Just wondering, how were B-52G bombers supposed to find targets in
anti-ship strikes? Were they to use their own sensors or depend on
offboard targeting?

Soviet naval bombers had big sea search radars, but B-52G didn't seem
to have one...

http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/AGM_84D_Harpoon_Missile.html

In article >,
(KDR) wrote:

> Just wondering, how were B-52G bombers supposed to find targets in
> anti-ship strikes? Were they to use their own sensors or depend on
> offboard targeting?

I'm assuming the B-52 would get some AWACS or Hawkeye input for
off-board targeting. Unless there's some classified stuff we dunno
about, I don't believe the B-52 has a targeting radar -- like you said.
I think there is some infrared search capability, but I have no idea if
that targeting info can be given to the missles.

"John C. Baker" > wrote in message

> In article >,
> (KDR) wrote:
>
> > Just wondering, how were B-52G bombers supposed to find targets in
> > anti-ship strikes? Were they to use their own sensors or depend on
> > offboard targeting?
>
> I'm assuming the B-52 would get some AWACS or Hawkeye input for
> off-board targeting. Unless there's some classified stuff we dunno
> about, I don't believe the B-52 has a targeting radar -- like you
> said. I think there is some infrared search capability, but I have no
> idea if that targeting info can be given to the missles.

The B-52 hs the APQ-156 radar, the same radar once carried in the A-6E TRAM,
which was regared as a top-notch radar bomber. That radar should be more
that sufficient for surface search against naval targets.

However, I expect they would get a steer from naval surveillence aircraft
(P-3s, for example) to get within range of the target.

--�
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

> > > Just wondering, how were B-52G bombers supposed to find targets in
> > > anti-ship strikes? Were they to use their own sensors or depend on
> > > offboard targeting?
<snip>

Also, remember that the Harpoon can be programmed to fly a course and search
for targets. You don't need to have a lock on one before you launch--a
simple bearing X, range Y, motion Z from another source (satellite, P-3,
E-2, etc.) should suffice.

Thanks for the reply. How about the attack profile? Were they to
approach target below the radar horizon? And at what height were they
supposed to launch Harpoon?



"Thomas Schoene" > wrote in message t>...
> "John C. Baker" > wrote in message
>
> > In article >,
> > (KDR) wrote:
> >
> > > Just wondering, how were B-52G bombers supposed to find targets in
> > > anti-ship strikes? Were they to use their own sensors or depend on
> > > offboard targeting?
> >
> > I'm assuming the B-52 would get some AWACS or Hawkeye input for
> > off-board targeting. Unless there's some classified stuff we dunno
> > about, I don't believe the B-52 has a targeting radar -- like you
> > said. I think there is some infrared search capability, but I have no
> > idea if that targeting info can be given to the missles.
>
> The B-52 hs the APQ-156 radar, the same radar once carried in the A-6E TRAM,
> which was regared as a top-notch radar bomber. That radar should be more
> that sufficient for surface search against naval targets.
>
> However, I expect they would get a steer from naval surveillence aircraft
> (P-3s, for example) to get within range of the target.

"KDR" > wrote in message
m
> Thanks for the reply. How about the attack profile? Were they to
> approach target below the radar horizon? And at what height were they
> supposed to launch Harpoon?

No comment. Remember, B-52s might still have to fly that mission (unlikely
but possible).

--�
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

In article >,
says...
> Just wondering, how were B-52G bombers supposed to find targets in
> anti-ship strikes? Were they to use their own sensors or depend on
> offboard targeting?
>
> Soviet naval bombers had big sea search radars, but B-52G didn't seem
> to have one...
>
> http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/AGM_84D_Harpoon_Missile.html
>

Don't teh G models carry an EO system in the nose ?


--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

Yes, the B-52G did carry ASQ-151 Electro-optical Viewing System (EVS),
which consisted of AVQ-22 LLLTV and AAQ-6 FLIR. But the main purpose
of this system was to prevent the bomber from flying into the ground
at night.



Tank Fixer > wrote in message >...
> In article >,
> says...
> > Just wondering, how were B-52G bombers supposed to find targets in
> > anti-ship strikes? Were they to use their own sensors or depend on
> > offboard targeting?
> >
> > Soviet naval bombers had big sea search radars, but B-52G didn't seem
> > to have one...
> >
> > http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/AGM_84D_Harpoon_Missile.html
> >
>
> Don't teh G models carry an EO system in the nose ?

>> Just wondering, how were B-52G bombers supposed to find targets in
>> anti-ship strikes? Were they to use their own sensors or depend on
>> offboard targeting?

Just like the H model when it picked up the mission, the G model was going to
work with naval assets that had the ability to classify vessels (we usually
worked with S-3s). The BUFF does have an ability (particularly over water) to
use its radar to find ships, but no way of knowing if its a Kashin Class
destroyer or the Love Boat.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

On 12 Oct 2003 11:15:12 GMT, (BUFDRVR) wrote:

>>> Just wondering, how were B-52G bombers supposed to find targets in
>>> anti-ship strikes? Were they to use their own sensors or depend on
>>> offboard targeting?
>
>Just like the H model when it picked up the mission, the G model was going to
>work with naval assets that had the ability to classify vessels (we usually
>worked with S-3s). The BUFF does have an ability (particularly over water) to
>use its radar to find ships, but no way of knowing if its a Kashin Class
>destroyer or the Love Boat.
>
>
>BUFDRVR
>
>"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
>everyone on Bear Creek"

Well, blowing up either one would count as a service to humanity :-)

Al Minyard

Pop quiz: When (date) was the first Harpoon launched off a B-52? ;-)


"BUFDRVR" > wrote in message
...
> >> Just wondering, how were B-52G bombers supposed to find targets in
> >> anti-ship strikes? Were they to use their own sensors or depend on
> >> offboard targeting?
>
> Just like the H model when it picked up the mission, the G model was going
to
> work with naval assets that had the ability to classify vessels (we
usually
> worked with S-3s). The BUFF does have an ability (particularly over water)
to
> use its radar to find ships, but no way of knowing if its a Kashin Class
> destroyer or the Love Boat.
>
>
> BUFDRVR
>
> "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
harelips
> everyone on Bear Creek"

>Pop quiz: When (date) was the first Harpoon launched off a B-52? ;-)

Sounds like someone can use their log book to answer this ;)

I'd be happy to get the year right....I'll say 1983 and for the hell of it, 15
April 1983???


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

ROFL!! No fair, you must know. It was about 1430 on 16 Mar 83. Excellent
guess! :-))

We hit the target, a destroyer full of styrofoam (or so we were told), dead
center from 52 miles. Lots of fun. During the time our crew was tasked
with Harpoon testing (along with another Mather crew and one BAD crew) we
tested the new BLUTE weapon retard system at EDW. The first drop was done
by our crew on that one too. First drop....not successful. Only about 10
out of, hmmm 48 (is that a full load BD?) worked.

Regards,

JB

"BUFDRVR" > wrote in message
...
> >Pop quiz: When (date) was the first Harpoon launched off a B-52? ;-)
>
> Sounds like someone can use their log book to answer this ;)
>
> I'd be happy to get the year right....I'll say 1983 and for the hell of
it, 15
> April 1983???
>
>
> BUFDRVR
>
> "Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
harelips
> everyone on Bear Creek"

When I was TDY to Eglin in 1976 testing AIM-7s on F-15s, there was a
B-52 crew testing some air-to-water missile. I'm thinking it was a
Harpoon, but it must not have been. Do you know what it was? IIRC, the
target was much like you describe on your test.

Jim Thomas

Jim Baker wrote:
> ROFL!! No fair, you must know. It was about 1430 on 16 Mar 83. Excellent
> guess! :-))
>
> We hit the target, a destroyer full of styrofoam (or so we were told), dead
> center from 52 miles. Lots of fun. During the time our crew was tasked
> with Harpoon testing (along with another Mather crew and one BAD crew) we
> tested the new BLUTE weapon retard system at EDW. The first drop was done
> by our crew on that one too. First drop....not successful. Only about 10
> out of, hmmm 48 (is that a full load BD?) worked.
>
> Regards,
>
> JB
>
> "BUFDRVR" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>>Pop quiz: When (date) was the first Harpoon launched off a B-52? ;-)
>>
>>Sounds like someone can use their log book to answer this ;)
>>
>>I'd be happy to get the year right....I'll say 1983 and for the hell of
>
> it, 15
>
>>April 1983???
>>
>>
>>BUFDRVR
>>
>>"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
>
> harelips
>
>>everyone on Bear Creek"
>
>
>

No, sorry, I don't have any idea what that could have been Jim.

JB

"Jim Thomas" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> When I was TDY to Eglin in 1976 testing AIM-7s on F-15s, there was a
> B-52 crew testing some air-to-water missile. I'm thinking it was a
> Harpoon, but it must not have been. Do you know what it was? IIRC, the
> target was much like you describe on your test.
>
> Jim Thomas
>
> Jim Baker wrote:
> > ROFL!! No fair, you must know. It was about 1430 on 16 Mar 83.
Excellent
> > guess! :-))
> >
> > We hit the target, a destroyer full of styrofoam (or so we were told),
dead
> > center from 52 miles. Lots of fun. During the time our crew was tasked
> > with Harpoon testing (along with another Mather crew and one BAD crew)
we
> > tested the new BLUTE weapon retard system at EDW. The first drop was
done
> > by our crew on that one too. First drop....not successful. Only about
10
> > out of, hmmm 48 (is that a full load BD?) worked.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > JB
> >
> > "BUFDRVR" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>>Pop quiz: When (date) was the first Harpoon launched off a B-52? ;-)
> >>
> >>Sounds like someone can use their log book to answer this ;)
> >>
> >>I'd be happy to get the year right....I'll say 1983 and for the hell of
> >
> > it, 15
> >
> >>April 1983???
> >>
> >>
> >>BUFDRVR
> >>
> >>"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it
> >
> > harelips
> >
> >>everyone on Bear Creek"
> >
> >
> >
>

On Sun, 12 Oct 2003 18:25:20 -0500, Alan Minyard >
wrote:


>
>Well, blowing up either one would count as a service to humanity :-)
>
>

In the case of the latter, I'd recommend deploying a full wing of buffs,
just to make sure.


greg

--
$ReplyAddress =~ s#\@.*$##; # Delete everything after the '@'
The Following is a true story.....
Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty.

> (is that a full load BD?)

Believe it or not, its kind of difficult to say what a full load of AGM-84D is
on a BUFF. There are enough stations for 6 per pylon, for a total of 12.
However, there were engine harmonics problems on the G model J-57 engines that
affected the two rear shoulder stations. So...the G model was only certified
to carry 4 per pylon for a total of 8. Now, the H model has entirely different
engines and one could reasonably suspect, entirely different harmonics, however
for years and years we were stuck with 8 total. About the time they started to
seriously discuss removing the weapon from the BUFF inventory (after spending
millions to upgrade the B-52 Offensive software as to permit any B-52 to shoot
Harpoon), they also started discussing new tests for the H model TF-33
harmoincs. I never heard anything beyond that and realistically, the weapon
should just be removed from the BUFF inventory. If there's a ship to be sunk
nowadays, the US Navy doesn't need to, and won't, call on the USAF to sink it
with an AGM-84D.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

In article >,
says...
> Yes, the B-52G did carry ASQ-151 Electro-optical Viewing System (EVS),
> which consisted of AVQ-22 LLLTV and AAQ-6 FLIR. But the main purpose
> of this system was to prevent the bomber from flying into the ground
> at night.
>

Could one use it to perform a search from altitude at night ?



>
>
> Tank Fixer > wrote in message >...
> > In article >,
> > says...
> > > Just wondering, how were B-52G bombers supposed to find targets in
> > > anti-ship strikes? Were they to use their own sensors or depend on
> > > offboard targeting?
> > >
> > > Soviet naval bombers had big sea search radars, but B-52G didn't seem
> > > to have one...
> > >
> > > http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/AGM_84D_Harpoon_Missile.html
> > >
> >
> > Don't teh G models carry an EO system in the nose ?
>

--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

In article >,
says...
> >> Just wondering, how were B-52G bombers supposed to find targets in
> >> anti-ship strikes? Were they to use their own sensors or depend on
> >> offboard targeting?
>
> Just like the H model when it picked up the mission, the G model was going to
> work with naval assets that had the ability to classify vessels (we usually
> worked with S-3s). The BUFF does have an ability (particularly over water) to
> use its radar to find ships, but no way of knowing if its a Kashin Class
> destroyer or the Love Boat.
>

One one hand you have a warship of a potentially hostile nation.

On the other you had a threat to all of mankind.



--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

No. The EVS was for low level only and was only a good eye outside some of
the time; when conditions were right and it was working properly. It
definitely helped at night, the FLIR that is, and the steerable TV was only
good in the day, when conditions were right and it was working properly.
The search equipment was the radar.

JB

"Tank Fixer" > wrote in message
k.net...
> In article >,
> says...
> > Yes, the B-52G did carry ASQ-151 Electro-optical Viewing System (EVS),
> > which consisted of AVQ-22 LLLTV and AAQ-6 FLIR. But the main purpose
> > of this system was to prevent the bomber from flying into the ground
> > at night.
> >
>
> Could one use it to perform a search from altitude at night ?
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > Tank Fixer > wrote in message
>...
> > > In article >,
> > > says...
> > > > Just wondering, how were B-52G bombers supposed to find targets in
> > > > anti-ship strikes? Were they to use their own sensors or depend on
> > > > offboard targeting?
> > > >
> > > > Soviet naval bombers had big sea search radars, but B-52G didn't
seem
> > > > to have one...
> > > >
> > > > http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/AGM_84D_Harpoon_Missile.html
> > > >
> > >
> > > Don't teh G models carry an EO system in the nose ?
> >
>
> --
> When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
> variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

In article >,
says...
> No. The EVS was for low level only and was only a good eye outside some of
> the time; when conditions were right and it was working properly. It
> definitely helped at night, the FLIR that is, and the steerable TV was only
> good in the day, when conditions were right and it was working properly.
> The search equipment was the radar.
>

Thanks, I wasn't familiar with the systems other than seeing them on the
nose of aircraft at various airshows.




> JB
>
> "Tank Fixer" > wrote in message
> k.net...
> > In article >,
> > says...
> > > Yes, the B-52G did carry ASQ-151 Electro-optical Viewing System (EVS),
> > > which consisted of AVQ-22 LLLTV and AAQ-6 FLIR. But the main purpose
> > > of this system was to prevent the bomber from flying into the ground
> > > at night.
> > >
> >
> > Could one use it to perform a search from altitude at night ?
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Tank Fixer > wrote in message
> >...
> > > > In article >,
> > > > says...
> > > > > Just wondering, how were B-52G bombers supposed to find targets in
> > > > > anti-ship strikes? Were they to use their own sensors or depend on
> > > > > offboard targeting?
> > > > >
> > > > > Soviet naval bombers had big sea search radars, but B-52G didn't
> seem
> > > > > to have one...
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/AGM_84D_Harpoon_Missile.html
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Don't teh G models carry an EO system in the nose ?
> > >
> >
> > --
> > When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
> > variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.
>
>
>

--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.