News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Trying to remember what I can of the B-52, I would be absolutely gobsmacked if it was a fuel and or engine problem considering it has 8 turbines. Considering there doesn't look like any secondary explosions would rule out some sort of payload shift. That seems to leave just an unintentional stall or indeed a jammed control surface. Considering the contractors, there is a non-zero chance they were instrumental in this.
Remember the B stands for Boeing (I know it’s actually Bomber for the class, but it fits too well here). Feel bad for the crew though.
Boeing is the poster child of what killed the USA.
Boeing went from an engineer centric company and was poisoned by a "reverse-merger" that put people who already killed one manufacturer in charge. These parasites proceeded to stick to the same playbook that drove them into the ground plus double downed on their greed. I added up all the stock buybacks which looks like legal embezzlement and it was more then the research and development costs of the 777 and the 787 combined. I didn't bother with adjusting for inflation as the buybacks are spread over decades, so the true cost is definitely worse.
I know you're just a random person, but the pilot was a childhood friend and I'm honestly still processing. He left behind his highschool sweetheart and two young children.
Also one-wings are notoriously hard to fly and B-52's are actively supporting the pilot (via computers) to even make it operational for a human, if I don't misremember. So maybe that failed?
Having passive assistance that couldn't fail would actually be a great thing an bring one-wing designs into the commercial aviation.
Edit: I was mistakenly speaking about a (rather) modern bomber B2. Mistook it for the B-52, which isn't a one-wing and built not long after the second world war.
B-52 not B2 Thing is from the 50s
Oh shit, my bad. I thought one-wing bomber. This us a flying fortress, no? Put an edit on my original comment.
Thanks for the correction
No. Flying fortress are the old old bomber from early cold war. They flew a lot in Vietnam. Slow slow planes. They also leave a black streak across the sky from the exhaust.
B1B is supersonic with the moving wings B2 is subsonic one wing
The B52 is the stratofortress. That might have been the source of confusion.