Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

displacedvermoter

(5,231 posts)

15. Those planes are all 60+ years old.

Reply to caraher (Reply #11)

Mon Jun 15, 2026, 07:41 PM

Jun 15

I wonder how much more tinkering they can do. Much more complicated aircraft than the venerable A10, which keeps getting returned from scrap heap.

Good luck to those flying these very old remnants of an earlier time. Think Slim Pickens...

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

2 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

orangecrush byronius

32 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Air Force B-52 bomber crashes shortly after takeoff at Edwards Air Force Base in California [View all] BumRushDaShow Jun 15 OP

Just saw something about new Rolls Royce engines being fitted to the B52s displacedvermoter Jun 15 #1

CNN has a video... 2naSalit Jun 15 #4

Probably a different kind of test caraher Jun 15 #11

Those planes are all 60+ years old. displacedvermoter Jun 15 #15

This flight apparently was a test of an upgraded radar system caraher Jun 15 #16

Could be. The point of that retrofit is Bluetus Jun 16 #20

Very interesting, thank you... displacedvermoter Jun 16 #25

They are impressive, and flying any craft productively for 100 years is mind-boggling Bluetus Jun 16 #30

Navy doesn't have any 60 year old warships or subs, displacedvermoter Jun 16 #31

This would never be allowed with commercial airlines Bluetus Jun 16 #32

419th Flight Test Squadron LudwigPastorius Jun 15 #2

I was looking at a local LA station's video feed of the base and runways BumRushDaShow Jun 15 #3

Truly disintegrated. 2naSalit Jun 15 #5

I saw that all 12 aboard died---correction, 8. C Moon Jun 15 #17

I posted a news piece about it... 2naSalit Jun 15 #18

Yes, very sad. C Moon Jun 15 #19

Yep...and it said a normal crew of five. This one had eight aboard. Bengus81 Jun 16 #22

Engineers testing the new equipment, trainers displacedvermoter Jun 16 #26

Damn irisblue Jun 15 #6

Holy crap! Strength to all affected! electric_blue68 Jun 15 #7

Odd that the U.S. would lose a long range strategic bomber the same day as Russia OnlinePoker Jun 15 #8

These airframes are so old I'm suprised sdfernando Jun 15 #9

Right. And now they are trying to extend them to 2050 (that's right at 100 years of service) Bluetus Jun 16 #21

8 crew members believed dead after B-52 bomber crashes at California's Edwards Air Force Base chowder66 Jun 15 #10

‪@meidastouch.com‬ � 24m TRAGIC NEWS: Eight crew members are believed to have been killed after a U.S. Air Force B-52 riversedge Jun 15 #12

💔💔💔 ultralite001 Jun 15 #13

""Initial indications are that the crash was not survivable," the base said." riversedge Jun 15 #14

B52-s were stationed in Wichita at McConnell for decades when it was a SAC base. Bengus81 Jun 16 #23

They would often fly in to what became Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst BumRushDaShow Jun 16 #24

They don't make 'em like that anymore..... JohnnyRingo Jun 16 #27

I have to ask this question... ColoradoHoosier Jun 16 #28

Since they are designed for long haul trips BumRushDaShow Jun 16 #29