B-1

[the concerned]

If required does the b-1 have the capability to carry weapons externally. If it does would it be possible to adapt the stealth weapons pods developed for the f-18 international and fit them for the b-1b

[davekench]

Just check wiki on B-1b and it can carry weapons internally or externally.

Dave

[quid21]

Why would you want to?

The B-1 is not exactly a stealthy aircraft in the class of the B-2 or F-117, so the addition of fitting stealth pods would not do much to reduce the overall signature I would imagine.

[page_verify]

My understanding is that the only external munitions the B-1B was designed to carry were the nuclear missiles that were retired from it as part of the START treaties. I've never seen any mention of external conventional weapons being carried or that the hardpoints have been maintained during upgrades. While no one can have an aircraft that's stealthy enough or carry too many weapons, I suspect the B-1B is doing fine as it is and that the B-2, F-22 or F-35 would be used where it's not.

[martmpf]

Is it, only the B1 that has only nuclear removed under Start?

[quid21]

Is it, only the B1 that has only nuclear removed under Start?

I believe that a certain number of B-52s were chopped up and left for the benefit of Soviet spy satellites. It was all about reducing the number of nukes and nuclear capable delivery systems.

[martmpf]

Thanks for that
Unless my understanding is mistaken:

That means -- All B1's, a number of B-52's (whose time was probably up anyway), nothing else?

Not that it matters really anyway, if push came to shove, aircraft born delivery, small part, not significant.

[the concerned]

I was just wondering if it could and thinking about what you could do with a b-1b. In a few dale brown books he uses converted bombers for other tasks so just thinking what could you realistically do.

[martmpf]

Can I have one dad.

Layby near my front door, only cause minor inconvenience if delivered with wings swept back

[page_verify]

In a nutshell, 365 B-52s were retired and destroyed while the B-1s lost their nuclear capability to meet the terms of the START treaty of the time. This left the USAF with its B-52Hs and B-2s, along with its ICBMs.

[T_J]

Is it, only the B1 that has only nuclear removed under Start?

A large proportion of the B-52H fleet are to be modified to conventional only under the NEW START Treaty.

The Air Force has converted 18 operational B-52s to a conventional-only configuration and, according to the head of Air Force Global Strike Command, is "on track" to meet New START Treaty requirements before its fiscal year 2018 deadline.

Under the treaty, the Air Force is required to modify 41 B-52H bombers to a conventional-only role -- 29 operational bombers and 12 of which are in storage. In written testimony provided July 14 to the House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee, Gen. Robin Rand said as of June 27 the service has converted 18 of the 29 operational bombers.

"We are on track to meet our New START Treaty commitments well before the FY-18 deadline," he said.

https://insidedefense.com/insider/air-f ... art-treaty

http://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2015/09 ... 442767214/

The final B-52G accountable under the New START Treaty was cut up during December 2013.

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/t ... start.aspx

Reference for New START

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/R41219.pdf

[wave scanner]

I think they carry a sniper pod externally?

My understanding was that the b1 was being reactivated as a nuke truck

[martmpf]

Start Treaty 2 and Trump

[page_verify]

The B-1's Sniper pod is hung from a converted hardpoint, which until around 2008 were all banned from being used by the START treaty. I've not heard any mention of the B-1 regaining its nuclear role, I'm not sure which weapon it'd carry if it did regain that mission given how few the US have.

[Andy_99]

The B-1's Sniper pod is hung from a converted hardpoint, which until around 2008 were all banned from being used by the START treaty. I've not heard any mention of the B-1 regaining its nuclear role, I'm not sure which weapon it'd carry if it did regain that mission given how few the US have.

I seem to recall that the last time they graced our shores they were pictured carrying the pods as well

[page_verify]

Originally, in 2008, they equipped eight aircraft. I suspect they've now equipped most if not all of of the combat coded fleet.

[martmpf]

A 2015 dated article that does appear to confirm the Sniper Pod fitting to the B-1B.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/sni ... mark-0562/

Not sure how that makes then nuclear capable again though?

[wave scanner]

I heard from a reliable state side source.
Owing to the Russians general rhetoric towards start & doing whatever they liked, ignoring treaties ( feeling like the US was picking on them)
That it was highly likely that they would be ready activated in thier nuclear role although this was in hindsight merely conjecture.
The original question was regarding hard points & hanging munitions / and or equipment off them.
Originally they could carry an obscene payload of nuclear weapons almost as many externally as internally on the rotary launcher.

[page_verify]

An old thread revival, apologies, but some notes from recent mutterings:

Some B-52s had their nuclear role removed in the last year as part of new treaty agreements
The B-52's nuclear gravity bomb mission (B-61 and B-83) was retired last year
There's a new generation of rotary launchers being fitted to the B-52 to carry the next generation of long range missiles
Someone I met took a B-1B to M1.4 but apparently changes were made to the engine inlets about 10 years ago that'd stop that now
He also took one to 40,000ft but again not for very long
Despite us not knowing it's a stealth aircraft, when it needs to be the B-1 can be invisible on radar

[Dazza37]

...when it needs to be the B-1 can be invisible on radar

Really? How? Considering the F-117, B-2, F-22 and F-35 aren't completely invisible to radar and they're hardcore stealth optimized designs, whereas the B-1 is not remotely in the same ballpark...

-Dazza