Okay, I'm another old dog that flew B52s but I flew the B52G in SEA combat as a copilot then on to SAC alert as the AC. It didn't take me 6 years to upgrade to pilot. All it took for me to upgrade was my AC hours in a EC47 in Vietnam and a proficiency in air refueling, a real challenge due to the lack of ailerons on the 'G'. We had spoilers tied to the yoke. And, while we injected 10.000 pounds of water for 90 seconds on takeoff to get our BUFF off the ground, the 'H' models, those in this video, do not use water. They have engines that more than double the thrust of the 'G's I flew. Even with water, our thrust maxed out at 14,700 pounds per engine as I remember it. The 'H' started out at around 20,000 pounds per engine.
17,000 for TF33s on B52’s. You can get more out of a TF33 but they are limited in B52 application due to design limitations of the airframe, the tail specifically.
@@fdhicks69 Yeah, I just heard that in another RU-vid video. I thought they were closer to 20,000 pounds. But even at 17,000 pounds of thrust, you can see why they don't need water injection for a takeoff. And I bet they don't need the full two miles of runway either like my 'G; did every time.
Sort of funny story for you: I went out to my G one bright and early Louisiana morning in the mid 80s and to my surprise, I saw Sgt. X up on a stand, working hard on his G, right at the right wing root. Keep in mind this guy was an expert crew chief with 12 years on B-52Gs. Now, his relief was there but he kept working. Turns out that Sgt. X had a brain fart and he mistook the fuel tank filler cap (back on the wing root and painted bright red) for the water injection filler cap (right there on the a/c body in easy reach and marked as such). Yeah, he was there ALL DAY helping purge that fuel tank, per orders. I'm so glad I saw that because it meant it was something I would NEVER forget to double check. Rules for crew chiefs: Murphy was an optimist. You are always short the part you need. That visiting aircrew has myopia where your marshaling wands are concerned. Hydraulic leaks always aim at your uniform. The aircrew does not know why their air refuel had "excessive overspray". You will, soon as you try to ground refuel. Engine cowlings: pound to fit, paint to match.
We had a crew chief at Castle AFB in the late 70s we called Buffarilla he could install a G model engine ring cowl by himself. And he was told to stop installing drag shoots by putting them on his shoulder and climbing the tail stand, not that they were worried he hurt himself, but he was breaking the the steps of the ladders due to excessive weight. 😂😂😂. I don’t really think he knew his own strength, I once saw him pick up a V8 engine block tuck it under one arm and walk away like it was a loaf of bread..
Fortunate to be protected by gentlemen flying and crewing these awesome machines. Even more kudos to their ground crews and mechanics who keep them up there. Vielen Dank.
These and other flying crews are why I don't get upset when the members or used to be members of the other services call it "The Chair Force". I just smile and say "yes, we do most of our best work sitting down.". Many of them have gone away mumbling to themselves about the smart assed former air force member. I never got to fly in one but I spent many hot summers days working inside the B-52C and B-52D models we had at March AFB back in 1970/1971. I've watched many a MITO takeoff caused usually by an operational ready inspection. BTW MITO is short for minimum interval take off. There was usually one lifting off, one halfway down the runway and the 4th following just starting it's takeoff roll. That last one and the KC-135 refueling planes taking off as soon as they could, encountered a lot of turbulence as shown by their wobbling back and forth as they climbed out. edit: by the way, back when I was at March, a guard told me they were issued the latest and greatest versions of the M-16 (which evolved into the M4) but were not issued any ammunition. I ran into that same craziness when I was assigned to guard a shipment in a C-130 from the Philippines to Stateside. A pretty stupid idea to me. If I was in charge of all our military branches a LOADED firearm would be part of the people's uniforms unless there was a safety reason for not having it, like an electrician or a maintenance person who had to crawl into the interior of a wing to fix something inside. Every uniform, Included dress uniforms and regular uniforms and fatigues, which I think they call "battle dress" these days but I got out over 25 years ago and a lot has changed.
I was stationed at Westover AFB MA in the '60s......loved to watch these babies land.....awesome sight !.........and definitely rattled the windows of the barracks when they had an alert and they took off ...........at 2am.....we lived in the Stony Brooke area of the base !
2:14 All models of the B-52 had tail guns. Originally four .50 cal. machine guns, but on the H-model these were replaced by the six-barreled M61 Vulcan, but that one has since been removed, so now it has none.
B-52’s don’t use the JT3D, its a TF33, the are some major differences one of which is water injection, I could go on but think of the TF33 as a Suped-up heavy duty JT3D adapted for Military use.
While the video was enjoyable, it was riddled with errors. For example, using start cartridges reduces engine starts from 10 minutes to 2 minutes. Startups NEVER took "over an hour." Once an aircraft is cocked on alert, it can be airborne less than 10 minutes after the crew arrives. The reason the aircraft pitches down after takeoff is the result of its very large flaps, which provide for a near-flat landing attitude. While the wing roots are pitched up (positive angle of attack of the chord), the wing tips are not. The resulting wing twist ensures the entire wing doesn't stall at once, thereby providing greater stability during takeoffs and landings. While the bomber requires two miles of runway for takeoff when fully loaded, it can both takeoff and land on much shorter runways at lighter loads. NONE of the B-52H models have water injection. The "smoke" is the natural result of 60+ year-old engine design. Boeing 707s smoked, too. As jet engine design progressed, they smoked less and less. It does NOT take "approximately 6 years to train a B-52 pilot!" One year for pilot training (UPT), less than a year at B-52 flight training, and a couple of months of local indoc and you have freshly minted but mission qualified co-pilots. A couple of years later, they can begin upgrading to aircraft commander. I have seen 1LT ACs, but it's rare. The biggest driver involves the fact you'll always have more ACs than co-pilots. ACs are given additional duties, and some PCS to staff jobs, but delays to upgrade to AC are the result of too many ACs and has nothing to do with extensive training requirements. The pilot does NOT direct the aircraft to the correct heading and altitude. That responsibility rests with the Navigator, who plans the three-dimensional profile of the mission (headings, courses, altitudes and velocities). He's backed up by the Radar Navigator and in turn backs up the RN's duties. The CP tracks and manages fuel while the AC manages the aircraft and crew. The EW detects and counters threats while handling some aspects of secure communications. Your info on speeds is partially incorrect. The aircraft cannot land "sideways." It can land in a crab.
Thanks for saving me a long, tedious comment about the "ALMOST got it right" texts. Helped to lower my blood pressure after watching the video. ( Signed : ex-nav/bomber in 52s - long ago)
The B-52H model shown in the video does not use water injection. It is turbofan powered. The mention of it here is an error on the part of the producers. The aircraft shown in the video have 4 carts, one on each engine pod, not just two like we had 50 years ago. The deck angle is lower on takeoff and landing because of the angle of incidence of the main wing and the fowler style flaps you mentioned. I know; I was both G and H model pilot 50 years ago.
The B-52H is scheduled to be upgraded into the new B-52J specification, receiving new Rolls Royce F130 engines, a new radar and some replaced electronics systems
Hi there! Great video! I have a question: The Poseidon seems to have a stairway mounted directly to the plane. How is this thing retracted when not in use? It seems so large and I could not see any hinges to fold it. Greetings from germany.
They replaced a lot of the KC-135 engines with more efficient ones, new CFM-56 engines. The B-52s are supposedly scheduled for an upgrade to the Rolls-Royce F130. Ah the old Dodge six pack alert truck. Crew and equipment in one trip. The MT tail flash is for Minot AFB in Montana.
I miss sleeping with the roar of these beauty's. The rumble of all these bombers heading to Vietnam was in a strange way to fall asleep. NO I WAS NOT A WAR MONGER. Just grew up with these aircraft always taking off. Then when i was in watched many of ORIs ((NEVER ACTUALLY KNEW IT WAS AN ORI, or the real thing. Watching these BUFFs launch one after another. By the time the 3rd bomber rolled around the hammerhead and kicked in the water, "IF" #2 had an issue and couldn't launch #3 and #4 could not see what has happened and crash.
Notice this B52 clip said it carries 70,000 pounds of weapons, not bombs. Is it even a bomber anymore? I say no because it carries standoff 'weapons' that have ranges of over 1000 miles to hit their targets with pinpoint accuracy.
When the enemy's air defenses (or lack thereof) allow, it can still drop "dumb" bombs (including nukes) and naval mines, when those are called for - so it retains its designation as a "bomber". However, with the presently-underway upgrade, it will also be able to "launch" more different types of precision-guided weapons (from safer, stand-off distances) than any other USAF aircraft.
I really think the era of the B52 dropping bombs, dumb, precision guided, and especially nukes, is over. Technically, the two bomb bays and external hard points can still be used for gravity bombs, true, but any targets that would require the destruction that a B52 strike could cause would be well defended by the air defenses an enemy would have. As for nuke delivery, once they remove the EVS and inferred features that are used for low level target penetration, gravity nukes are no longer an option. We practiced flying low-level approaches at 500 feet in our 'G' models when we were dropping 'tones' in our practice areas in the 70s after Vietnam. Low level approaches were used to avoid detection, true because they didn't have look-down shoot-down capability yet. They do now. But it was also designed to put land features between us and the nuke we just dropped after a PUP maneuver to protect us from the blast and radiation wave that would follow a nuclear explosion. I just wish we had the stand-off weapons we have now during the Vietnam conflict and we wouldn't have lost so many aircrews over Vietnam.
I wonder why they are so averse to making new B-52's. They still have the plans. Maybe A.F. brass likes new things that aren't necessarily better. The B-52 is what I call a perfected design, just like the A-10 is a perfected design.
Sadly, the B-52 can't fly very fast and it's not very maneuverable. It also reflects a HUGE radar return. All those things make it very easy to shoot down. That's why it is now relegated to flying a long way from anywhere that might have serious anti-aircraft defenses, and lobbing guided weapons in from a distance. While that's still very worrisome for potential enemies, over the long haul if you wanted to maintain such an offensive capability it would make more economic sense to do the same thing from a newer airframe like the Boeing 777.
My dad was a navigator on B-47's and later the B-52's during his whole career with deployments ranging from Texas air bases to Altus AFB during the Cuban Missile Crisis to Guam during the Vietnam War days. Those 2-mile takeoff requirements are no joke. He said the runway at Guam was less than adequate to take off from and the plane would often stall out over the cliff edge and dip into the ocean. According to him, there was even a USN submarine off that coast whose mission was rescue and salvage ops should a bomber go in the drink. He said his biggest nightmares from those days wasn't from combat, but the Guam takeoffs and midair refueling ops. He was a very accomplished individual who grew up on a poor farm in Oklahoma, worked his ass off to graduate college with a master's in cartography and history, to settling down after 20+ years in the service. He was full of life lessons forged from his days of hard, dedicated work.
Guam's runway was notorious because both ends of it were higher than the middle, meaning that, after being sure you were accelerating properly on the intial, downhill run, you would find your airspeed either NOT increasing toward flying speed...or actually LOSING a knot or two as you started up the hill. The high ambient temperature and heavy fuel and weapons loads during the war only made this worse! RESPECT for your dad!
Back in the 1970s, my family was late on its way to the airshow at the local airbase. We were a mile north of the base when suddenly we saw a B-52 that had come from Minot descend out of the cloud base (probably 2,000 ft AGL). It couldn't land due to lack of runway length, so it did one overflight of the airfield and then disappeared. At that distance it was sight to behold, a big slow moving behemoth. What I find most amazing about this aircraft is that the prototype flew BEFORE the Korean War ended, and (with upgrades) it is still flying 70 years later. Truly the GOAT bomber.
Definitely. It’s only the H model that’s in service now I believe. It’s the newest variant of a tried and true platform, but with improved structural strength compared with the older variants, which is why it’s been around for so long. I grew up around Carswell AFB, and got to watch those things take off, land, and taxi. They’re absolutely huge, and their engines are some of the loudest ever, even more than a fighter at full afterburner in my opinion.
Numerous errors noted, this depicts the the final series of the aircraft - the "H" model which was powered by the early turbo fan engines. Water injection was not employed there. "Shotgun" starts are/were smoky and worked - usually. None of the models require "2 miles" of runway for take-off. As experience with turban engines grew the concept of reduced thrust take-off thrust was conceived to extend engine life and reduce maintenance became widely accepted throughout the aviation industry. Rarely are throttles set " to Their Limits During Scary Smoky Takeoffs". And, the "smoky takeoffs" mostly disappeared when the water injection went away. As previously noted herein if "six years" were required to train a B-52 crew I believe the system would have been bogged down with FEB's (flying evaluation boards). It doesn't happen that way. Granted, training in combat operations is a continuous activity just as practice is for musicians and athletes. I was very fortunate to have operated large Boeing aircraft for forty years, the first five of those years as a crew member and pilot instructor on various models of the B-52.
4:46. These are H model B-52s. They have turbofan engines. The G models had turbojet engines which had less power. H-models do not have water injection systems.
I flew the "B" ,"C" and "D" Models first in 1957 and a few years after that ,but non of the latter models. They were very reliable and I flew many of those long airborne flights. Not as manueverable as the B-47's, I flew before, but found it easy to fly and control. Love the old girl.
@@iansampson2492 I flew B-47's at Barksdale in 1955 . Cant place your John Sweet , but the name rings a bell. I flew B.52's in Castle AFB, Westover AFB and Mc Coy AFB , so may have met along the way.
My dad flew the B-52 in the 1960s and early 70s after which he was transferred to SAC HQ in Omaha to become the deputy director of bomber maintenance and eventually became the director. We were stationed at Griffis AFB in Rome, NY. He did two tours in Vietnam and flew over 120 combat missions. During an alert, I witnessed the MITO takeoff during the late 60s. The runway at Griffiss was 12,000 feet long. The planes entered the runway in a staggered formation and began their roll-off. They were very close, less than 500 feet in separation. The noise was unbearable, even watching from Base Ops. They hit the end of the runway and began water injecting. It was one of the most unbelievable sights I have ever witnessed. Each plane would peel left and right to mitigate wake turbulence. Remember, each plane carried live but not armed nuclear weapons. That would occur close to the fail-safe point. It was a different time.
As a fan of the USA 🇺🇸🦅🏛️🌉🗽military🔫🚁✈️👮👩✈️ and an enthusiast of B-52✈️ myself, I admire👏👍🙂 the video 🎥📲📀📼about the Stratosphere Fortress bomber ✈️you made. Hello and greetings from Walter of New Zealand 🇳🇿🐑🏡🐄🏔️ and Australia🇦🇺🌏🦘🌳🐨🌲🦜🌊🐳🚢🐬
Why don't the producers employ a Subject Matter Expert to advise them on the content of these videos?? Any qualified B-52 pilot could have saved them from making a video that is rife with errors. The B-52H model shown in the video does not use water injection. It is turbofan powered. The mention of it here is an error on the part of the producers. The aircraft shown in the video have 4 starting carts, one on each engine pod, not just two like we had 50 years ago. The deck angle is lower on takeoff and landing because of the 7 degree angle of incidence of the main wing and the fowler style flaps you mentioned. I know; I was both G and H model pilot 50 years ago.
The engine have already been upgraded for the "H" model. I agree that the older models were dirty. The current engines will be even cleaner when the new RR engines are installed. I flew both models for 23 years. It has saved MANY lives. From a retired colonel!
much respect for all those mechanics who repair, fix, maintain such complex systems to keep all those aircraft trouble free and in the air!! A major war will be the true test of all the good maintenance systems! Bravo to all you good men!!
We've been at war constantly since the Korean War, often declared by lies and excuses to get involved in the affairs of others that had nothing to do with the safety and security of the US to begin with. The only real winners of them are the defense industry and corporations whose interests promoted these wars. Where have you been?
This is a nice video, but there are too many mistakes. I flew KC-135s at Ellsworth AFB, with B-52H models Loring AFB Maine with B-52Gs and Castle AFB with both G and Hs. Better research needs to be completed prior to publication.
Hopefully, those new Rolls Royce engines won't need water injection, which makes it look bad with that black smoke coming out.. but those engines have been troopers! I still love the B1b and especially the B2 Spirit, I'm anxious to see what the end result of the B21 Raiders will look like, and if they still plan to use the current F35 engines or maybe the new GE ones they're trying to push even though they won't work on the b variant. Either way with tr3 and block 4 coming up they'll have to do something for the updates and with the B21 being updated eventually, wonder if two F135 engines will be enough for cooling since it'll share most of the existing equipment of the F35 to save cost since the B2 were so expensive.. Either way, I'm glad the B52s are getting new engines, finally! That'll extend it to 2050, which is nuts.
The B-52H model shown in the video does not use water injection. It is turbofan powered. The mention of it here is an error on the part of the producers. I know; I was both G and H model pilot 50 years ago.
I used to live directly under the glidepath of B-52s when I lived in Merced, CA , back in the late 70s. The planes were practicing landings at the now defunct Castle AFB in Atwater, CA. They flew about 1,000 feet directly over my house and were loud enough to wake the deaf. Those engines screamed power and were music to this USAF veteran's ears.
Remembering watching my bomber take off one day in 1986... there was a general on board who'd flown one in Vietnam and he wanted to do the takeoff that day. Of course they let him. He _barely_ cleared the end of the runway and did clip some tree branches with the gear before he got any altitude. Lucky he didn't damage the hydraulics or blow a tire! I had enough to do without some hotdog dinging up my workplace.
I believe his point was that the video caption - which said the thick black smoke was due to the pilots using water injection - was misinformation. The smoke is from the inefficiency of the 1960s-era engines. It's an observation that's noteworthy only to B-52 fanatics.
ref your B-52 comment..... Yup, I was just thinking eight throttles, eight sets of dials and gauges, eight fuel lines to monitor? That's a very big leap up from four of everything...........beyond doubt an incredible machine: bordering the unbelievable for its design date, just 10 years after the end of World War II..........
A small error: The B-52 engine smoke doesn't result from water injection. It's simply due to the relatively inefficient burning of fuel by these early-design engines. B-52s built from '52 to '59 (the vast majority of them) had an even LESS efficient, less powerful engine design than those seen in the video. Those were so weak that they required water injection to produce enough thrust to get a heavily-loaded plane up to flying speed in a mile and a half. Those original engines left behind far denser black clouds that those seen in this video. The last B-52s built from '59 to '62, (which is the only batch still in service), had an entirely different engine, with more thrust and NO water injection. Even so, being from the early 60s, they can't compare to newer engines in terms of their thrust or their efficiency of fuel burn...so they still smoke much more than we're used to seeing these days. These last-surviving B-52s will shortly be re-engined with eight modern, higher-thrust engines, which will allow them to operate from shorter runways and cover greater distances before refueling is necessary. The smoke will be gone.
My dad started at Boeing on B-52 #11. Transfered to the Dash8, 707, then 747s. Watched the First 47 fly with him! Potentially the B-52 might be in the air as long as the 747. Unreal. Awesome.
The 747 first flew in 1969. By that time, the B-52 had already been flying for 17 years (and had been deployed to frontline squadrons for 15 years). That gives it a considerable head start. It would be more accurate to suggest that, if the existing 747s (since they're out-of-production now) are well-cared-for, they might be able to last as long as the B-52 (which the USAF is about to re-engine).
Thank you all for the thumbs up and salutes I really do appreciate it. But, I must give a GIANT Salute to our crews that kept these great birds going during that time and our butts safe. They were the ones out in the wet and cold during long hours turning wrenches and doing what needed to be done . Without these super dedicated people we could not have completed our missions . If you are still with us " Big Salute " , if not R.I.P. dear brothers.
Appreciate the accolades, Never heard that much about what we did while in the service, seemed like we were the lowest of the lowest most of the time. Again many thanks Sir.
This video says that it needs 2 miles of runway to take off. That is not true ! When I lived in L.A. I saw a B-52 takeoff from Van Nuys airport , and that runway could not have been more than a mile. I stood at the end of the runway on Saticoy Ave. and watched it take off at treetop level . It was amazing!
The 12,000 ft runways that were standard for B-52 bases were built to accommodate aircraft loaded to their limit with fuel (just under 310,000 lbs, max) and weapons, on a hot day when thrust would be at a minimum. B-52s CAN get off the ground in much less distance if they aren't fully fueled and don't have any weapons on board. That is no doubt what you saw at Van Nuys.
If you want to sell poetry in Hades, you're off to a good start. The B-52 is a most useful tool for killing human beings. Where you found the word "beauty" in all this is beyond my understanding.
Saw many take-off and landings of B52 at Loring AFB ,ME long gone now , There was a B-47 on display when I was at Plattsburgh AFB,NY,also long gone now.
There is a great series of books about the 60s & 70s B-52 crews. Called "WE WERE CREWDOGS" I - VII. Good stuff. Most are out of print. Thriftbooks has a few. Make you laugh, make you cry, and most of all make you know we were in good hands during Vietnam, the cold war and Desert Storm, Iraqi Freedom.
I worked on B-52G & H models at Ellsworth AFB during mid-late '70's as a jet engine troop. "H" models were nicer because water injection is not used with the TF33 engine, and they were a touch quieter. Earlier models("G" and earlier) with J57 engines that used water injection left a heavy smoke trail upon takeoff and climbout. Amazing the H model Buffs are still flying! Boeing definitely got this design right!
They certainly did get it right, although not without quirks, since it was a "first attempt" in many ways. The J57 was the first really large, essentially-10,000 lb thrust-class engine ever built, custom-designed by P&W for the B-52 (and selected as the USAF's "single standard engine" that was to power ALL jets - bombers, fighters, tankers, and transport...a not-so-good idea, as it turned out) had its own issues. That included a need for water injection, and a tendency for the water to drown the engine if an unwatched throttle crept back (or was pulled back). The plane's swept wings also resulted in a perverse tendency for the nose to pitch UP sharply at the entry to every turn, instead of DOWN as most airplanes do - forces which were impractical to "trim away", requiring pilots to simply acquire the muscle memory to physically force and hold the yoke away when rolling. (That's a quirk that became much more noticeable in later models that did without ailerons.) The likelihood of dragging a wingtip (due to the long, drooping wings) make the wing-low technique for countering crosswinds when landing impossible, so pilots must learn to land IN a crab, with the landing gear rotated to point down the runway - sometimes requiring landing with the runway centerline visible through the side windscreen rather than right over the nose. The massive landing gear and huge double Fowler flaps create massive pitching moments when extended or retracted (the flaps take 60 seconds to do either, and they have no intermediate positions like "approach"), and can require riding the trim button for a bit during climbout. The BUFF also wants to "dutch roll" a bit at high altitude (ceiling: FL500) - noticeably, but not alarmingly. Because of the differential lift between the wings and the tailplane, and the distance between the two, B-52s also suffered the weird tendency to pitch down when entering ground effect, instead of "floating" a bit as most planes do. Of course, pilots are already clicking the trim back during this phase, just prior to abandoning the trim button to manually haul the forward trucks the last couple inches above the aft trucks at touchdown. The practical result of that downward pitch is a momentary mushiness of the yoke at 70' above the ground, right when you want a bit more precision. One last and very impressive oddity is that due to the ground-effect quirk and the positive angle of attack of the wings on the fuselage, during touch-and-go landing practice (done at light gross weights), when the plane first pops off the runway, it wants to pitch up and climb into a stall. The pilot must shove the nose down to a negative deck angle (that is, pointing DOWN at the runway) to arrest that tendency and start a manageable climbout...VERY alarming to novices riding in the jump seat! It's also hella uncomfortable on long missions in the cockpit, with an upper deck just over three feet tall. Despite these oddities, it is a practical aircraft and an effective bomber, whether at 35,000' or at 100' altitude. Also, Boeing designed it to take three times the official g-limit when it was new, and USAF has periodically reinforced the airframes of various models to return them to near that state, even as they go on accumulating wear and tear.
Excellent video. From '76 to '80 I was stationed at a SAC base in northern Maine - Loring AFB. We had 9 B-52H models fully loaded with nukes and fuel on 24 hour alert. We also had 9 KC-135 air refueling tankers to support the bombers. Our mobile KC-135 flight simulator was parked near the flightline so the crews could get to their planes quickly whenever the klaxon started screaming. The video referred to "MIT"'s for minimum interval takeoffs. We always referred to Minimum Interval Takeoffs as "MITO"'s. Sometimes I heard the MITO's referred to as "Elephant Walks". In either case, we had a perfect view of the whole process. Very impressive.
I had some of the same experiences, only with the older E- models out of Walker AFB Roswell NM. Back then, they didn't have the shotgun start and used the J-57 engine. One of the biggest things I see different about the takeoffs is that the E-models would most times take of with a nose down attitude. Sometimes the rear landing gear would lift off the runway first. Actually had the privilege of flying on them a few times as an A/1c assistant crew chief. Proved to be a real experience.
my father worked building the base from the start and I used to go with him on Saturdays as a kid, they were building the huge cantilever hanger at that time I believe 1950 or 1951, the B-36s were stationed there then and they would make our school shake when going over so low, later in 1958-59 I worked on the Dow AFB in Bangor Maine lengthening the runway for the B-52s that were coming there
SAC trained killer here as well! 28th FMS Ellsworth AFB from late '76 through mid '80, jet engine troop on G & H models, & KC/EC-135 tanker/command post aircraft, all of which used J57 or TF33 engines. We had a double(heavy)wing, so double the maintenance for us!
@@MM_in_Havasu I was in the 28th FMS welding shop from August 1976 to December 1979, probably ran into each other. Who was your shop chief and branch chief?
I was just a teen, but in "69" I lived just off base of Kadena when a B-52 didn't make the take off and blew up at the end of the runway! Wow that was loud. That was during Nam!
Back in 1973-1975, I was a USAF security policeman and assigned to guard the nuclear loaded B-52's at Minot AFB. I was so impressed by the planes themselves but more so, the dedicated flight crews who were on alert. I remember the time during the Israeli-Arab war in 1973, where the alert B-52s and their crews taxied there B-52's to the actual runway and sat there all day and night ready to take off. Fond memories. Nothing but respect for the B-52s, their crews, maintenance crews and my fellow security police team that use to be the 91st Security Squadron!!
I remember that "show of force" to the Russian satellites. I got the call about 3:00AM to report to the flight line. One of my duties was to "check in" all the B-52 crews to insure they were assigned to an aircraft being readied for flight. The Alert aircraft were already lined up at the end of the runway. They were soon joined by the other B-52's that were made ready to fly.
Growing up in Kansas we used to sneak into Schilling at the far end of the runway at night and lay down in the tall grass and get blasted by the B-52s as they did touch and go. And I wonder why my hearing is toast at 62 years old!
I lived about 50 mi. south of Oscoda Mi. Growing up and after taking off they flew over my house pretty low. When they closed the base it was like losing a major attraction at a carnival. I couldn’t believe I really missed them.
Two quick questions about the B-52 and SAC alert facilities. (My father was on a B-52 crew in 1960s Seymour Johnson AB and later Westover, in the 4241st then later the 51st bomb wing.) My questions: 1. How long would it take a B-52 back then to get airborne if while on alert the alarm had sounded? Question 2. If there was a family emergency at home how could my father be contacted? Did wives have the number of an emergency phone or something similar? Thanks. (This is for a book I am writing about my family.)
Don't know about the first, but the second sure. Spent many Christmases at the Alert Shack while my dad was on Alert. He flew back from Vietnam when his sister passed. This was the 60's.
The time-to-airborne would depend on where the plane was parked. If it was on a special strip leading directly to the beginning of the active runway, it could be off the ground in ten minutes...perhaps a little less. (Some bases didn't have such special strips, and some bases parked their planes at mid-field so they could take off from either end of the runway. That would require an additional 5-10 minutes of taxiing before the takeoff could be started.) As for family emergencies, families would typically call the crew's squadron commander, or if they weren't immediate family living on the base, they would call the base's main number and the base operator would most likely connect them to the wing command post. People there would figure out what needed to be done, and would arrange the necessary communication (assuming it was peacetime). Good luck on your book!
There was a mention some where that it took many years to train a B-52 pilot . My experience in pilot training was flying AT-6 and B-25's . Upon graduation I went straight to B-47's . Two years later I was flying B-52's after two months transition at Castle AFB and two weeks weapons course . Air refueling was new and required precision flying. I believe the green area was about a four foot square. could be wrong as my 90 year old memory slips some times. Best of luck to those of my brothers still flying them. Treat her well and she will take care of you.
My father crewed a B-36 and B-52 (Mather, Castle, Seymour Johnson, Westover) during the late 50s through the mid 70s. I think he was in one of the last B-36s flying, and he told me his B-36 is on display at Wright-Patterson. He managed to skip the B-47, which I understand had a bad habit of blowing up during flight, wing spar failure, I believe. Good to hear you survived the B-47.
I was stationed at Walker AFB 1960-1963 All they had were E-models. Their primary mission there was training new flight crews for the "52's. it was not long after I left the service that they closed Walker down. Also had KC-135's There.
I was stationed at Walker AFB Roswell NM 1960-1963. Their primary mission was training new crews for the '52's. They were only using the E model which never saw any kind of combat. Flew IP position on a couple of those missions when they were practicing air refueling. Believe we were somewhere over southern Colorado at the time. That was quite an experience.
Those Ariel fueling operations are the most dangerous operation these aircrews do other than combat missions of course. Just an amazing marvel of aviation technology.
Yeah, the civilian version is the JT3D, the TF33 has some significant differences mostly the stuff we hung on the outside of the engine with the exception of the water injection.
When I was in the Air Force in the 1960s Mito takeoffs I believe were set at 15 seconds apart, to the point that some of the vortices created by the wings of one aircraft would affect the stability of each successive aircraft. Maybe that is why what is shown in this video, are the bombers taking off with a longer interval between each one taking off.
Memories for me also. As a forester in Michigan's U.P., I would be out in the wilderness working and low flying B-52's from Kincheloe air base would wake up the quiet sereneness, so low I imagined I could see the rivets. My sincere thanks and honor to our military staff and their greatness.
I tested runs w/water in-the-spring ( above 40F )...Grand Forks, N.D. AFB (SAC). 83'-87' I was based there, Brrr! B-52G Crew Chief/flight-line. PS...my teacher on base/engine run simulator...etc, asked for me to run w/his self'...Tech Sgt type. (I served though 97')
Beware of google mother Co. to youtube Anti - FREE speech to our USA constitution. Again: the B-52 is like fine wine" she just gets better w/age. And w/her advance inners and new pods from the Bad... as in awesome Rolls Royce engines, she outstanding as like her first flight to the sky's. Pray for crews and the lady herself, she has done us/USA proud!
how many B-24s would it take to equal one B-52 .... as for FODs, that's what caused the crash of the Concorde back in 2000. kudos and thanks to all the men who fly these planes and to the men and women who keep them capable of leaving the ground
You want to talk FOD, I have a little story that I experienced back in the early 60's. Someone got the bright idea for clearing the runway of Ice by using a couple of 52's and letting them start a taxi roll down the runway one behind the other and let the heat from the exhaust melt the Ice. Only problem was second plane got to close behind the first and engines picked up Ice that the previous plane had broken loose . Needless to say there were a couple of engines that got shelled out . Don't know who paid for that one!
the pilot from the second plane was probably from California and either didn't have a lick of sense or had never experienced the damage ice can do. @@rolandemartin854
LMAO.. Is it just a lack of knowledge or do people not realize there is nothing unusual with a B-52's engines trailing smoke on takeoff? They have been doing it for 50 years....They even state it on the screen.. Also the B-52 is older than most of the pilots that fly them.. It is the best aircraft value the U.S. has made before the A-10...
6 years to train a B-52 pilot? 1 year of pilot training + 6 months of RTU + 2 months of Water/Land Survival training + a few months of local qual= 2 years.
I was in civil engineering and I loved hearing the Jets, mostly the A-10 at Davis-Monthan AFB. Saw both the Space Shuttles Challenger and Columbia twice when they were being carried on top of the 747.
Glad WE have never had to use them in a Nuclear War. but WoW! What a wuppin they delivered in Iraq and other not unclassified stuff...(So you have a rodent problem..yeah .. I will put in a call then do not say check is in the mail or I could give the wrong co-ordinates and the package comes from 47 thousand feet to only you.
As an older "fossil" mech on older B-52 F models, back in the 60's, I LOVE watching these videos of all the new stuff that is flyin' around! "Keep 'em flying folks"!
@@godblessamerica7048 I look at it as my duty to our country, and in appreciation for all the past and present folks that serve, and have served and given their lives.
@@weskal5490 I felt it was my duty to serve, not just for our current folks, but for all service folks that went before, and especially those who gave their lives.
THANK YOU MIKE FOR ALL THE GOOD WORK! I worked for SAC 1st Combat Eval out in the desert bomb scoring the B-52, FB111, F4, & the B1-B Lancer also a beautiful beast. Buff is my first love. I can close my eyes and pick it out amongst a ton of sounds.
First time I loaded this vid I was hearing 'alarm claxon(siren) and then it 'froze on me. had to do a 'button' restart. NOT GOOD for the hard drive L's & G's.😡
Man kann Triebwerke nicht bis an ihre Grenzen "drosseln", höchstens "hochfahren". Genau das passiert hier im Film. Bei den meisten militärischen Flugzeugen wird der Start mit "Vollgas" durchgeführt. Gruß, Wulf "Buddy" Beeck, ehemaliger Militär-Jetpilot.
Normal start up in a B-52 does not take an hour and the starting cartridges only save the time of starting an external APU, not a huge difference in starting time. Back in my day, when the mission was more complex, included hours of low level terrain avoidance, it usually took about 4 years from entry of pilot training to becoming aircraft commander in a B-52, not sure why it would be 6 years today?
