Civil B-52 ever to happen

[sabredriver]

Ive heard at times that CAF maybe or some US owner may in future get a chance to buy a B-52 to restore or if still flying.

Id prefer a B-52D as they are the real combat bird that deserve to be flown again.

Anyone think a B-52D flying is a goer?

[mustangdriver]

She would be expensive, but I don't see why it could be done. Although with the USAF still flying the type, not many airshows would pay the CAF to bring one in that they could get for free by just asking the USAF.

[MX304]

Short answer: No way in hell. The U.S. gov would never let a post cold war stategic bomber be flown in civilian hands. I doubt even the Collings foundation could pull it off. Besides to be considered a "warbird" it would have to be something not currently being flown by the USAF, and that might be another 50 years......

[tom d. friedman]

i agree!!

[Shay]

2 words....."Nuclear Capabilities"

Shay
____________
Semper Fortis

[bdk]

I believe these are also covered by the SALT treaties, aren't they?

[Chris]

Besides, I'm sure Gary would love to tackle a B-52 after "LIL and "FIFI" are done. For you CAFers, lets figure out ANNUAC. Lets see, $1000 per engine, $1 per horsepower---- never mind!!!!!

[jmkendall]

While I don't think that a civilian B-52 will be in the works for the next fifty years. I don't think that being nucular capable is the reason.

Even with the 'backpack' nucs of the Vietnam war, any aircraft can be considered nucular capable.

And; what would you rather try to track? A low and slow Cesna, or a BIG and obvious B-52?

Joe

[Ztex]

THe CAF already has a nuke capable airplane....




The B-52 would be waaaay too expensive to operate, but it would be cool to see... with some creative sponsorship...

[RickH]

The F-4 and TA-4F are ,...er WERE, I MEAN, WERE, nuclear capable.

That Sabredriver sure does like to kick that anthill !

[retroaviation]

Let's see..........We could take those noisy diesel burning engines off, put some good round engines on there. Maybe a couple of 3350's on the inboard positions, a couple of 2800's just outboard of those. That takes care of the inboard engine pods. We could get an 1820 off a T-28 on each inboard position of the outboard pods so that O.P. would be happy. Naturally, we'd have to put a good engine right next to that 1820 so that it would be reliable...so a couple of 1340's will work there. Naturally, we'd have to use the bomb bays for extra oil tanks and compartments for cleaning supplies though.

So now that I've figured out the engine mods, how can I modify that landing gear system? Hmmmm................................

Gary

[Shay]

I just don't ever see it happening. How many countries would love to get ahold of one the world's premier strategic bombers? And a civilian operated BUFF would be way more readily accessible than the military counter-parts.

Besides there won't be any left by the time the USAF finally retires them. I read that through continual refit and upgrade programs the USAF intend to keep the BUFFs in inventory for the next 50 years or so. By that time the remain B-52s will be so maxed out on airframe time. The best bet if at all would be any of the BUFFs mounted on poles or in front of base gates.



Ztex

What's the story with this picture???

Someone been busy photoshop'ing, or what? If so nice job, I did a double take at first glance.

Shay
_____________
Semper Fortis

[RickH]

It's the old NASA B-52 photoshopped. The picture has been floating around for at least 3-4 years.

[tom d. friedman]

who ever tweaked that buff pic must have alot of time on his hands!!

[6trn4brn]

Newbie here, so I will probably pay dearly for this...but, I have heard a rumor that the B-52D at Willow Run is running out of options to be moved, so the Air Farce in it's infinite wisdom is going to scrap it. I'm sure that the guys on here from Yankee Air will know a lot more about that than I...sure would make a nice lawn ornament though