Buff but keep the A-6 sure... why not.
I know it's different now.... but I used to run a typesetter that had the same S-300 Bus has the A-6.
Posted by: Shipman   2004-07-28 5:42:55 PM  

#14  It's just one of those classic designs; a gift which keeps on giving...on, and on, and on...
Posted by: Sgt. Mom   2004-07-28 5:37:26 PM  

#13  Steve, We still have other airframes to provide tactical SEAD packages. The Buff looks menacing when its all by itself or in a group, but looks like a juicy steak to SAM crews and Fighters. My bust on the EF-111 but he EC-130 (Compass Call) is very much in use. The CC is a juicy target too and usually hangs well back of the battle and the BUFF would have the same problem (just less people on board). There are F-16, F-15, and F-18 variants that carry an ESM pod (and HARMs) that is used on SEAD packages. Radar directed missiles are ususally not a problem because the enemy is too scared to turn them on (lest they become a HARM target). Let the BUFF retire with dignity, before they start to fall from the sky and taint their career.
Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter)   2004-07-28 5:19:10 PM  

#12  Thanks Raj, Steve. Amazing that the air frames can take it!
Posted by: Anonymous5902   2004-07-28 5:06:27 PM  

#11  (note to self - let Steve field these question in the future...)
Posted by: Raj   2004-07-28 4:58:37 PM  

#10  A total of 744 B-52s were built with the last, a B-52H, delivered in October 1962. Only the H model is still in the Air Force inventory and all are assigned to Air Combat Command. The first of 102 B-52H's was delivered to Strategic Air Command in May 1961. The H model can carry up to 20 air launched cruise missiles. In addition, it can carry the conventional cruise missile which was launched from B-52G models during Desert Storm. Today, 94 B-52H's are all that remain of 744 Stratofortresses built in the '50s and '60s.

Report on their estimated service life here. They are going to try to keep them flying until 2025!
Posted by: Steve   2004-07-28 4:12:19 PM  

#9  October 26, 1962 Same date as the B-58 Hustler (No it was not named for Clinton.)
Posted by: Mr. Davis   2004-07-28 4:08:25 PM  

#8  A5902 - IIRC (History Channel show from 2 months ago) they're all the original ones from the 50's & 60's, as you mentioned. I believe they were designed for 30 years of service, of course they're well past that by now.
Posted by: Raj   2004-07-28 4:02:46 PM  

#7  Sorry Cyber Sarge, the EF-111's beat the B-52 to the boneyard: The last squadron of EF-111s remaining in service, at Cannon AFB, NM, peformed the Suppression of Enemy Air Defense [SEAD] mission. DOD decided to retire the EF-111A jammer and replace it with a new Air Force system, the high speed anti-radiation missile (HARM) targeting system on the F-16C, and the existing Navy electronic warfare aircraft, the EA-6B. Recognizing that too few EA-6B aircraft may be available to meet both Air Force and Navy needs, DOD retained these 12 EF-111s in the active inventory through 1998, when additional upgraded EA-6Bs became available. The Raven's replacement, the Prowler, is a four-seat derivative of the highly successful A-6 Intruder. It features an upgraded version of the same tactical jamming system employed by the Raven.
Trouble is the EA-6Bs are almost as old as the 111 and there are not enough of them. I think the EB-52 is a gap filler till they can get a unmanned EW drone.
Posted by: Steve   2004-07-28 4:02:11 PM  

#6  When was the last B-52 put into service? How old are some of the ones still flying? They can't be the same ones from the 50s and 60s are they?
Posted by: Anonymous5902   2004-07-28 3:57:29 PM  

#5  In the Air Force we had a name for slow flying aircraft that eminated lots of EW gear....TARGETS! Dumb idea, retire the airframe, and move on. We already have the EF-111 and the EC-130 that do a fine job of eletronic warfare. they work with an ECM package (F-15E armed with HARM missiles). I will miss the BUFF, but I think it's time to send it to DM on a final flight.
Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter)   2004-07-28 3:42:15 PM  

#4  Anonymoose: three kings

The B-52 is the battleship of the air. Keep them flying! Hey, how about bringing back the battleships? Nothing says navel power like a 16 inch shell in the morning...
Posted by: Chuck Simmins   2004-07-28 2:16:43 PM  

#3  A mirror
Posted by: Michael   2004-07-28 2:16:28 PM  

#2  I wonder how much air-borne LASER or CPB they could haul? Think about it. What beats a laser?
Posted by: Anonymoose   2004-07-28 2:12:29 PM  

#1  Whoa! A B-52 Screech!
Speaking of passive counter-measures.....
I wonder how much tin-foil one of them suckers could haul.
Posted by: Shipman   2004-07-28 2:06:47 PM  

00:00