B2 stealth jets return home after 25 hour mission (Dial Up Warning)

Six hero pilots return home safe and sound from a bombing mission to Libya which saw them in the cockpit for an incredible 25 hours.

Three B-2 Spirit bombers, piloted by two men each, made it back after the 11,418-mile round trip from the Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri - where they are kept in special hangars - to Libya, where they hit targets on forces loyal to Colonel Gaddafi and back again.

At $2.1bn, they are the most expensive warplanes in the world and rarely leave their climate-controlled hangars. But when it does, the B-2 bomber makes a spectacularly effective start to a war - including during this weekend's aerial attack on Libya's air defences.

Its mission is to penetrate heavily defended enemy territory and 'kick down the door' on the opening night of a conflict. One of its special features is its ability to carry eight GBU-37 'bunker buster' bombs, weighing in at 2.27 tonnes that are capable of boring 20 to 30 ft of rock or reinforced concrete before detonating.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1368337/Libya-crisis-B2-stealth-bombers-25-hour-flight-Missouri-Tripoli.html#ixzz1HHtA7diw











Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1368337/Libya-crisis-B2-stealth-bombers-25-hour-flight-Missouri-Tripoli.html#ixzz1HHsMrBtF

Our world is really something.

K & R :thumbsup:

....unless someone needs a good arse kicking.

This shit really impresses me and makes me want to sing like this;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cWz9MrHskk

and I don't know why....

Too bad we couldn't have done better than six missiles. But at least this 'war' is for a better cause than Iraq and company...

:hi: :loveya:

They had to have had fueling support - likey the KC-135 which was put into service in 1956. Its purpose was to enable any fighter in the US to leave its base and travel to any place on earth. Fueling is done in flight with some amazing pilot skills. The fighter positions below the KC-135 and the fuel is loaded into the fighter with a 20 ft. boom.
I invite anyone interested to go to YouTube and search KC-135. They have some showing refueling of the B-2.

My father was engineer on that plane for many years. When I saw how it really worked - thanks to youtube videos, I was so proud. The KC-135 will likely serve at least 60 years before it is replaced by the new tanker - contract awarded to Boeing.

I am not pro-war, but when I see the marvels of technology, such as refueling in flight, it is a thrilling sight.

I suppose they could have refueled somewhere in the ME but I doubt it. The KC-135 would have been there for other fighters as well.
N.K.A.W.T.G. - No-one kicks ass without tanker gas

:shrug: :patriot:

fuel capacity is 167,000 lb - roundtrip about 334,000 lb - the range is 6,000 miles wich is just slightly more than its trip each way.
167,000 lb converts to 20011 gallons, so roundtrip for one is 40022 gallons

For all three, roundtrip - 120,066 gallons, estimate

Lots!

and potential bang for the buck. :patriot:

get worse than that! - kidding - kidding.
I seem to recall, the Bradley tank gets about 10 gallons to the mile.

In any event, even if the plane technically has the range to fly the mission without tanking, in practice I'd guess that they can carry a heavier bombload if they refuel along the way.

It still seems utterly ridiculous to fly bombing missions from the continental US. Clearly the sortie rate can't be much better than 0.5 per aircraft per day under such conditions! It's like lighting cigars with 100 dollar bills... we do it because we can, not because it makes any sense to do so.

B-2 Spirit Stealth bombers?

Are the pilots strapped to a seat or a toilet?

Can they treat a flush like another bomb?

They are also allowed to take naps.

In my bunk.. alone.. but I'd be a MEMBER and tell the story at bars in my later years!

:rofl:

:toast::hi:

So, you're repping Lougheed-Martin? McD-D? Boeing?

done the same job with a lot less fuel. Maybe they just needed flight time to get their flight pay.

Since they are stealth and can take care of the air defense sites without being hit.

The idea is to knock out RADAR and such to clear the way for others to come in. Since they're basically invisible and silent, they can precision-target anti-aircraft batteries and then come home, then the guys on the carriers can come in hot and noisy and take out other targets without worrying about getting blown out of the sky.

Even though I don't agree with it, I have to appreciate the logic and strategy involved, much like a chess game. Except, of course, it's extremely rare for things to blow up during a chess game....

This stuff is why we can't afford real national health care, affordable higher education, better schools. And our politicians are always talking about 'cuts' as they spend more on weapons.

Thrilling. :sarcasm:

You should be grateful. Isn't DU awesome!

How will the charge show up on my credit card bill?

but just maybe, not so many in Libya thanks to our porn.

Unfortunately, our porn was not sent to Darfur.

People are suffering right here in the U.S., our economy is shot, and yet here we go, on yet another poorly thought-out, oil-related, hugely expensive instance of military adventurism in yet another Muslim country. I didn't like it when the Bushes did it, and I don't like it now, with Obama is continuing the same miserable practice.

DU is a changin'

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I'm ashamed of this country.

I believe that some aircraft can carry such heavy payloads that they can't take off with full fuel tanks (too much weight, too long a take-off roll for available runways.) Once they're up to altitude and cruise speed they fill 'er up from the tankers.
One reason the B-2's are stationed in USA is because the stealth coatings on the skin are extremely fragile and sensitive to weather conditions: rain, hail, etc. In fact, the F-117's deployed to the Middle East had to be kept in hangars unless in use. There is are unconfirmed stories that bats flying in the hangars in Iraq kept crashing into the F-117's because their own sensing systems did not "see" the F-117's. I suspect that except for Diego Garcia and another base or two, there is not sufficient skill or personnel to maintain the aircraft skin. The repairs are costly and time-consuming. The aircrafts' shapes do help deflect radar signals, as does careful design attention to avoid exposed metal, so that's a plus, making the plane seem much smaller than otherwise.
In a catch-22, I've read that the Russians have started to deploy old-tech long-wave radar which is able to "defeat" the stealth coating, and thus the aircraft are no longer really stealthy, just absurdly expensive basic black tools of war. Perhaps the joke's on us...
Would appreciate any alternative views or information. TIA.

My understanding is that while you can detect a stealth aircraft's presence with a larger radar wave, you sacrifice the ability to accurately track it. Knowing it's there is information, for sure, but not being able to track it well enough to shoot it down makes knowing it's there less helpful.

It's not the coating that long wave radar gets around, but the shape; coating is kind of the last 1% of stealth, after shape and heat concerns. In the case of the B-2, just about every system requires such extensive infrastructure to maintain (not just the skin) that it makes the most sense to have them fly from home, almost no matter where they're going, rather than cart all the equipment and manpower to a forward location.

My $0.02.

just sayin'

I am so proud of our military capabilities. Too bad we are broke and going
bankrupt by any commonly accepted accounting principles.

...that makes them "hero pilots"?