Say it aint so...

[Jarink1]

1. The mission the a/c was designed for changed, rather often. B-1B's are carrying sniper pods and doing close air support in the Middle East now. A far cry from original design specs.

Yes, but couldn't the same be said of the B-52s? Yet, they are projected to remain in service until 2040.

[StyrenePilot1970]

Yes, but couldn't the same be said of the B-52s? Yet, they are projected to remain in service until 2040.

keep a tired old airframe in service far past its sell by date.

Yup, it could.

The problem is the purchasing system and mentality, not the aircraft...

[Randy Haskin]

But with drones and unmanned aircraft, does it really matter anymore?

I just wanted to correct a subtle difference here: there aren't any "drones" that the US has in operational roles.

A drone is something that is programmed to fly a pre-planned route that is not modifiable in flight -- like the D-21 of yesteryear.

An unmanned aircraft (the current USAF term is 'Remotely Piloted Aircraft', or RPA) has a live human being that makes decisions about the operation of the aircraft real time -- it is actively flown.

The Global Hawk is about the closest the USAF gets to a 'drone', as it doesn't get flown with a stick/throttles, but with mouse clicks. Even with the GH, though, there is a man there the entire flight who is altering flightpaths, orbits, altitudes, airspeeds, etc, to match mission requirements.

Even the QF-4s and MQM-107s that are shot down for the WSEP programs aren't really 'drones' by the specific correct terms.

Although the terms get thrown around like synonyms, they are not and in fact there are important differences between the two.