B-2 Crash Guam February 2008 [Archive]

View Full Version : B-2 Crash Guam February 2008

PLMerite

July 15th 08, 09:05 PM

Story and more photos:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4273248.html

Raymond O'Hara

July 15th 08, 09:16 PM

"PLMerite" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> Story and more photos:
>
>
> http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4273248.html
>
>
B2s are cost more than their weight in gold is worth."stealth technology"
mostly consists of advanced avionics that manage control surfaces and flaps
that allow it to fly.
the reason the original flying wings were scraped was because they were very
unstable and they didn't have the computers to fix that.

PLMerite

July 15th 08, 09:37 PM

"Raymond O'Hara" > wrote in message
...
>
> "PLMerite" > wrote in message
> . ..
>>
>> Story and more photos:
>>
>>
>> http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4273248.html
>>
>>
> B2s are cost more than their weight in gold is worth."stealth technology"
> mostly consists of advanced avionics that manage control surfaces and
> flaps
> that allow it to fly.

Please tell me that English is not your primary language.

> the reason the original flying wings were scraped was because they were
> very
> unstable and they didn't have the computers to fix that.

Yeah, thanks for that.

Regards, PLMerite

--

"I flew the 109 almost 2,000 times. For me, there's nothing better, and of
course, there's always this rivalry between the 109 and the Spitfire. And I
am often asked: which plane I think is better. I tell them I shot down 10
Spitfires, and that's my answer."
- Major Hans-Ekkehard Bob JG 54, JG 51, JG 3, EJG 2, JV 44

Raymond O'Hara

July 15th 08, 09:48 PM

"PLMerite" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Raymond O'Hara" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "PLMerite" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>>>
>>> Story and more photos:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4273248.html
>>>
>>>
>> B2s are cost more than their weight in gold is worth."stealth technology"
>> mostly consists of advanced avionics that manage control surfaces and
>> flaps
>> that allow it to fly.
>
>
> Please tell me that English is not your primary language.
>
>
>> the reason the original flying wings were scraped was because they were
>> very
>> unstable and they didn't have the computers to fix that.
>
>
> Yeah, thanks for that.
>
>
> Regards, PLMerite
>

now that is a very cool picture

>
> --
>
> "I flew the 109 almost 2,000 times. For me, there's nothing better, and
> of
> course, there's always this rivalry between the 109 and the Spitfire. And
> I
> am often asked: which plane I think is better. I tell them I shot down 10
> Spitfires, and that's my answer."
> - Major Hans-Ekkehard Bob JG 54, JG 51, JG 3, EJG 2, JV 44
>

there is a mythology that has grown up around the spitfire.
but the planes were basically equals and neutral observers generally give
the 109 ther nod for a tighter turning radius.

the Battle of Britain was on TV this last saturday. its a great ovie and no
CGI will ever beat having real planes.

i saw it when it came out at the music hall{now the wang center} on one of
those giant widescreen. nothing like it.

PLMerite

July 15th 08, 10:05 PM

"Raymond O'Hara" > wrote in message
...
>

>>
>
> now that is a very cool picture

Yes, I think it's neat. The photographer had to be on his/her toes to get
that one.

Here's the one I was originally looking for, tying in the B-49 and the B-2.

Regards, PLMerite

Peter Skelton

July 16th 08, 12:02 AM

Raymond O'Hara

July 16th 08, 02:52 AM

"PLMerite" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Raymond O'Hara" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>
>>>
>>
>> now that is a very cool picture
>
>
> Yes, I think it's neat. The photographer had to be on his/her toes to get
> that one.
>
> Here's the one I was originally looking for, tying in the B-49 and the
> B-2.
>
>
>
> Regards, PLMerite
>

cute,
but it should have been reversed a B-2 casting the shadow of its forbear.

one of the things i liked about the original war of the worlds{the gene
barry one} was the bit with the flying wing attacking the martians

the B-1b and the B-2 are two of the coolest looking planes ever
the B-1b is just flat out beautiful. and watching a B-2 fly over always gets
everybody pointing up and yelling "look!"

Brian Paul Ehni

July 16th 08, 02:55 AM

On 7/15/08 3:16 PM, in article ,
"Raymond O'Hara" > wrote:

>
> "PLMerite" > wrote in message
> . ..
>>
>> Story and more photos:
>>
>>
>> http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4273248.html
>>
>>
> B2s are cost more than their weight in gold is worth."stealth technology"
> mostly consists of advanced avionics that manage control surfaces and flaps
> that allow it to fly.
> the reason the original flying wings were scraped was because they were very
> unstable and they didn't have the computers to fix that.
>
>

You are SO ignorant you don't know the difference between stealth and
fly-by-wire. Stealth means low observability, including radar and visual.
What you're talking about is the inherent instability of many of today's
best fighter aircraft; without fly-by-wire, they would not be able to do the
maneuvers you see FA-18s, F-22s, and various Russian MIGs and Sukhois do.

Next time, try getting your act together before you show people how stupid
you are.
--
Brian Ehni

Morgans[_2_]

July 16th 08, 05:11 AM

"PLMerite" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> Story and more photos:
>
>
> http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4273248.html

Wow, I'm very surprised to see that there was that much of the aircraft
intact after the crash. I would have expected to see pieces the size of
small suitcases, and an engine or wheel here and there.
--
Jim in NC

Raymond O'Hara

July 16th 08, 05:14 AM

"Brian Paul Ehni" > wrote in message
...
> On 7/15/08 3:16 PM, in article ,
> "Raymond O'Hara" > wrote:
>
>>
>> "PLMerite" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>>>
>>> Story and more photos:
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4273248.html
>>>
>>>
>> B2s are cost more than their weight in gold is worth."stealth technology"
>> mostly consists of advanced avionics that manage control surfaces and
>> flaps
>> that allow it to fly.
>> the reason the original flying wings were scraped was because they were
>> very
>> unstable and they didn't have the computers to fix that.
>>
>>
>
>
> You are SO ignorant you don't know the difference between stealth and
> fly-by-wire. Stealth means low observability, including radar and visual.
> What you're talking about is the inherent instability of many of today's
> best fighter aircraft; without fly-by-wire, they would not be able to do
> the
> maneuvers you see FA-18s, F-22s, and various Russian MIGs and Sukhois do.
>
> Next time, try getting your act together before you show people how stupid
> you are.
> --
> Brian Ehni
>
>

no you are a fool.
the special "stealth technonolgy" that made the B-2 flyable and which is
what makes it flyable is the fly by wire avionics{mass computers}
without that then the plne would have been as useless as old B-49.

when they tallk about the high cost of the "strealth technology" it that
is what they mean.

it's easy to see why we are in such a mess, you wingnuts are as soft as a
sneaker full of ****.

PLMerite

July 16th 08, 11:31 AM

"Raymond O'Hara" > wrote in message
...
>
> "PLMerite" > wrote in message
> m...
>>
>> "Raymond O'Hara" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> now that is a very cool picture
>>
>>
>> Yes, I think it's neat. The photographer had to be on his/her toes to
>> get
>> that one.
>>
>> Here's the one I was originally looking for, tying in the B-49 and the
>> B-2.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards, PLMerite
>>
>
> cute,
> but it should have been reversed a B-2 casting the shadow of its forbear.
>
> one of the things i liked about the original war of the worlds{the gene
> barry one} was the bit with the flying wing attacking the martians
>
> the B-1b and the B-2 are two of the coolest looking planes ever
> the B-1b is just flat out beautiful. and watching a B-2 fly over always
> gets
> everybody pointing up and yelling "look!"
>
>

Will[_4_]

July 16th 08, 05:13 PM

PLMerite wrote:
> "Raymond O'Hara" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "PLMerite" > wrote in message
>> m...
>>> "Raymond O'Hara" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> now that is a very cool picture
>>>
>>> Yes, I think it's neat. The photographer had to be on his/her toes to
>>> get
>>> that one.
>>>
>>> Here's the one I was originally looking for, tying in the B-49 and the
>>> B-2.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards, PLMerite
>>>
>> cute,
>> but it should have been reversed a B-2 casting the shadow of its forbear.
>>
>> one of the things i liked about the original war of the worlds{the gene
>> barry one} was the bit with the flying wing attacking the martians
>>
>> the B-1b and the B-2 are two of the coolest looking planes ever
>> the B-1b is just flat out beautiful. and watching a B-2 fly over always
>> gets
>> everybody pointing up and yelling "look!"
>>
>>
>
>
This was always my favorite shot of The B-1

Will[_4_]

July 16th 08, 05:16 PM

Raymond O'Hara

July 16th 08, 07:25 PM

"PLMerite" > wrote in message
...
>> cute,
>> but it should have been reversed a B-2 casting the shadow of its forbear.
>>
>> one of the things i liked about the original war of the worlds{the gene
>> barry one} was the bit with the flying wing attacking the martians
>>
>> the B-1b and the B-2 are two of the coolest looking planes ever
>> the B-1b is just flat out beautiful. and watching a B-2 fly over always
>> gets
>> everybody pointing up and yelling "look!"
>>

for the flyover at the NA$CAR New Hampshire 300
they have B-1s from missouri do the flyover. one will always stand on its
tail right over the track, nail the throttles and go straight up, the sound
is beautiful.

Guybrush Threepwood[_2_]

July 16th 08, 07:28 PM

"Raymond O'Hara" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
>
> "Brian Paul Ehni" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 7/15/08 3:16 PM, in article ,
>> "Raymond O'Hara" > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "PLMerite" > wrote in message
>>> . ..
>>>>
>>>> Story and more photos:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4273248.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>> B2s are cost more than their weight in gold is worth."stealth
>>> technology"
>>> mostly consists of advanced avionics that manage control surfaces and
>>> flaps
>>> that allow it to fly.
>>> the reason the original flying wings were scraped was because they were
>>> very
>>> unstable and they didn't have the computers to fix that.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> You are SO ignorant you don't know the difference between stealth and
>> fly-by-wire. Stealth means low observability, including radar and visual.
>> What you're talking about is the inherent instability of many of today's
>> best fighter aircraft; without fly-by-wire, they would not be able to do
>> the
>> maneuvers you see FA-18s, F-22s, and various Russian MIGs and Sukhois do.
>>
>> Next time, try getting your act together before you show people how
>> stupid
>> you are.
>> --
>> Brian Ehni
>>
>>
>
> no you are a fool.
> the special "stealth technonolgy" that made the B-2 flyable and which is
> what makes it flyable is the fly by wire avionics{mass computers}
> without that then the plne would have been as useless as old B-49.
>
> when they tallk about the high cost of the "strealth technology" it that
> is what they mean.
>
> it's easy to see why we are in such a mess, you wingnuts are as soft as a
> sneaker full of ****.
>

Both of you are a little bit right. The so called "stealth technology"
consists aof special radar absorbing material, special radar absorbing paint
and the arrangement of the surfaces in a way that they reflect as less as
possible electromagnetic waves in the direction where the came from. These
are the main drivers. Now, the arrangemnet of the surfaces is less
aerodynamic than on conventional aircraft. Thus the flight control software
is a lot more complicated. Therefore the whole thing is very expensive.

....and no ....I am not a native englisch speaker.....but I like the
BF109...:-)

--
Gruß Guybrush

Brian Paul Ehni

July 17th 08, 05:26 AM

On 7/16/08 1:28 PM, in article
, "Guybrush Threepwood"
> wrote:

> "Raymond O'Hara" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> ...
>>
>> "Brian Paul Ehni" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 7/15/08 3:16 PM, in article ,
>>> "Raymond O'Hara" > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "PLMerite" > wrote in message
>>>> . ..
>>>>>
>>>>> Story and more photos:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/air_space/4273248.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> B2s are cost more than their weight in gold is worth."stealth
>>>> technology"
>>>> mostly consists of advanced avionics that manage control surfaces and
>>>> flaps
>>>> that allow it to fly.
>>>> the reason the original flying wings were scraped was because they were
>>>> very
>>>> unstable and they didn't have the computers to fix that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> You are SO ignorant you don't know the difference between stealth and
>>> fly-by-wire. Stealth means low observability, including radar and visual.
>>> What you're talking about is the inherent instability of many of today's
>>> best fighter aircraft; without fly-by-wire, they would not be able to do
>>> the
>>> maneuvers you see FA-18s, F-22s, and various Russian MIGs and Sukhois do.
>>>
>>> Next time, try getting your act together before you show people how
>>> stupid
>>> you are.
>>> --
>>> Brian Ehni
>>>
>>>
>>
>> no you are a fool.
>> the special "stealth technonolgy" that made the B-2 flyable and which is
>> what makes it flyable is the fly by wire avionics{mass computers}
>> without that then the plne would have been as useless as old B-49.
>>
>> when they tallk about the high cost of the "strealth technology" it that
>> is what they mean.
>>
>> it's easy to see why we are in such a mess, you wingnuts are as soft as a
>> sneaker full of ****.
>>
>
>
> Both of you are a little bit right. The so called "stealth technology"
> consists aof special radar absorbing material, special radar absorbing paint
> and the arrangement of the surfaces in a way that they reflect as less as
> possible electromagnetic waves in the direction where the came from. These
> are the main drivers. Now, the arrangemnet of the surfaces is less
> aerodynamic than on conventional aircraft. Thus the flight control software
> is a lot more complicated. Therefore the whole thing is very expensive.
>
> ...and no ....I am not a native englisch speaker.....but I like the
>
> BF109...:-)

I guess you two hotshots need to rewrite the Wikipedia entries for stealth
then:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealth_technology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealth_aircraft

Not to mention:
http://science.howstuffworks.com/question69.htm

Note that NOWHERE do these mention "advanced avionics that manage control
surfaces and flaps that allow it to fly." as Ray so stupidly points out.

STEALTH IS STRICTLY ABOUT OBSERVABILITY, NOT HOW THE FLIGHT CONTROLS ARE
ACTIVATED. A lot of modern jet aircraft will not fly if all the flight
computers crap out; the pilot makes input to the joystick, and the computers
use that input, plus sensor data to determine what the plane's actually
doing, to determine what the pilot wants the plane to do. The computers then
make it happen.

Additionally, many of today's aircraft are inherently unstable. Even if
there were cables linking the flight controls to the control surfaces, a
pilot couldn't keep the plane flying as they are aerodynamically unstable.

This is why fly-by-wire is so important today.
--
Brian Ehni

186 days till the Shrub is gone

July 17th 08, 03:03 PM

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 20:28:34 +0200, "Guybrush Threepwood"
> wrote:

>
>
>Both of you are a little bit right. The so called "stealth technology"
>consists aof special radar absorbing material, special radar absorbing paint
>and the arrangement of the surfaces in a way that they reflect as less as
>possible electromagnetic waves in the direction where the came from. These
>are the main drivers. Now, the arrangemnet of the surfaces is less
>aerodynamic than on conventional aircraft. Thus the flight control software
>is a lot more complicated. Therefore the whole thing is very expensive.
>

There's one more important ingredient to the B2 'stealth technology'
and that's the radar system. It must be jam proof and virtually
undetectable. Took a lot of effort and money to get there.

Notice everyone talks about the reasons about the B2's low profile,
but no one talks about the B2 radar.
--

A Libertarian society is an oxymoron.

mr_antone

186 days till the Shrub is gone

July 17th 08, 03:29 PM

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 20:28:34 +0200, "Guybrush Threepwood"
> wrote:

>
>
>Both of you are a little bit right. The so called "stealth technology"
>consists aof special radar absorbing material, special radar absorbing paint
>and the arrangement of the surfaces in a way that they reflect as less as
>possible electromagnetic waves in the direction where the came from. These
>are the main drivers. Now, the arrangemnet of the surfaces is less
>aerodynamic than on conventional aircraft. Thus the flight control software
>is a lot more complicated. Therefore the whole thing is very expensive.
>

Another ingredient is the active ECM. This helps mask and spoof any
radar which may pick up the B2. It has a considerable affect on
reducing the B2 profile.
Again very costly and not talked about much.
--

A Libertarian society is an oxymoron.

mr_antone

Brian Paul Ehni

July 18th 08, 02:29 AM

On 7/17/08 9:29 AM, in article ,
"186 days till the Shrub is gone" > wrote:

> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 20:28:34 +0200, "Guybrush Threepwood"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Both of you are a little bit right. The so called "stealth technology"
>> consists aof special radar absorbing material, special radar absorbing paint
>> and the arrangement of the surfaces in a way that they reflect as less as
>> possible electromagnetic waves in the direction where the came from. These
>> are the main drivers. Now, the arrangemnet of the surfaces is less
>> aerodynamic than on conventional aircraft. Thus the flight control software
>> is a lot more complicated. Therefore the whole thing is very expensive.
>>
>
> Another ingredient is the active ECM. This helps mask and spoof any
> radar which may pick up the B2. It has a considerable affect on
> reducing the B2 profile.
> Again very costly and not talked about much.
> --
>
> A Libertarian society is an oxymoron.
>
> mr_antone
>
Both of these are included in the low observables I mentioned, and I was
specific to mention radar, meaning incoming and outgoing signals.
--
Brian Ehni

Maple1

July 22nd 08, 07:28 PM

>>
>
>
> no you are a fool.
> the special "stealth technonolgy" that made the B-2 flyable and which is
> what makes it flyable is the fly by wire avionics{mass computers}
> without that then the plne would have been as useless as old B-49.
>
> when they tallk about the high cost of the "strealth technology" it that
> is what they mean.
>
> it's easy to see why we are in such a mess, you wingnuts are as soft as a
> sneaker full of ****.
>
>

Your an Idiot!!! Stealth is low radar cross section not fly by wire and
avionics It is the shape of the airframe and the paints and materials.
The fly by wire and computers are necessary due to the instability of
the stealth design.

whogoes

July 24th 08, 06:33 AM

"Maple1" > wrote in message
news:REphk.127336$gc5.126263@pd7urf2no...
>
>>>
>>
>>
>> no you are a fool.
>> the special "stealth technonolgy" that made the B-2 flyable and which is
>> what makes it flyable is the fly by wire avionics{mass computers}
>> without that then the plne would have been as useless as old B-49.
>>
>> when they tallk about the high cost of the "strealth technology" it
>> that is what they mean.
>>
>> it's easy to see why we are in such a mess, you wingnuts are as soft as a
>> sneaker full of ****.
>
> Your an Idiot!!! Stealth is low radar cross section not fly by wire and
> avionics It is the shape of the airframe and the paints and materials. The
> fly by wire and computers are necessary due to the instability of the
> stealth design.

Agreed but when a billion dollar plane turns into a pile of polymer due to
"moisture in a sensor" then you have to question how much redundancy is in
the system and the veracity of the design. Theyre saying a single point
failure lead to a complete and catastrophic failure of the fly by wire
system ???? I was listening to a doco and they were pointing out that the B2
has major components from every state and that this was done intentionally
to "sign" on the members for each state.