Check These Out: Buddy Finder | Videos | SpouseBUZZ | My Friend Network | News | Military Equipment


Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
  Login/Join 
Member
Picture of pavejim
Posted
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,332038,00.html


Jeezz...knowing how people react to V22's crashing, I am sure they will be calling for the canxing of the B2 program.
 
Posts: 582 | Registered: Mon 27 December 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of lstgnfghtr
Posted Hide Post
Nah...

...Spirits don't have Flight Engineers.
 
Posts: 1344 | Registered: Sun 01 October 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Highly Experienced Member
Posted Hide Post
Build 50 B-1s for the cost of replacement - - more bang for the buck, and a lot less heartburn for joe taxpayer if one goes down - -
 
Posts: 11827 | Registered: Fri 01 June 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of lstgnfghtr
Posted Hide Post
HOOAH!!!

Beer
 
Posts: 1344 | Registered: Sun 01 October 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by greywolfghost:
Build 50 B-1s for the cost of replacement - - more bang for the buck, and a lot less heartburn for joe taxpayer if one goes down - -


Words of wisdom right there! Man, I miss the bones!!!!!! Beer
 
Posts: 340 | Registered: Thu 13 July 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Basic Training
Picture of Slam_Crunchfist
Posted Hide Post
LOL @ this thread! The B-2 will never be scrapped because of ONE mishap in it's history. Seems like all I ever hear is how the B1 sucks and costs way too much money to maintain. On the other hand, look at the B-52. All these years in service and still kicking serious ACE!!!
 
Posts: 68 | Registered: Thu 07 February 2008Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Basic Training
Picture of bluebuff
Posted Hide Post
quote:
LOL @ this thread! The B-2 will never be scrapped because of ONE mishap in it's history. Seems like all I ever hear is how the B1 sucks and costs way too much money to maintain. On the other hand, look at the B-52. All these years in service and still kicking serious ACE!!!


HELL YEAH!!!! Back in 2003 the B-1s TRIED to relieve us B-52 guys in DG. The first B-1 IFEed in with an engine failure. The rest were either broken state side or at Guam. It took them at least 2 additional weeks to get mission ready.

However, I do have to give credit where credit is due. They’re getting a lot of combat sorties and dropping a lot of munitions. I wonder what their MC rate is?
 
Posts: 15 | Registered: Tue 16 January 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Highly Experienced Member
Posted Hide Post
Should bring a hybrid of the B-1 back - - something like the B-58 Hustler. That would reduce swingwing maintenance problem, all ow for more fuel or payload storage - and scare the hell out of all the bad guys out there, the way the B-58 did -

 
Posts: 11827 | Registered: Fri 01 June 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of Reach6
Posted Hide Post
Wow! The B-58 Hustler! That brings back memories as a child. My father was stationed at a SAC base with these babies.

Definately an aircraft before its time! I sat and watched a praticed alert launch and my ears were ringing for days!

Those were the days when you knew how the wing did during an ORI by whether there was a moving van parked at the Wing Commander's house after the team left.
 
Posts: 429 | Registered: Fri 14 December 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of TwoTangoTwo
Posted Hide Post
So, has there been any further info on the cause of the crash? I haven't really heard anything. Curious as to what went wrong so suddenly upon takeoff...
 
Posts: 1519 | Registered: Wed 14 December 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
You can still 'have it all'- just have HALF
Picture of TheWifey
Posted Hide Post
My understanding is the first thing that will happen is to assemble a Safety Investigation Board. The purpose of the SIB is to establish exactly what happened and why, and to use that knowledge in an effort to (hopefully) prevent this type of accident from happening in the future. All testimonies and data remain off the public record, and statements made by anyone interviewed are not released within the AF community as a whole nor are they “held against” anyone career-wise. It’s all about finding the truth. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe SIBs are conducted over a 30-day period of time – no more, no less.

A subsequent Accident Investigation Board (AIB) will already have been assembled and will begin its investigation following that of the SIB. The purpose of the AIB is, among other things, to determine if the AF or its members have any culpability – financial, legally or otherwise - as a result of the event.

I’m not an expert or anything, it’s just that my hubby has been tasked to serve on several boards and the above is my recollection of how the chain of events play out.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
The "not released" info is what is called "privileged information," it is protected by law and can never be used in a court of law. That is the big difference between the two boards...in order to insure the mishap is investigated without fear of reprisal during the SIB, witnesses are offered privilege, while in an AIB, the witness is often read their rights.
 
Posts: 5982 | Registered: Fri 10 October 2003Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Posted Hide Post
Here's video of that B-2 crash. In this video, the first B-2 takes off without incident, but the second one seems to have immediate trouble. Moisture got into a device that controls the left wing surfaces. This is 3 min.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bn9gfJ3Fzxo
 
Posts: 1444 | Registered: Wed 04 February 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of Hobie819
Posted Hide Post
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/06/crash.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Like the above mentioned, it looks like it was moisture.
quote:
The Air Force said the first crash of a B-2 stealth bomber was caused by moisture in sensors and estimated the loss of the aircraft at $1.4 billion..

The crash probably could have been avoided if knowledge of a technique to evaporate the moisture had been disseminated throughout the B-2 program, Maj. Gen. Floyd L. Carpenter, who headed an accident investigation board, said Thursday.


Bet the maintainers that thought of this one wished they would've submitted it for the IDEA program...
 
Posts: 293 | Registered: Thu 15 February 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of caninedale
Posted Hide Post
No doubt. I wonder what the reward would be for saving 23 billing dollars.
 
Posts: 1346 | Registered: Fri 02 February 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Hobie819:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/06/crash.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Like the above mentioned, it looks like it was moisture.
quote:
The Air Force said the first crash of a B-2 stealth bomber was caused by moisture in sensors and estimated the loss of the aircraft at $1.4 billion..

The crash probably could have been avoided if knowledge of a technique to evaporate the moisture had been disseminated throughout the B-2 program, Maj. Gen. Floyd L. Carpenter, who headed an accident investigation board, said Thursday.


Bet the maintainers that thought of this one wished they would've submitted it for the IDEA program...


All kinds of wonderful news for the AF this week. /sarcasm/
 
Posts: 1444 | Registered: Wed 04 February 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Basic Training
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by caninedale:
No doubt. I wonder what the reward would be for saving 23 billing dollars.


10,000
 
Posts: 237 | Registered: Thu 20 July 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of lstgnfghtr
Posted Hide Post
$10,000, eh?

Lets do the math on this with a reduction by tens.....

So...if all I need is a grand in pocket money, I could limit my good ideas for the IDEA program to $2.3 Billion?

$230M is good for a crisp Hundo?

$23M for a ten-spot?

$2.3M for a buck?

$230K for a dime (or two nickels...take your pick)

...and last, but certainly not least...

$23K for a penny?

Lets think about this for a moment...if you take the amount of compensation that a Soldier would probably receive over the course of treatment and recuperation for receiving a severe A$$ beating, it would quite likely approach somewhere around $23,000 (if you include VA claims later).

So...if that math holds...every single time I restrain my innate natural desire to beat the living $hit out of some dip-$hit troop that opens his mouth prior to engaging the meat in his cranial cavity (such restraint being a daily occurrence for most of us)...I, in essence, am actually saving the US Military somewhere around a total cost of $23,000.

.........Where's my F*&KING penny?

Angry Whip
 
Posts: 1344 | Registered: Sun 01 October 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
You can still 'have it all'- just have HALF
Picture of TheWifey
Posted Hide Post
Where are you guys getting this $23 billion number?
 
Posts: 5982 | Registered: Fri 10 October 2003Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of lstgnfghtr
Posted Hide Post
Well...I got the $23B from caninedale, and the $10K from adamkruse.

And for the record...I've already earned ANOTHER penny this morning while leaving the chow hall. (cocky little punk)

If it weren't for all this restraint I've learned over the years, there would certainly be stacks of beaten down Airmen laying all around me (and young hothead Marines...let's not forget them).
 
Posts: 1344 | Registered: Sun 01 October 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of caninedale
Posted Hide Post
Sorry, misplaced period led to the confusion. It should have read 2.3 billion. Though I have seen numbers anywhere from 2.1 to 2.3 billion. I guess with one a smoking hole now, the cost per just went up so 2.3 is a little closer.
 
Posts: 1346 | Registered: Fri 02 February 2007Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
You can still 'have it all'- just have HALF
Picture of TheWifey
Posted Hide Post
Here is a pretty good breakdown: http://www.cdi.org/issues/aviation/B296.html

The planes themselves aren't worth nearly that much, but what we've sunk into their development is...we still "own" that, I suppose.
 
Posts: 5982 | Registered: Fri 10 October 2003Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Posted Hide Post
The B-2's modified aerial flux capacitor accounts for around $1 billion of that cost.
 
Posts: 1444 | Registered: Wed 04 February 2004Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Picture of lstgnfghtr
Posted Hide Post
I thought it was 88 miles per hour...

You mean it's actually 88 KNOTS?



It's the LIBYANS!!!!!



 
Posts: 1344 | Registered: Sun 01 October 2006Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
Member
Posted