B-52 landing

[PR3D4TOR]

Some people here seem to think of this B-52 as just another plane that couldn't possibly be worth risking lives for. This particular B-52 was on a test flight with Boeing test pilots and suffered a catastrophic structural failure in flight. With the B-52s forming the backbone of America's nuclear deterrent at the height of the Cold War (this incident happened a year or two after the Cuban missile crisis and just as American involvement in the Vietnam War started ramping up) getting that bird home so it could be studied was of the utmost importance. Clearly worth risking, or even willingly sacrificing lives for. There was a lot more at stake in those days than the lives of an air crew and potential civilian lives on the ground. Nations were at stake. The world was at stake. And that Boeing crew knew and understood that.

[PR3D4TOR]

No, I'm with you. I can understand a reprimand for not following the procedures, but I too can't fault a perfect ditch that brought not only both pilots down safely, but saved the jet too.

Exactly. Clearly an overreaction brought on by risk-aversion mentality and silly politics, and a terrible waste of talent. The pilot should have been given a slap on the wrist... and a promotion.

[Zimme83]

Some people here seem to think of this B-52 as just another plane that couldn't possibly be worth risking lives for. This particular B-52 was on a test flight with Boeing test pilots and suffered a catastrophic structural failure in flight. With the B-52s forming the backbone of America's nuclear deterrent at the height of the Cold War (this incident happened a year or two after the Cuban missile crisis and just as American involvement in the Vietnam War started ramping up) getting that bird home so it could be studied was of the utmost importance. Clearly worth risking, or even willingly sacrificing lives for. There was a lot more at stake in those days than the lives of an air crew and potential civilian lives on the ground. Nations were at stake. The world was at stake. And that Boeing crew knew and understood that.

And there is very little so support that claim, While the B-52 was indeed an important project they land it simply because they felt that they had enough control over the aircraft to perform a safe landing. He even said in the video that they prepared to abandon the aircraft but soon realized that the plane was controllable enough. It gave them time to take action in order to increase the level of control and finally to land. Thats how its work, first question is "do I/we have control over the aircraft?" If yes then you can stay on board a little longer and try to sort things out. Based on what he said in the video, they would have bailed if they had not felt that they could fly the plane safely.

[PR3D4TOR]

"Important project" ? ... That's the kind of historical ignorance I'm talking about. This was a USAF operational B-52 on loan to Boeing. One of hundreds of B-52s in service at the time. Hundreds of aircraft that were absolutely vital to the survival of the United States and were flying daily with live nuclear bombs on board 15 minutes away from Soviet airspace... All with a potentially fatal structural flaw. There was nothing safe about how they flew and landed that plane. It was a huge risk, but it was worth it, and it paid off. They would of course have abandoned the aircraft if it was uncontrollable. No good reason to sacrifice lives for nothing.

[Zimme83]

And also: the issues with structural fatigue seems to have been more of a concern for the expected life span of the B-52, not for the daily operation. in 1964 the B-52 had been fully operational for several years and the structural fatigue issues was not keeping the planes on the ground so its a bit overdramatic to claim that it was so important to save the plane that it was worth risking the lives of the crew and civilians. It was of course valuable to the engineers that they got the chance to study the plane but and a great achievement by the crew but there is no need to be a drama queen.

[PR3D4TOR]

That structural failure and that test flight had nothing to do with structural fatigue.

[PR3D4TOR]

I suggest you watch the video again. Especially this part: https://youtu.be/wclfY0Meruw?t=483

[Zimme83]

No, but the test was conducted due to the concerns over structural fatigue. There weren't a lot of B-52:s breaking apart and falling out of the sky. It was about planes being worn out faster than expected due to low level flights and that could affect their projected life span and increase the cost of maintenance. But flight operations wasn't affected and neither their capabilities to deliver a nuclear strike.

[Zimme83]

I suggest you watch the video again. Especially this part: https://youtu.be/wclfY0Meruw?t=483

I havent disputed that either, i disputed your exaggerations of the importance of the test. You makes it sound like the entire future of the US depended on them landing that plane, a bit overdramatic.

In the 50.s and 60.s there were several jets that had issues with structural fatigue and/or failures due to limited experience and knowledge among aircraft engineers. The deHavilland Comet just fell out of the sky for no apparent reason until they found out about metal fatigue and there are more examples.

[PR3D4TOR]

No, but the test was conducted due to the concerns over structural fatigue.

Where do you get that from? The Boeing pilot tells us that their mission was to record the structural loads encountered on a low level sortie with special instruments installed to record the stresses exerted on various parts of the aircraft. This was unknown territory for Boeing and the USAF since the B-52 hadn't been designed for low level flying. To my knowledge the B-52 fleet was never grounded after 1957 right up to the end of the Cold War. It was too important and they kept it in the air no matter what. Like in this case where the whole fleet needed to have their tail structures strengthened. No wonder one out of seven B-52s produced were lost in accidents.

[PR3D4TOR]

You makes it sound like the entire future of the US depended on them landing that plane, a bit overdramatic.

Only in your head. The B-52 fleet was that important, and if there was a chance this bird and its valuable data could be salvaged they would take it, and they did. Regardless of the fate of this aircraft and its crew the B-52s would have kept on flying.

[Oldman731]

This was unknown territory for Boeing and the USAF since the B-52 hadn't been designed for low level flying.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ND3Q2_9zwpY

- oldman

[DaveBB]

B-52 tour given by actual B-52 flight crew.  Interesting that the pilot said the maximum speed was 470 knots.  He went on to say Mach .9. Max altitude was 47,000 feet, and unrefueled range is 4000 miles.

The B-52 had a highly accurate celestial navigation computer that was more accurate than the compass. It could even lock onto stars during the daytime.  Once three stars were locked on, the computer gave the actual heading of the plane. 

It also had an optical bombsite, but it wasn't as accurate as the radar bombsite.  The optical bombsite could be used to watch the bombs hit the target, or used to check the landing gear of the plane.

The pilot giving the tour of the upper deck of the aircraft said missions from Guam to Vietnam and back were normally 9 hours.  His longest mission was 26 hours.