I’m not an expert but know enough to converse. As I understand it:
The B-1 should be more expensive to fly than the B-52 because of its variable wing geometry and the nature of its engine. But, we spent a boatload of cash to make the B-1 cheaper. We put soft constraints on the performance envelope in mission design then optimized the aircraft for it.
We didn’t update the B-52 because it was far more expensive: replace 8 engines designed in the 1950s with 2 or 4 modern engines, requiring redesign of wing, tail, and cockpit, as well as manufacturing of old parts due to scarcity. If we’d spent for engine modernization then it’d be cheaper to fly because that style of airfrane is almost always cheaper to fly than an airframe that can comfortably sustain Mach 1. It’d even be cheaper to fly for the B-1 mission because we don’t ask the B-1 to leverage the Mach 1 speed it was designed for.
It’s shit like this that helps my civilian self understand the meaning of FUBAR. A rare example of a well-run program is the C-130.
I went digging and what I found surprised me.
2010 numbers.
B-1 $63k / flight hour
B-52 $72k
B-2 $135k
JDAMs, dumb bombs made smart, are primarily the B-1 role. Higher tech munitions are primarily the B-52 role.
I think that when they want it done cheap they use the B-1.
Huh, that’s very surprising seeing what I read about maintenance and downtime of the B1.
I’m not an expert but know enough to converse. As I understand it:
The B-1 should be more expensive to fly than the B-52 because of its variable wing geometry and the nature of its engine. But, we spent a boatload of cash to make the B-1 cheaper. We put soft constraints on the performance envelope in mission design then optimized the aircraft for it.
We didn’t update the B-52 because it was far more expensive: replace 8 engines designed in the 1950s with 2 or 4 modern engines, requiring redesign of wing, tail, and cockpit, as well as manufacturing of old parts due to scarcity. If we’d spent for engine modernization then it’d be cheaper to fly because that style of airfrane is almost always cheaper to fly than an airframe that can comfortably sustain Mach 1. It’d even be cheaper to fly for the B-1 mission because we don’t ask the B-1 to leverage the Mach 1 speed it was designed for.
It’s shit like this that helps my civilian self understand the meaning of FUBAR. A rare example of a well-run program is the C-130.