The "Buff" turns 60

And to think that the last one built was built 52 years ago!

 

And to think, that I worked on it in 1951 and saw the first flight in April, 1952.

 

How secret was the landing gear function? Was it known to everyone who worked on the project?

 

I don't remember it as being secret, it was wide open there on the mock up for anyone to see and there didn't seem to be much "secrecy" inside the building. It was an incredibly simple mechanism, all four struts, trucks, and retraction system were identical. The struts were vertical and mounted on a trunnion that was slanted at a 45 deg. angle to the vertical in the inboard/outboard axis (y)? The left gear went forward and inboard the right gear went aft and inboard. Manufactured by A.O.Smith, forgings by Wyman-Gordon. Huge pieces of machinery mounted on bulkheads of mostly forged aluminum, again Wyman-Gordon. The USAF foolishly had the photos of the first take off airbrushed to remove the landing gear to show it (them) retracted. The whole world saw photos of it taxiing.
It was always amazing to see the wings start to lift and flex upward long before the airplane was airborne.

 

I wonder if it will ever see combat action again?

 

I think the idea of re-engining the fleet, which has come and gone several times, is alive again.

 

Talk about getting your monies worth. Both the B-52 and KC-135. Both over 50 years old and going strong. I'm not sure about the B-52 but I know while the USAF were buying the 135 they bought 82 jets per year for around 10 years. Mr Parks, when you guys were working on these how long did you think they would be in service?

 

James- They are updating the avionics again with Mil Standard 1760 buses and carriage equipment to allow for a really large number of Small Diameter Bombs. So probably.

 

I bought 1/200 scale model kits years ago of both the B-52G and 747-100. I was going to switch engines just for the fun of it.

The 747 would have had the eight J57s (or, if you will, JT3s) with 707-style sound suppressors and a 1959-vintage Pan Am scheme, and the B-52 would have wound up with the four JT9s (F105s in military service) and the natural-metal and white undersides scheme used during the Cold War days.

When I retire, I may just do this crazy engine switch. At least the 52 will look something like what a re-engined "BUFF" would look like now.

 

One of these
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Having seen the B-17 and B-29 last only a short time, the feeling was that the B-52 would be the same. The B-47 didn't last long so nobody thought anything different for the B-52 at the time. The fatigue in the B-52's wing became a concern pretty soon after they changed the mission to low level penetration BUT the engineers soon had some fixes that increased the life span and this continued year after year and kept the bird going. They changed skin alloys and some internal structure and it keeps on chugging along. I would never have imagined that it would out live me and I can see that it just might. Having worked in tool design and spent much time on the floor, I can still remember a lot of the manufacturing sequences and structural features of the airplane. It was an interesting design that broke away from the contemporary techniques.Strong but flexible.