Why was it never converted to a bomber?

>>34011036
>boeing
>good
lol

Because the B-52 already existed.

So... yeah.

>>34011042
go shitpost elsewhere

>>34011036
Better used as a tanker, but that's only my opinion

>>34011036
because implementing a bomb bay or ram is an engineering nightmare

>>34011036
>boeing
top kek get this amerishart crap outta here.

>>34011540
>because implementing a bomb bay or ram is an engineering nightmare
Oh, you want your airframe to have structure there so if can handle landing? Well fuck you, I'm going to cut a big hole through it.

Having your plane snap in half during landing will just have to be part of the maintenance routine.

>>34011036
We already had plenty of B52s and the airframe is not designed for carrying cargo and weaponry, it's designed to carry passengers

>>34011036
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/cmca.htm

File: download (1).jpg (7KB, 310x163px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 310x163px

>>34011036
There was a plan to set them up with rotary launchers for cruise missiles.

>>34011036

B-52 is optimised for the job.

>>34011555

As opposed to? What other countries are still building bombers in this day and age.

>>34011673

Noone because they have been obsolete since the 60s.

Iran uses 747's for combat roles in the Iran-Iraq war IIRC.

Also Israel used a 707 to drop their version of a daisy cutter on sudan back in 2010 or so.

>>34011540
This.

747 fuselage is pressurized. You'd have to put in a bunch of pressure bulkheads to keep the crew area pressurized at altitude and open a bomb bay.

>>34011297
Why? Boeing thread, this is like the home of shit.

File: 1465752335207.png (193KB, 523x270px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 523x270px

>>34011036
I flew business class in a new 747-8, it was impressive for sure, aren't they going to use it for the new AF1 with 24/7 Twitter link to allow airborne shitposting?

File: Ukraine passenger plane shot down.jpg (48KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 480x360px

>>34011036
>2017
>wanting to build a bomber that looks like a civilian plane from the outside
What could go wrong?

File: KC-747.jpg (65KB, 800x423px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 800x423px

>>34011506
>Better used as a tanker, but that's only my opinion
the Iranians agree with you

File: 1494866793528.jpg (98KB, 1280x850px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1280x850px

>>34011685
wew lad

>>34011036

Same reason we don't add anti-ship missiles to cargo ships

>>34011506
>>34011895
There is a picture out there of the tanker 747 refueling a sr-71.

File: file.png (290KB, 800x451px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 800x451px

4 engined b52 is pure sex

>>34013779
>Slower
>More expensive
>Less payload
>Missile b8
>Literally worse than the bone in every way

Why do we keep this POS around

>>34013830
Because the bone is a retarded seal.

>>34011895
The IRIAF is the most interesting AF in the history of the world so far.

It's not as easy as ripping out the seating and cutting a hole in the floor, making it strong enough to not implode once it gets depressurised would be an engineering nightmare.

>>34013999
First of all, that's fucking stupid, explosive decompression in SPACE is a myth, let alone at 40k feet. Second, that's fucking stupid, because you can just drop shit out the back, so you don't need to worry about compromising the integrity in most of the undercarriage. Thirdly, you don't have to pressurize a fucking bomb bay. They're bombs, not kittens. Lastly, the real reason they don't use common cargo aircraft as bombers is because >>34011876

File: MC747.jpg (77KB, 800x496px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 800x496px

Probably because any passing airliner becomes a potential threat for your AD to dispose of.

File: p8farnborough.jpg (182KB, 1052x724px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 1052x724px

>>34014089
That said all 737s are now fair game.

>>34011036
Two of them were during 9/11

>>34014152
75 and 76 nothing with four engines was hijacked.

File: Airborne-Laser-ABL.jpg (103KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 1024x683px

Pew Pew Pew.

File: airborne_laser-boneyard.jpg (88KB, 1024x596px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 1024x596px

>>34014241
Another boondoggle off to the graveyard

because it wasn't designed to be a bomber. for starters, all of its primary wing structure passes through right where you'd need to the bomb bay doors to be.

File: us004208949-003.gif (43KB, 773x467px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 773x467px

>>34014281

File: us004208949-005.gif (49KB, 739x483px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 739x483px

>>34014345

File: us004208949-002.gif (28KB, 515x683px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 515x683px

>>34014348

File: B29 cutaway2.gif (178KB, 1061x664px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 1061x664px

>>34014281
That's also why a B29 couldn't carry BIG bombs.
Didn't stop it being a bomber.

>>34011036
iirc Rwanda used one to drop off a bunch of troops outside the Congo capital in a surprise attack.

Tutsi's can operate pretty hard apparently.

>>34011595
>the airframe is not designed for carrying cargo and weaponry, it's designed to carry passengers
from the department of "i have no idea what im talking about"
it was designed as a cargo plane that could carry passengers because when it was designed, it was expected that supersonic passenger transport would make subsonic passenger transport obsolete but subsonic cargo carriers would be needed for the foreseeable future

most variants that still fly are cargo 747 you fucking half wit

File: SOFIA-1.jpg (49KB, 730x410px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 730x410px

>>34011781
Piece of piss. Next. ;)

>>34011854
Well, the current AF-1 has all the communication equipment it needs. It even have a telephone line. So a wifi would certainly be available to continue his shitpost.

>>34011540
I dunno. Pull the chairs, stack a bunch of bombs on a conveyor of sorts. Feed them to a mechanical lever that flings them out the rear entrance and call it a day.

>>34013830
because congress won't buy off on another long range bomber, plus fighter mafia run the Air Farce now instead of Curtis and the boys from SAC, so instead of shit fighters and everything else being spent on bombers and missiles, we get the F-22 and F-35.

>>34014581
Cargo pallets distribute weight more evenly vs bombs. Also bombs need bomb doors which weakens the structural integrity of the plane when opened unless heavily reinforced. Also the wing spars are at the bottom c.f. thr B52 which has high mounted wings for this very purpose. Dipshit.

>>34014108
There is also a 767 tanker.

>>34011918
Its still obsolete