• @Ameripol
    link
    English
    3310 months ago

    May the 1000 year reign of the B-52 bring us joy and prosperity.

      • @Madison420
        link
        English
        410 months ago

        I’m still surprised theres not a gunship version, thing could carry a fuckload of dakka.

        • @too_high_for_this
          link
          English
          610 months ago

          The B-52 is designed to fly high-altitude at high subsonic speed. And they’re not very maneuverable. They’re meant to fly straight to a target, drop a payload, and GTFO.

          Gunships fly low and slow, banking in a circle to keep their guns on target. For a B-52 to do the same maneuver, it’d have to be higher and much further away.

          This is like saying we should make a Chinook bomber because it could carry a lot of bombs. Like yeah, it could, but there’s better options.

          • 𝙣𝙪𝙠𝙚
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1510 months ago

            This is like saying we should make a Chinook bomber

            Fuck yeah. Do that too!

          • @Madison420
            link
            English
            510 months ago

            It depends on what kind of gunship you want, lots of guns can fit on a b52 that can’t on an ac130. A series of 155s or bofors 40mk4s, mk38 bushmasters or stripped down 5" guns all of which fire rapidly, automatically and at ranges the ac130 could not touch with significant increases of time on target.

            It doesn’t need to be maneuverable, gunboats don’t go in without air superiority anyway. That said they’re way more maneuverable and controllable then you’d imagine. It wouldn’t need to be one or the other, you could have both running counter pylon turns covering up for the gaps in each other’s capabilities.

            https://theaviationgeekclub.com/that-time-a-usaf-b-52-strategic-bomber-did-a-fly-by-below-the-flight-deck-of-uss-ranger-aircraft-carrier/amp/

            Notably many people said the ac130 was not a useful idea.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2710 months ago

    Anyone else yearn to live in a fantasy setting where they could get a plane like this and go from airfield to airfield living as a traveling trader?

    • @d00ery
      link
      English
      1610 months ago

      😂 I think that’s a cool idea; but I reckon the running cost in fuel alone, without maintenance, would make this implausible.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1010 months ago

        There’s a Mr. Fusion on board to power the retrofitted pulse engines. Which is a good thing, since all the nanobots that nonstop repair the airframe take about half the energy produced (the engines taking the other half, of course).

        Just remember to chuck a couple Cyberdyne Model-101 skeletons in the fuel chamber and you’re good for another year or so.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      210 months ago

      Is this like a high fantasy setting or a more sci-fi one. I’ve had this for the former. Though with a number of different vehicles.

  • @nexguy
    link
    English
    1410 months ago

    An unforseen cost is all the wrapping paper and scotch tape.