A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Why was the USAF.....................



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #201  
Old January 13th 04, 10:49 PM
Alan Minyard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 01:43:48 GMT, "Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote:

(BUFDRVR) wrote in
:

Anyone with D model time, is long retired, or dead.


Not true. There a few "tall tail" guys around. They're all O-6
or above.

Or E-9...


Very good, bad on my part to exclude our gunners.


I'm a bit unclear on one thing, was the 0.50 quartet replaced
by the m61 on all the B52s and then, subsequently, removed from
service in the early 90s?


Regards...


Different threat profiles.

Al Minyard
  #203  
Old January 13th 04, 10:49 PM
Alan Minyard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


All I remember is it was a tall tail.

Good flick.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


Me too, but I can't remember her name :-))

Al Minyard
  #204  
Old January 13th 04, 10:49 PM
Alan Minyard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:33:54 GMT, "Gord Beaman" ) wrote:

Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
"John Keeney" wrote:

At least it wasn't the Navy's B-52N.


...the catapult launches were spectacular, but kicking the whole ship
backwards fifty yards was annoying the crew...


...plus I still think that the engineering that must have gone
into that wing folding joint must have been horrendous not to
mention worrying in use.


What was really worrying was the hinge in the fuselage so it would
fit on an elevator. :-)

Al Minyard
  #205  
Old January 14th 04, 03:08 AM
Michael Williamson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bjørnar Bolsøy wrote:

I'm a bit unclear on one thing, was the 0.50 quartet replaced
by the m61 on all the B52s and then, subsequently, removed from
service in the early 90s?



The gatling gun only appeared on the H model- other B-52 models
continued to carry the 4 x .50 installation until their retirement
(unless some G's stayed around long enough to have them removed),
IIRC.

The gun installation was finally removed due to the changed
threat, which presumably would no longer be from enemy aircraft
closing to within the range and field of fire of the removed
gun.

Mike

  #206  
Old January 15th 04, 08:41 PM
Laurence Doering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 22:13:03 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:
In article ,
"Gord Beaman" ) wrote:

Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
"John Keeney" wrote:

At least it wasn't the Navy's B-52N.

...the catapult launches were spectacular, but kicking the whole ship
backwards fifty yards was annoying the crew...


...plus I still think that the engineering that must have gone
into that wing folding joint must have been horrendous not to
mention worrying in use.


Well, after those two guys got caught in the accordion folds of the
Model I B-52N, the telescoping wings of the Model II were a big
improvement. Although they did have a tendency to push Tomcats over
the side if you accidentally activated them without checking clearances.


Are you sure about that? My sources say the B-52Ns that actually
made it into the fleet had more or less conventional folding wings,
with the hinges just outboard of the inner engine pylons.

The real bitch was designing a hydraulic system that was capable
of folding the starboard wing 90 degrees quickly enough so the
wing would clear the carrier's island a split second after the
B-52N caught the three wire.

I don't think they ever did work all the bugs out of the system,
especially since it had to unfold the wing just as quickly to
save the aircraft in the event of a bolter. Forces caused by
gyroscopic precession of the rotating parts of the #7 and #8
engines (which tended to twist the pod off its pylon) as the
wing folded were also a problem.


ljd
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
More drug allegations made, By USAF in Italy Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 December 24th 03 12:31 AM
A-4 / A-7 Question Tank Fixer Military Aviation 135 October 25th 03 03:59 AM
USAF Fighter-Attack SPO members from the 1980s? R Haskin Military Aviation 0 September 20th 03 12:06 PM
USAF squadrons in 1985 Bob Martin Military Aviation 4 September 9th 03 05:46 PM
FS Books USAF, Navy, Marine pilots and planes Ken Insch Military Aviation 0 July 20th 03 02:36 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.