Author Topic: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam  (Read 12976 times)

wmenorr67

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,775
B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« on: July 20, 2008, 07:46:15 PM »
Quote
HONOLULU   The Air Force says a B-52 bomber carrying six crew members has crashed off the island of Guam.

The Coast Guard says two people have been recovered from the waters. Their condition was not immediately available.

Rescue crews from the Navy, Coast Guard and local fire department are searching for the others.

Officials say the crashed occurred about 25 miles northwest of Apra Harbor.

The accident is the second for the Air Force this year on Guam.

In February, a B-2 crashed at Andersen Air Force Base in the first-ever crash of a stealth bomber. The military estimated the loss of the aircraft at $1.4 billion.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,386981,00.html

Hate to hear about this.  They have been around a long time and are still a great asset of our military.
There are five things, above all else, that make life worth living: a good relationship with God, a good woman, good health, good friends, and a good cigar.

Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier.  One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

Bacon is the candy bar of meats!

Only the dead have seen the end of war!

Manedwolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,516
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #1 on: July 20, 2008, 07:55:58 PM »
I hope everyone managed to get out okay. Though if they used the term "recovered", not "rescued", that generally is not a good thing.  sad

wmenorr67

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,775
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #2 on: July 20, 2008, 07:59:19 PM »
Kind of my thoughts also.  And they have found only 2 of 6.  Just have to say a prayer for them and their families.
There are five things, above all else, that make life worth living: a good relationship with God, a good woman, good health, good friends, and a good cigar.

Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier.  One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

Bacon is the candy bar of meats!

Only the dead have seen the end of war!

Balog

  • Unrepentant race traitor
  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 17,774
  • What if we tried more?
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #3 on: July 20, 2008, 08:08:29 PM »
Oh no!

What're the ejections systems like on a B52? Any chance these guys are ok? Sad
Quote from: French G.
I was always pleasant, friendly and within arm's reach of a gun.

Quote from: Standing Wolf
If government is the answer, it must have been a really, really, really stupid question.

wmenorr67

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,775
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #4 on: July 20, 2008, 08:10:33 PM »
Don't believe that there are any systems.
There are five things, above all else, that make life worth living: a good relationship with God, a good woman, good health, good friends, and a good cigar.

Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier.  One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

Bacon is the candy bar of meats!

Only the dead have seen the end of war!

Manedwolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,516
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #5 on: July 20, 2008, 08:16:24 PM »
Don't believe that there are any systems.

Huh? I always thought there was full conventional ejection for the top deck, and downward ejection for anyone below, if they still have people below?


wmenorr67

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,775
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #6 on: July 20, 2008, 08:19:19 PM »
There may well be.  Maybe one of our Air Force vets will know something when they see this.
There are five things, above all else, that make life worth living: a good relationship with God, a good woman, good health, good friends, and a good cigar.

Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier.  One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

Bacon is the candy bar of meats!

Only the dead have seen the end of war!

wmenorr67

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,775
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #7 on: July 20, 2008, 08:32:55 PM »
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/bomber/b-52.htm

This website states that there are in fact 6 ejection seats.  Now the next question would be if they had time to use them.
There are five things, above all else, that make life worth living: a good relationship with God, a good woman, good health, good friends, and a good cigar.

Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier.  One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

Bacon is the candy bar of meats!

Only the dead have seen the end of war!

RocketMan

  • Mad Rocket Scientist
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,649
  • Semper Fidelis
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #8 on: July 21, 2008, 12:09:24 AM »
Downward ejection is somewhat problematic.  Especially at low altitude.
If there really was intelligent life on other planets, we'd be sending them foreign aid.

Conservatives see George Orwell's "1984" as a cautionary tale.  Progressives view it as a "how to" manual.

My wife often says to me, "You are evil and must be destroyed." She may be right.

Liberals believe one should never let reason, logic and facts get in the way of a good emotional argument.

Manedwolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,516
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #9 on: July 21, 2008, 04:01:02 AM »
It was also apparently a parade overflight. Would they have a full crew for that, or just two?

wmenorr67

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,775
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #10 on: July 21, 2008, 04:10:52 AM »
Well you would still want your navigator.  And for consistancy basis once a team always a team.
There are five things, above all else, that make life worth living: a good relationship with God, a good woman, good health, good friends, and a good cigar.

Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier.  One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

Bacon is the candy bar of meats!

Only the dead have seen the end of war!

Tallpine

  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 23,172
  • Grumpy Old Grandpa
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #11 on: July 21, 2008, 07:17:16 AM »
Sounds like a crash on approach to me.  I wonder what the weather/daylight conditions were at the time?

Sucks to fly clear across the Pacific and die almost in sight of the runway Sad
Freedom is a heavy load, a great and strange burden for the spirit to undertake. It is not easy. It is not a gift given, but a choice made, and the choice may be a hard one. The road goes upward toward the light; but the laden traveller may never reach the end of it.  - Ursula Le Guin

Gewehr98

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 11,010
  • Yee-haa!
    • Neural Misfires (Blog)
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #12 on: July 21, 2008, 07:39:15 AM »
Your local B-52 Air Force vet is still recovering, and in a lot of pain.

But yes, we had 6 ejection seats in the B-52H model, 4 upstairs and 2 downstairs.  The two guys downstairs had to depend on the aircraft commander and pilot to "yank and bank" the jet in the last few seconds so they had a good chance of ejecting into clear sky vs. the trees, terrain, or water.  A BUFF crash out of K.I. Sawyer AFB a few years ago resulted in a downstairs ejection sequence into the trees that mangled the radar nav and bomb nav so badly, they didn't even take them out of the body bags for post-mortem X-rays.  I talked to the X-Ray tech, and he said EVERY bone in their bodies was so shattered, death was instantaneous.  He knew they were the downstairs navigators, because of the wiz wheels, pens, pencils, etc. in their pockets. 

B-52G and H ejection sequence is inititiated by making sure your ankles are against the base of the seat (important if you don't want legs amputated at knee-level), then rotating the rings at the end of your seat's armrests completely upright.  This arms the seat, at which point you look upwards to watch the overhead hatch.  The act of arming the seat is *supposed* to release the hatch hinges and pop up a little air spoiler in the hatch to make it separate cleanly from the jet. No hatch separation, no ejection sequence - you'll punch yourself into a hatch on the way out. As you're looking up confirming hatch separation, you pull the trigger bars inside the rings to get the seat moving.  This is where the old saying "Rotate and Squeeze" comes from, BTW.  The seat, with seat survival kit, parachute, and you aboard punches out of the jet, and within 1/2 second of departing the jet, this nasty little thing called a "man-seat separator" kicks you in the small of the back like a mule, relieving you of a ballistic trajectory caused by several hundred pounds of used ejection seat.  That leaves you, your parachute, and seat kit to dangle enroute to the ground. 

If all's well, you can deploy your chute, or rely on your aneroid barometer mechanism to pop the canopy before the minimum altitude.  Then you run through a mental checklist before your feet hit the ground or water.  "Canopy - visor - mask - seat kit - LPU..." and so forth. The joke at egress school was that you waited to release your canopy from the harness until the cold water came up past your ankles, NOT when the warm liquid went down your legs.  I always thought the ejection seat trainer would make a fun amusement park ride, because you're strapped in to a seat with functional pneumatic ram, the only difference being you stay in the seat at the end of the stroke. Woo-hoo!

If it's not all well, it doesn't really matter, because they aren't Zero-Zero ejection seats, and God wasn't with you on that day.

CSAR uses the term "Recovery" to describe living aircrew retrieved post-crash, btw. Don't read too much into it.

   
"Bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round...

http://neuralmisfires.blogspot.com

"Never squat with your spurs on!"

Firethorn

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,789
  • Where'd my explosive space modulator go?
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #13 on: July 21, 2008, 09:34:05 AM »
While I'm concerned about the crew, and odds are I'll be hearing about it tomorrow(I'm at one of the B52 bases), I'm also concerned at a more strategic level.  At this point, I can do nothing for the plane or crew, and I'd rather find out the official story.

To whit, the Air force is flying planes it can't replace.  While I'm not too worried about the F-15 or F-16 at this point, as we could just build more F-22s, or the C-130, which is still under production. 

We can't build new B-52 planes today even if we wanted to.  That concerns me greatly.  It's exasperated in that neither can we really start building B-1 or B-2s, or even A-10s.  The very craft we're using the most heavily we can't replace.

Manedwolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,516
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #14 on: July 21, 2008, 09:43:52 AM »
While I'm concerned about the crew, and odds are I'll be hearing about it tomorrow(I'm at one of the B52 bases), I'm also concerned at a more strategic level.  At this point, I can do nothing for the plane or crew, and I'd rather find out the official story.

To whit, the Air force is flying planes it can't replace.  While I'm not too worried about the F-15 or F-16 at this point, as we could just build more F-22s, or the C-130, which is still under production. 

We can't build new B-52 planes today even if we wanted to.  That concerns me greatly.  It's exasperated in that neither can we really start building B-1 or B-2s, or even A-10s.  The very craft we're using the most heavily we can't replace.

I thought they pulled the usable parts out of all the old models they had to chop for the arms treaties? I'm pretty sure they did not throw away the engines!

Balog

  • Unrepentant race traitor
  • friends
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 17,774
  • What if we tried more?
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #15 on: July 21, 2008, 09:58:55 AM »
Why can't we build new B52's, A-10's etc?
Quote from: French G.
I was always pleasant, friendly and within arm's reach of a gun.

Quote from: Standing Wolf
If government is the answer, it must have been a really, really, really stupid question.

41magsnub

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7,579
  • Don't make me assume my ultimate form!
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #16 on: July 21, 2008, 10:41:31 AM »
The production lines are shutdown and the tooling and dies are repurposed or destroyed.  It would not be "impossible" just very very very very hard to do so.

Sergeant Bob

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,861
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #17 on: July 21, 2008, 11:36:24 AM »
While I'm concerned about the crew, and odds are I'll be hearing about it tomorrow(I'm at one of the B52 bases), I'm also concerned at a more strategic level.  At this point, I can do nothing for the plane or crew, and I'd rather find out the official story.

To whit, the Air force is flying planes it can't replace.  While I'm not too worried about the F-15 or F-16 at this point, as we could just build more F-22s, or the C-130, which is still under production. 

We can't build new B-52 planes today even if we wanted to.  That concerns me greatly.  It's exasperated in that neither can we really start building B-1 or B-2s, or even A-10s.  The very craft we're using the most heavily we can't replace.

I thought they pulled the usable parts out of all the old models they had to chop for the arms treaties? I'm pretty sure they did not throw away the engines!

As for the B52's, the H (current model) and G (retired) have completely different types of engines. The G is a water injection turbojet and the H is a turbofan. Not compatible without major modifications.
Personally, I do not understand how a bunch of people demanding a bigger govt can call themselves anarchist.
I meet lots of folks like this, claim to be anarchist but really they're just liberals with pierced genitals. - gunsmith

I already have canned butter, buying more. Canned blueberries, some pancake making dry goods and the end of the world is gonna be delicious.  -French G

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #18 on: July 21, 2008, 11:49:11 AM »
Alright, so the old assembly lines are gone.  If we wanted new bombers, wouldn't we want to design something newer and better anyway?  Why not just design a new bomber from scratch and build it in a new assembly plant.

Manedwolf

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 14,516
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #19 on: July 21, 2008, 11:53:02 AM »
Alright, so the old assembly lines are gone.  If we wanted new bombers, wouldn't we want to design something newer and better anyway?  Why not just design a new bomber from scratch and build it in a new assembly plant.

Do you know how many years that takes? Beyond just the appropriations stage, there's materials development, wind tunnel testing, and a long, long process of freezing design elements as others are worked on, then going back when a requirement changes something that was frozen, which changes other things, and...

I've seen my dad's notes for the XC-123. Lots of back and forth changes up and down the design process. Even with CAD to prevent "Oh, crap, that won't fit there now!" backtracking, I'm sure it still takes quite a while.

Then they need to fly prototypes, etc. It takes a long time. What was the development time for the F-16, a decade or so?

41magsnub

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7,579
  • Don't make me assume my ultimate form!
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #20 on: July 21, 2008, 11:58:43 AM »
While I'm concerned about the crew, and odds are I'll be hearing about it tomorrow(I'm at one of the B52 bases), I'm also concerned at a more strategic level.  At this point, I can do nothing for the plane or crew, and I'd rather find out the official story.

To whit, the Air force is flying planes it can't replace.  While I'm not too worried about the F-15 or F-16 at this point, as we could just build more F-22s, or the C-130, which is still under production. 

We can't build new B-52 planes today even if we wanted to.  That concerns me greatly.  It's exasperated in that neither can we really start building B-1 or B-2s, or even A-10s.  The very craft we're using the most heavily we can't replace.

I thought they pulled the usable parts out of all the old models they had to chop for the arms treaties? I'm pretty sure they did not throw away the engines!

As for the B52's, the H (current model) and G (retired) have completely different types of engines. The G is a water injection turbojet and the H is a turbofan. Not compatible without major modifications.

There has been talk of putting different modern jet engines on the B52's for years with a net increase in power and efficiency but nothing has ever come of it.

Headless Thompson Gunner

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,517
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #21 on: July 21, 2008, 12:20:50 PM »
I don't doubt that it takes lots of time (and money!) to design and build a fleet of aircraft.

It just seems to me that the old B-52 assemblies are of no great value any more.  The B-52 is essentially a late 1940's design, right?  How hard can it be today to design something that can duplicate that 1940's era performance?

Lennyjoe

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,764
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #22 on: July 21, 2008, 12:55:21 PM »
Quote
If we wanted new bombers, wouldn't we want to design something newer and better anyway?
Been trying to develop something to take the A-10's place but haven't had much sucess.  Congress (and ground pounders) like choppers and hot rod new age fighter jets.  They don't like the low and slow munitions and gatling gun carrying flying crosses anymore.   angry

Sorry, I'm a dedicated 22 year A-10 guy and get all fired up when they talk bad about my beloved Warthog.


41magsnub

  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7,579
  • Don't make me assume my ultimate form!
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #23 on: July 21, 2008, 12:57:54 PM »
The current plan is for the F-35 to replace the A10 when they are retired eventually.  I'm not sure how will that will work out myself give just how different the aircraft are from one another.  But, maybe the idea is as military weapons technology gets better it will be increasingly less safe for an A10 to operate at slow speeds.

RocketMan

  • Mad Rocket Scientist
  • friend
  • Senior Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 13,649
  • Semper Fidelis
Re: B-52 Bomber Carrying Six Crew Members Crashes Off Guam
« Reply #24 on: July 21, 2008, 02:59:23 PM »
The latest report is two dead, four missing.  Sad.
If there really was intelligent life on other planets, we'd be sending them foreign aid.

Conservatives see George Orwell's "1984" as a cautionary tale.  Progressives view it as a "how to" manual.

My wife often says to me, "You are evil and must be destroyed." She may be right.

Liberals believe one should never let reason, logic and facts get in the way of a good emotional argument.