B52 image I hadn't seen before

Did the H model have the same folding tailplane as the D. Its an obvious weak point.

A quick internet search shows an “H” with it’s fin folded. I never saw any folded during my time around the type.
Notice the photo in the OP, quite a chunk of the leading edge remains, whereas the fin folds completely flat. If it failed because of the fold feature, wouldn’t it have failed uniformly at the break?

I wasn’t aware that the folding fin was a weak point on any aircraft…several Boeing types (B-50, Stratocruiser/C-97s, KC-135s, early 707s) had folding fins, though the feature was rarely used.
Again, the severe clear air turbulence that took off that tail seemed to be a “one off” occurrence. I’ve never heard of a fleet-wide strengthening program.

Did the H model have the same folding tailplane as the D. Its an obvious weak point.

J. Boyle – Wow that must have been an amazing experience. Im guessing you rode in the tail gunner’s position.?

No, I was on a jump seat between the pilot and co-pilot.

Remember the B-52G & H had their gunners with the rest of the crew in front (next to the ECM operator facing aft on the main deck).

It was quite different than my flight in a B-1B. The low level mission in that was a non-event, very smooth and effortless.
I know it’s a cliché, but riding low in the 52 was like riding in my Jeep, firm and you feel every bump. The B-1, well, it was more like my Mercedes.

That is one very wrinkled skin.

Standard BUFF!

Here she is when I saw her in the Boneyard in 2008.

That is one very wrinkled skin.

Here she is when I saw her in the Boneyard in 2008.

Celebrity Row?

Here she is when I saw her in the Boneyard in 2008.

Good point, although the F117A Night Hawk also used stealth for defence and that had two vertical stabilisers. J. Boyle – Wow that must have been an amazing experience. Im guessing you rode in the tail gunner’s position.?

The Vulcan performed exceptionally well at very low level during operation Red Flag. That can’t have gone unnoticed by US designers. Just because you have a large stabiliser doesn’t mean it’s going to shear off during low level manoeuvres when encountering high lateral forces. British Engineer’s have been over engineering their structures dating back to at least the industrial revolution. Its a feature of our design codes. Only in recent years with the introduction of European Design codes are we reducing safety factors and relying on high tech testing and empirical calculations. (Time to duck as there’s bound to be someone who disagrees).

Perhaps the experiences of the B52 tests were contributing factors in the B2 not having a fin. 🙂

Since stealth is the B-2s defense, I don’t think they need to be low enough where turbulence is a factor.
My B-52 ride was rather wild, complete with a very low level segment over the open ranges of Montana.
I recall the pilot (a friend…who I later set up with my sister. Shouldn’t have done that, he’s far too nice a guy 🙂 ) working hard on the controls as we were bounced around in the heat.
All great fun…except I was the only one without an ejection seat. 🙂

I believe the aircraft was recovered to a runway by using the undercarriage to control direction of flight.
It seems that the individual legs were retracted and extended in a sequence to control the direction of flight along with the use of the remaining control surfaces.
Clever guys these Yanks!!

The 52’s main gear are staggered “bicycle” types that go into the fuselage. Given the narrowness of the fuselage, I don’t think they’re far enough apart to do what you’re suggesting.

I believe the aircraft was recovered to a runway by using the undercarriage to control direction of flight.
It seems that the individual legs were retracted and extended in a sequence to control the direction of flight along with the use of the remaining control surfaces.

Would they not have used engine thrust to control direction?

Think somebody was reading the auto prompt in the video 🙂

Haha! Nope just done far to much late night reading… It’s also in one of the story lines in a book I’ve read called The Wild Blue which is a fictional piece about the US Air Force.

Perhaps the experiences of the B52 tests were contributing factors in the B2 not having a fin. 🙂

That must be the definition of `irony`, “configured to investigate structural failures suffered a structural failure”.

Think somebody was reading the auto prompt in the video 🙂

Maybe worth reading Captain David Phillips account of mountain related turbulence in a BCal VC-10 more than 40 years ago
http://www.british-caledonian.com/BCal_G-ASIX_Flight_over_the_Andes_1.html
http://www.british-caledonian.com/BCal_G-ASIX_Flight_over_the_Andes_2.html

Was on a test flight low through the Sierra Nevada’s as I remember reading about, think the yanks had lost a couple of buffs training for the low altitude bombing of the USSR and it was something to do with the turbulence in the mountains that buffeted the tail plane causing it to fail with the loss of the aircraft on a couple of occasions.

I’m a prop rather than jet fan, so not too surprising that there are B52 images that have passed me by.

Moggy

I believe the aircraft was recovered to a runway by using the undercarriage to control direction of flight.
It seems that the individual legs were retracted and extended in a sequence to control the direction of flight along with the use of the remaining control surfaces.
I am not sure if this is possible on standard build aircraft.
The guys in a ground simulator instructed the crew what to do and when!

Clever guys these Yanks!!

B-52H 61-0023: it has been a visitor to the UK over the years but now retired/stored at Davis Monthan. Might yet visit the UK again…

That photo has been around for quite awhile, so I’m surprised you haven’t seen it. It does seem to make its way into a lot of books/articles.

It was operating out of Wichita and encountered CAT. And being an “H”, there is a good chance the aircraft is operational.