Only so many way to improve on “thing that fly and drop big things where desired”
And then there’s the “other” C130s. The AC130s. That big ass plane which, if you are hostile infantry and see it circling your position while dipping the left wing, you should plan on dying in the next several seconds. Bad mama-jama. All kind of guns on that bird. I’ve heard it can cover an area the size of a football field, and in so doing place a bullet in every single square foot of the target area.
We can hear those suckers doing live fire test around here. Those suckers sound scary from miles away. If one was aiming at me I’d be praying for a manhole cover to cower under.
I had no idea you could land a big-ass C130 transport on an aircraft carrier but it has been demonstrated many times. They aren’t used in that way but I thought it was a cool fact regarding their short take-off and landing characteristics from just about any strip.
It’s surprising that after all these years Congress has not forced them to upgrade to other models so that they could bring more money/jobs to their districts and states.
That’s a gawddamm big boat, too. 
That’s a good point. The designs may be 50 years old, but how old are the actual units that are in service?
I am not sure about the C130 fleet but the current B-52 fleet, the primary long-range strategic bombers, really was built in the early 1960’s. As mentioned, they aren’t scheduled to be retired until at least 2040 when the actual planes will be about 80 years old. The point is that well-engineered airframes are extremely strong and mostly non-corrosive. The USAF can keep any of them in service as long as needed just through maintainence and upgrades. That service life for the planes themselves could easily be the better part of a century or more for aircraft of those types (non-fighters) if needed.
They can pull a lot of replacement parts from AMARC in Arizona. And they do.
Especially the ‘guillotined’ B-52s that are sitting out there, chopped in half, as part of our treaties with the Russkies.
Say what?
Actually the Navy is using the Super Hornet which is a scaled up version of the original.
If you look at just about any aircraft with a history you will see a variety of Model changes that fix, improve, and expand the role of the plane. The Hornet is an exellent example because the larger version was tasked with replacing the F-14.
I don’t know the exact treaty but the B-52 is a long range strategic bomber that is nuclear capable and can fly anywhere in the world non-stop and back with air refueling. They were used to fly from Missouri to Iraq and back non-stop especially during the start of both Gulf Wars. The B-52 is not an antique. It is an incredibly scary war machine that any country wants to avoid confrontation with. Any nuclear non-proliferation agreement would probably include cutting down the number of them.
I don’t know that I’ve ever seen anything more impressive than a Buff opening the bomb bay doors and raining 500 pound bombs on a target. I forget how many 500 pounders it can hold…think it’s about 50 or so. Really wouldn’t want to see that from the target’s perspective.
FWIW, the M1A1 Abrams is continually recycled too.
I recall B-2s flying out of Missouri during the Gulf War, and filling some Minute Man silos here in Arkansas after Salt II with concrete and leaving them open to satellite inspection, but not the B-52s. They probably just weren’t as newsworthy and sexy as the B-2s.
You are right about that and I should have known better because I grew up near B-52 headquarters in Louisiana. The idea is exactly the same but the facts should be corrected to Barksdale AFB in Louisiana.
Here is a sample:
“On 16 February 1991 a flight of B-52Gs launching from and returning to Barksdale AFB, Louisiana, struck targets inside Iraq. This was at the time the longest distance combat mission in history: 35 hours and 14,000 statute miles round trip.[67][68] Over the next months, B-52Gs operating from bases at Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, RAF Fairford in the United Kingdom, Moron AB, Spain and on the island of Diego Garcia flew low level bombing missions.”
I’ve only been in cockpits from static versions the B-52, etc…I sure hope they’ve done something to improve the comfort factor of the seats!
As someone mentioned, Lockheed still has the Hercules in production: the C-130 is essentially the Hercules design using 2000’s engines and systems, and they keep getting sales.
U2s (and its variant the TR1) were last delivered in the late 80s IIRC, USAF is said to be thinking of retiring the U2 maybe by the mid 20teens depending on how unmanned drones like GlobalHawk prove capable for similar missions.
The Boeings have been out of production for far longer (remember, a 135 is NOT a 707), basically relying on rebuilds and upgrades to keep fighting.
FWIW, the Soviets kept making and using 'til the end, and the Russians still use today, Tupolev “Bear” long-range bomber/maritime patrol/AEW aircraft, which use turboPROP engines and were made from the 50s to the 90s, in spite of later developing various “more sophisticated” designs, for similar reasons as mentioned earlier for the BUFF and the Herc: the technology is mature, the airplane takes a beating and keeps on ticking, and trying to design anew something to perform the same mission better would cost too much and take too long.
And the story of the attempt to find a replacement for the KC-135 is an example of what could potentially happen when the time comes to really replace the 52s and 130s.
To elaborate for the laymen who may be confused by that exchange: As part of the arms-reductions pact, some specified weapons platforms that were to be taken off the rolls would not just be “deactivated” or “retired” or “cashed out”, but had to be visibly destroyed so as to be physically impossible to repair and redeploy. e.g. filling missile silos with concrete and leaving the tops open. For B-52s this involved taking a honkin’ big-arsed “blade” of metal and concrete, lifting it high with a construction crane, and dropping it onto the aircraft.
I believe the “chopped” planes were already stripped for salvageable systems, but afterwards anything not actually welded to the airframe would be harvestable for parts.
I thought I mentioned that.
Great googly moogly.
If we still had the bombers in service today we had 80 years ago, we’d have been using the Keystone Panther - a biplane, made of canvas covered wood, capable of about 100 mph full tilt - in Iraq.