The NEW B-52 ENGINES Will CHANGE The Entire Aviation Industry! Here's Why

The United States military is about to give a cold war-era bomber aircraft a new lease of life, thanks to an upgrade that will see it fitted with new and more advanced engines. It is an upgrade that will see the workhorse of the country’s bomber force continue flying for a quarter century more, taking its total service time to about a century. Today, we reveal all the details about this move that is bound to alter military aviation industry.
✈️ Don't forget to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE for more aviation content! ✈️
Tags: Aviation,Boeing,Airbus,WingedWorld,Planes,Plane,Airplane,Airplanes,aviation,planes,flying,avgeek,aviationnews,flight,flight review,b-52,b-52 engine,b-52 new engine,new engine b-52 fly 100 years,b-52 engines just shocked everyone,comac c919,airbus vs boeing vs comac,aviation compilation,aviation moments,b52 stratosphere,b52 aircraft,b52 carpet bombing,military aircraft,us air force,b52,b52 shot,b 52 bomber,b52h,b52h stratofortress,b52 engine,b52h engines

[@johnslugger]

*OMG!!!!!!!!!!! ITS ALL OVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OMG!!!!! (I really hate these click-bait titles!!)

[@doctorcrichton]

It was all over for me when I drove my first Rolls Royce!! OMG! You cannot imagine such a quality. British obsessional quality .... to go as far as quality can go as standard...

[@pilotdane1]

I know right !!!! - "THIS IS GOING TO CHANGE THE WORLD" !!!!.....new vacuum cleaner haha

[@super_morto]

I like how they said the speed and I have still no idea how fast it goes.

[@hlcepeda]

@@super_morto Mach 0.86 (for the P&W engines being replaced), so, 86% of the speed of sound, but at what altitude? SoS decreases with increasing altitude.

[@super_morto]

@@hlcepeda And I still still don't know. MPH would be great thanks.

[@timacrow]

When the B52 was rolled out, my mom was a recent college graduate; a few years later, in the late 1950s, she was a production/technical artist with Boeing working on B52s. She is now in her mid 90s, and the B52 still flies!

[@larryulrich9110]

Know what you mean. My mom was with CAP, Civilian Air Patrol. I was only in 2nd grade.

[@DavidHiggs-no8zl]

great plane , over engineered , rolls royce engines will keep this plane in the skys for another 50 years ,

[@alhubele654]

Built back in the day when Boeing still produced quality aircraft that didn't fall apart in flight.

[@karlschauff7989]

Before DEI was the company's top priority.

[@dennisbishop3016]

Old school. Slide rule engieering and responsible management.

[@robbieshand6139]

Probably why they're now using British engines 😂

[@curthenry9398]

I worked on B-52 in the early 70's, after discharge I hire a older man that worked at Boing in the 60's building B-52's. Jon and I spoke often on the B-52's, most conversation was that Jon did such a good job building B-52 and I did such a good job of maintaining B-52's they are still flying.

[@blueblur6447]

If only Boeing could get back to this era of innovations and quality.

[@Inpreesme]

Boeing is now all about enriching shareholders, management, and the 1%. They have enough lawyers to tie anyone up in court that wants to go after them so don’t expect quality to suddenly become part of their mission statement

[@fgm1197]

For crying out loud stop it already

[@ohger1]

What an idiotic statement.

[@blueblur6447]

@@ohger1 What is idiotic about my statement?

[@user-ij1sp7om9o]

@@ohger1 ask two US astronauts stranded at ISS about how idiotic this statement is

[@ginginthing]

I worked on the rewing program for the 52H's back in the early 70's. I thought the fuselages were on their last few years of life back then. It's an amazing aircraft.

[@mikeharrington878]

I was assigned to Helicopter Training Squadron Eighteen out of Milton, FL back in the early 80s. We were at a tactical landing training field, and I was hanging around outside the bird because it was hot as hell, and it was cooler under the rotor wash. I was standing there next to the Allison engine in the bird, the blades wopping over my head, when suddenly I heard the roar of much, much louder engines. I looked up, and there was a B-52 at about a 60 degree angle of bank turning into final to Eglin AFB about two miles away. I heard that Stratofortress a mile away even while standing next to a turning helicopter. I can't imagine what it must've sounded like to any people that were directly underneath that behemoth turning into final like that. Even the pilots heard it inside as they were talking. Wild. Hopefully these new engines are quieter and burn cleaner. Man, that thing smoked, too. o.O Oh yeah, I need to also state for the record: ⚓GO NAVY⚓

[@armadillotoe]

My USAF dorm room at Offutt AFB was at the end of the runway. When the B-52s had an emergency drill and they took off every 30? seconds it sounded like the end of the world. I suppose that was appropriate.

[@jo-jobighiker5552]

Click bate... B52's does an engine swap. How does this change The Entire Aviation Industry?

[@studioxxswe]

agree

[@chuck8094]

That's what I was thinking. Thanks for saving me the time I might have wasted on this click bait.

[@liamwhelehan2703]

I don't think it qualifies as click bait... Everyone puts "World Changing!" or something else in the title of their video. Here I was looking for a video on the B52 re-engine process, and it did what it said on the tin, as long as you ignore the Hyperbole.

[@Ronnie_B]

*bait Historically, the B52 has black smoke trails...😅

[@Mark-gu9ye]

Thanks dude!

[@MichaelKennedy-pn6kv]

Really nice to see them flying for longer, but how exactly will it 'CHANGE The Entire Aviation Industry!'???

[@jeebusk]

did you click the thumbnail? bam change 😅

[@steveburke7675]

...these jet engine youtubers needs to come up with a new schtick other than the weekly "this engine will change the aviation industry". Crap video. "Do not recommend Channel".

[@protorhinocerator142]

It will change history FOREVER

[@tihomirrasperic]

so if they managed to replace the B-52 engines, it means they have the technology, and the next step is to replace the engines on the 747 family and there are a huge number of them everyone can talk about how the 777 and 787 are the pinnacle of technology, but the 747 is still the "queen of the sky"

[@TheRavensOmen]

@@protorhinocerator142 It's a total game changer! This represents the most profound change since the dawn of time! IT'S ALL OVER!!!

[@erictaylor5462]

An F-15 flying escort on a B-52 started doing aileron and barrel rolls, literally flying circles around the B-52. The F-15 pilot told the B-52 pilot "Anything you can do I cab do better." The B-52 responded, "Oh yea? Watch this." The B-52 continued flying without the slightest change to heading, altitude or speed for the next several minutes. The F-15 pilot finally ask, "What are you going to do?" "Oh, I already did it. I shut down two of my engines."

[@bluskytoo]

similar story in C-130s and A-10s, only the C-130 pilot gets up and goes to take a leak and get a cup of coffee.

[@wayne-lj4in]

Love it! :>)

[@SteveS-dj4nq]

A retired B-52 pilot told me that story/joke, but said four engines were shut down….

[@PatrickJDoyle-bw3fu]

One of the stories is, the transport pilot is speaking to a fighter pilot that is able to do all kinds of maneuvers, the transport pilot says, watch this, after minutes of silence the fighter pilot asked what he did, the reply was, oh went back and made my self some lunch, took a nap then went to the bathroom, silence from the fighter pilot

[@frisk151]

Okay... That was funny

[@OFallons]

“AI” reader seems pretty silly, it’s not the Army Air Corp anymore it’s the “AIR FORCE” the B52 was introduced when the AiR FORCE is running the show not the ARMY AIR CORP,

[@Critical-Thinker895]

Yea I saw that Army logo at the beginning and laughed. It became the Air Force before I ever served in the Air Force and I've been out 50 years.

[@280StJohnsPl]

@@Critical-Thinker895 Same here F-4C Crew Chief :)

[@Adrian_Nel]

@OFallons Yeah, just another example of cut-n-paste-without-reading-or-listening-before-postingKZbinism.

[@derekheuring2984]

I'll never forget the first time I saw a B52. It was 1974 and I was skydiving at Lake Elsinore in California. We always did a "Hop and Pop" at the end of the day to slowly float down as the Sun set. The views from 7,200' agl were magnificent at that time of day. A "Hop and Pop" was when we pulled our ripcords as soon as we were clear of the aircraft and had developed enough speed for the pilot chutes to pull our main chutes out. I was lazily hanging from my canopy when I saw a smudge of smoke off in the distance which I kept watching as it grew closer and closer. Eventually a fuselage and 4 engine pods were discerniblle. That's a very smoky DC 8 I remember thinking to myself. The aircraft kept moving towards me but it became apparent it was going to pass well to the West of the drop zone. It eventually got close enough that I could that the 4 engine pods each had 2 two engines....It's a B52! I shouted to no one but myself! Such a magnificent sight to be at the same height as the massive bomber!

[@aldunlop4622]

Cool story! I had a similar experience once - on a surfing trip we were camping, I woke up just before dawn and went for a surf on my own. There was no surf that day, so I paddled out about 100m and just sat on my board watching the sunrise on the flat ocean. It was dead calm, and silent. After a few minutes, something strange happened; the surface of the water started popping and I realised it was raining. I was wearing a wetsuit, so I didn't feel it. While I was sitting there enjoying this sparkling morning, I heard a rumbling sound down the coast which got louder and louder, and all of a sudden, 2 FA-18 Hornet fighter jets came screaming over the headland maybe a few hundred metres about the ocean. They flew straight over me, went the length of the beach and disappeared over the next headland. It took about 3 seconds. Went from this silent enjoyment of nature to the awesome power of technology within a few minutes. I'll never forget it.

[@DavidHiggs-no8zl]

amazing story

[@Za7a7aZ]

100 years,... Can you imagine 3 generations of the same family piloting the same b52

[@stevetravelsaus]

They only started flying them in 1952. 72 years NOT 100. Not even close to 100 years.

[@uliwehner]

@@stevetravelsaus you must not have watched the video then. the point was made that the B52 with new engines can fly another 25 years. so, yeah, that makes it 100 years.

[@tedlesher2884]

3 generations is already there, probably 4 by now.

[@edjarrett3164]

The Buff stands as a testament to Boeing engineering. It was built with slide rules and will be flying when the B1 and B2 bombers are in the boneyard. It was a vastly over engineered platform and it’s the reason for its continued longevity.

[@lawrencegore6647]

It was not over engineered. I was responsible for the design guidelines.

[@edjarrett3164]

@@lawrencegore6647 Well it was better engineered than the follow on bombers. Maybe mission specs weren’t as clear on the newer bombers. I know utilization plays a key roll in airframe lifespan.

[@lawrencegore6647]

@@edjarrett3164Indeed it does. We redesigned the G/H for Cold War missions and training. Today's usage if far more benign.

[@franksanta-teresa971]

The Air Force became a separate service from the Army in 1947; 0:57 "the Army(???) made 8 variants of this bomber aircraft and designated them A through H."

[@rumannkoch4864]

Years ago, at the Fort Lauderdale Air & Sea Show, I saw a B-52 approaching from many miles away before the announcer introduced it because of its long black smoke trails. It passed right in front of us and then made a quick high-banking turn so effortlessly, like a fighter jet. Amazing! The Buff has always been a Beast. Can't wait to see what it can do with these new engines!

[@kelvinfoote9897]

You should have seen what the Vulcan bomber used to be able to do. Take off and immediately climb at about 60 degrees.It could also bank very steeply and they even rolled the early model.. It was as quite a sight.

[@houstongalloway6380]

@@kelvinfoote9897 Saw them at Barksdale AFB in 1974. They were awe inspiring!

[@ak1ranger]

The 20-25 year old BR 715 turbofans will change the aviation industry forever? Why? They are neither new or cutting edge but they are the perfect size to still maintain the podded engine layout. The 715s are used on a number of other aircraft such as ALL Boeing 717s (MD-95), Gulfstream jets of some models, Cessna Citation X and others. So they aren't going to change the entire industry and this video doesn't explain what they mean.

[@rokuth]

On the replacing the TF33 engines to 2 GE 9X engines, much of what was said in the video is correct, however, the other issue is the sheer size of the GE engine. It may have just been too big to put on a B-52. As for reducing the number of engines to 4, it would have been a single engine on each engine pylon. That would not only provided greater efficiency, but also lower drag. However, there are also other aerodynamic issues that may have occurred because of this, as well as the cost of modifying the structures to accept 4 engines instead of 8. As it is, the F130 has the same thrust of the original TF33 engines, meaning no need to alter structural elements for an engine of greater thrust, and/or size. It ensures reliability, and durability, saving overall costs for the remaining life of the B-52.

[@georgedvorak9481]

Typical Murican idiocy - the GE engines don't smoke properly...

[@chaseschneier1076]

What kind of modifications would be necessary? There are already 4 pylons and each could accept one engine. Sounds like someone is making a killing off this deal.

[@okbutthenagain.9402]

You do realise right that the B52's are getting RR F130 engines and not GE's right?

[@davidabbott1951]

If mounting 8 engines was a critical need, I would think a military version of an engine in the CF34-10 series would have been a better candidate. Superior, frankly, to the Rolls engine as well. The CF34/TF34 family has one of the best performance track records of any engine that currently turns.

[@some_guy441]

Here at Barksdale AFB in Louisiana... AS LONG AS IT MAKES THEM QUIETER, I'M ALL FOR IT!

[@derekheuring2984]

One of these days the USAF is going to honor a Grandfather, Father, and Grandson who have all flown or worked on the BUFF.

[@papa2z]

Sooner than later, My dad, fresh out of High School worked on and flew in B-52's at Altus, AFB in 1958-1961. My two sons are third generation, 39 and 35 years old. Surprised it hasn't happened.

[@williampotter2098]

Many airliners have been retired simply because their engines become outdated and engines with lower maintenance costs and more economical fuel burns are available to new jets. The Buff is well overdue for new motors. Kind of a no-brainer. The cost savings over going through a new aircraft acquisition is enormous. The attorney fees alone would pay for this modification.

[@rodbutler4054]

There may be tax depreciation benefits in commercial purchase of new equipment.

[@fw1421]

I’ve been waiting on this since I was stationed at Barksdale AFB in the late 70’s. The BUFF has needed new engines for SOOOOO long! Better reliability,better efficiency,and way better maintenance costs.

[@u2mister17]

And 90 MPH slower at cruse altitude.

[@terrancestodolka4829]

Really since 1952, it needed better engines...

[@u2mister17]

@@terrancestodolka4829 Turbo jet engines are much faster than turbo fans.

[@hotdog9262]

@@u2mister17 one would think the main objectives are reliability and cost, not to mention the fuel consumption of a modern engine

[@u2mister17]

@@hotdog9262 One you think staying alive is the military's first objective.

[@marcelb7259]

I have never seen such a good technical review on the B- and it's new engine before. Kudos for the great work guys ! Cheers from Canada.

[@simonlunt353]

I still can’t believe the B52 is still flying even after all its modifications well done to RR

[@hiturbine]

100 years' service for an airframe is so far beyond believability as to touch the realm of science fiction.

[@matsv201]

It was going to happen at some time. Technological advance following a S curve. So the airframe for heavy bomjer started to stagnate in 1950s

[@bobclifton8021]

The C-47, also known as the DC-3 has been around since 1932. That's coming up on a century. There's also a number of Ford Trimotors still around and going strong. That's another century.

[@hiturbine]

@@bobclifton8021 The C-47 has not seen active US military service since 1975. The Ford Trimotor is a museum piece more than an airframe in active service. Whereas the B52H makes up 72 aircraft of three active Bomb Wings in regular service at two USAF bases: Barksdale AFB in LA (2nd and 307th), and Minot AFB in ND (5th). There's also the 412th, sationed at Edwards AFB as a "Test Wing") .

[@bobclifton8021]

@@hiturbine While the C47 and Ford trimotor are not now in active military service they are still in use all over the world. They just keep on keeping on. You even have C47's now with turbine engines. I flew in one of those out of Somalia some years ago. It was a pretty high hog machine.

[@pablogodi1392]

The MG-42 machine gun is going to be in use for a century in just 8 years, just now is "called" MG3 in Europe or M60 in USA, and all that without any notable modification

[@erictaylor5462]

The B-52 has been a front line combat aircraft for 60% of the history of aviation. The creation of the B-52 is closer to the first flight of any airplane than it is to the modern area.

[@johncrispin2118]

Interesting, glad RR are supplying ,, perish the thought you could actually mention RR is a British company. ‘bout time then US bought something that was nominally British At least , been the other way round for too long . Good luck to the B52 we should have kept the Avro Vulcan for the same reasons , likewise as the Russian’s have kept their huge turboprop “Bears”😮

[@johnzenkin1344]

@johncrispin2118...but the Yanks never like to give credit to other countries, they just like to kid their own public that everything is and was invented/created in America. It's all about propaganda and brain washing.

[@patrickvillers6454]

It's amazing that an aircraft conceived in a hotel room in 1948 Dayton Ohio carved out of balsa wood would have this longevity.

[@jimmywilliamson8540]

It seems like they're spending a bit more money than they really need to but it's always surprising when the government does something that approaches practicality

[@mi-t-mouth3413]

bribes

[@kurtthomsen2414]

I worked in the office responsible for B-52 development in the early 80s. We did studies on re-engineing (?) the aircraft back then.

[@copferthat]

During WW2 the US produced the Mustang, which, due to under performance, had it's engines changed to Rolls Royce, which transformed it entirely. Here we have another Anglo American wedding of a great aircraft with a British engine, another wedding made in heaven.

[@MrNoneofthisisreal]

I guess you forgot how RR essentially bankrupted Lockheed with their failed engines in the 70s. Delayed the marvelous L-1011 past the sales opportunity sweet spot. Thanks RR

[@martinwhitfield1362]

I have watched too much KZbin but your intro started to sound like a KZbin App. "Russians hate it that a smart dude has found a way to make a new engine for the B52!"

[@justgivemethetruth]

Boeing was awesome in 1948, and for a long time after. These new engines ... I just hope our B-52s don't start falling out of the sky.

[@robertfritz3622]

It's about time!!! This has been needed for years!!

[@VulcanAvenger]

A true testament to the slide-rule engineers of the time, committed and brilliant. Thank you to all who created and kept this big bird in service to protect our country all these years.

[@moors710]

When I was at Boeing in 1987, they found a wing from a B52 that had been misplaced for 25 years. During a remodel of plant 2 they found the carpenters had built a wall over a wing that had been set aside.

[@chriswhite3692]

Grandpa BUFF will love his new legs.

[@jerrydeanswanson79]

Thanks for the program. The B-52H Stratofortress came to EAA in Oshkosh this year. What a sight...and sound!

[@Tonetwisters]

I've been hearing about these new engines for seven or eight years now; I woulda thought all this was long done and over with.

[@shenmisheshou7002]

This is just typical of government projects. First, the service has to build a case for the expenditure, then they have to go to congress to get money to do the program. Congress can be very slow to digest large military expenditures because with congress, there are always people that want to tack on some pet expenditures to any kind of spending bill. Next, the have to do the necessary design change evaluation. It isn't as easy as just bolting on the engine. All of the systems have to be re-evaluated to ensure that the engine can be compatible with the aircraft engineering. Next, plans for making any necessary changes have to be put together and bids need to be solicited for contractors in the event that some special work needs to be done that the USAF is incapable of doing. The engines then need to be tested in the configuration that they will operate in, using any upgraded controls and such. This process just takes a lot of time. The F-35 contracts started in about 1995, and the F35 did not enter service until 2015, so 20 years or so, and even then, when the F-35 was put into service, it was incapable of meeting the original contract goals (and still is, and will never meet contract goals.)

[@sophdog1678]

Many years ago, I dreamt I was flying a B-52 - solo - and I remember all I could think of was how beautifully it handled. Amazing to see the type still in service after so long.

[@rodeleon2875]

when they emptied the alert pads in a matter of minutes during exercises, our barracks shook. after a couple years i got used to it and didn't even really notice.

[@bertg.6056]

These RR engines are off the shelf, and have been installed and performing in bizjets for years.

[@jeffrey1312]

That's the real secret of military aircraft engines. Only fighter jets have special engines. Most military aircraft have standard commercial engines that have been renamed. That's a good thing, not a bad thing.

[@bertg.6056]

@@jeffrey1312 Exactly ! Not exactly industry-changing, is it?

[@williamzk9083]

This started as a joint venture the BMW Rolls Royce BR-715. It was good to see BMW get back into aviation engines and jet engines which it pioneered. Rolls Royce Brought out BMW and of course Rolls Royce brought out Allison in 1992. It will need at least 560 engines to reequipped every B-52 so I imagine they will make about 1000 plus spares. I assume much of the engine will be made in the USA certainly final assembly.

[@smiley3012]

Yet they charge the military top tier dollar.

[@bertg.6056]

@@smiley3012 Are you thinking a discount for Uncle Sammy?

[@MyScotty7]

When I take a flight and see Rolls Royce engines on my plane I know it's a safe flight!

[@fred1092]

When I was in the sixth grade my class went to Blytheville, AR which was a SAC base at the time. We got to go out on the tarmac and look at them. Huge! Really awesome planes.

[@Bill-sp8kb]

Won't change the aviation industry, but they'll do wonders for the B-52.

[@sgttim8617]

My father, a Crew Chief, Involved in the Berlin Airlift, Woulda' been So...Proud, Too see thes new engines on the "Buff". He Remembered when the US Bought "Rolls Royce- Engines in the later years of WW2, to Put them on P-51- Mustangs ! It was only one of 2- Models of Propeller-Driven Aircraft, that could Take Down a " Jet - MiG", during the Vietnam War !

[@airbrushken5339]

I'm surprised ... as they closed all three Air Force Bases in Michigan, 2 of which were B-52 Strategic Air Command Bases and Selfridge, which was the oldest active Base that had every branch of the US Military located there, plus a large housing area, including housing for "Wives in Waiting". I left the US Army (5th Army) from Selfridge in 1979 to take residence in Australia as a Teacher and I retired here. I remember lines of them at Wurtsmith Air Force Base in Oscoda, Michigan ... Interesting post.

[@user-gh2ff3yn4j]

Been hearing about this for years.I have yet to see it come to pass.

[@dennisallen8333]

To change out the engines was a no brainer!

[@davidchristensen6908]

Wow, what a bargain the citizen got when the military authorized these planes. Oh yes lots of money spent, these will make 100 years. I wish I could be alive to see that. We will see.

[@michaeldelaney7271]

A little update on the B-52 updates/re-engine program. I've recently learned that the entire program is predicted to cost over $48 Billion dollars. If a new aircraft were being acquired instead, it would already have modern avionics, sensors, etc. Assume the B-52 upgrades (including new engines) will cost $50 Billion and the B-21 cost is $600 Million (currently $550 Million). So, now the comparison is 76 Antique B-52's (with some new equipment & engines) vs. 83 new B-21's (that are all new and have no fatigue issues). If the USAF doesn't need all the advanced features of the B-21 to do the B-52's mission, maybe they could procure a "reduced capability" model Raider. A B-21L (Lite)? For $550 Million, they could have 90 B-21L's. And, the B-52 still uses 8 engines, has a 5 (or 6) man crew, along with the Radar Cross Section (RCS) of a VLB (Very Large Barn). The B-21 uses 2 engines, 2 crew and is very "Stealthy" (low RCS). This B-52 upgrade program seems to be just more corporate welfare.

[@sweynforkbeardtraindude]

My Pops drove a BUFF from 1955-1959. His grandson, my nephew is in the photo at 6:57 of this video. Pretty damn cool!

[@frankgordon8829]

In Vietnam there were TWO weapons that could not only scare the shit out of even the FRIENDLY troop but the enemy as well. ONE, was the battleship! It threw a projectile as big AND as heavy as a Volkswagen. When it hit, it decimated an area as big or bigger than a CITY BLOCK! The second, was the B52. You didn't even know you were about to go into eternity! They were SO HIGH, you never heard them! There were a few enemies who, by sheer luck survived & when U.S. troops came upon them, they were bleeding from the ears & sometime the eyes! They were in total shock. You look at the swath of devastation & it was hundreds of yards wide & 1/2 mile long. Those were called "Arclight strikes." Even when the Vietnamese retreated to the HUNDREDS of miles of tunnels (which provided good protection from artillery), they were NEVER safe. Hundreds died in those tunnels. By direct hits or the pressure wave that exploded their ears & even heart! There are young pilots flying those that their GRANDFATHER flew the same planes!

[@ronhat-nx6yq]

With today's missile and detection systems, I would think the B52 would be a flying duck.

[@marknicholson2281]

No matter what improvements are made in missiles there will always be improvements in EW tech to protect these. It’s been the case since the 70s. Vietnam had SAMs but B-52s conducted bombing raids. Over 200 B-52s flew in Operation Linebaker. Over 250 SA-2s launched. Just 12 B-52s lost with 9 damaged. That’s 12 missiles a kill and just 1% loss rate and 20,000 tons of bombs dropped. As missiles develop so does EW and anti-missile technology. A B52 has a dedicated EW crew member and a large amount of EW equipment that is unable to be carried in smaller aircraft. And they won’t be alone USAF will obtain domination of the airspace before the Buffs are sent in. Which side has the upper hand in the technology in any future conflict is far from certain.

[@JanPeterson]

@@marknicholson2281 Plus, with stand off weapons, the B-52 doesn't have to be anywhere near the target.

[@georgespalding7640]

Living in Hemet back in the 60s, I remember the B-52's on their practice runs from March Air Force Base flying over the valley almost every day with regularity. We called them the Angels of Death because we knew what their purpose was and we knew what they were designed to carry and deliver. Thank God they never were used for their original intent or I wouldn't be here commenting in this thread. March Air Force Base was one of the primary targets of the Soviet Union in the event of nuclear war.

[@MrHistorian123]

The B52 is obsolescent. The airframes are now getting close to the end of their life and an engine upgrade isn't going to change that. It also has the radar cross section of a small galaxy and would be easy pickings for any half-modern air defence system.

[@Davethreshold]

My late friend Rob was a B-52 Jet Mechanic. His security clearance was just under, or equal to the President.

[@bellis872]

I don’t care what others may think, but I thoroughly believe the B-52s are BAD ASS airplanes!!!

[@deltavee2]

The BUFF came by it's name honestly but watching them moving down the runway with the wings still low over the runway they look like beautiful pissed-off hawks (or eagles for y'all) with a bad attitude. Those new RR P-130 engines will push them well past the Mach .8 they are currently capable of. They are badasses each and every one matched only by the equally badass crews that fly them, some of them third generation BUFF crew. Long and strong may they fly, constant and reliable warriors in the continued defence of democracy. They fight for and are a symbol of the free world. They fly and fight for us all, the many countries that love and admire the U.S.

[@geoffgeoff143]

I notice they aren't replacing the wiper blades

[@I.M.A.Panther3619]

😂🤣😅😂

[@uingaeoc3905]

@@I.M.A.Panther3619 Yes! and that will be designated as B52K so as to not cause confusion!

[@eagle2019]

Not needed with the new RainX dispensers!!

[@nordan00]

I got in those things when they were 30 years old. I got out of those things 32 years ago. I cannot believe that they’re projected to go for another 30 years. Statistically, it’s highly likely that they’re gonna outlast me by at least a decade or two!

[@martinschneider7130]

I thought, that this could still wait some 25 years. The First 100 years are still Not over !

[@venturefanatic9262]

Change the Industry is a stretch, but changing it's history isn't. Imagine these things lasting 100+ years?

[@hawklord100]

RR engines, it is going to be a winner for sure

[@hughjass-pz3cp]

yeah, islamist engines.

[@B-A-L]

​@@hughjass-pz3cpWtf are you on about?

[@nathd1748]

​@@hughjass-pz3cpWTF you on about?

[@Thewaldo12345]

I was on the baseball team at LSU Shreveport when 911 happened. We were at practice when the sky seemingly went black with all of the fleet in the air.

[@frankbaine3918]

Rolls Royce engines saved the P-51 Mustang from mediocrity and enabled it to protect US B-17s from the Luftwaffe pretty much all the way into Germany and back. So yeah!

[@faschwank]

Hey robot voice man, the Army didn't adopt the B-52. It was the Air Force. Get your facts straight.

[@Thomas-em9du]

In the 60s Pratt and Whitney had a B52 on loan to test their JT9 series engine. That engine eventually powered the Boeing 747 and C5 cargo aircraft. I was weird to see the B-52 flying over Connecticut with one large test engine and 3 sets the TF33 engines😊

[@chrissmith7669]

The reengining is hardly groundbreaking. Take on off the shelf engine and make it fit the existing hole

[@shenmisheshou7002]

It is considerably more complicated than that. All of the engine control systems have to be re-done and the provisions for the software controls that are typical of most of these modern engines has to be incorporated into the B-52.

[@chrissmith7669]

@@shenmisheshou7002 but it’s hardly going to change the industry.

[@shenmisheshou7002]

@@chrissmith7669 No, nothing here but business as usual. Cleary the channel pimped up the title.

[@ianjardine7324]

Another important factor in keeping the eight engine design is redundancy the last thing the air force wants is a plane going down in unfriendly areas due to engine failure or damage and due to it's size the Buff has limited option for landing even in friendly territory. Two engines is fine for a commercial jet which can land almost anywhere if they lose half their thrust the Buff would have to lose four engines to have the same urgency.

[@richardbarber4444]

It has been noted that due to cross-talk between paired engines air intake if one of the pair shuts down so too must the other. This observation from a retired aircraft designer when we were both contemplating design , face to face, of Concord!

[@richard-in-willesden7945]

The new engines, which aren't really a "new" design, have been extensively tried and tested in commercial aircraft and should be very reliable, much more so than the engines they are replacing. The B-52 needs eight engines because the wing sits too low to the ground to accommodate four more modern larger diameter high-bypass engines. In deciding to proceed with eight new smaller diameter engines the design team appear to have discounted the possibility of jacking up the undercarriage so that the whole aircraft sits higher above the ground, thus enabling four larger engines to be utilised. An alternative strategy would have been to move the engines forward of the wing to enable them to be located higher up, but Boeing tried that with the 737 Max and it didn't end well. If it had been possible to use four larger and more powerful engines, such as the PW2000 used on Boeing C-17s and 757s, this would probably have been preferable to using eight smaller diameter and less powerful RR F130 engines, so the RR F130s are a bit of a compromise solution.

[@ianjardine7324]

@@richard-in-willesden7945 All good points but I think you're right about the designers looking at the 737 incidents and saying not only no but hell no. If there's an option that achieves the performance and economy targets without risking unforeseen safety issues and expensive structural changes the decision becomes a no brainer.

[@paolozampieri2691]

USAF is never shy to spend money…when it’s not theirs!

[@uliwehner]

ok? are suggesting we make the USAF a profit center? hiring them out to the highest bidder for pay?

[@The-KP]

4:10 to hear about the new engines

[@warhorse03826]

Grandpa Buff gonna get warp engines and be in service for a thousand years.

[@NotALot-xm6gz]

Grandpa Buff is still going to be in service in 2424 with ion cannons and trans-ward drive.

[@armadillotoe]

The B-52 has to be the best bang for the buck of any aircraft. (see what I did there?)

[@raywhitehead730]

Upgrading engines or even new manufacturing engines for a airplane is not a new idea. I bet the Rolls Royce engines will do well. I remember changing RR engines on the AV8-A, Harrier. In those early days, engines were changed every 250 flight hours. We were constantly changing engines. A lot of work.

[@MrBobTracey]

Check your MIc audio. Frequent pops. Consider editing out breaths as well and less compression.

[@Gary-zq3pz]

How about shifting some of the defense production crews over to the airliner division? It'd be nice if they were built more like the military planes.

[@williampotter2098]

I'm very pro USAF. I was a pilot there. But the government designing military aircraft would double their cost.

[@user-kj5td9hd3s]

These were used during Vietnam. When they flew over all you could see was a white vapor trail.

[@kitemanmusic]

Black smoke means poor combustion. A mock-up picture of a 4 engine B52 would have been interesting. This plane would be cheaper to maintain.

[@eagle2019]

Unless it was a cartridge start!!! A four engine change would have cost substantially more due to airframe modifications and would require months more of downtime. The RR conversion is almost a modular change with the exception of the changes in the cockpit.

[@tedlesher2884]

Black smoke was mostly from water injection used on takeoff with earlier models.

[@JTV84]

it's a shame other cold war era jets haven't fared so well, like the british V bombers.

[@JanPeterson]

Will the new engines still be able to do a cartridge start? Or are they looking at adding an APU to the B-52?

[@gringoviejo1935]

given that the new engines have the same thrust as the old ones, how can this re-engining allow shorter runway take-off runs?

[@sebrofc]

As long as it still screams like a pack of demons escaping from the depts of hell it's got my vote 🤣

[@awatt]

It'll do that but in British

[@IbocC64]

Yes, because we should trust the advice of Boeing. Sure...

[@NathanDean79]

The B-52’s have been re winged and had new engines installed. Gone are the days when a bomber flys over a target and opens its bombs bays and 30-40 bombs fall out or even flying over a target and dropping one nuclear bomb. The US has around 750 Air Lauched Cruise missiles with 150 kt warheads that have a range of 1800 miles. The B-52 Carrie’s these and can carry non nuclear missiles and satalite and laser guided bombs. In a nuclear war ever B-52 we have will be loaded with these cruise missiles and every B1 bomber we have will be loaded with them too. They will fly with fighter escorts to a point on the map well outside of air defense range and fire these missiles. The B-2 and especially the B-21 can fly over a target and drop a bomb on it. Even our nuclear gravity bombs can now have a JDAM kit put on them that will enable the plane to drop The bomb about 30-40 miles From the target and it will be guided to the target.

[@jimorr820]

The army doesn't fly the B-52, the Air Force does. Your credibility just went down the drain.

[@glennridsdale577]

And “the army” certainly didn’t build them!

[@vobchopper]

Don't be so pedantic

[@user-su2sh9ve7g]

@@glennridsdale577 True, Boeing built the planes when 'they' knew how to build a airplane before the merger with McConnell-Douglass...

[@williampotter2098]

@@vobchopper Yeah, the truth is so pissy. Go back to your sandbox.

[@mountainadventures7346]

The USAF was born from the US Army Air Corps. After WW2…. That was the badge at the beginning of the video?

[@MrYort13]

So how is that wire bundle holding up? Oh its not, ever see a tie strap after 15 years? The engine if far from the issue. How are the fittings on the gear? This is just another hole to dump BILLIONs into.

[@RightWingNutter]

So same thrust, much greater fuel economy. Plus new radar, likely ECM, and avionics. I presume the newest glide bombs and cruise missiles will will work also.

[@kevint9702]

Isn't the US military supposed to use products made in the USA?

[@marklittle8805]

Rolls Royce has an American division. It isn't like it is a Russian company or something.

[@rickwalker2]

They use lots of products from other countries.

[@johnbrobston1334]

(a) Rolls has a US manufacturing facility. (b) NATO treaties require that the US use a certain amount of equipment from other NATO members. I remember my boss kept telling me "Pad the bid, the Navy doesn't want a British propeller". Guess what . . .

[@ericwelsh4853]

So, I think we're never going to see a four-engine B-52. I really wanted that to happen.

[@fw1421]

That would require an engine like those on a Boeing 737 Max. The B-52 wing moves up and down a LOT. That would put the engines very close to the ground on taxi/take off/landing. The smaller diameter engines are higher up,safer and already a very proven design. Look what happened with the 737 Max 8. They had to move it forward and up changing a lot of parameters,so much that they had to make big software changes to the flight data computers because the 737 is a fly by wire design,the B-52 is not. These smaller diameter engine were the best way to go without having to redesign the whole wing too.

[@denali9449]

This has been covered multiple times by the USAF and Boeing. Biggest reason to stay with the eight engines is stability. The plane is already limited in yaw control as a result of reducing the height of the vertical stabilizer years ago. If one engine on a wing fails with an eight engine plane the corresponding thrust reduction is only 25% on that wing. On a four engine plane the reduction would be 50%. The other issues have to do with the way the electrical and mechanical systems are designed. The amount of rewiring and new hydraulic plumbing to accommodate the four engine design was cost prohibitive.

[@Thwarptide]

As long as the B52 has a valuable place in the fleet yet Considering the fly excellent weapons platform, the amazing longevity of the airframe, I simply have no clue why they do not build more while incorporating all the modern upgrades.

[@KlausErmecke]

Would you mind go away from these bombastic announcements?

[@gottfriedheumesser1994]

No, they are stuck to that nonsense!

[@williampotter2098]

@KlausErmecke Would you use proper English and take the time to explain what your seeming whiny complaint is?

[@williampotter2098]

@@gottfriedheumesser1994 What are you whining about? I was a USAF pilot and had a career flying jets. This is important news to people. If you haven't been paying attention, Russia and China with help from North Korea have been restarting the Cold War after seeing a weak president in the US. We need this airplane and it needs new motors. Is it that hard for you to understand? I'm very interested in new development in this story.

[@gottfriedheumesser1994]

@@williampotter2098 The titles of the episodes on this channel are 'not extremely wise'. and your postings too. I also have several thousand flight hours and landings in my 'sitting organ'. You seem to be the typical US citizen who is hated all over the world because of his feeling superior to all others and having little knowledge of what's outside the USA. Keep your wisdom for yourself!

[@gottfriedheumesser1994]

@@williampotter2098 Donald Trump and Boris Johnson: Their hair has the color of straw, and what's below is not different.

[@seannash4695]

I fully support this choice but please try to keep the black powder quick start feature.

[@jamesthompson7969]

No water assist take-off...No longer a 1550 gallon water tank needed? We had water on the 'G' model...(Crew Chief Grand Forks, North Dakota.)

[@cosmovg9955]

The buff is forever 😂

[@tomrichter244]

Any idea about where these upgrades will be accomplished

[@Tbobelak]

Just don't let Boeing redesign the doors

[@andrewrae6755]

Rolls-Royce Holdings plc, a British multinational company, owns Rolls-Royce, (NOT North America,) the business that designs, manufactures, and distributes power systems for aviation and other industries. Rolls-Royce Holdings was incorporated in February 2011. As of April 2021, the top 12 shareholders of Rolls-Royce Holdings plc owned 52% of the company, with no single shareholder having significant control. Some of the shareholders include:

[@MegaMesozoic]

....and?

[@FlyFishMike_]

Boy howdy I wish YT could ban all AI content and AI - narrated videos. At any rate, I remember staying on base in Fort Worth, TX with family when certain B-52s were testing out 4 larger turbofan engines instead of the 8 regular engines. They were doing 'touch-n-go' landings and takeoffs. I was amazed at how much quieter the larger 4 engines were, but it didn't seem like a real B-52 and I'm glad they stuck with the original 8-engine design.