B-52 re-generated to flying status.

BravoHotel

BravoHotel

Well-Known Member
Interesting article on a B-52 being returned to active service.



For the first time a B-52 is regenerated from Tucson’s Boneyard. (Photo by Davis Monthan Air Force Base)

For the very first time, a Boeing B-52 Stratofortress has moved from the boneyard back into the sky again. The veteran bomber took off from Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Arizona for the first time following its restoration on Friday, the 13th of February. Technicians at the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group, otherwise known as AMARG, pulled the BUFF from the massive storage yard beside Davis-Monthan during 2014 to replace a damaged aircraft in the active fleet which the Air Force deemed beyond economic repair.

www.warbirdsnews.com/warbirds-news/fun-facts/return-ghost-rider.html
 
So this must be a low time airframe?

Edit:
Nicknamed “Ghost Rider”, ’007 last served with the 5th Bomb Wing from Minot AFB before going into storage in the mid-2000s. The AMARG team selected her for regeneration because, of the thirteen B-52Hs in storage, she was in the best condition and had the lowest airframe hours. In fact she is in such good shape that members of her maintenance team felt ‘Ghost Rider’ was better off than several active airframes currently serving.
 
Good to see a plane leaving a boneyard. And if I read the article right it's also getting that overhaul to modenize the Buffs that was approved in 2013.
 
Whatusername said:
Good to see a plane leaving a boneyard. And if I read the article right it's also getting that overhaul to modenize the Buffs that was approved in 2013.
Click to expand...

Planes often leave the boneyard, those that are there in temp status or in flyable storage (everything west of Kolb Rd). The ones there for good, are the ones east of Kolb Rd in the scrapping/dismantling area.

All B-52s that have ever come here, have never left. This being the first ever since the very early 1970s when the first B-52s began arriving.
 
PositionAndHold said:
Nothing like diggin (or resurecting) an airplane out of the airplane grave yard, one named Ghost Rider no less and flying it for the first time on Friday the 13th. Some one had a death wish. :)
Click to expand...
Perhaps not a death wish, if all the ground runs and functional tests were good I'd fly on it. I've flown on Lears post 12 year, 12,000 landing, including wing removal/installation. Albeit with a Lear approved test pilot, but that was mainly for the stall tests required due to the leading edge removal/installation. If you can avoid it, don't stall a Lear, it's pretty exciting.
 
knot4u said:
Perhaps not a death wish, if all the ground runs and functional tests were good I'd fly on it. I've flown on Lears post 12 year, 12,000 landing, including wing removal/installation. Albeit with a Lear approved test pilot, but that was mainly for the stall tests required due to the leading edge removal/installation. If you can avoid it, don't stall a Lear, it's pretty exciting.
Click to expand...
I've always heard that about the old 20/30 series Lears. Haven't heard much about the 40/45 series though. In the sim the stalls are pretty benign. I'd fly it too. We actually flew this last Friday the 13th. No problems at all. Knock on wood.
 
MikeD said:
Planes often leave the boneyard, those that are there in temp status or in flyable storage (everything west of Kolb Rd). The ones there for good, are the ones east of Kolb Rd in the scrapping/dismantling area.

All B-52s that have ever come here, have never left. This being the first ever since the very early 1970s when the first B-52s began arriving.
Click to expand...

Ah I know that they try to great lengths to preserve some. But I was under the feeling that one a plane went to a bone yard the chances of it getting out was nil.

As for the low return rate for the Buffs is because it's a old airframe with the wear that comes with it being 50 years old? Or was it because we had to retire several bombers when we were negotiating with the USSR?
 
PositionAndHold said:
I've always heard that about the old 20/30 series Lears. Haven't heard much about the 40/45 series though. In the sim the stalls are pretty benign. I'd fly it too. We actually flew this last Friday the 13th. No problems at all. Knock on wood.
Click to expand...
I helped once on a Lear 28 12 year, the pilot that flew our test flights was the same pilot that completed the initial flights after it was built for that airframe, multiple flights requiring mainly spoiler adjustments. It was very obvious that he had an emotional attachment to the 28/29s. I don't work on those anymore, but the 28 was loud, fast and badass.
 
And before anyone says there aren't Lear 29s, they were built and never sold to civilians. Kinda sad actually, the additional range and a service ceiling of 51,000ft would have been selling points.
 
Whatusername said:
Ah I know that they try to great lengths to preserve some. But I was under the feeling that one a plane went to a bone yard the chances of it getting out was nil.

As for the low return rate for the Buffs is because it's a old airframe with the wear that comes with it being 50 years old? Or was it because we had to retire several bombers when we were negotiating with the USSR?
Click to expand...

Most of the B-52s were old or outdated. The first A/B/C/E model B-52s were some of the first planes and were retired in the late 60s to very early 70s due to age and equipment. B-52s that served in combat in Vietnam were D/F/G models. The F model was retired in '78, and the D (most of which all served in Vietnam) in '84 due mainly to corrosion/age and other problems inherent in not only overseas basing at the time, but also the stresses of low-level flying following Vietnam when nuclear penetration tactics dictated going in low-level as opposed to high-level. The G model served again in Desert Storm, and was retired in '94 due to age and stresses on the airframe. The H model, which is still in service, never saw combat until Afghanistan; as it's whole life was spent sitting nuclear alert; hence why Hs never went to Vietnam or Desert Storm. But they're fairly lower time airframes, even due to their age, since they spent much of their lives sitting at bases on alert status, versus flying all the time.

Mandates or the START treaty mandated that we had to scrap many B-52s we had in storage. B-52s that were in storage, and even those in museums, are counted as "active" aircraft under the Treaty. There's a treaty monitoring office at DMA, and Russian military would regularly visit to ensure treaty compliance, just as we would do to them. Also as part of the treaty, B-1 Lancer bombers lost their nuclear mission and went to an all-conventional mission.
 
Side note: I've been told that many Russian treaty observers are much more interested in American shopping than performing a function that could be replaced by a web cam.
 
Whatusername said:
Or was it because we had to retire several bombers when we were negotiating with the USSR?
Click to expand...

The aircraft retired for the USSR (Salt Treaty) were cut up so the USSR satellites could see we were in compliance. The Red's did the same. The period is long past but these birds are being used for parts.

Remember "Trust but Verify"?

2yll3s8.png
 
MikeD said:
There's a treaty monitoring office at DMA, and Russian military would regularly visit to ensure treaty compliance, just as we would do to them. Also as part of the treaty, B-1 Lancer bombers lost their nuclear mission and went to an all-conventional mission.
Click to expand...

I was hunting on Vandenberg AFB when the Russians were on the base. We were given clear directions on which roads to take because the Russians where allowed to take our shot guns.

One aircraft the USSR wanted us to retire but the US refused was the F-111's based in Europe. I guess the Russians had no defense to the super sonic low level bomber.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top