General Electric proposes to keep B-52 bombers in US Air Force service until 2097

For more than 60 years, the iconic Boeing B-52 Stratofortress has been a symbol of the military might of the United States of America. Today they are going to breathe new life into it by installing new power plants, thereby extending the operation of the aircraft until the next century. The author of the Telegram channel “Wings of War” will talk about the grandiose plans of the Pentagon and aircraft engine manufacturers.

Cabin structure

The aircraft is piloted by two crew members, the B-2 (bomber), the photo of which is presented below, is equipped for this purpose with a pressurized cabin located in the front of the aircraft.

Pilots get to their workplace through a compartment in the front landing gear via a folding ladder. Each pilot has a full set of control instruments at his workplace. In the same place there are buttons for starting the engines and on-board equipment systems of the aircraft. These buttons are placed in case of an alarm.

The protection of the transparent part of the cabin consists of 4 panels of a multilayer structure, allowing for horizontal visibility at an angle of 200º. In the event of a nuclear explosion not far from the aircraft, a composition with gold components is applied to the glass, becoming lightproof and not transmitting radiation. The flight of aviators is carried out in anti-laser glasses.

Disadvantages of invisible

Wide sections of the American military and congressmen are simply deceived in their best expectations. Not all people have knowledge in the field of radio engineering, and even more so in the phenomenon of diffraction of electromagnetic radiation. Lecturers spoke to them with the idea of ​​​​creating an invisible bomber; scientists vied with each other to promise the creation of such an aircraft today and infected many people with this idea.

But the effectiveness of the idea turns out to be somewhat questionable; the resulting dispersion area of ​​the aircraft remains in the range from 0.0015 to 0.1 m2. This characteristic far exceeds the readings of, for example, a fighter whose ESR is 3-4 m2. At first glance, the dispersion area is in an advantageous range.

But the reduced RCS of a bomber does not become a critical indicator of its invisibility. Scatter reduction is only effective when flying over older air defense systems. Modern modifications of radars are able to discern an aircraft with such a scattering area at a distance of up to ten to twenty kilometers.

The flat shape, lack of vertical lines and tail make it impossible to stay on course, and this requires the installation of expensive electronic controls.

Practical problems with infrared radiation have arisen, despite the concerted efforts of engineers and scientists. They are trying to place the engines on top of the aircraft, changing the outlet openings of the nozzles to accelerate the cooling of burnt fuel products. This gives its results, but it does not provide ideal concealment of the hot jet exhaust.

Eyewitness accounts at various modern exhibitions indicate that through the pupil of a thermal imager the aircraft is very noticeably visible and clearly visible. The enemy can see the device, in which case the B-2 (bomber) is doomed to destruction.

Stealth Bomber Crash

The accident occurred on the island of Guam. Four aircraft from those that have been based on the island for the last 4 months leave the airfield. The bomber named "Spirit of Kansas" takes off second. A characteristic bang is heard and thick smoke appears at some distance from the control tower. Fire and ambulance services are called, but the plane cannot be saved; it is completely destroyed.

The crew of the plane that took off first was ordered to urgently return to its location; all flights of bombers of this type were suspended until the original causes of the accident were clarified. The pilots managed to eject and were not very seriously injured; one was discharged on the second day, and the other was treated in hospital for some time.

It is assumed that the cause of the accident was a mechanical failure or human error. After a study, a special commission concluded that the explosion of the B-2 stealth bomber occurred as a result of engine failure.

Incidents

Ten B-1Bs were lost in crashes. Between 1984 and 2001, 17 people were killed in B-1B crashes and accidents.

• On September 19, 1997 at 15:25, a B-1B (s/n 85-0078) crashed while performing a low-altitude training flight. All four crew members were killed.
• On February 18, 1998, a B-1B (s/n 84-0057) crashed near the city. After signaling the fire and turning off the engine, a short circuit occurred in the fire warning and extinguishing panel, causing the remaining three engines to shut down. The crew ejected safely.
• On December 12, 2001 at 21:30, a B-1B (s/n 86-0114) crashed over the Indian Ocean. All four crew members successfully ejected and were rescued. The emergency occurred during a flight to perform a long-range combat mission over Afghanistan. The pilot, Captain William Steele, attributed the crash to "several malfunctions" that caused the bomber to "go out of control."
• On September 15, 2005, a B-1B (s/n 85-0066) was seriously damaged as a result of a fire while landing at Andersen Air Force Base on the island of Guam. A hydraulic fluid leak and sparks from a damaged wheel caused a fire in the right landing gear as the plane landed. The fire damaged the right wing, engine nacelle, airframe and landing gear. The estimated cost of repairs was more than $32 million.
• On May 8, 2006, a B-1B (s/n 86-0132) landed with its landing gear raised after an eleven-hour flight to Diego Garcia. The resulting fire was quickly extinguished. The crew evacuated through the top hatch, the co-pilot received a minor back injury.
• On April 4, 2008 at 21:10, a B-1B (s/n 86-0116/EL) was destroyed by successive explosions of ammunition during a fire at an airbase in Qatar. The cause was a hydraulic system failure during taxiing, after which the bomber crashed into a concrete barrier and caught fire. The crew left the plane safely.
• On August 19, 2013 at 09:30, a B-1B (s/n 85-0091) crashed near the city during a training flight after takeoff from an air base. All four crew members ejected safely and landed with minor injuries. The cause was mechanical damage, which caused fuel leakage and explosions.
• On May 1, 2018, at 1:30 p.m., a B-1B (s/n 86-0109/DY) made an emergency landing at Midland Airport.

Incident 1 May 2020 (crash landing at Midland)

During a routine training flight, fire alarms went off in three compartments of the bomber (later the media, citing unofficial sources, reported that the crew paid attention to the signals that appeared on the fire warning panel: first, about the fire of the third engine (the plane has four in total), located closer to the fuselage, and then about a fire in the wing fairing). Two fires were extinguished by standard means, the third - in engine No. 2 - could not be extinguished and the commander ordered the crew to leave the plane

The weapon operator was the first to carry out the commander's order, the emergency hatch was shot off, the cabin was depressurized, but the operator's seat did not move on the rails, and the ejection did not occur. After this, the ship’s commander ordered to “cancel the ejection. We're trying to sit down." Within 25 minutes, the B-1B, with its engine on fire and the cabin depressurized, flew to the airport in Midland and was landed safely, then the burning engine was extinguished (the weapons operator remained in his seat the entire time until landing, and there was still the danger that his seat would eject will happen anyway). The $400 million plane was saved; After major repairs and modernization, it will be returned to the 7th Bomb Wing in Texas.

Unofficial sources familiar with the results of the investigation called the crew commander a hero for saving the combat vehicle and the people on board. Subsequently, the crew members were awarded the Flying Cross for their professionalism and courage shown in the emergency situation.

Flight ban (following the May 1 incident in Midland)

In June 2020, US Air Force spokesman William Russell announced that the United States would stop flying the B-1B Lancer bomber. The flights were grounded June 7 after a May 1 B-1B incident in Midland identified a problem with one of the aircraft's ejection seat components, an agency spokesman said. On June 21, the media, citing the US Air Force command, reported that the ban on B-1B flights had been lifted.

Technical characteristics of the combat vehicle

The manned bomber has excellent technical characteristics. The B-2 (bomber) is equipped with avionics. The FLIR infrared system creates an extended overview, the HANIUAL radio wave altimeter is designed so that its signal is not detected by the enemy during reconnaissance.

For movement in given coordinates, an inertial navigation system is installed, and there is a channel for exchanging data with reconnaissance satellites. Accurate release of JDAM guided munitions within a given range is ensured using a target designation device. The aircraft has a connected system of sensors that transmit data to the control system about changes in the situation outside the ship.

The aircraft is equipped with an AFAR radar, but this is not a typical device for a stealth aircraft; as soon as you issue one signal, enemy air defenses will detect the aircraft. For example, the older F-117 aircraft has only passive data collection capabilities. Aircraft technical characteristics:

• two pilots can comfortably sit in the cockpit;
• the length of the flying cruise ship is 20.9 m;
• the device has a wingspan of 52.1 m;
• aircraft height - 5.1 m;
• wing surface area - 460 m2;
• an empty cruiser without filling weighs 71.7 tons;
• normal and maximum takeoff weights are 152.6 and 171 tons, respectively;
• the fuel for refueling the device for the entire flight period weighs 73 tons;
• payload before and after modernization – 22.7 and 27 tons, respectively;
• the aircraft engine is a two-circuit turbojet, weighs 1,452 tons;
• maximum possible flight speed - 860 km/h;
• the cruiser's average speed is 776 km/h, the combat area covers a radius of 5310 km;
• the flight range is 11,110 km, the travel time is 6.5 hours, the B-2 (bomber) rises to a maximum of 15,000 m.

It was smooth on paper, but they forgot about the ravines...

The take-off weight in the project was “frozen” at a value of 163332 kg, but the calculated characteristics of the B-1 as they were refined (and the iterative recalculation method was used) kept decreasing. For example, the estimated air defense breakthrough speed at an altitude of 61 m decreased from 1163 to 1041 km/h. With the length of such a section being 3,704 km (which was determined by the echeloned structure of the air defense system in the USSR), the total range in calculations in 1971 was 11,301 km, and the following year - only 10,212 km.

The range with a “jerk” of 1111 km at a speed of 2237 km/h at an altitude of 15418...18664 m decreased not so significantly - from 9306 to 9171 km, and the combat radius even increased - from 7825 to 8615 km (the subsonic radius in 1971 was 9140 km, and in 1972 it became 8977 km). But all this could only be achieved with refueling on the way to the target, and without it the intercontinental aircraft turned into a medium-range bomber.

Here another “company secret” is visible to the naked eye. She planned to land at a very short distance from the target of attack: in 1971, the plane had to move away from the target (i.e., from the point of use of weapons) by 2161 km with the first option of breaking through the air defense and by 1482 km with the second, and in 1972 These sections were reduced to 1235 and 556 km respectively! This meant that the base where he would have to land after a nuclear attack fell within the range of medium-range bombers, and in the latter case, even enemy tactical aircraft!

This was nonsense, however, in June 1970, the Rockwell concern received $2.283 billion for five experimental B-1As, and although the following year their number was reduced to three and funding was reduced to 1.351 billion, that was money considerable. But even here, the “firms” were in for trouble - a very profitable order for the construction of prototypes (which are several times more expensive than future production vehicles) was given to the state Air Force plant in Palmdale in California - US Air Force Plant No. 42. And accordingly, a significant part of the project budget went to him.

Final assembly of a prototype B-1A aircraft in Palmdale Photo: www.nationalmuseum.af.mil

The ceremony of rolling out the first experimental B-1A bomber from the assembly shop of Air Force Plant No. 42 in Palmdale - October 26, 1974. Photo: www.nationalmuseum.af.mil

The ceremony of rolling out the first experimental B-1A bomber from the assembly shop of Air Force Plant No. 42 in Palmdale - October 26, 1974. Photo: www.nationalmuseum.af.mil

January 23, 1975 - The B-1A takes off on its second flight, accompanied by an F-111 aircraft from which it is to be videotaped. In fact, this was the first test flight, it was carried out from Edwards Air Force Base, and on the first flight on December 23, 1974, the car simply flew there from the factory Photo: www.nationalmuseum.af.mil

The first B-1A was built right on time. Its rollout took place on October 26, 1974, and after a very short ground test it was flown on December 23. True, then before the second flight, the first B-1A spent a month on the ground - defects identified during the flight were eliminated.

Flight tests of the new vehicle took place at Edwards Air Force Base in California without serious breakdowns or failures, but it did not show the declared characteristics. In particular, instead of a speed of 2237 km/h, it was possible to squeeze out only 1587, but in this mode the plane turned out to be unstable, and it was “cut down” by another 100 km/h.

The first experimental B-1A in a test flight at low altitude in difficult terrain. Small aerodynamic surfaces on the forward fuselage were automatically deflected to dampen random air gusts. They helped the automatic terrain following system keep the aircraft on a given trajectory, reduced the load on the airframe (and from such air gusts they are much greater than from maneuvering) and increased comfort for the crew Photo: www.nationalmuseum.af.mil

Design flaws

The fact that the winged ship lacks a tail does not in the least prevent it from maneuvering smartly in the air; B-2 stealth bombers do not maintain their chosen course in the sky due to the lack of a vertical keel. The turn is carried out by the roll of the aircraft, during which the force on the lower wing decreases, and the upper one receives an increasing lifting force, which leads to the aircraft turning in the desired direction. In aviation, there is the concept of “wing load”, which is one of the most important parameters of a vessel. The fewer kilograms of force per square centimeter of the wing, the easier it is for the aircraft to make turns in the air. This increases the maneuverability of the bomber.

It is impossible to control a bomber without installing an electrical remote control system and automatic devices that monitor the flight process and issue command impulses to the mechanical parts of the wings.

Aircraft control system

The B-2 bomber is equipped with additional electric remote control, which is a digital quadruplex system with quick response elements. The automatic control contains four computing units and remains operational if two of them fail. The air warning system contains 20 pressure sensors, making it unobtrusive.

The American B-2 bomber has an NSS-class navigation subsystem in its on-board equipment. Lightning-fast response to changes in the flight situation is carried out by two interconnected electronic units: IMU (inertial) and AIU (astro-inertial). Each pilot monitors 4 multi-function indicators.

In service

20 bombers at the end of 2020

19 B-2s (originally 20, one crashed) are assigned to Whiteman AFB, Missouri, and are part of the 509th Bomb Wing, Eighth Air Force, Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC). This unit is the only permanently operating (active) squadron of B-2 aircraft in the United States. Another B-2 aircraft is assigned to the Air Force Materiel Command's (AFMC) 412th Test Wing at Edwards AFB for evaluation and test work.

All other aviation units that fly or have flown the B-2 do not have their own bombers.

Fundamental features of the aircraft design

The B-2 Spirit bomber is being produced in the form of a wing, the design assumes the complete absence of vertical tail components. Splitting flaps are installed on the end of the wings as guide rudders. Most of the body and main parts are made of titanium and aluminum alloys. Additional materials include carbon fiber reinforced plastics and polyamides with an increased heat resistance coefficient.

The B-2 Spirit strategic bomber has a load-bearing element in the form of a titanium caisson located in the front half of the hull and continuing in the intermediate sections. The wings of the aircraft are made of carbon fiber. Monolithic titanium caisson panels are made 23 mm thick. The parts are connected to each other by diffuse welding or improved plastic molding.

Main strategic bombers

Cold War

• Tu-4
• Tu-16
• Tu-22M
• Tu-95
• M-4
• B-29
• B-36
• B-52 Stratofortress
• Avro Vulcan
• Vickers Valiant
• Handley Page Victor

Experienced and unrealized projects

• M-50
• M-56
• Tu-96
• Tu-135
• Tu-230
• T-4
• T-60
• XB-70

Modern

• Tu-95MS
• Tu-22M3
• Tu-160
• B-1B
• B-2 Spirit
• B-52H Stratofortress
• Xian H-6A

Future

• Xian H-20
• PAK DA and modernized Tu-160
• NGB (Next-Generation Bomber)

Equivalent to a large airplane crowd

According to the calculations of military scientists, in order to inflict damage in the depths of the enemy, 32 F-16 bombers using high-precision weapons require a lot of accompanying equipment. The escort consists of 16 fighters, 4 jamming aircraft, 8 aircraft for suppressing radars and a whole flock of tankers (15 pieces), which provide the above-mentioned crews with fuel.

An absolutely identical blow in power is delivered by a group of invisible F-117s of 8 aircraft, accompanied by two base tankers. But the American B-2 bomber takes the leading position in this comparative analysis - performing a similar mission requires the presence of only two stealth systems in the air and does not require the use of fuel tankers, since the maximum flight range does not require refueling in the sky. As you can see, the savings are obvious.

Combat bomber career

The first time a bomber was used for destruction was during the NATO war in Yugoslavia, where about 600 precision-guided munitions were dropped. Characteristically, the planes bombed without stopping, they departed from a base in Missouri, dropped bombs in Kosovo and flew back.

The Iraq War provides a new fighting ground. A B-2 stealth bomber takes off from Diego Garcia Atoll and another secret base without disclosing its name. In total, the planes make about 22 sorties. Whiteman Air Force Base released 27 aircraft loaded with ammunition, which together with the first bombing dropped more than 300 tons of bombs on Iraqi territory. The average stay in the air was 30 hours, while it is noted that the longest record duration belongs to one of the crews, who was in the sky for more than 50 hours.

Participation in the bombing of Libya in 2011 adds a lot of experience to his combat career, during which ammunition was dropped on 45 ground targets. For a tiny production series of 21 bombers, very good combat experience is noted.

Performance characteristics

Data source: Pace S., 1998; Logan D., Miller J., 1986; Ilyin V. E., Levin M. A., 1996.

Comparison with analogues

Bomber 2B-L1 (B-1).

Bomber 2B-L1 (B-1).

Developer: Krylov, Kolpakov-Miroshnichenko Country: USSR First flight: 1924

In 1922, the revolutionary whirlwinds blowing over Russia definitely began to transform into creative forces capable of the rise and revival of an impoverished and war-ravaged country. Some revival began in the field of airplane design. The center of Russian aircraft manufacturing has become Moscow with its main production base - State Aviation Plant No. 1 (GAZ No. 1), the former Dux plant.

In January 1923, by order of the Aviation Department of the GUVP VSNKh, the Technical Department of GAZ No. 1 was renamed to the Plant Design Bureau. The design bureau's first task was to redesign the English reconnaissance aircraft DH-9 to Russian standards and materials. In production, the aircraft received the designation R-1 (“Reconnaissance First”). The design bureau gained work experience, replenished its staff in accordance with practical expediency, and finally formed a capable team.

At the beginning of 1924, GAZ Design Bureau No. 1 received several tasks from the Air Force Directorate to design new prototype aircraft. One of them was a twin-engine bomb carrier, the task for which was issued by the design unit of the Aviation Department of the Main Military Directorate on March 10, 1924. The vehicle was supposed to be built with two four-hundred-horsepower Liberty-12 engines, so it received the designation 2B-L1 (the first twin-engine bomb carrier with Liberty engines). Moreover, the aircraft was defined specifically as a “bomb carrier” - the name “bomber” had not yet come into practice at that time.

The initial assignment for 2B-L1, expressed in a very brief form, was repeatedly supplemented by oral instructions from the head of the design department of the Aviation Department V.F. Goncharov. It was Goncharov who coordinated technical data and characteristics with representatives of the Air Force. In particular, as a result of approvals, the weight of the lifted bomb load was reduced from 1000 kg to 550-600 kg, the specified payload (crew, gasoline, bombs) in the final version was 1100 kg.

The design of the aircraft at the first stage was carried out by the head of the plant's design bureau V.V. Kalinin, designers A.A. Krylov and L.D. Kolpakov-Miroshnichenko. The last two were engaged in finding rational dimensions and layout of the apparatus in accordance with the available structural materials. Krylov worked on the design of a monoplane bomb carrier, Kolpakov-Miroshnichenko - a biplane. From the point of view of materials, the project of a monoplane with a metal wing, an innovation for those years, seemed very tempting, but the actual implementation of this innovation could significantly complicate and delay construction. As a result, the design of an all-wood biplane was chosen; the metal was supposed to be used to a limited extent in individual components and elements. Thus, the project presented by Leonid Dementievich Kolpakov-Miroshnichenko went into detailed development. It should be noted that the designer Kolpakov-Miroshnichenko had pre-revolutionary experience in designing large aircraft. In 1915, at the Lebedev plant, according to his design, the twin-engine Lebed-XIV (Lebed-Grand) aircraft was built, which could well be classified as a medium bomber.

Officially, the assignment for the design of the 2B-L1 came from the Scientific Committee at the Air Force Directorate on March 7, 1924. A little more than two months later - on May 17 - the preliminary draft was ready and sent to the customer and to the Aviation Department of the Main Administration for Aircraft Management. The approval of the project was delayed by almost a year and took place only in April 1925. The plant foresaw such red tape and, without waiting for the papers to be returned, almost immediately began detailed design.

On August 15, 1924, production of the aircraft began and continued until the middle of next summer. During the past year the following events have occurred. In the fall, representatives of the Leningrad Special Technical Bureau for Military Inventions (Ostekhbyuro), headed by Vladimir Ivanovich Bekauri, appeared at GAZ No. 1. The Ostekhbyuro was interested in aircraft capable of carrying mines and torpedoes. The design bureau of the Moscow plant was asked to develop and build a special purpose aircraft (SON) capable of lifting loads weighing up to 2000 kg. SON was supposed to have four engines - two Liberty and two Fiat - with a total power of more than 2000 hp. The task seemed impossible, and the plant management refused the order. A few months later, Bekauri made a new proposal - to revise the order for 2B-L1 for the tasks of the Ostekhbyuro. In March 1925, a contract was drawn up for the conversion of the bomb carrier. The essence of the alterations boiled down to the manufacture of a new, higher chassis, rearrangement of the engines, installation of sighting devices in the bow and a torpedo release mechanism. The total cost of work to re-equip the bomb carrier was estimated at 43,500 gold rubles. In case of successful cooperation, GAZ No. 1 could count on receiving a new order from the Ostekhburo. It was planned to build a special purpose air cruiser (AKON) - an aircraft carrying torpedoes or mines, capable of delivering a cargo weighing 1200 kg to a target in 5 hours of flight time at a speed of 165 km/h.

The Air Force Department, in response to such great interest in the 2B-L1 shown by an outside agency, responded back in February 1925 with a categorical refusal to transfer it to anyone. However, Bekauri representatives continued to hover around the aircraft until its construction was completed. This led to some funny results. Although the Air Force held on to the bomber, the attitude towards it was cool; it was believed that it was an experimental vehicle, and not entirely successful. But in the course of unfolding events, interest in the aircraft increased unusually and GAZ No. 1 received notification of a possible order of 5-6 such devices for military aviation.

As a result, the agreement to remake 2B-L1 to meet the requirements of the Ostekhbyuro did not take place. It is only known that the designers of GAZ No. 1 completed the entire scope of design work for the Leningrad Institute, for which the amount of 7,800 rubles was paid. The plane was completed in accordance with its original purpose.

2B-L1 was an all-wood biplane 12.68 m long with a wingspan of 22.30 m. Liberty engines were installed in the space between the wing plans, in the camber of the V-shaped struts. The engine installation, gas supply and cooling system were largely borrowed from the R-1 aircraft, only the frontal surface of the water radiators was increased by 10. The crew consisted of 3-4 people. The pilot was in a single-seat cockpit, the equipment of which - in the instruments, the control stick - also showed features of the P-1 cockpit. For air defense, front and middle machine gun turrets were provided; In addition to them, there was a so-called redundant rifle installation for the defense of the lower rear hemisphere. The bomb load was located inside the fuselage. The plane had dimensions that made it possible to transport it disassembled by rail.

The 2B-L1 appeared on the Khodynka airfield in early August 1924. After testing the engines and the first taxiing, a decent number of deficiencies appeared. On August 7, the landing gear was broken, after which the device was sent to the factory for repair and debugging of the systems. Within a couple of months of being on the factory floor, the control system was redone; in particular, the control stick was replaced with a steering wheel. By mid-autumn, the plane was again taken to the airfield, already on a ski chassis. On November 15, 1924, pilot J.G. Paul took the car into the air and made the first 20-minute flight in a circle. According to the tester, the machine was successfully adjusted, easily took off from the ground, and behaved normally in flight. As a disadvantage, the pilot noted tight aileron control and unstable engine operation. In general, for the first flight the results were considered satisfactory. When taxiing into the hangar, a problem occurred - the tail spike broke again. This breakdown required new repairs, which were carried out in the hangar.

During the repair of the experimental bomb carrier, which received the designation B-1 in the Air Force, the following events occurred. On November 26, 1926, the all-metal twin-engine ANT-4 (TB-1), designed and built at TsAGI on instructions from the Ostekhburo, flew for the first time. It turns out that the Leningrad bureau ordered carrier aircraft from two organizations at once for insurance purposes. The Tsagovsky ANT-4, both in appearance and based on the results of its first flights, seemed more advanced than the work of GAZ No. 1. Naturally, the question arose about creating a bomber vehicle for military aviation on its basis. However, there were, by all accounts, insufficient opportunities to build such aircraft from metal. Therefore, the Air Force has now ordered two bomb carriers from different organizations. Aircraft Plant No. 1 was asked to design a more advanced B-2 aircraft, taking into account the B-1 experience. It was supposed to be built from wood, and the American Wright Tornado engines were used as a power plant. Interest in the B-2 was maintained until mid-1926, but the project did not come to fruition.

The history of the B-1 then developed as follows. Flights on it continued in March 1926. Pilots Y.G. Paul and K.K. Artseulov flew. In May the plane was transferred to N.O.A. (Scientific Experimental Airfield) for testing under the military program. In the summer of 1926, the B-1 was supposed to be transferred for operation to the Air Force.

On May 28, pilot Paul, while performing deep turns of up to 60°, noted vibration and shaking of the tail unit. During inspection on the ground, cracks were discovered at the junction of the fin and stabilizer. The structure in this place was strengthened and flights were stopped. At a specially assembled commission, it was decided to transfer the aircraft for static testing. I was primarily interested in the strength of the fuselage. During testing, the B-1 design fully confirmed compliance with the calculations; the fuselage withstood loads that were 20% higher than the calculated ones. There was no talk of restoring the aircraft or continuing experiments with it.

In the second half of 1926, the question of building a bomber aircraft from wood was raised again. The main purpose was a wartime bomb carrier, which was supposed to be built as a backup for the TB-1. This aircraft was designed by N.N. Polikarpov and built in 1929 at aircraft plant No. 25 under the designation TB-2. TB-2 was not transferred to the series.

If we consider the history of Russian aircraft manufacturing in general and the history of the creation of the B-1 (2B-L1) in particular, a number of questions involuntarily arise about the reasons for the outright failure with the B-1. Indeed, GAZ Design Bureau No. 1 had everything at its disposal: funds, equipment, production space. And the result... And the young TsAGI, literally huddled in unsuitable premises on Voznesenskaya Street (now Radio Street), at the same time designed and built the magnificent ANT-4.

The reasons for what happened are seen as follows. First of all, the TsAGI team was not novices at all. Since the organization of the institute in 1918, not only practical experience, but also experience of interaction between employees has been systematically accumulated here. Moreover, the backbone of the institute consisted of scientists and engineers, who rallied into a team of like-minded people and enthusiasts even during the period of study with N.E. Zhukovsky. After the death of Zhukovsky, a group for the practical design and construction of aircraft (and not only aircraft) was finally formed, headed by A.N. Tupolev. The leader of the group not only did not relinquish his primacy, but also increasingly gained authority. Therefore, we can say that by the time the ANT-4 was designed and built, TsAGI had a fairly monolithic and well-coordinated team.

At GAZ No. 1 the situation was completely different. The aviation department of Voenprom, created to manage the aviation industry, consisted of various officials who came from everywhere - sent according to orders and appointed from above. The Aviation Department's attempt to create an organization on the basis of aircraft plant No. 1 for the design and construction of new prototype aircraft encountered unforeseen insurmountable difficulties. According to many participants in the events, the period 1923-1926 was characterized by: “...organizational inconsistencies, nepotism, red tape, formalism on the one hand, and petty care on the other.”

How did this affect the B-1 bomber specifically? Production of the aircraft officially began on August 15, 1924 and proceeded quite actively for two months. And then the pace of work slowed down due to personal problems, reshuffling of employees and clarification of the age-old question “who is in charge here?”

At first, the head of the plant's design bureau was Polikarpov, then Grigorovich. With the appointment of the latter as technical director of GAZ No. 1, the position of head of the design bureau appeared; it was filled by V.V. Kalinin. In August 1924, with the departure of Grigorovich, Polikarpov was reappointed to the post of production manager and head of the design bureau. As we see, not only people changed, but also job titles.

By 1925, a certain vacuum had formed around the bomb carrier under construction: one of the initiators of the construction of 2B-L1, V.V. Kalinin, left the plant, co-author of the project A.A. Krylov began developing the R-II reconnaissance aircraft, the leaders of the experimental workshop that built the aircraft changed one after another ... In January 1925, Aviatrest was created, within which a department of experimental land aircraft construction (OSS) was formed under the leadership of N.N. Polikarpov. And although work on the 2B-L1 was now within his competence, Nikolai Polikarpov refused to lead the completion of the aircraft, designed and laid down without his participation, and agreed to be only a consultant.

From February 8, 1925, the construction of the aircraft was carried out under the leadership of an engineer (namely an engineer, without a position, although there were plenty of bosses around) Kolpakov-Miroshnichenko, who wrote in a memorandum on the progress of work:

“The design bureau is completely unequipped, there is no calm atmosphere and silence. Unsystematic and nervous work, constant pressure to meet deadlines that were technically obviously impossible, which significantly affected the quality, both from the constructive and production side. ... Frequent changes in organization and persons, who sometimes gave orders diametrically opposed to the previous ones. ... Powerlessness of senior designers, often undeserved undermining of their authority, both in their presence and in their absence...”

Indeed, Kolpakov-Miroshnichenko, who was appointed to “manage the completion” of the aircraft, could not in fact influence the progress of work. Often changes and additions were made without his participation. They could, for example, install a pipe that was obviously less durable - as a result, the crutch would break.

The most accurate assessment of the situation at GAZ No. 1 was contained in a letter from Aviatrest sent to the plant’s Management Board on June 6, 1926:

“According to information available at Aviatrest, the working conditions of the plant’s technical employees are deeply abnormal and unsatisfactory. Aviatrest draws your attention to the constant struggle of various currents dividing the plant’s personnel into warring parties. Unfortunately, in this behind-the-scenes struggle not caused by the circumstances of the case, both senior technical personnel and “foreign” aircraft take an active part. “Ours” are built quickly and all shortcomings on them are eliminated and even obscured in front of the Trust. “Alien” machines take years to be built, and every mistake is subject to unnecessary protracted discussions... As a result of the struggle of these warring parties, the construction of aircraft is sabotaged.”

In the second half of 1926, the situation at aircraft factory No. 1 largely returned to normal. Without trying to determine the role of individual figures in what is happening, we can assume with a high degree of confidence that time itself worked - enough time has passed for the emergence of a fully functional and effective creative team. We should not forget that all participants in the events came from pre-revolutionary Russia, and they had to build their business relationships in radically different, socialist conditions. Therefore, the problem of building the 2B-L1 aircraft was largely determined not by technical difficulties, but by issues of determining the place of an individual in the conditions of the new government.

Unfortunately, the described state of affairs in industry does not apply only to the period described. With the formation of new creative and production teams, similar phenomena were observed in subsequent years.

LTH:

Modification: 2B-L1 Wing span, m: 22.30 Length, m: 12.68 Height, m: 5.15 Wing area, m2: 145.00 Weight, kg - empty aircraft: 3080 - normal take-off: 6400 Engine type : 2 x PD “Liberty” L-12 - power, hp: 2 x 400 Maximum speed, km/h: 165 Cruising speed, km/h: 134 Flight duration, h: up to 6 Rate of climb, m/min: 95 Service ceiling, m: 4000 Crew, people: 3-4 Armament: 2 x 7.62 mm machine guns, bombs up to 500 kg.

Bomber 2B-1L on the airfield of the Khodynka airfield.

Bomber 2B-L1 at the Khodynka airfield. Summer 1925

2B-L1. Drawing.

2B-L1. Scheme 1.

2B-L1. Scheme 2.

.

.

List of sources: V.B.Shavrov. History of aircraft designs in the USSR until 1938. B.L. Simakov. Airplanes of the country of the Soviets. 1917-1970. Aviation. Mikhail Maslov. The story of a bomb carrier.

Aircraft modernization

In 2008, America's Congress funds a program to modernize the B-2 (bomber). The control system for defeating moving ground targets and the radar network are undergoing positive changes. 2009 increases the aircraft's carrying capacity, which is 27 tons, divided in half in the right and left compartments. In 2010, the material of the aircraft panel will be improved, making the recent cracking of the part impossible.

The panel is located between the engines; damage to its surface is associated with the fact that metal fatigue gradually accumulates, leading to cracks. It protects the composite frame from the hot jet stream and is exposed to high temperatures; vibration during the operation of power plants also plays an important role. The company's engineers are up to the task of making changes to the tail design and using more advanced steels.

In April 2010, the bomber received improved software, a new navigation and advanced communication system. And in September 2012, changes were made to the control of the aircraft regarding the installation of a modernized AN/APQ-181 radar with an available AFAR radar. The new features are complemented by a more advanced communications system and replacement of equipment in the on-board compartment.

Modernization

In 2012, the US Air Force operated 66 B-1B bombers, the average age of which was 24.1 years. In this regard, these bombers have undergone and are undergoing a number of modernizations.

Conventional Mission Upgrade Program (CMUP)

is a program that began in 1993 to convert B-1Bs to equip them with conventional weapons. The following upgrades were implemented as part of the program:

• Block B
  - software update for on-board systems.
• Block C
  - equipped with CBU-87/89/97 cluster bombs.
• Block D
  (1993-2003) - equipping with a towed fiber-optic decoy system AN/ALE-50, communication system AN/ARC-210, adding support for GPS navigation to the avionics, equipping with high-precision guided bombs GBU-31 Joint Direct Attack Munition ( JDAM).
• Block E
  (1996-2004) - modernization of information systems to support a wider range of weapons, integration with weapons such as Wind Corrected Munition Dispenser (WCMD), Joint Stand-Off Weapon (JSOW), and Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (JASSM) ).
• Block F
  (1997-2008) - equipped with AN/ALQ-214 IDECM electronic warfare system and AN/ALR-56M radiation warning system.

Cockpit Upgrade Program (CUP)

— program to update the cockpit.
As part of the program, LCD and other more advanced electronic devices were installed on the B-1B. Link-16
is a program to equip aircraft with a Link-16 communication channel, which allows you to automatically exchange data with other aircraft in real time.

While upgrading the B-1B, the US Air Force plans to keep these aircraft in service until 2038.

Modifications

Two B-1Bs maneuver over New Mexico. February 24, 2010

• B-1A
  (4 produced) Version built to the original B-1 specification, with adjustable air intakes and a maximum speed of Mach 2.2. As a crew rescue system, one ejection capsule was installed, in which all four crew members left the plane together.
• B-1B
  (100 produced) A revised version of the B-1, incorporating radar stealth technology and a maximum speed of Mach 1.25. The concept of a low-altitude air defense breakthrough aircraft has been implemented through the ability to fly at ultra-low altitudes while skirting the terrain. To rescue the crew, a system of four individual ACES II ejection seats is used, each of which has its own personal escape hatch. During the flight, each crew member is fixed in his seat and can eject independently of the others. It is impossible for the entire crew to leave the B-1B at the same time; sequential ejection is provided: first, the operators of weapons and defense systems sitting behind them, then the pilots - so that crew members cannot crash into each other. During use, personal ejection seats ACES II have proven their reliability and low level of injury to a person during ejection.
• B-1R
  (under development) A variant promoted as an upgrade to the B-1B. According to the developers, the B-1R (R stands for “regional”) should receive new radars, air-to-air missiles and new Pratt & Whitney F119 engines. Presumably, this version of the aircraft will have a maximum speed of Mach 2.2, but the flight range will be 20% less than its predecessor.

It's all about the engines

The B-52H is currently Pratt & Whitney TF33 engines . Their age corresponds to that of B -52 . The military has been arguing for a long time what is more profitable: to modernize and maintain the performance of current units or to completely replace them with new engines? They decided that maintenance and repair of TF33 are too expensive, and by using new units the military also expects to reduce fuel consumption.

P&W powerplants . Currently, each of the 8 installed engines generates 17,000 lb (75.7 kN) of thrust. The military also wants a modern turbofan with a higher bypass ratio and digital control of the powertrain. The engine should have reduced fuel consumption, reduced noise levels, emissions, as well as reduced operating costs. It is also expected that the new engines will increase the aircraft's flight range by 20-40%. Now it is more than 16,000 km .

General Electric offers the CF34-10 and the Passport of engines (read more about these engines here) that are already in widespread commercial use, which they say is a testament to their reliability, efficiency and ease of maintenance.

Using the same components found in commercial equipment has been a common practice for the US military in its procurement efforts in recent years. Sometimes this made equipment maintenance more difficult than simplified. However, when it comes to something as complex as a jet engine, common parts may not be the worst solution.

GE is confident that it will be able to satisfy the Pentagon’s requests in full and in all required parameters. And in some cases, provide higher performance.

History of creation

During the Cold War between the USSR and America in 1979, R. Reagan, during the election campaign, promised to restore the weapons of the American army. Within a year, the American government intends to create a number of promising aircraft for quickly delivering ammunition to the affected area, and the B-2 stealth bomber is not at the top of the list. Pragmatic Americans scrutinize every dollar before investing it in any business. A fantastic aircraft with increased capabilities and reduced visibility seemed like a project with justified prospects and was under special control of the US government.

Northrop Grumman is developing a stealth strategic bomber designed to penetrate dense air defense systems and deliver nuclear and other weapons. It is being developed on the basis of the ATV industrial program.

The project is codenamed B-2 with the symbol Spirit. A design hiccup in 1987 delayed the start of testing until 1989 and increased funding for the project by another billion dollars. By 1989, financiers estimate the cost of creating a new aircraft at $23.1 billion.

The first copy gets a start in life at a military plant in California, where it takes place for the first time and is demonstrated to interested sections of the public. Due to high costs, only 21 B-2 Spirit Stealts are being built. All combat vehicles receive personal names that coincide with the names of the states of America. The last copy of the winged ship, called the Spirit of America, entered service with the army in July 2000.

Price

The B-2 is the most expensive aircraft in the world (and probably the most expensive aircraft in aviation history). In 1998, the cost of one B-2, excluding R&D, was $1.157 billion. The cost of the entire B-2 program was estimated at nearly $45 billion in 1997; Thus, taking into account R&D, the cost of one car at that time reached 2.1 billion dollars.

According to the US Air Force and manufacturers, the high cost of the aircraft is mainly due to a reduction in its purchases. Due to the collapse of the USSR, out of the originally planned 132 bombers, only 20 units were purchased during the entire production period.

Form

The appearance is based on a system of four petals, and the shape of the aircraft is created by 12 lines. This concentrates the reflection in the horizontal plane and in a small number of sectors of the central part. The rear and front parallel frames of the hulls, hatches, engine compartments, and landing gear doors create 4 sectors of the main display. With the front and rear hemispheres, 2 sectors are obtained.

In frontal and lateral projection, the winged ship has no planes or straight lines. A structure is installed at the base of the wing that absorbs radio waves. The front part of the edge of the aircraft is made at an acute angle of 33º, and the rear part is made in the shape of the English letter W. At the middle of the half-span of the wing, the upper break point is determined; the B-2 Northrop bomber has a supercritical wing profile.

The aircraft is equipped with 4 engines located on both sides of the bomb bays. To ensure inconspicuous operation in the sky, the engine nozzles are designed flat, there are no gaps on the outer surface of the aircraft, and the engines and weapons are located inside the device.

Story

The development of this aircraft by Rockwell International experienced many delays, mainly due to the complexity of the theory of strategic balance between flexible response and nuclear parity [ source not specified 1852 days

]. The original version of the aircraft, the B-1A, was developed in the early 1970s, but production ceased after the first 4 prototypes were completed. In 1980, based on the B-1A, the B-1B was created as a low-altitude air defense breakthrough aircraft. The B-1B entered service with the US Air Force in 1985.

The aircraft was placed at the disposal of the US Air Force Strategic Command as a carrier of nuclear weapons. In the 1990s, it was converted into a carrier of tactical weapons.

The aircraft saw service in 1998 during Operation Desert Fox and during the NATO operation in Kosovo the following year. The aircraft also takes part in US and NATO military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The B-1B represents the supersonic component of US long-range aviation, along with the subsonic B-52 and B-2 Spirit.

The aircraft holds 61 world records for speed, range, load and climb rate (according to the manufacturer - more than 100).

The B-1 is the only variable-sweep wing aircraft in service with the US Air Force since the retirement of the EF-111 Raven (a variant of the F-111) in 1998 and the F-14 Tomcat in 2006.

Term limitation

A bomber is usually called strategic only when it has an intercontinental range (over 5,000 km) and is capable of using nuclear weapons. For example, aircraft such as the Tu-22M, Tu-16 and B-47 (B-47) are capable of using strategic nuclear weapons, but do not have an intercontinental flight range, and are therefore often called long-range bombers. (In fact, this use of the term “long-range bombers” is incorrect, since such bombers, not having an intercontinental flight range, are otherwise technically also strategic bombers. That is, intercontinental and so-called “long-range” bombers are nothing more than two subclasses of strategic bombers).

However, due to the uncertainty of the criteria on the one hand, and the political situation on the other, some countries may call not only technically strategic, but tactical and operational-tactical bombers strategic (Xian H-6A - Chinese Air Force, Vickers 667 Valiant - British Air Force, Mirage 2000N - French Air Force, FB-111 - US Air Force). In the latter cases, this is often caused by the use (including planned) of technically tactical and operational-tactical bombers as strategic ones. Sometimes the use of tactical and operational-tactical bombers as strategic bombers is advisable if strategic targets on enemy territory are within the reach of tactical and operational-tactical strike aircraft.

general description

The B-2 strategic bomber, a product of the American military industry, is being developed as an aircraft with reduced detection capability by enemy air defense forces. It does not become completely invisible, since special tracking systems detect it on radar screens, but it is invisible to conventional air defense, which indicates its survivability under bombing conditions.

The appearance of the aircraft is impressive, reminiscent of aircraft from a science fiction film. The B-2 Spirit bomber looks in the sky as a rapidly rushing black flap of a triangular shape; a glance in profile reveals it to be a real flying saucer, flattened, without a tail or fuselage.

To ensure the invisibility function, advanced stealth technologies are used:

• the outer surface of the aircraft is covered with materials with a high degree of absorption of radio waves;
• the design scheme of aerodynamics “flying wing” is used;
• shielding of jet engine jets is used, the EPR value is in the range from 0.0015 to 0.1 sq. m.

Top 6 strategic bombers: B-2 Spirit vs Tu-160

Rating of strategic bombers from Forbes Russia

Strategic airpower is one of the three main nuclear deterrents, along with land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and nuclear-powered missile-carrying submarines. The main advantages of aviation are the possibility of its repeated use, unlike missile weapons, and a greater level of control - a bomber can always be recalled or its flight mission and goals can be changed. After launch, the ICBM inevitably flies towards the target. Among the disadvantages of bombers, it is worth noting a noticeably lower reaction time - if an ICBM flies to the target in only 30 minutes, and pre-launch preparation takes no more than 5 minutes, then the bomber needs hours to fly to the target, while a noticeable part of the aircraft can be destroyed by a strike from the same ICBMs at the airport. Nevertheless, the versatility of modern strategic bombers allows them to be used in non-nuclear war in local conflicts.

1st place: Tu-160 “White Swan”

The most modern Russian bomber is the Tu-160 “White Swan” (Blackjack according to NATO classification). It was put into service in 1987. This supersonic bomber is the heaviest military aircraft in the world and also has the largest payload (45 tons). The maximum take-off weight of the bomber is 275 tons, and the practical flight range without in-flight refueling is 12,300 kilometers (and with refueling it is virtually unlimited). The Tu-160's maximum flight speed is 2,200 km/h (2.08 times the speed of sound), while the sweep angle of the bomber's wings varies depending on the flight mode.

The “highlight” of the Tu-160 is the weapons the bomber carries. We are talking about strategic cruise missiles Kh-55SM and the latest Kh-102. The Kh-55SM allows you to hit targets at a maximum range of 3,500 km from the carrier aircraft, and the Kh-102 at a range of up to 5,500 km. Moreover, the power of the nuclear warheads that these missiles carry is 200 and 250 kilotons, respectively. In total, the Tu-160 can take 12 cruise missiles in one flight. These cruise missiles are also available in a non-nuclear, high-precision version - the Kh-555 and Kh-101 were successfully used in Syria.

It is clear that there are no means capable of detecting and destroying an aircraft at a distance of 3500 km, much less 5500 km, so the combat potential of the Tu-160 is enormous, and therefore it takes first place in the rating. At the moment, the Russian Aerospace Forces have 16 such bombers, and by the mid-2020s it is planned to resume production of a deeply modernized version of the aircraft - the Tu-160M2.

2nd place: B-2 Spirit

The American strategic bomber B-2 Spirit can definitely be called the most technologically advanced in the world. The aircraft is made according to the “flying wing” design and is covered with a special radio-absorbing substance, which can greatly reduce its visibility to enemy radar stations (Stealth technology). The aircraft was adopted by the US Air Force in 1997; there are currently 20 of these bombers in service. Technical complexity and a small number of aircraft produced made the B-2 the most expensive aircraft in the world - one bomber, taking into account development costs, costs $2.1 billion.

However, despite all its complexity and manufacturability, the B-2 is not very strong as a strategic bomber and nuclear deterrent. The thing is that the main armament of the B-2 is free-falling nuclear and non-nuclear bombs, and not cruise missiles. This means that the plane must fly directly to the target. Firstly, it takes longer (especially considering that the aircraft is not supersonic), and secondly, stealth does not mean invisibility - modern air defense systems are capable of detecting the B-2, just at a shorter range than if it was an ordinary plane. This means that the bomber will not be allowed to reach key targets. On the other hand, the B-2 turned out to be very useful in local conflicts against countries such as Iraq, where its stealth made it possible to avoid even isolated losses.

Thus, the B-2 outperforms its competitors, but its real combat potential is limited by its meager weapons. This is why Spirit does not take first place in the ranking.

3rd place: B-52H Stratofortress

The B-52H Stratofortress is the “old man” of American aviation. Aircraft of this model were produced in the early 1960s, after which many upgrades were carried out. Despite its age, the bomber is the only carrier of strategic cruise missiles in the US fleet, making it the primary US airborne nuclear deterrent.

The maximum flight range of the aircraft is 11,000 kilometers, and the cruising speed is 900 km/h. The B-52H can carry up to 20 AGM-86B ALCM cruise missiles, with a maximum launch range of 2,400 km. There are also high-precision non-nuclear modifications of this missile, with a launch range of up to 1200 km. Despite the fact that the AGM-86B ALCM is noticeably inferior to the Russian Kh-55SM and Kh-102, the available characteristics are sufficient to be able to strike with a high probability before the bomber is detected and destroyed by enemy air defense forces or fighter aircraft.

There are 73 aircraft of this type in service; by 2020, 46 of them will remain carriers of nuclear weapons. For its indispensability for more than half a century and its preserved combat potential, the B-52H Stratofortress takes 3rd place in the ranking.

4th place: Tu-95MS

The Tu-95MS (Bear according to NATO classification) with its turboprop engines and the specific noise during their operation may seem, at first glance, to be a long-outdated machine. However, this is not so - the bomber’s flight characteristics allow it to perform missions at intercontinental ranges (the practical flight range is 10,500 kilometers, and with in-flight refueling it is unlimited). At the same time, the aircraft’s ability to carry 8 Kh-55SM or Kh-101/102 strategic cruise missiles makes it possible to strike deep into enemy territory without entering the air defense zone.

The first modification of the Tu-95 was put into service in 1956, but the aircraft of the Tu-95MS modification were produced after 1981, respectively, they are noticeably “fresher” than the same B-52H. At the moment, there are about 35 vehicles of this type in service; their modernization to the Tu-95MSM level has begun, after which they will be able to carry high-precision non-nuclear cruise missiles Kh-101 and nuclear Kh-102.

The modernized Bears will remain in Russian service until the 2040s, retaining serious combat potential. This fact allows the aircraft to get into our rating, occupying a rather conditional fourth place - the bomber may well qualify for third, or even second place in terms of its actual efficiency.

5th place: Tu-22M3

The Russian Tu-22M3 (Backfire according to NATO classification), as well as the American B-1B Lancer, are included in our rating conditionally, since both of them are very close to strategic aviation, but at the moment they are not considered strategic bombers. Let's see why.

The Tu-22M3 supersonic long-range bomber entered service in 1983. Its practical range is about 5,000 km and its combat radius is about 2,500 km. At the same time, according to an agreement with the United States, the Tu-22M3 is not equipped with an in-flight refueling system, so it is impossible to use it at intercontinental ranges.

However, the aircraft is capable of carrying 2 Kh-22 cruise missiles, with a maximum launch range of up to 500 km and a flight speed of 4000 km/h (unlike the subsonic strategic cruise missiles Kh-55SM and Kh-101/102). The modernization of aircraft to the level of the Tu-22M3M has begun, a version that can use the new Kh-32 cruise missiles. Their estimated launch range will be 1000 km, and their flight speed will be on the verge of hypersonic (4-5 speeds of sound). That is why the Tu-22M3 ended up in our rating - the aircraft is considered a threat to enemy carrier strike groups and targets in Europe.

6th place: B-1B Lancer

The American supersonic bomber B-1B Lancer is quite similar in appearance to the Tu-160. It was adopted by the US Air Force in 1985. The United States abandoned the production of the B-1A Lancer aircraft, which is very similar in concept to the Tu-160. As a result, a modification of the B-1B Lancer was created, which has a noticeably lower flight speed (1.25 the speed of sound), but has the ability to fly at ultra-low altitudes while following the terrain. This approach is quite effective for breaking through enemy air defense systems, although it does not guarantee it.

Despite its intercontinental flight range (12,000 kilometers) and the ability to refuel in the air, the B-1B is no longer classified as a strategic bomber and is not taken into account by the START-3 weapons register (Treaty between the Russian Federation and the United States on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms). This is due to the fact that the equipment necessary for the use of nuclear weapons has been removed from the aircraft. In addition, the nuclear-tipped AGM-69 SRAM aeroballistic missiles the bomber carried were retired.

Now the B-1B Lancer carries conventional weapons and is actively used in local conflicts. However, if necessary, it is quite possible to make it a carrier of nuclear weapons again, which is why the aircraft is included in our rating.

Combat use

• In December 1998 - during the air offensive Operation Desert Fox in Iraq to destroy facilities where components of weapons of mass destruction, as well as their carriers, could be located or produced. Two B1-Bs during four sorties of the second stage of the operation (following in the second echelon, after the destruction of the radar of air defense systems and most of the mobile launchers of air defense systems with sea- and air-based cruise missiles, high-tech aircraft of tactical and carrier-based aircraft, during the first stage) Mk 82 bombs destroyed the bases of the Republican Guard.
• In 2001-2002 - in the first 6 months of the Operation Enduring Freedom military operation in Afghanistan, eight B1-Bs dropped about 40% of all warheads (by weight) delivered by coalition forces, including about 3,900 JDAM guided bombs. 1 aircraft was lost due to technical reasons.
• In 2003, during Operation Iraqi Freedom in Iraq, the B1-B accounted for about 43% of the JDAM guided bombs dropped, using 11 aircraft.
• March 19, 2011 - during the military operation “Odyssey. Dawn" in Libya, two US Air Force B-1Bs were lifted from an airfield in South Dakota. Together with three Northrop B-2 Spirit bombers from Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri, they were sent to Libya. The duration of the B-1B mission in Libya was approximately 24 hours. In this operation, B-1Bs destroyed 105 targets and B-2 Spirits destroyed 45 targets. Among them are weapons depots, air defense facilities, command and control posts, and maintenance facilities for aviation and other military equipment.
• From October 2014 to January 2020, US Air Force B-1Bs participated in air strikes against ISIS militants in Syria in the city of Kobani. During this time, B-1B missions accounted for 3% of total anti-ISIS air missions, and bombs and other munitions dropped accounted for 40%. The aircraft participating in the operation are planned to be modernized in the summer of 2020.

Development

Background

B-1B environmental testing

In December 1957, the US Air Force accepted an offer from North American Aviation to replace its fleet of Boeing B-52 Stratofortress strategic bombers with the North American XB-70 Valkyrie. The XB-70 was a six-engine jet bomber capable of flying at Mach 3 at an altitude of 21 km, making it virtually invulnerable to enemy fighters. Soviet interceptor aircraft could not intercept an aircraft flying at such an altitude as the Lockheed U-2 reconnaissance aircraft. In addition, the Valkyrie could reach much higher speeds. By the end of the 1950s, anti-aircraft missiles (SAMs) had reached such a stage of development that they could shoot down high-flying targets, which was confirmed by the downing of Powers' U-2 in 1960 over the Urals.

Even before the downing of the U-2, the US Air Force strategic command found it necessary to change tactics to a low-altitude breakthrough. This tactic made it possible to reduce the distance at which the aircraft was detected by air defense radars. At that time, air defense missiles did not have the necessary effectiveness when firing at low-flying targets. In addition, low-flying targets were difficult to detect by interceptor radars due to the difficulty of identifying the target against the background of the underlying surface. High air resistance at low altitudes forced the XB-70 to be used at transonic speeds and significantly reduced their range. As a result, it turned out that the Valkyrie was forced to fly at speeds comparable to the speed of the B-52, which it was supposed to replace, and also had a shorter range. The Valkyrie project was canceled by US President John F. Kennedy in 1961 as unsuitable for the new role and due to the growing role of intercontinental ballistic missiles, and the two XB-70 prototypes built were used in supersonic research. The B-52, never intended for low-altitude air defense penetration, was able to outpace its intended competitor and remained in service for another 55 years.

Peculiarities

The B-1B's electronic interlocking equipment, infrared sensors, radar and warning systems complement its low visibility radar capabilities and form a comprehensive defense system for the aircraft.

The engineered low-vibration wings and turbofan engines not only provide greater range and high speed at low altitudes, but they also enhance bomber capabilities. The special design of the wing - flaps forward - allows you to perform a short roll for takeoff.

The B-1B uses radar and inertial navigation equipment to allow aircraft crews to provide global control, correct flight paths and target coordinates, flight data, and precision bombing without the need for ground-based corrective navigation aids. The B-1B's built-in modular avionics allows maintenance personnel to accurately identify technical problems and replace components in a quick, efficient manner on the ground.

Aircraft AN/ALQ 161A defensive avionics is a complex electronic assembly that detects and counters enemy radar threats. It also has the ability to detect and counter missiles attacking from the tail. It protects the aircraft by employing appropriate countermeasures, such as electronic jamming or metallized confuse tapes, or thermal missiles. Like offensive avionics, the defensive complex has reprogrammable properties that allow it to adapt on the fly to combat new enemy attacks.

The B-1B is intended to be the primary replacement for the US Air Force's strategic aircraft.

Its significant advantages include:

Low radar cross-section to make detection significantly more difficult.

The ability to fly lower and faster while carrying a larger payload.

Advanced counter-intelligence and countermeasures measures to extend survivability.

Literature

• Ilyin V. E., Levin M. A.
  Bombers. - M.: Victoria, AST, 1996. - T. 1. - P. 243-270. — 272 p. — (Modern aviation). — ISBN 5-89327-004-5.
• Pace, Steve.
  Boeing North American B-1 Lancer. - North Branch, MN, USA: Specialty Press, 1998. - 100 p. - (WarbirdTech Vol. 19). — ISBN 1-58007-012-4.
• Logan, Don & Miller, Jay.
  Rockwell International B-1A/B. - Arlington, Texas: Aerofax Inc., 1986. - 40 p. — (Aerofax Minigraph 24). — ISBN 0-942548-32-9.
• P. Ivanov
  . Bomber B-1B: some results of the first years of operation // Foreign Military Review, No. 5, 1988. pp. 37-38.
• A. Bokov
  . Electronic equipment of the B-1B bomber // “Foreign Military Review”, No. 2, 1989. pp. 44-50

Notes

1. ↑
2. Pace, 1998, p. 84.
3. Jenkins, Dennis R.
   B-1 Lancer: The Most Complicated Warplane Ever Developed. - New York: McGraw-Hill., 1999. - ISBN ISBN 0-07-134694-5.
4. Boeing.
   .
5. ↑ Donald 1997, p. 723.
6. ↑
7. (English).
8. ↑ Rockwell B-1. Service and combat use. World aviation. Issue 228, 2013
9. ↑ The Military Balance 2020, p.55
10. (English).
11. ↑ (English).
12. (English).
13. (English).
14. . lenta.ru (March 5, 2016). Retrieved March 5, 2020.
15. . edition.cnn.com. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
16. . edition.cnn.com. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
17. ↑ John Pike.
    . www.globalsecurity.org. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
18. Harro Ranter.
    . aviation-safety.net. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
19. USA // “Foreign Military Review”, No. 1 (610), 1998. p. 36
20. Harro Ranter.
    . aviation-safety.net. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
21. . usatoday30.usatoday.com. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
22. Ted A. Morris, Jr.
    . www.zianet.com. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
23. . www.joebaugher.com. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
24. Harro Ranter.
    . aviation-safety.net. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
25. (July 22, 2011). Retrieved November 14, 2020.
26. (December 29, 2016). Retrieved November 14, 2020.
27. (English). edition.cnn.com. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
28. Harro Ranter.
    . aviation-safety.net. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
29. (May 5, 2017). Retrieved November 14, 2020.
30. Harro Ranter.
    . aviation-safety.net. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
31. (May 2, 2018). Retrieved November 14, 2020.
32. Harro Ranter.
    . aviation-safety.net. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
33. (English). defense-blog.com. Retrieved November 14, 2020.
34. ↑ .
35. ↑
36. ↑ Ilyin V. E., Levin M. A. Bombers.-M.: Victoria, AST.1996.-272 p. Volume 1. p. 68 ISBN 5-89327-004-5
37. (English).
38. (unavailable link). Retrieved March 6, 2020.
39. The Military Balance 2020, p.199
40. ↑ The Military Balance 2020. p.-46