Strategic Bomber Requirements
 

None except those aircraft are all over 200 years old.......

It's time to retire those friggin A/C...........

Agreed,,

RIP

We do not have anything to replace them with, especially for conventional bombing.

TR

..and a lot of other capabilities that they bring...

In Desert Storm we had 10% smart bombs and 90% dumb bombs.

New Iraq war, it was 10% dumb bombs and 90% smart bombs.

IMO we don't need their capability anymore. I'd rather see one bomb one target practiced.;)

Actually we are closer than you think..

The Grumman RQ-4B Global Hawk has a wing span of the 707.. It's primary use is intel, with 30 hrs on station. The technology is not to far off to allow armed flights. Load it with a bunch of J-DAM's & it's got your back..

Another is the Grumman X-47B J-UCAS, it may replace ALL the Tom Cruises in the world as the go-to attack delivery craft. NG just got a contract to develop a carrier based version.. Think of it as the F-22A, with no windows...

We are talking UAV's,, combined with the latest technology smart-bombs,, why pay for the truck driver who wants star billing,, and coffee brakes??

Other's are working this topic,, Grumman is not the only provider, but it's the one where my kids work...

Let's say I am looking for a replacement capability for the Buff.

Which UAV has a 70,000 pound paylaod and a combat radius of 4,400 miles?

TR

None.

But why would we need a direct replacement for the B52?

The B1/B2 fleet has the nuclear penetration mission covered.

The B2 and again the B1 to a lesser extent have the capability to operate in a high ADA EM threat environment to deliever nuclear or conventional munitions....Although we will at the onset of hostilities do whatever it takes to gain air superiority and reduce the ADA threat.

If we're after tonnage of dumb bombs, the B2 and the B1 can dump a bunch of them just like the B52

IMO, A next gen UAS could fill the role of JADAM carrier with as much loiter time/payload as necessary support us playing single bomb wack-a-mole against HVTs/MVTs and provide CAS.

Once we get a UAS that we can hang a serious amount bombs onto (and enough of them) then IMO, the need for the B52 drops greatly.

I'm certainly no expert. Am I missing something?

How many B1s and B2s do we have, or high capacity UAV bombers?

How long do you think it would take (and cost) to build enough to cover the B-52's share of the conventional bombing mission?

TR

TR,

That probably will never happen, for a bunch of reasons. I think in the current world of PC citizens, carpet bombing is a monster that died,, or they want it to die..

In the near future, I can see an FA lying on his belly, laser device in hand calling for support by pressing the trigger and one of these new UAV's slipping a couple 1 ton's out the door.. More like a personal artillery battery in your pocket, waiting at 40k ft...

Don't get me wrong,, I like carpet bombing,, use to love being awakened at 3AM by the Arc-Light runs along the Cambodian boarder,, night after night. Thank god we have some of the B-52's still flying..

Carpet bombing is not what I am talking about. The first couple of JDAMs may not be enough till the next aircraft arrives on station.

We sure needed the B-52 capability in the fall of 2001, along with the Navy aircraft, and everyone else's we could grab.

B-52s allowed extremely long loiter times to drop lots of smaller strikes, without the expense of building an equivalent load carrying capacity of B-1s or B-2s, and without the unneeded (and expensive) stealth capability of the B-2.

Still waiting for someone to tell me how many B-1s and B-2s we have, vs. B-52s.:munchin

TR

They built 21 B2's, one down, 20 remain..

There was four(4) B-1A's built 4 and one hundred(100) B-1B, but I think 1/2 are already retired..

Somewhere around 750 B-52's built,, Lord only knows how many are still air worthy..

According to the USAF fact sheet, it looks like we have:

B52H - 94

B1 - 65

B2 - 20

This isn't counting test aircraft.

So the current B-52 fleet represents what percentage of our ability to delivery large quantities of ordnance long distances?

What would it cost to replace that capability with more modern aircraft?

BTW, for those who do not think we need that many strat bombers, imagine the need if the NKPA decides to come south, or the Chinese decide to take Taiwan back into the fold by force.

TR

Sad day losing an air crew and the aircraft. Rest in Peace! Prayers out!

The B-52 is still a great weapons platform. The aircraft and crew remain a vital and powerful deterrent in our nations' defense. There is no replacement. If all B-52s were removed from the inventory, we loose considerable capability.

Weapons systems and avionics change regularly. Two aircraft that have stood the test of time are the B-52, and the C-130. Not a bit stealthy but highly adaptable, very capable platforms for many different configurations.

I have no doubt that B-52 crews would rather be in a spiffy, new aircraft, and not the one dad flew. On the other hand, if you'll recall, a "new" B-2 went in after take-off from Guam a few weeks ago.

My $.02

RF 1