mkellytx

The runway at Anderson AFB in Guam is noticeably curved, so much so that for BUFF takeoff's we had to brief that the second 70 knot call was the one to start the timer as the first call came while the jet was going downhill and the second when it was going up hill.

Former B-52 flight test engineer (FTE) and B-1 maintenance officer here. The Bone and the BUFF very much could conduct SEAD, or more realistically DEAD using AGM-69 SRAM's, but those were SIOP only and withdrawn in the 90's due to safety concerns. The problem with both of the bombers are that the pilots are bus drivers, almost everything interesting having to do with a weapon is controlled by a Radar Nav/Nav/WSO. The BUFF still has 6 ejection seats, but the Guns position is no longer active as the guns were removed in the 90's. The seat is still there and maintained and available for augmented crews (extra pilot if you fly 24+ hrs for example). That's also where the FTE's at Eddy's patch get to sit when they fly. Of course for non combat missions the crew size is ten: P, CP, RN, Nav, EWO, Guns, IP. IN, IEWO, +1 (hammock behind IP) . The jets at Edwards never flew the +1 while I was there, and the bed was replaced with special instrumentation for the ED jets. Recalling my weekly knowledge quiz the ejection order was for the Nav to go first, all of the guys in jump seats to get out through the Nav hatch with the RN acting as jumpmaster, then RN, EWO, Guns, CP and finally P. Honestly, most folks don't understand how bad the BUFF's handling characteristics are, it's not an easy plane to fly. Then almost all of the weapons actions happens down stairs with the nav's. Finally, the EWO station is marked classified so good look finding a picture much less modeling it. The Bone isn't much better, most all of the interesting stuff happens in back and that stuff is pretty hard to find open source.

The book Vipers in the Storm is a must read if you wish to understand USAF block 40's during ODS. The author flew with the 4 FS and 421 FS during ODS, very insightful. Basically, the 388 FW had Nav pods, but all of the targeting pods went to the Beagle squadrons since they had GIB's. Still quite a bit of good info on what a block 40 with the Nav pod could do.

Disappointing to see that statement from the COO, but it does look like FM and performance appendix for the Italian Tornado got pulled down and are no longer public...

The ADF's could and did carry Sparrows, but given the end of the Cold War those went away pretty fast or started using AMRAAM's for the handful that stuck around more than a few years. USAF block 50/52's never used them although many foreign AF's did.

QuiGon, The moral argument thing is a particularly bad question to ask me since I signed a no reservation pledge in order to commission as an USAF officer who wanted to fly planes...

One of the biggest reasons they won't go there is nuclear procedures and safeguards are highly classified. I've flown on nuclear bombers, good luck getting any information to accurately model them on a Viper, Mud Hen, Bug or BUFF. Now what is within the realm of modeling are 50's or 60's era aircraft. If anyone modeled a century series aircraft those systems are old enough to be declassified. It would actually be quite challenging to run an intercept and use a Genie from a Deuce or 106.

Just attempting to educate. This incident was an example discussed in the Equations of Motion short course and an example of an adverse lateral directional modes adversely impacting the longitudinal mode. It also served to reinforce the use of a backside technique to control the aircraft. Backside works on both sides of the power curve, frontside technique on the backside can get you killed. No confrontation intended only correcting that the root chord changed not the span from C to D. Getting on topic, it will be great to get one of the century series with such nastiness at hi aoa. It will also be great to fly an aircraft that requires the pilot to be well ahead of the plane and pay careful attention to the throttle setting and stick position lest you depart the aircraft.

The wing platform change for the D was an increase at the wing root and adding wing flaps inboard. Even with that minimum control from the F-100C to F-100D were pretty close to each other. Aircraft Weight / Power off Minimum Control Speed (Stall Speed) / Power on Minimum Control Speed (Stall Speed) F-100C 25,000 / 137 (131) / 130 (123) 30,000 / 149 (142) / 143 (135) F-100D 24,000 / 134 (124) / 128 (110) 28,000 / 144 (134) / 139 (126) 32,000 / 153 (143) / 148 (136) From 1F-100C-1 and 1F-100D-1 MCA isn't much different so tip stall, adverse yaw and pitch up are all still there to make low speed flying challenging. Plenty of D's perished in Saber Dances: https://www.historynet.com/deadly-sabre-dance.htm Also, try using a more authoritative source than Wikipedia. Multiple F-100 dash one's are available online. Many universities have their engineering course materials available online, MIT and Stanford come to mind. Finally, I did spend 5 of my 15 years in the aerospace industry as a flight test engineer, took short courses at USAF TPS and National, before all of that I got an MS in aero with a research focus in flight test. Flight dynamics is a topic I know pretty well.

Not really. FWIW, years ago I worked with a retired commandant of USAF Test Pilot School who got his start in Huns. His description of what it was like to fly the plane was, "You grew eyes on the back of your head and when the slats came down the stick stayed centered." The jet had bad adverse yaw and early jet engines weren't know for their rapid throttle response. Get on the backside of the power curve and things go downhill really fast. Piston engine planes and T-33's really didn't prepare guys for to fly it in the left had side of the envelope. By the 60's you had better training in a better trainer (T-38 which requires care and attention to land well) which in turn lowered the accident rate.

Not quite, the F3 implementation lacked the mid course updates and didn't use the full capability of the AMRAAM, but it was better than Sky Flash. They could and did carry ALARM's though...

Anderson AFB Now that we know the next free map is the Mariana's this has to be implemented. FWIW, back in the day when I was BUFF aircrew...the old crusty RN's used to talk about the 70 knot time call at Anderson being the second time not the first time because of the change of slope of the runway... Cheers SKÖT

The BUFF's aren't carpet bombing anymore because the bad guys aren't kind enough to assemble themselves as a big area target. Rest assured, the last time they did this we gladly dropped 27 mk117's from the bay on them and kept the JDAM's on the wings for clean up. Sadly, they learned and now we play whack a mole with JDAMS and GBU's... Former BUFF aircrew here.

Answering the original question any of the current bombers would be difficult to model in the game. Even if you could do a 4 or 6 position cockpit, the EW station is always the one that lacks unclassified documentation that couldn't be modeled. There's sufficient documentation out there to model the front seats and the offensive station, maybe even model the Laptop controlled targeting pod from 10 years ago. The new cockpit with the color LCD MFD's and with all the nice new data links is too new and not public domain.

Probably, but the only times I worked B-2 tests I was always the radar target so I never really knew much about the bomber's capabilities.

By 2002 that was deactivated, 2002-2005 I was a maintenance officer in the 7th BW and 2005-2008 I was a FTE in the 419th FLTS. It was one of the first things I asked about when I started working on the Bone, only to be disappointed by the answer it that it went away with the nuclear mission.

OK, poor form to forget the sts. The word choice is appropriate when it is meant to be analogous to a single action pistol, with a round in chamber, with a full magazine, with the hammer cocked (sts) back and with the safety off. Which pretty much describes a BUFF on alert, all the switches are preset, cartridges are in every engine, up to 20 cans of instant sunshine are on board, and the crew is a stones throw away to fire the carts.

He didn't ask about cart starting a hot cocked BUFF on alert. The Bone is cold start only, once it lost its SIOP mission the go button on the nose gear was no longer deemed needed.

Crews usually step 90 minutes prior to TO, walk around, check bombs, load all their stuff on the jet, review forms, APU start around 50-60 minutes, engine start 35-45 minutes, taxi 10 minutes, then take off. That's pretty standard timeline for both the BUFF and the Bone, I was a maintenance officer on the latter and a flight test engineer for both with almost 100 hours on the BUFF. Lots of checklists and lots of of things to check.

And the right timing, apply when pilots are in short supply guys with Coke bottle glasses get radiator wings. Apply when there are plenty, oh you have the wrong degree, no one wants to be an engineer, so that history major has your pilot slot, enjoy your life in acquisitions... Happened to me, but now that I'm old and have a kid and glad I'm writing this under the same roof as the kid rather than some tent over in the sandbox getting ready to spend 8 hours the next day boring holes in the air hoping someone asks me to drop a JDAM.

It all depends on where in the envelope you find yourself. Below 20,000-ish feet you are limited by KIAS, and with a lot of fighters it is limited by the canopy temperature. Above 20,000-ish feet you are Mach limited. Mach limitations are tricky, it could be choking a fixed inlet or it could be flutter limited, which is very configuration specific. Without specific information it is very difficult to make categorical statements. FWIW one of the real world flight test techniques I've done many times in the BUFF was to set up at Vmo at 22-23 Kft and slowly descend until we hit Vne somewhere between 19-21 Kft. This was usually the most challenging condition for weapons releases.

I flew with a Marine in Iraq who said it perfectly, "The Dash One you blue suiters use tells you everything you CAN do while my NATOPS tells me everything I CAN'T do, I like my way better because if it isn't expressly forbidden it's fair game."

First of all, nuclear weapons are lawful weapons unlike chemical and biological which are both banned by international treaties. Game play, the big strategic nukes would be no fun, the smaller tactical might be interesting, especially since it's believed that Russia would use them in any war with NATO over the Baltic's. Are they moral? Well, the 1950's strategy of MAD and targeting cities with multi-megaton weapons was only an extension of how World War II was fought where all sides targeted cities, the only difference of the H-bomb was an economy of force where one aircraft could do the job of a thousand. Today's accurate weapons allow counter-force strategies that can eliminate the need to target cities as a primary strategy. Still, strat weapons are boring and bad for game play. All that said, if there was a Europe theater with a Baltic campaign, allowing tactical nukes like the B61 family could make for some really interesting "Alone and unafraid" missions for Vipers and Mud Hens.

Yes, in this airplane, and yes that MALD Balls 50 is the tail number 60-050, wasn't a pilot so never used the crosswind gear, most of my time in the jet was sitting next to the EW facing backwards running orange boxes. Most of the really interesting stuff is covered by NDA's. Getting back to topic, the combination of ECM and maneuver can neutralize the S-75 even in a BUFF. I did get to see an EW do so on a training hop to the UTTR against simulated threats, and no specifics, those are TTP's which I can't discuss.

Linebacker II, 15 loses on 741 sorties attempted. The aircrew nearly mutinied over the loses and SAC policy. The 11 Days of Christmas by Marshal Michel is a very compelling read of the B-52 campaign over North Vietnam in 1972. Personally I read the book in the gunners seat of 60-0050 on a mission from Edwards to Eglin to shoot a MALD.