"Buzzer" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 09:36:48 -0500, "Kevin Brooks"
wrote:

Baugher seems to indicate the C's continued in operational service until
as
late as 1966 with the 99th BW out of Westover in MA
(http://home.att.net/~jbaugher2/b52_8.html ). IAPR (Spring 2003 issue)
indicates that "some" C models ended up receiving the TA radar, but it is
unclear as to when the last C gave up its SIOP mission. Baugher indicates
that the development and fielding of the TA radar was apparently
problematic, but goes into no detail on that subject.

Baugher indicates the E's had the improved Doppler radar for use in low
level navigation, but not the terrain avoidance radar. It appears that
different sources are (again) providing somewhat different pictures of
what
was included, with IAPR, in its Summer 2003 issue, including a list of
low
level nav aids that were included in the original production (and
apparently
were so unreliable the system had to be completely rebuilt, a task that
took
until 1964 to complete) which does not include the TA radar. But IAPR
also
says the E was the first model that was intended from the start to be a
low
level operator, so the TA may have been included and the sources just
failed
to mention it.

Baugher had/has some problems with dates and such on B-52D ECM so
there might be some problems with other systems. I think the page has
been changed and the material deleted, but it went along something
like a piece of ECM equipment on the D wasn't installed until 1967
when in fact I had worked on that piece of equipment in 1963 and it
had been there long before I was there. Trying to keep track of just
ECM mods on B-52s from the 60s onward would probably take a book a
foot thick.

As far as my post to Walt it is the old ECM - defence game. Something
I never figured out how an EWO could get credit for getting the plane
through the defences and the defense/interceptors could get credit for
shooting the plane down,

Walt mentioned the Forbes RB47Es. I worked on something of the
equivalent EB-57s at Forbes, previously Holloman Det 1 4677th DSES, in
the mid 70s. The main interceptor jammer was basically "dumbed down"
for training. A toggle switch on the front of the transmitter safety
wired in what you might say was the safe for training mode.

I go back to the B-52H and here comes a new, fancy interceptor jammer
called the ALQ-117. It has an EWO controlled switch for training and
war. The EWOs complain that the training mode for our interceptors is
worse than the system it replaced. Almost like it had been
deliberately "dumbed down" for training purposes.

As far as using the interceptor IR mode to track a B-52? About all I
can say about that is first you have to know what part of the sky that
big old plane is in. Might not be easy "IF" ECM gets to use everything
they have available. The ten or so years I spent in SAC everything was
never used. One time I thought it was a go, but when the planes got to
the staging base for the excercise they went out and changed one thing
back to training. Oh, well...

OK. I'll definitely defer to your first-hand knowledge regarding this
subject, and thanks for the explanation. I guess in summary, what I am left
with are still a couple of unanswered questions (and which may not get
answered-- I'd imagine that given a B-52 fleet the size of the one that
existed in the mid-sixties (up to 600 plus), there was likely some variation
across the board as to who operated how and with what specific models and
what specific modifications, so there may very well not be any single
answers): a) Did all of the C's that remained active in a SIOP role until
retired in 1970 have the TA system; b) Were all B-52 penetrations throughout
the sixties to be at low altitude in the SIOP role, and when exactly did
that become "law" (ignoring the oft-reported 1959 date, because we know that
at least one B-52 crewmember has indicated that he did not transition to the
low altitude approach until "the early sixties"), or was it a gradual
process that was effected across the fleet and if so when was it effective
for the last implementers; and c) How did Hound Dog affect the penetration
plan (presuming that most Hound Dogs would have been launched from higher
altitude, as a low altitude launch ate rather significantly into the max
rang capability), or were the Dogs supposed to be launched pre-penetration,
followed by descent to a lower altitude for penetration to deliver the
free-fall weapons carried internally? ISTR there used to be another B-52
type pilot (predating Buffdrvr's experience) who has contributed here rather
recently who might be able to shed some light on some of those areas.

Brooks