B-2 stealth bombers get meticulous makeovers

[unhappycamper]

A B-2 stealth bomber gets a final coating of paint as part of its overhaul in a high-security hangar at Northrop Grumman Corp.'s facility in Palmdale.


B-2 stealth bombers get meticulous makeovers
By W.J. Hennigan, Los Angeles Times
June 10, 2010

Hunched over, her eyes fixed downward, Tanya Hart inches across the vast wing of the B-2 stealth bomber one small step at a time, looking for any nicks or hairline scratches in the freshly repainted surface.

Even a tiny blemish could make the B-2 as visible on radar screens as a giant flying tin can. Hart, 50, is the last line of defense for what may be the world's most expensive paint job.

"This isn't a job where you can afford to mess up," said Hart, a "surface technician" for Northrop Grumman Corp., which built the bombers and is now overhauling them.

The B-2 has been called one of the greatest achievements in military technology since the atom bomb. But keeping the massive, bat-winged plane from being detectable by radar is no easy task. It's not cheap, either.

Overhauling a stealth bomber, which must be done every seven years, costs $60 million, on average, and usually takes a year.



unhappycamper comment: Since these things cost $2.1 billion dollars each, $60 million for a paint job seems reasonable.

[Sherman A1]

1. I wonder if they could do my old Ford Truck as well?

It would be nice to have it freshly painted and being a little less radar visible wouldn't be all bad.

[Dr.Phool]

2. We're still paying for that obsolete, worthless piece of shit?

Talk about a flying budget cut!

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

9. Obsolete? What has surpassed it's role?

Keep in mind the B2 has a 6000nm range and can carry 80 500lb JDAM bombs (or 16 warheads)
Oh yeah... it's stealth.

[depakid]

3. On the other hand, unlike other hair trigger weapons systems, they can be called back

and were reasonably well adapted to perform other tactical missions.

[Bonobo]

4. More war porn! Whee!

Yes, I am sure many people are "interested" in this.

Yes, I could ignore the OP because I am not gleeful about weapons designed to bomb civilians stealthily.

But I would prefer, seeing as this is a discussion board, to discuss WHY we are spending that kind of money on unecessary weapons when we ignore the health, education and general well-being of our citizens.

I also question this as a form of entertainment.

DU is not "Guns N Ammo" magazine and everyone should take a long think about what the hell we are doing with this kind of war fetishing and WHO it makes us a a people and a country.

Unrec.

[unhappycamper]

5. I am just attemping to show your tax dollars at work.

I posted about American deaths and injuries for a few years and folks seem to have lost interest. Pretty much the way the peace movement has gone since Obama was elected.

So I decided to follow the money. Granted $60 million isn't much in the grand scheme of things, but I think $2.1 billion dollars is.

[Bonobo]

6. 2.1 billion X 20 + 100's of millions in repairs.

Maybe 300 billion for those beasts. What have we got from them?

It is corporate welfare.

[unhappycamper]

7. On that you and I agree. n/t

[Ichingcarpenter]

8. I read your posts you record the obscene waste

of our military industrial complex, ..... Thanks
Now, how many teachers could that money supported or high speed rail could that have help start. this is only one of the many thousand boondoggles you point out

THANK YOU...KEEP IT UP

[Historic NY]

10. "Job Security"....built in costs....with a seven year itch.