Re: What is the range of the B-1B?

[user]

Easy, the endurance of the crew!!! I know there is no such thing as a
stupid question,,,except that one! The only mechanical limiting
factors would be servicing the consumables, (oil, oxygen, hydraulics,
etc..)just like any inflight refueling capable aircraft.


On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:04:56 -0800, Hobo > wrote:

>
>I think the range of the B-1B is supposed to be classified, but does
>anyone have any educated guesses?

[PosterBoy]

"Hobo" > wrote in message
...
>
> I think the range of the B-1B is supposed to be classified, but does
> anyone have any educated guesses?

One source lists it as 7,239 miles (unrefueled). Another has it at 7,455
miles (urf).
If I had to make an educated guess, I'd subtract the former from the
latter, add half the result to the former and estimate 2,347 miles
(urf)...then sit back and wait for the ARs to point out a math error!!!!

Cheers.

[Ragnar]

"Hobo" > wrote in message
...
>
> I think the range of the B-1B is supposed to be classified, but does
> anyone have any educated guesses?

Its air refuellable. Range is no longer relevant.

[SA]

"Hobo" > skrev i en meddelelse
...
>
> I think the range of the B-1B is supposed to be classified, but does
> anyone have any educated guesses?

According to the "B-1B Factbook" by Rockwell International, the range is
bestween 4425NM and 9466NM depending on payload, mission profile and tanker
support. 4425NM is for at ACM standoff mission, all at high level, with 16
ACM and no tanker support. The 9466NM is for a conventional mission with a
High-Low-High profile and 56 Mk-82 and KC-10 tanker support.

The factbook can be found on the B-1 page on www.fas.org.

Regards
Søren Augustesen

[Bjørnar]

"Ragnar" > wrote in :
> "Hobo" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> I think the range of the B-1B is supposed to be classified, but does
>> anyone have any educated guesses?
>
> Its air refuellable. Range is no longer relevant.

Wouldn't you agree that, althought perhaps not as significantly
for long-range aircraft, dependency on inflight refueling is
very relevant?


Regards...

[Ragnar]

"Bjørnar" > wrote in message
...
> "Ragnar" > wrote in :
> > "Hobo" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >> I think the range of the B-1B is supposed to be classified, but does
> >> anyone have any educated guesses?
> >
> > Its air refuellable. Range is no longer relevant.
>
> Wouldn't you agree that, althought perhaps not as significantly
> for long-range aircraft, dependency on inflight refueling is
> very relevant?

Perhaps, but it is irrelevant in the context of the original question.

[robert arndt]

"SA" > wrote in message >...
> "Hobo" > skrev i en meddelelse
> ...
> >
> > I think the range of the B-1B is supposed to be classified, but does
> > anyone have any educated guesses?
>
> According to the "B-1B Factbook" by Rockwell International, the range is
> bestween 4425NM and 9466NM depending on payload, mission profile and tanker
> support. 4425NM is for at ACM standoff mission, all at high level, with 16
> ACM and no tanker support. The 9466NM is for a conventional mission with a
> High-Low-High profile and 56 Mk-82 and KC-10 tanker support.
>
> The factbook can be found on the B-1 page on www.fas.org.
>
> Regards
> Søren Augustesen


With standard fuel load, according to:

"International Directory of Military Aircraft 2002/2003"- 6,475 NM*

"Pocket Guide to Military Aircraft"- 7,455 miles

"Janes Recognition Guide" (latest edition)- 6,475 NM

"Aircraft of the World Complete Guide"- 7,239 miles

"Directory of Military Aircraft of the World"- 7,455 miles



*Int. NM= 1.150779 statue miles= 7,451 miles

I think it is safe to say that the 7,455 miles figure is correct.

Rob

[Leslie Swartz]

Not if you're the United States of America, it isn't.

Sorry about that; but true.

Steve Swartz

"Bjørnar" > wrote in message
...
> "Ragnar" > wrote in :
> > "Hobo" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
> >> I think the range of the B-1B is supposed to be classified, but does
> >> anyone have any educated guesses?
> >
> > Its air refuellable. Range is no longer relevant.
>
> Wouldn't you agree that, althought perhaps not as significantly
> for long-range aircraft, dependency on inflight refueling is
> very relevant?
>
>
> Regards...

[BUFDRVR]

>> I think the range of the B-1B is supposed to be classified, but does
>> anyone have any educated guesses?
>
>Its air refuellable. Range is no longer relevant.

Uhh, yes it is, very much so. The less tankers an airframe uses the easier the
air campaign planning and execution goes.


BUFDRVR

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

[BUFDRVR]

>> Wouldn't you agree that, althought perhaps not as significantly
>> for long-range aircraft, dependency on inflight refueling is
>> very relevant?

>Not if you're the United States of America, it isn't.
>

Why is that? Do we have unlimited tankers? How about unlimited ramp space to
put our tankers? I've got news for you, the OIF air campaign was driven solely
by tankers. Not bombs, bombers or fighters, but tankers, how many and where.

>Sorry about that; but true.

You're wrong.


BUFDRVR

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

[Michael Kelly]

Hobo wrote:
> I think the range of the B-1B is supposed to be classified, but does
> anyone have any educated guesses?

Depends on mission profile, fuel load and weapons load. That said
during OEF the Bone were flying 1000 miles to the target zone and
loitering for multiple hours then flying back.

Michael Kelly
Bone Maintainer