U.S. Air Force B-52 bombers will be deploying to the United Kingdom shortly as part of a ‘Bomber Task Force’ training mission to “familiarise themselves” with European airspace.

It should be noted that ‘Bomber Task Force’ missions regularly visit the UK, with the most recent being a B-2 stealth bomber. You can read more about the previous deployment by clicking here. Anyway, onto the current deployment…

The support aircraft for the bomber arrived today. Aviation news website ‘Airspeed Media’ posted on Facebook:

“With support aircraft arriving today at RAF Fairford, it will hopefully soon be time to welcome back the Minot AB based BUFFs to the UK.”

The US Air Force explains the purpose of Bomber Task Force missions as follows “by training in Europe, aircrew and Airmen are familiarizing themselves with the European theater and airspace, to enhance enduring skills and relationships with allies and partners”.

On their website, the U.S. Air Force describe the bomber as follows:

“The B-52H Stratofortress is a long-range, heavy bomber that can perform a variety of missions. The bomber is capable of flying at high subsonic speeds at altitudes of up to 50,000 feet (15,166.6 meters). It can carry nuclear or precision guided conventional ordnance with worldwide precision navigation capability. In a conventional conflict, the B-52 can perform strategic attack, close-air support, air interdiction, offensive counter-air and maritime operations.

B-52s are equipped with advanced targeting pods. Targeting pods provide improved long-range target detection, identification and continuous stabilized surveillance for all missions, including close air support of ground forces. The advanced targeting and image processing technology significantly increases the combat effectiveness of the B-52 during day, night and less than ideal weather conditions when attacking ground targets with a variety of standoff weapons (e.g., laser-guided bombs, conventional bombs and GPS-guided weapons). The use of aerial refuelling gives the B-52 a range limited only by aircrew endurance. It has an unrefueled combat range in excess of 8,800 miles (14,080 kilometres).”

For more than 60 years, B-52s have been the backbone of the strategic bomber force for the United States.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

118 COMMENTS

  1. Beautiful beasts aren’t they? I can remember making a model ( Revell?) of one of these back in the early sixties with my Dad!

  2. Well my much advertised deployment of the big boys toys to the UK on a training mission has begun in prelude to Ukraine invasion. So how I can’t get over the similarities between the start of WII and now. A Tyrannical bully whose been allowed to grow his military and use to expand his empire by invading a neighboring county. All the while the European leaders talk peace and sanctions instead of standing up to him. Why has there been no word from the UN? A foreign state is about to invade another , isn’t that what the UN was set up to stop? If the UN were to deploy troops to the Ukrainian boarder that do not belong to NATO then that would put Putin in a corner and he would have to back down as his main point of this is his expansion plans and anti NATO stance, so by removing NATO from the equation his bluff will be called and he would have to pull back. India could be the country to deploy troops and create a buffer zone between Russia and Ukraine just long enough that it delays an invasion due to spring rains and avoid WW3.

    • As the USAF European long range bomber base I’m surprised there arn’t Buffs or B1s at Fairford already. But at the end of the day its just for show, demonstrating that this kind of kit can be deployed fairly quickly. It’ll Be interesting to see how many fly in, if its over 6 the US will be making a clear statement.

    • Would require approval by the Security Council and you can be certain that two of the 5 permanent members, Russia and China, would block any such proposal.

    • Their massive lead in tech and services? The fact that there will always be cheap labour thanks to their immigration? The fact that, unlike Britain ever was, they are a massive country sitting in between both oceans with the 3rd largest population in the world?

      • Just don’t mention that since 1971 it was mainly done on credit. Plus they never really had to pay for any import, they just printed more US$ at negligible cost. We never did that.

        Also, unique amongst empires, their homeland has not been attacked.

        All this leads inevitably to a feeling of invincibility.

          • My use of English might be better than your understanding Dave. The US was not an empire when we burnt the Whitehouse. I intentionally used the word “empire” to qualify my statement. Even so, good to see you again hard on my trail, keeping me on my toes. I got an extra bowl of gruel last week down to your efforts.

          • The hooch allowance is above my grade. Big week next week, I’m promoted to 5 day old bread from 10 days.ļ»æšŸ‘Œļ»æ

          • You may well be right Barry but we will see. Russia help the Donbas in their civil war with Kiev yes, actually invade I still don’t see it happening.

          • Ivan its only you are your Russian buddies who believe its actually a civil war its seen by the Ukraine people as Russian insurgency and rightfully so just like with the Georgians, just like Hitler with the Czechoslovakia, I know Lord haw haw is your daily inspiration and you kick out of being special in your opinions , but it comes across as delusional at the best of times.

          • Thanks mate I was running out of responses from my Goebbels manual, I had forgotten about Haw Haw. I’m off to get some gems.

  4. Putin knows Biden and the West won’t do a thing besides slap more useless sanctions of him and his buddies if they invade Ukraine. This is all just for show.

    • The US/UK plus a NATO token group have got themselves into a rather unfortunate position.

      If the Russians attack to defend their citizens then it is possible nothing apart from that will happen. but if, contrary to what Putin has said, the actually attack Ukraine then, as almost everyone agrees it will be over in days. Then it gets interesting.

      Biden will have to sanction Russia or lose face but the potential sanctions that have been discussed so far are, as you describe “useless” but whilst they will have an impact on Russia the probable Russia action would be a disaster for all in the West. Europe without gas in March? Very possible as most of the EU’s gas from Russia is on ‘spot’ not ‘contract’ supply so they could easily and legally shut the valves. Sending energy prices, including ours, through the roof.

      If Russian oligarchs in the West are hit they will send money, if it hasn’t already gone, out of the UK in particular, with a good chance it goes back to Russia, not the intention but good for Putin.

      There are many other adverse financial effects but also political. The US/UK will have shown again that they won’t support allies when push comes to shove. Our expertise seems to be of the cause chaos then get out variety.

      My view is that all this is being puffed up (imminent invasion for around 8 weeks now) so when nothing happens Biden and Boris and maybe Macron (election April) can all claim victory as their actions ‘saw the Russians off’ rather than acknowledging that Putin has done what he said from the start, no invasion.

      Mind you everyone can get all worked up if those 3 RuN Moskva class cruisers get together in the Eastern Med and then the Black Sea. Incidentally almost all the Black Sea Fleet is dockside currently, so they aren’t expecting much soon.

      EDIT correct spelling mistake

      • Or to look at it another way, a perfect opportunity for Putin to step back and claim it was all western propaganda.

        Make him look “Big” back home.

        Whether the West were right or wrong to expand NATO and the EU Eastwards, Russia has zero right the threaten an independent country.

        • Maybe, but if you saw the Macron/Putin press conference today you would notice that Putin is primarily interested in the NATO and US document discussions, not Ukraine. Also, Russia is not threatening Ukraine other than telling them not to attack Donbas and to get a move on with the Minsk 2 agreement.

          • No, I do not mean that. There are not 100,000 plus front line troops complete with all necessary offensive support equipment sat on the Russian border.
            NATO has not annexed half of an independent neighbouring country.
            NATO is not forward deploying nuclear capable ballistic missiles in breach of the IRBM treaty.

          • 100,000+ within 150 or so miles I would not describe as ‘sat on the border’.

            I assume you mean Crimea, which is tiny compared to mainland Ukraine. Even if you include Donbas which no-one has claimed is ‘annexed’ how about under 10% at a guess?

            The IRBM Treaty is now defunct.

          • So it’s ok to annex part of another country?

            150 miles is a days travel once the movement orders are given.

          • No, that would be the standard Russian military tactic used to initiate an attack; using the various rocket, ballistic missile and artillery pieces Russia has moved into position.

          • The Ukrainian Army uses the same tactics and they have moved into position, much closer to the demarcation line.

          • False equivalence. No one is threatening to invade or overthrow Russia. All Putin has dreamed of is subjugation. His whole career speaks to this.

      • Iā€™m not sure attacking to defend citizens makes the best sense. If they Russians in Ukraine are having such a bad time itā€™s not far to the Russian border.
        I donā€™t think the sanctions will be as bad for the U.K. as they will be for Russia. Look at North Korea sanctions. That is an example of what long term sanctions can do. Russian income is dependent on gas sales. If it turns off the taps europe will adapt quickly. Germany may struggle a bit but if it can get a gas port terminal open lots of gas can be shipped in. Thereā€™s spare electricity generation capacity for emergency heating and if it got really bad mobile diesel generators can be brought on line quickly. Never underestimate how quickly things would be in place for next winter. Russia would never again be trusted with gas supply.
        Ukraine isnā€™t getting any help with boots on the ground if an invasion does happen. They will be supported from the sidelines. No massive nato deployments will happen to help Ukraine. If Russia threatens further then it will happen.
        I see it that the only big losers will be Ukraine and Russia. Any disruption in the world does cause upsets for the world economy but nothing compared to what the instigators suffer.
        I still donā€™t see what putin has to gain for going forward and hopefully the plan is to get something in exchange for a withdrawal

        • The problem is that they are Russian speaking Ukrainians in a part of Ukraine that many have been in in generations since 1860 and Kiev wants to eliminate Russian as a language in the country. They do not see Russia as home and have shown that they will fight, hard to defend their current home.

          Russia’s income may be boosted by gas sales but it is no longer dependent on its sales, especially to the West. If the taps are turned off in winter there is no alternative, people will die. Gas port terminals are expensive and take years and in practical terms cannot replace pipeline gas. Also Russia would, unless payment not possible by no SWIFT, almost certainly continue to honour long term contracts and just stop supplying the spot market, losing no contractual trust.

          I understand your view on who suffers but unfortunately we will be hit, probably hard as well, both in terms of energy prices and economic impacts. Ukraine will be the main sufferer as I can’t see who will pick up the bills.

          But, as I said in my reply to Bob above, to the Russians Ukraine is a distracting sideshow. They really want the security agreements.

          • Oh by that reasoning let them attack Estonia and Latvia with all their Russian speakers settled in those lands by Russian tyrants over the years.

          • The thing to remember here, is that all the former Eastern bloc countries that joined NATO were afraid of the Russians……huge own goal on the part of Russia and now Putin is complaining about it by threatening Ukraine….demonstrating exactly what they were all afraid of….. I don’t think Putin actually wants to invade Ukraine although he is afraid of a NATO backed Ukraine trying to take back Crimea home to the Russian Black Sea fleet….Russia only got involved in Syria because it provides the Russians with the only naval base they have in the Med.

          • Hi, actually nothing I could disagree with.

            However, nothing to remember either: I lived in Latvia, Czech Republic and Slovakia.

            They told their stories.

          • Obviously, the logic is Putin must. It is the strategy of a maniac. Russia needs good relations not some psychologically damaged nationalist trying to reverse history.

          • No they don’t ā€“ not all. The is an amusing video online that shows what happens when someone placed a huge coloured photograph of Putin in a shared public lift in a housing scheme; a concealed camera recorded their reactions and words. They weren’t overjoyed any more than we might be confronted by our own leaders. At least we can dump ours. All attempts to build a democratic system in Russia fail.

      • The citizens I mention are the estimated 940,000 citizens of Ukraine living in the Donbas that now have citizenship of Russia as well. That’s all, nothing to do with Crimea.

      • Hi John, any further delays in any supposed invasion is even more preparation time for Ukraine’s defences and more supply time for its Western allies. Same for the build up on Russian side too but we should know which side we’re on. I’m all for the perceived little guy šŸ‡ŗšŸ‡¦ and the values we, “the West”, stand for and should defend. Let’s hope diplomacy, possible sanctions and detterence tone this situation down. It can’t fun on the front line for the military but you’ve also got to feel for all civilians who will be caught up in this. It’s also hard to know much the World’s media is making it seem worse than it is or isn’t.

        • Agree apart from the sentence re West’s values. It seems we are happy with some of the worst dictators, Saudi etc, as long as they stay onside, only standing up for democracy when it suits us, often leaving countries in far worse state, Iraq, Libya etc, than before we interfered.

          • Putin’s choice of international friends is of course so much more moral? I think not. Yours is weak argument that looks fine on paper, but Putin’s, not Russia, is a thug regime that suppresses and poisons opposition at home and abroad so please spare us the wonky parallels.

          • So, no defence of the terrible trail of disaster by US/NATO then. What has any other organisation done since WW2 that gets anywhere near it?

          • Terrible has changed its definition I see.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Congo_War#Dispute_over_death_toll

            Moe than five million dead, half of them children. That is terrible but apparently NATO is worse.

            NATO is such a ‘terrible’ organisation watch how many more join after Russia shows its true face. There is nothing about the Ukrainian crisis that Putin provoked that could not be resolved peacefully by negotiation. But that would not be Putin’s style.

          • I really don’t see how a war between a couple of countries/tribes in the center of Africa can, regardless of its terrible death toll, in anyway rate comparison with the Worldwide carnage left by the US/NATO.

            Putin did not provoke the civil war in Ukraine, that was the US/EU backed coup in 2013/4 which overthrew the democratically elected Government.

            There is indeed a document that has been in being since 2015, the Minsk Protocol, drafted by the Normandy Four (that included Putin) agreed after a lot of negotiation by all parties up to including us the UK on the UNSC. It holds the path to peace. The power of the right wing in Ukraine has stopped it, not Russia.

      • “Over in days?” it will be a brave commander that tells putin that even if it is what he wants to hear. Whatever happened to the old adage “Never underestimate your enemy”. Perhaps you are right – I just wouldn’t count on it.

          • We do have experience, it’s called Kursk; now reverse the forces for sure but the intel is in, the tactics are known and the Russians will only win after very solid kicking with a level of casualties that could Putin to be relieved of his head.

            Time to stand up to a bully.

          • I can’t seem to remember any of the following in use at Kursk. UAVs, satellites, ECM, precision missiles, networked comms, thermobaric warheads etc. and I am sure they would have an as yet unknown impact.

      • šŸ¤£

        Presumably you believe Hitler was protecting all those ethnic Germans in Czechoslovakia, Poland, Norway, France, etc, etcā€¦

        NATO forces are deployed to protect NATO members only, or have you been completely deaf and blind to every single news report on these deployments.

        Russia has increased the number of BCTs deployed from from 60 to 83 in the last few weeks, an additional 14 are en route. Once those arrive then ā€œimminentā€ becomes an accurate adjective.

        Stop being Putinā€™s useful idiot, you could be better than that šŸ¤·šŸ»ā€ā™‚ļø

        • Of course not and I well understand that on current statements NATO will do nothing to help out in Ukraine apart from material supply, which would probably stop if hostilities started.

          We cannot judge at the moment why Russia has so much forward in Belarus. It may be a chest beating ‘see what we can move if pushed’ ‘super’ exercise or it may be an outright threat. We will see in a couple of weeks time when everything is scheduled to return home.

      • If the Russians attack to defend their citizens then it is possible nothing apart from that will happen. but if, contrary to what Putin has said, the actually attack Ukraine then, as almost everyone agrees it will be over in days. Then it gets interesting.

        The Sudetenland argument. Short term a Pyrrhic victory. Medium to long term a disaster for Russia. Ukrainians who don’t flee westward will be as disgruntled as any large occupied country might be. Putin adds Ukraine to his collection of failed and failing states he does not have the money to either police or re-build. He also unites everyone from Finland to Spain, the Republic of Ireland to Bulgaria and beyond, against clear Russian aggression. Is there a plan? I cannot see one that ends well for Russia or its people.

        • Sorry Barry but it is not the same. Russia entering Ukraine on one side in a civil war, does the business in a few days and then exits is hardly going to generate the kind of backwash you describe. If that then forces Kiev to implement Minsk it could even be regarded as a move that forced peace.

    • I suspect a new iron curtain will desend across Europe – just further east. Russia will be forced into the arms of China who will become the dominent partner. Economic ties between the west and russia & china will reduce to a dribble irritating Putin’s supporters. Oddly Russia may decide ultimately that their only way out will be to join the EU and NATO. That in turn may satisfy both the economic and security concerns.

      • Both are very basically organisations of democracies.

        How on earth will Russia get in?

        (See for comparison China attempting to join CPTPP – China will be unable to get in because of market transparency requirements.)

        • You are certainly correct. Russia would need to become a democracy. This is not unprecidented. Probably more difficult for Russia given it’s dominance in the past but it is selling hydrocarbons which are going out of fashion. Taking neighbours by force is an act of desperation.

      • I would agree that Russia will be driving into China’s arms, for economic support. It’s a gift horse for China and allows them a rapid step up in world influence.

        Don’t expect Chinese troops to stand with them though, the Chinese economy is based on export of goods and services to the West.

        They will steer clear of direct military intervention anywhere in the west and will happily pull the strings from the shadows.

        A major additional concern for China would also be a war in Ukraine that could well destabilise Russia and lead to an internal power struggle.

  5. Very nice aircraft. They are great for loitering and throwing bombs at targets that pop up. Not sure I would want to take one into an area with enemy anti aircraft systems. I imagine there EW is good on them. With the B1 B2 and soon to be B21 the B-52 will still have its uses for a long time.

  6. Not so sure. In the Cold War it was thought 75% of SAC bombers would reach their targets or release point of ALCM and that the PVO’s vast radar and SAM barriers would be taken down by ECM/jamming.

    Now I know the Russian SAM’s systems have improved from the SA2/SA5 but so have our own ECM capabilities.

    • Agreed. I’m afraid many still imagine a B52 strike as this slow, high flying bomber, flying high for everyone to see, trying to reach a target to drop bombs. When in reality, this involves an entire strike package using intelligence of the SAMs systems in the area, operating parameters of the systems, limitations of the SAM type, likely tactics of the operators, areas where radar coverage is likely limited, etc. This is in addition to the escorts using ECM and as you stated, long range missiles that can be fired way beyond the range of any existing SAMs. The Russians are really good at air defence and the SAMs are potent but recent history has shown that whenever they come up at against US/NATO air strikes, they seem to get rolled over time and again.

    • No, fire the missiles and back to base. Part of the role of the S-400’s long range missiles is, if they can’t down them, to keep assets like the B-52 well away, its their missiles that are in many cases the SAM and ECM targets. Ironically the B-52 might find itself flying alongside a Kalibre, both heading for the same airfield.

      • JIMK wrote:
        Part of the role of the S-400ā€™s long range missiles is, if they canā€™t down them, to keep assets like the B-52 well away, 

        The US ensures its strike aircraft and heavy bombers are accompanied by electronic-warfare aircraft which is a service now provided by the EA-18G Growler. That said during the US/France/UK strikes on Syrian chemical sites in 2018, the US strike led by 2 B1s was accompanied by an older EA-6B Prowler. Iā€™m not saying they would be effective, but experience during the air war over North Vietnam during the 60s led the US to develop them in which to counter Russian made SAMs a task they proved to be very good at.I’m also pretty sure the US mil have received a lot of data regards radars and missiles from the Israelis. So the US will have amassed a lot of data on what the Russians have fielded.

        Lets hope that we never find out.

        • Neither side really knows just how good their ‘stuff’ is against the other as it has never been used in anger. Without doubt there will be surprises but they are as yet unknown. Like you I hope it stays that way.

          • The US is very much aware of the capabilities of the S-400 system. The USAF and Israelis have been evaluating its capabilities in Syria and, by now, I feel, know precisely how to handle it. It hasn’t stopped Israel from flying freely around Syria.

          • Given their fairly limited need for the full facilities in Syria I somehow doubt that anyone yet knows its full abilities outside Russia. No missiles have been fired for a start, and the main radars are probably in ‘training’ or ‘export’ mode. Much the same as most F-35s probably flying with reflectors until they need stealth for real.

  9. It would appear both sides are upping the anti, nothing more I hope.

    “Russian Sukhoi Su-25SM ā€˜Frogfoot’ ground attacks jets have arrived in Belarus in a rare deployment of aviation assets from Russia’s Far East to the European country, which is closely allied to Moscow.”

    https://www.janes.com/defence-news/defence/latest/russia-deploys-su-25sm-jets-to-belarus-from-far-east

    Janes Analysis: Russian build up on Ukrainian border
    ļ»æ07 FEBRUARY 2022

    https://www.janes.com/defence-news/defence/latest/russian-build-up-on-ukrainian-border

    • In a way Russia is telling the US that it feels safe in leaving its border with China much less defended as Russia and China now have each other’s backs.

        • Calling it a spire is a bit of an exaggeration, from memory its a dome with a cross on top and even calling it a cathedral is a bit of a push, related I think to MK’s campaigns to be called a city. No idea how tall but it has convenient for the shopping car parks around it.

          • Not by a mile. If the US hadn’t started acting up against both Russia and China at the same time then they would not have felt the need to ally themselves. The both realised that individually they were vulnerable but together the US was vulnerable as it could no longer fight a two front war.

  10. The buffs can carry 20 Tomahawks each and fire well out of reach of Russian Sam’s so even a small force of 10 planes can can do some serious damage while flying over the med or mainland Europe. Let’s not forget the the very public show of force near Cyprus of a Ohio sub that can unleash 150 Tomahawks and you have some serious amount of missles fired well out of range. Add in some B2s which can carry 16 Tomahawks flown direct from US and you could easily have over 500 missles taking out command and control and SAM radar out of the equation. Russia is an attacking force so not dug in to hardened bunkers and our daily overflights will tell us exactly where the are. All of these can be fired from international waters so no target for Russia to retaliate with. The USs ability to strike from afar can not be ignored. Boots don’t have to be on ground in Ukraine they have enough soldiers digging in. And let’s not forget all the other subs from UK and France that may or may not be lurking in range of those Russian targets sat out in the open add in some MQ9s drone out of Italy (already flying sorties on recon over black sea) . There’s alot of firepower available at arm’s reach. The only losers are the Ukrainian people and Russian mother’s.

    • The mechanics of a potential NATO/ Russian conflict aside, if this turned into a direct Military conflict between the two, things will have gone very badly wrong and switching it off, could be a lot harder…..

        • Absolutely David, the Ukrainians won’t just sit there and let Russian artillery blast away, they will revert to defence in depth and mobile warfare, hopefully being fed intelligence regarding Russian troop displacements by NATO all the while.

          Split up into smaller battle groups, highly mobile and critically knowing where the enemy is, they will start taking a serous toll of the Russians. Ukraine haven’t just sat back since the Crimea was taken, they have set about rebuilding their Armed Forces, they will fight hard and cause considerable damage to the Russians.

          Is Putin stupid enough, that’s the real question guys?

    • I think you are describing WW3 not any Ukrainian conflict. The US have already said they have no obligation so won’t interfere.

      • Well that’s on the cards if Putin does invade…do you think he will stop with Ukraine he wants all NATO pushed back to the old iron curtain map so the likes of Poland Estonia Latvia Romania will be his next targets.

        • The Russians are attempting to get NATO countries to stand by the OECD 1999 and 2010 agreements that they signed rather than by using force.

          • Yeah sure and tomorrow they’ll be following through with their commitment to the Budapest memorandum.

          • Which, as I understand it, the Russians believe was negated by the overthrow of the democratically elected Government in Kiev in 2013/4. The US/EU backed coup.

          • OECD is an international organization that promotes world trade and economic growth. It has absolutely nothing to do with Ukraine, NATO, or Russia’s Putinperialism.

          • Really sorry, I put the wrong initials. I meant to say OSCE and this is the link to their key document, para 3 refers. This document and the 3 agreements before it form the core of the Russian’s demands for a written agreement on security in Europe. Last week Lavrov wrote to all signatories asking for their current position on it, in writing.

            https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/b/6/74985.pdf

            As I have said before, Ukraine is a side show to the Russian’s security demands.

  12. JohninMK is either an excellent devil’s advocate, thick as mince or a troll.

    Occam’s Razor? Troll. And possibly more than one.

  13. Just watch the documentary about the RAF Vulcans bombing Port Stanley on the Falklands. 8000 mile round trip from Ascension Island.
    These B52 beauties could do there and back without refuelling. Lovely jubbly.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here