Forum: Military Aircraft of the Cold War

So Im noticing something. Many of the books Ive read about the B-1B note that the ECM fairing on the bottom side the tail was changed by 2001 and that the wierd diomond shaped blister is the current configuration. However, I am noticing that about half of B-1B's have this blister and the other half still have the two blade antenna configuration. This is the same with the under belly between the landing gear. As far as I can tell the blister replaced the blade anntena on about half of B-1B's around 1997-2000. So, why did the replacements stop and why are only half of B-1B's equipped? I cant find out anywhere and its not because its sensitive, Its because it was part of the DAS upgrade that got all messed up when the AF cancelled it. So, tell me about it.

F-16.net Sponsor

My best shot in answering you this, bandit... would be that likely, it is in fact 'sensitive' as you say - at least to some degree? Perhaps the sensitive nature would at least in part deal with specifics of why the USAF limited the numbers or cancelled it, and so forth? Maybe a force structure/operations/budget detail not necessarily made public, who knows.. Shrug

You've got an interesting curiosity in digging for certain facts though, so I give you credit for that effort. Respects.

Folks, I've switched this topic to the Cold War section. Granted, the BONE didn't see combat until Operation Desert Fox, and the particular mod that was the original subject of the thread is recent, but overall, the BONE was originally designed and built during the Cold War, and in many ways, is already out-dated technology, especially when you factor in the B-2 and the planned "2040 Bomber".

I would like to see a thread continue on the BONE, and this thread would a good start on the topic on this aircraft.

geogen wrote:

You've got an interesting curiosity in digging for certain facts though, so I give you credit for that effort. Respects.

Funny you should say that, before I went into ROTC (and dropped due to medical) I had a 49th FW F-117 pilot tell me that same thing. Curiosity I guess. To bad I dont have the hookups, I could get a more interesting job!

Also, I debated putting this topic in the Cold War thread...probly should have. Thanks!!

I don't agree that the B-1B is already outdated technology. While it naturally isn't as survivable as the B-2A, something flying low, fast, with a relatively small RCS and good ECM systems will still be a challenge to catch. Modern upgrades have provided GPS and precision strike capability which is certainly useful in this day and age.

As far as this "2040 bomber" I wasn't aware 2040 was picked as the date. Do they even know if it will be subsonic or supersonic yet? If supersonic how fast?

Forum Veteran Joined: Apr 16, 2005 - 03:16 PM Posts: 800

Apparently the B-1s are going to be upgraded with an AESA radar. Would it be possible to give it an AMRAAM capability for self defense? Maybe even to integrate the F-35's DAS for 360 deg engagement. There's surely room in such a large aircraft to integrate the DAS sensors.

AESA & DAS!?! FB-1B..?

Makes the FB-1R (w/F119's super-cruise) seem an even more deadly proposal!

Shrug

TEG

Ah heck, if we are making an FB-1R then lets give it TVC and HMCS. Kidding. I dont expect air to air weaponry to appear on the B-1.

Forum Veteran Joined: Apr 16, 2005 - 03:16 PM Posts: 800

The JDRADM could eventually be a good weapon for the B-1, both a/a and anti-radar capability.

I've pondered in past postings, for perhaps around 20 B-1Bs being upgraded with appropriate avionics to suffice with such future roles.

My gut feeling is to go beyond the JDRADM and AMRAAM capability though and actually incorporate an air launched variant of the SM-6, an Air-Intercept variant of NCADE, or at least the ESSM as a strategic intercept capability to cover that yet deployed very long endurance contingency.

But I'd concur fully with Viperall (as I'm usually on the same page with him), that yes, the JDRADM could and should be planned for a future general B-1B upgrade capacity at the least. That shouldn't be rocket science (or billed to the taxpayer as such).

That_Engine_Guy wrote:

AESA & DAS!?! FB-1B..?

Makes the FB-1R (w/F119's super-cruise) seem an even more deadly proposal!

Shrug

TEG

We always have that discussion at work about putting F-119's on the B-1. Without some beefing up, these things would fall apart right now. Lmfao.
These thing crack windows every time they nose up too hard. Haha

There's so much we could do with the B-1B. I can see it performing so many roles at once. When I think of an aircraft that can do battle space management, jamming, electronic attack, be a bomb/missile truck, gather ELINT, all at the same time, I think of the B-1B. Load that thing up with an AESA radars, jammers, sensors, missiles, bombs, F119 engines, a well trained crew of fire-breathers and you'll have a game changing aircraft on your hands.

Yes, that's a popular proposal indeed, disco. Perhaps even 20 units (?) converted for Show of Force deployments or a strategic counter show of force, show up/escort, etc. Would be be a glove fit platform for one thing, made for an updated AIM-97 SeekBat derivative (a la ERAM + an IIR seeker), 450km no-booster mod, deterrence, relay-netted with loitering UCAV co-op et al.

I'm interested by Mush's comments above though.. I personally think F1119 might either be too much overkill, dimensionally challenged or otherwise not feasible? Maybe even a PW F232 type derivative or upgraded GE-132. Would be cheaper but still get improved cruise/dash performance.

And maybe indeed remake the entire cockpit and canopy section to 'beef up'? e.g., go with composite covered crew section, with mini- windows (employing big screen displays, visor mounted displays with High-Def DAS-derived vision)? Could make sense to config the unmanned capability too while at it..

How much do they really need an afterburner? Perhaps a non-AB version of an F135 or F136 would be a stronger candidate than the F119. I fail to see how the F119 is a good fit for the B-1B when it's optimized for a flight regime the B-1B wasn't meant to fly.

I think the original B-1 design was optimized for Mach 2+ performance. It might have use for two pairs of F119s. Imagine a Special Forces team that's cut-off and surrounded, needing CAS. This thing would be able to get warheads on foreheads faster than any other strike platform if it could supercruise. It would save lives.

Forum: Military Aircraft of the Cold War

The BONE (B-1)