B-1 bomber

The B1-B Lancer, built in Palmdale California by Rockwell International.

The Bone is bad bomber! Especially since I helped build them :)

Category:

Autos & Vehicles

Tags:

• B-1
• bomber
• aircraft
• military
• air
• force
• lancer
• bone
• airplane

[TheFaygoFanatic]

the b1 is such a badass bomber, here in michigan we used to heat treat the 8ft ball screws that make the wings open and close, its cool knowing i contributed somwhat, not really but

[gman1868]

@TheFaygoFanatic There were alot of us that did our part.

[sailordiver2007]

This video won't impress any informed expert. The segments showing several bombs falling were all small tactical bombs that don't fit with the mission this aircraft was designed to do. The B-1 is not much faster than the B-52, and carries only 2/3 the payload. The B-1 is a dud that was resurrected by Reagan after Carter canceled it. It is beautiful and graceful, but not worth the money we paid for it.

[gman1868]

Unfortunately, you are mistaken.

Max Speed

B-52: 560 kts B1-B: 747 kts

Max Payload

B-52: 70,000lbs B1-B: 133,800lbs

Most importantly, when the B1-B was put into service to assume the role of delivering atomic weapons on target inthe Soviet Union, it can fly low-level penetration at >500 kts vs 250 kts for the BUFF

[dnno1]

@sailordiver2007, no, no, no! At the begiing of a campaign it is the least risky choice to go in with you B-2 and F-117 bombers to take out the enemy's radar defenses. You then use Tomahawks to take out the missile and air defense sites. Once a long range first strike nuclear platform, the B-1B's role is now to enter the theater (after all the defense systems have been destroyed) and deliver precision (or non precision) munitions to any adversary anywhere in the world.

[dnno1]

@gman1868, the official website for the US Air Force has a fact sheet on the B-1B that says that the payload weight is 70,000 lbs. It also says that the B-1's top speed is 900 mph (about 782 kts or Mach 1.2). The B-1B is much faster and has a higher payload capability than the B-52. That's because it was designed to be that way.

[dnno1]

@sailordiver2007, dropping bombs 200 ft off the deck at near Mach speed and then taking off while doing a barrel roll is pretty impressive for a bomber. Let's see them do that with a B-2 or a B-52.

[sngsht]

They built the FIF, Wing carry thru,and engine Nacelle sections in Columbus,OH... I built them there...

[spark300c]

@sailordiver2007 you mean in bombing they are restricted but what about being intercept by missile or anther fighter. Also it young and only one Variant in service. B-52 work bust if their not worried about being shot out of the sky. One can see that b-1 trade some things for survivability. After all a Plus the next upgrade if ever done will make capable of dog fighting from a distance and just fast as any fighter.

[foxsecret]

@dacorom TU-160 is a copy of the B-1 and has never seen combat. So, not a proven aircraft but...it makes a good display bird.

[sailordiver2007]

@gman1868 Your numbers are correct, but they don't apply to actual mission planning. Defense contractors created scenarios where their birds would satisfy a design requirement and perform well, but in actual missions, planners discovered some serious limitations that weren't figured in the testing scenario. Lots of work--arounds were developed, but they often fell short and disappointed congressional budgeting analysts who were approached for more funding. The B-1 is beautiful & elegant.

[blewis9505]

@sailordiver2007 I remember Rockwell, Columbus (OH) and working out on East 5th Avenue when it was considered THE place to work. Assigned to the weapons bay, the nacelles and later the bulkhead of the space shuttle the place had the best insurance pkg on the planet and excellent wages. Jim Chandler headed up the M/E Dept where a young buck by the name of Leon Panetta worked along with other Manufacturing Engineers. Everything changed when Boeing came in and 7,000 Columbus folk lost jobs.