Stealth bomber crashes; pilots safe

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by MacNut, Feb 23, 2008.

  1. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #1
    HAGATNA, Guam (AP) -- A B-2 stealth bomber plunged to the ground shortly after taking off from an air base in Guam on Saturday, the first time one crashed, but both pilots ejected safely, Air Force officials said.

    The aircraft was taking off with three others on their last flight out of Guam after a four-month deployment, part of a continuous U.S. bomber presence in the western Pacific. After the crash, the other three bombers were being kept on Guam, said Maj. Eric Hilliard at Hickham Air Force Base in Hawaii.

    At least one B-2 bomber had taken off safely from Andersen Air Force Base but was brought back when another aircraft plunged to the ground.

    There were no injuries on the ground or damage to buildings, and no munitions were on board. Each B-2 bomber costs about $1.2 billion to build.

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/23/stealth.bomber.crash.ap/index.html
     
  2. stevegmu macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    A stone's throw from the White House.
  3. biturbomunkie macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2006
    Location:
    cali
  4. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #4
    The persecution complex is strong in this one Obi-Wan...
     
  5. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #5
    I'm starting to think it might be pathological.
     
  6. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #6
    Ah, the flying wing. I'm actually surprised the thing flies in a straight line at all to be honest. Glad nobody was hurt, although if the pilots had gone down with the plane I would have suspected it to be met with a bunch of SCUBA divers, a shark and a camouflage net :)
     
  7. killerrobot macrumors 68020

    killerrobot

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #7
    I didn't know that they had any out of Whiteman AF Base.
    Good to know the pilots are okay.
    About blaming Bush - why do we have B-2's patrolling the Western Pacific?
    I guess we blew everything up in Iraq already.:rolleyes:
     
  8. swiftaw macrumors 603

    swiftaw

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Location:
    Omaha, NE, USA
    #8
    Nice Thunderball reference.

    Bad week for the air force, first the two F-15's crash into each other, then this.
     
  9. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #9
    Even nicer since the Vulcan featured in Thunderball was reportedly the inspiration for the whole stealth programme.
     
  10. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #10
    Actually, I think both the Vulcan and the B-2 were based on the B-35/B-49 flying wing design flown just after WW2.
     
  11. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #11
    The original stealth airplane was the SR-71.

    The F-117 was inspired by a translation of a Russian paper that contained information on how to predict observability.

    That's correct.

    Attached pictures of the YB-35 and YB-49.
     

    Attached Files:

  12. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #13
    Yes, the f-117 came from a program of what shape was least visible to radar -- then engineered into a plane.

    Amazing though how long ago the project was started.

    --

    The B-2, yep immediately ground the planes and suspect bad fuel. then look for the cause.
     
  13. sushi Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #14
    It had flat plates due to the level of computing power available at the time.

    The B-2 is curved due to advances in computing power.

    Same for the F-22.

    In the early 70's, so it is over 30 year's old. :eek:

    For those who might be interested, "Skunk Works" by Ben Rich is a wonderful book on the subject.
     
  14. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #15
    The Avro Vulcan was in service from 1953, long before either the SR71 or its predecessors, the A1-12. The "invisible to radar" aspect was first seen in practice when a flight of Vulcans on a wargames exercise were completely undetected by US air defences.
     
  15. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #16
    perhaps because older designs weren't really tested for low radar visibility ?

    look at the Horten (pre)WW2 designs and tell me the B2 design is based on the Avro Vulcan as opposed to those (the Horten design were even using some quite low tech radar absorbing technologies)
    actually nazi germany actively experimented on stealth technology for submarine towers and snorkels for hiding them better from aircrafts and ships

    not that delta wings is an invention of avro either ;)


    that said the statement that only british and US radars can detect stealth aircraft is perhaps the most dubious statement ... after all during 2003 even the austrian air radar system, built and designed in the late 70ties, from the austrian "air force" detected 2 F-117 illegal crossing austria in the radar shadow of an unarmed airforce transport machine which actually had permission
    to add insult to the injury: the austrian "air force" then intercepted them using their Saab Draken,armed only with guns, for taking pictures (for an angry letter to the US which denied everything)

    if the austrian airforce can detect F-117 planes hiding in the radar shadow of a boeing with their radars then for sure pretty much all western countries can

    just for laughs: here an actual picture of the austrian flight surveillance center of the austrian "air force"
    [​IMG]
     
  16. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #17
    My quote does add that the F117s were in "Stealth Mode" when detected by the UK. Perhaps they were not in your example?
     
  17. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #18
    well they were trying to hide from the radar by flying close to a boeing and thus illegal crossing so why wouldn't they switch on "stealth mode" to make themselves less visible

    edit: and that wasn't the only case .. in 1999 they were able to track F-117 even over croatia/bosnia ... i doubt they would be flying there with transponders switched to "on"
     
  18. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #19
    Well, they aren't very stealthy at all, then, are they? :rolleyes:
    Put it down to another example of Lockheed scamming the DoD...:p

    But it still doesn't detract from the achievement of the RAF in managing to bomb New York without even being seen.
     
  19. tutubibi macrumors 6502a

    tutubibi

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2003
    Location:
    localhost
    #20
    F-117 was detected by old long pulse radars and shot by Serbian defenses using seemingly obsolete 60s-era Soviet SA-3 surface-to-air missile.
    In typical example of arrogant engineering :D, the F-117 was designed to be stealthy against modern radars. Against old long pulse duration radars, its not stealthy.
     
  20. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #21
    That was inappropriate and completely uncalled for.
     
  21. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #22
    random fact. It shows up as a V on the radar. That is the problem when the craft is the size of the wave length. It was a design problem they knew about when making the F-117. Old school radar would nail it every time. That and when they banked for a turned.
     
  22. edesignuk Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
    #23
    Quoted for coolness :cool: :D I especially like that last bit and am very surprised by it, can that really be the case?

    Glad that no one was hurt in the B-2 crash. Still though, $1.2bn down the toilet :eek:
     
  23. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #24
    Pshaw... that's chump change. We spend that every day in Iraq.
     
  24. stevegmu macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2008
    Location:
    A stone's throw from the White House.
    #25
    Actually, the R&D costs are built into the $1.2 Billion figure. Actual cost of parts and assembly is far less.
     

Share This Page