On Jul 6, 8:50 pm, some...@some.domain wrote:

yeap...tho I hear some are fighting to keep it around a few more years.

The F-22 is much more capable and effective, I think. And yes, B-52's
can drop all of the new munitions, including guided missiles, etc. The
F-117 was a great plane for its time, but the F-22 is both stealthy
and bobust, a fighter and bomber. Last I heard the B-52 will be
around another 30 years... maybe even make a hundred.

On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 04:21:53 GMT, someone@some.domain wrote:

F/A-22 is also easier to maintain and more provides for a more flexible
mission response. F-117 could be thought of as the USAF Tomcat...as far
as retirements go.

Not to mention that they don't call the Nighthawk the "toxic avenger"
for nothing. Old tech, and some of the materials used in it's
construction and maintenance are...let's say - "hazardous".

--
- Rufus

Bluepen wrote:

High altitude bombing has about a foot for foot range. So if you are at
45,000 feet, the bomb will fly 45,000 forward from releaase. Now, let's say
you drop JSOWs. That can dramatically increase the range the bomb can fly.
The JSOW was/is basically a glider bomb. Since gliders have a glide ratio
of 20 to 1 or higher, that makes these little gems nice stand off weapons.

Whether the BUFF is carrying them is anothe thing. Back in my time as a
BUFF Weapons Officer, they were among a long list of things the AF and ACC
were looking at.

someone@some.domain wrote:

someone@some.domain wrote:

What won't fit on the inside might just fit on the outside. The D model
could carry 108 500 lb bombs. The H models don't carry that many because
the bomb bay doesn't have the same modification as the D had. Still, it
will carry 45 or 51 500 lb bombs depending on the pylons attached. It makes
a mess no matter how many it carries.

I have heard that a common current load is 27 dumb bombs internal and 10 GPS
bombs external.

Jim
wrote in message
news:b2Yji.24628$G_4.7007@fe09.news.easynews.com...

Jim Williams wrote:

Well, no.

You'd never get that result, even ignoring air resistance which rather
quickly scrubs off most of the bomb's forward velocity.

Recall that the bomb will -never- have more forward velocity than the
speed of the aircraft releasing it while the downward velocity will
increase at the rate of 32ft/sec/sec.

Thus, velocity = gt

and distance = (1/2)gt^2

where g = 32ft/sec^2.

Of course, in the real world, eventually air resistance takes over as
the bomb's downward speed stabilizes at its terminal velocity - but that
same air resistance will also have scrubbed off all its forward velocity.

Cheers,

Jim Williams wrote:

That depends on your airspeed of course.

That depends on the glider of course; I doubt JSOWS fly at anywhere near
that good of a sink rate.

Pat

Jim Williams wrote:

Back in 1978, I took a trip to the USSR while in college. On the way
back, I ran into a BBC camera crew that had been let into Vietnam and
were on their way back to Britain.
One of the things they noted were the fish farm ponds
These were thousands of circular ponds, and existed in long lines across
the landscape.
It took them a few moments to realize how all theses circular ponds for
raising fish had been excavated courtesy of the American Government with
the aid of Boeing in a surprisingly short period of time, and free of
charge.
Your tax dollars at work. :-)

Pat