Military Base Closings.......
- Thread starter MikeD
- Start date
[ QUOTE ]
MikeD, do you know if it's true that they B-1s are getting retired soon?
[/ QUOTE ]
I know the Air Force had wanted this, but Congress authorized last year to bring the B-1Bs stored at AMARC (the boneyard) out of retirement and back to active duty.
I think the current plan is to consolodate all B-1Bs at Dyess AFB.
I don't know if things have changed, but it used to be very expensive to operate, but had a very low reliability rate, which I think is why the AF wants to get rid of them.
MikeD, do you know if it's true that they B-1s are getting retired soon?
[/ QUOTE ]
I know the Air Force had wanted this, but Congress authorized last year to bring the B-1Bs stored at AMARC (the boneyard) out of retirement and back to active duty.
I think the current plan is to consolodate all B-1Bs at Dyess AFB.
I don't know if things have changed, but it used to be very expensive to operate, but had a very low reliability rate, which I think is why the AF wants to get rid of them.
TrinidadGT20
Vice President of Awesome
I heard Otis is on the chopping block.
Slight thread hijack...
Do any of you know if Pease AFB is still at least partially active? I know that it was formally closed years ago but I'm not sure if it is 100% closed or if there is still some military activity there. So far attempts to commercialize it with airline service have failed (aside from Pan Am III's presence) largely because of its proximity to MHT, BOS, and Portland, ME.
Slight thread hijack...
Do any of you know if Pease AFB is still at least partially active? I know that it was formally closed years ago but I'm not sure if it is 100% closed or if there is still some military activity there. So far attempts to commercialize it with airline service have failed (aside from Pan Am III's presence) largely because of its proximity to MHT, BOS, and Portland, ME.
TrinidadGT20
Vice President of Awesome
[ QUOTE ]
I think the current plan is to consolodate all B-1Bs at Dyess AFB.
I don't know if things have changed, but it used to be very expensive to operate, but had a very low reliability rate, which I think is why the AF wants to get rid of them.
[/ QUOTE ]
Is Rockwell still in business anymore, at least as an aviation company?
It still amazes me that the B52 is still flying and hasn't been replaced, or at the very least undergone engine modernization to save fuel.
I think the current plan is to consolodate all B-1Bs at Dyess AFB.
I don't know if things have changed, but it used to be very expensive to operate, but had a very low reliability rate, which I think is why the AF wants to get rid of them.
[/ QUOTE ]
Is Rockwell still in business anymore, at least as an aviation company?
It still amazes me that the B52 is still flying and hasn't been replaced, or at the very least undergone engine modernization to save fuel.
[ QUOTE ]
Do any of you know if Pease AFB is still at least partially active? I know that it was formally closed years ago but I'm not sure if it is 100% closed or if there is still some military activity there. So far attempts to commercialize it with airline service have failed (aside from Pan Am III's presence) largely because of its proximity to MHT, BOS, and Portland, ME.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think the NHANG still operates KC-135s out of there.
There was talk of going after Pease for the frieght market, to help clear up congestion in Boston. I don't know if any of the big freight companies have done that yet or not, though.
People didn't want to have to deal with an hour commute to Boston or Portland, but I think packages don't mind it.
Do any of you know if Pease AFB is still at least partially active? I know that it was formally closed years ago but I'm not sure if it is 100% closed or if there is still some military activity there. So far attempts to commercialize it with airline service have failed (aside from Pan Am III's presence) largely because of its proximity to MHT, BOS, and Portland, ME.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think the NHANG still operates KC-135s out of there.
There was talk of going after Pease for the frieght market, to help clear up congestion in Boston. I don't know if any of the big freight companies have done that yet or not, though.
People didn't want to have to deal with an hour commute to Boston or Portland, but I think packages don't mind it.
[ QUOTE ]
Is Rockwell still in business anymore, at least as an aviation company?
[/ QUOTE ]
Rockwell Collins still makes avionics and communications equipment, but the Rockwell that was formerly North American and that built the B-1 and the space shuttle was absorbed by Boeing in the 1990s.
[ QUOTE ]
It still amazes me that the B52 is still flying and hasn't been replaced, or at the very least undergone engine modernization to save fuel.
[/ QUOTE ]
With it's capability as a standoff cruise missile platform, it's still very effective. There is talk of them flying until 2040 (almost 90 years in service?). They've been talking about re-engining them for at least 25 years now, but I don't think it's going to happen. It will probably cost more than it will probably save. The B-52Hs, which are the only model left, were the most fuel efficient of the bunch.
Plus, the B-52 is huge benefit as far as psy-ops. I remember when Desert Storm was starting, one of the guys on TV said "The Iraqi forces are battle-hardened after their years of war with Iran." The military analyst next to him replied, "Yeah, but the Iranians weren't carpet bombing them with B-52s on a continual basis."
That's the other great thing about the B-52; as a conventional platform carrying Mk-82 dumb bombs, it doesn't use precision guided munitions because it doesn't have to. Just draw a box and everything within that box will be obliterated.
And that's why it remains a significant weapon capability from a psy-ops point of view.
Is Rockwell still in business anymore, at least as an aviation company?
[/ QUOTE ]
Rockwell Collins still makes avionics and communications equipment, but the Rockwell that was formerly North American and that built the B-1 and the space shuttle was absorbed by Boeing in the 1990s.
[ QUOTE ]
It still amazes me that the B52 is still flying and hasn't been replaced, or at the very least undergone engine modernization to save fuel.
[/ QUOTE ]
With it's capability as a standoff cruise missile platform, it's still very effective. There is talk of them flying until 2040 (almost 90 years in service?). They've been talking about re-engining them for at least 25 years now, but I don't think it's going to happen. It will probably cost more than it will probably save. The B-52Hs, which are the only model left, were the most fuel efficient of the bunch.
Plus, the B-52 is huge benefit as far as psy-ops. I remember when Desert Storm was starting, one of the guys on TV said "The Iraqi forces are battle-hardened after their years of war with Iran." The military analyst next to him replied, "Yeah, but the Iranians weren't carpet bombing them with B-52s on a continual basis."
That's the other great thing about the B-52; as a conventional platform carrying Mk-82 dumb bombs, it doesn't use precision guided munitions because it doesn't have to. Just draw a box and everything within that box will be obliterated.
And that's why it remains a significant weapon capability from a psy-ops point of view.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
MikeD, do you know if it's true that they B-1s are getting retired soon?
[/ QUOTE ]
I know the Air Force had wanted this, but Congress authorized last year to bring the B-1Bs stored at AMARC (the boneyard) out of retirement and back to active duty.
I think the current plan is to consolodate all B-1Bs at Dyess AFB.
I don't know if things have changed, but it used to be very expensive to operate, but had a very low reliability rate, which I think is why the AF wants to get rid of them.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're absolutely right.
[ QUOTE ]
MikeD, do you know if it's true that they B-1s are getting retired soon?
[/ QUOTE ]
I know the Air Force had wanted this, but Congress authorized last year to bring the B-1Bs stored at AMARC (the boneyard) out of retirement and back to active duty.
I think the current plan is to consolodate all B-1Bs at Dyess AFB.
I don't know if things have changed, but it used to be very expensive to operate, but had a very low reliability rate, which I think is why the AF wants to get rid of them.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're absolutely right.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do any of you know if Pease AFB is still at least partially active? I know that it was formally closed years ago but I'm not sure if it is 100% closed or if there is still some military activity there. So far attempts to commercialize it with airline service have failed (aside from Pan Am III's presence) largely because of its proximity to MHT, BOS, and Portland, ME.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think the NHANG still operates KC-135s out of there.
There was talk of going after Pease for the frieght market, to help clear up congestion in Boston. I don't know if any of the big freight companies have done that yet or not, though.
People didn't want to have to deal with an hour commute to Boston or Portland, but I think packages don't mind it.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're right, NH Guard still flies 135s out of there. Called Pease International Tradeport, I believe it was the first base closing "success story" following the '88 BRAC.
[ QUOTE ]
Do any of you know if Pease AFB is still at least partially active? I know that it was formally closed years ago but I'm not sure if it is 100% closed or if there is still some military activity there. So far attempts to commercialize it with airline service have failed (aside from Pan Am III's presence) largely because of its proximity to MHT, BOS, and Portland, ME.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think the NHANG still operates KC-135s out of there.
There was talk of going after Pease for the frieght market, to help clear up congestion in Boston. I don't know if any of the big freight companies have done that yet or not, though.
People didn't want to have to deal with an hour commute to Boston or Portland, but I think packages don't mind it.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're right, NH Guard still flies 135s out of there. Called Pease International Tradeport, I believe it was the first base closing "success story" following the '88 BRAC.
TrinidadGT20
Vice President of Awesome
[ QUOTE ]
There was talk of going after Pease for the frieght market, to help clear up congestion in Boston. I don't know if any of the big freight companies have done that yet or not, though.
[/ QUOTE ]
Possibly. I haven't heard. With an 11,000' runway and its centralized location (MHT, BOS, and Portland) it makes sense to have that a freight-centric airport.
Did y'all know that the Pease is an alternate landing spot for the Space Shuttle, if for some reason they should need to land it in the northeast?
There was talk of going after Pease for the frieght market, to help clear up congestion in Boston. I don't know if any of the big freight companies have done that yet or not, though.
[/ QUOTE ]
Possibly. I haven't heard. With an 11,000' runway and its centralized location (MHT, BOS, and Portland) it makes sense to have that a freight-centric airport.
Did y'all know that the Pease is an alternate landing spot for the Space Shuttle, if for some reason they should need to land it in the northeast?
