US bomber fleet

  • Was reading an article about how, at the moment, all three types of our bombers are at Guam. This part intrigued me:


    "The deployments could have additional significance in the Pacific considering the planes’ capabilities. The B-2 is the only U.S. bomber capable of carrying a nuclear gravity bomb. B-52s are able to carry smaller nuclear cruise missiles, while B-1s do not carry nuclear weapons as a result of a the 2010 New START Treaty between the United States and Russia."



    https://www.washingtonpost.com…c/?utm_term=.366939027b2f

    renowned climatologist Bill Nye — and by climatologist, we mean guy who takes pictures of the Weather Channel on his TV and posts them to Twitter as proof of climate change.

  • I've touched that B36 at Dayton. Fucking B52 is invisible under it

    renowned climatologist Bill Nye — and by climatologist, we mean guy who takes pictures of the Weather Channel on his TV and posts them to Twitter as proof of climate change.

  • while B-1s do not carry nuclear weapons as a result of a the 2010 New START Treaty between the United States and Russia."

    Not quite true. Bush Sr. ordered the conversion to conventional bombs in 1992 after the collapse of the Soviet Union and was carried out in phases. One of the conversion "phases" took place in 1995 when arming and fusing systems were removed. The last phase was (under the START Treaty) done in 2010, when the hard points were modified to prevent the carrying of nuclear bombs, removing wire bundles used for the arming of nuke bombs and destruction of nuclear pylons. The conversion that Bush Sr. had ordered in 1991 was finally complete in 2011 at a cost of over $3 billion dollars.

    “Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official.”

  • That's a bit of an odd statement. I don't see why a B-52H can't carry a B61 thermonuclear gravity bomb. They sure used to be able to. I wonder if they're talking about a specific nuclear bomb.

  • That's a bit of an odd statement. I don't see why a B-52H can't carry a B61 thermonuclear gravity bomb. They sure used to be able to. I wonder if they're talking about a specific nuclear bomb.

    They may have converted the bomb bays to rotary cruise missile launchers or similar

    renowned climatologist Bill Nye — and by climatologist, we mean guy who takes pictures of the Weather Channel on his TV and posts them to Twitter as proof of climate change.

  • They still have external pylons. You used to be able to load at least 24 on the pylons alone. They mention the external pylons on the B-51G being converted for a new cruise missile, but that usually just means wiring. Maybe there's some new conformal skins they use for them. The B-52H should still be able to do it. Really, most external racks clamp the bomb/missile the same way (unless it's A2A). It's just wiring that makes the difference. And a B61 doesn't really need that much wiring. Much of the consent stuff is handled in the weapons rack itself via the nuclear consent switch/solenoid.

  • Regarding the B52's nuclear capability, it lost a large part of it when the AGM 129 was retired in 2012. It will however get it back shortly when the new LRSO nuclear capable cruise missile enters service, equipping the B2, B52, and the future B21. The B52 can still use the AGM 86, but it's old, however despite its age it proved more reliable and easier to operate than the AGM 129, which is why the AF shitcanned it in the first place. The B52 can carry 20 AGM86 nuclear cruise missiles, and will have a similar number of LRSOs.


    Couple of accurate articles regarding the B52 and losing the B61 capability, as well as future cruise missile stuff.


    https://fas.org/blogs/security/2017/05/b-52-bombs/


    http://www.thedrive.com/the-wa…ar-cruise-missile-program

  • Quote

    The reason for the change appears to be that the B-52 is no longer considered survivable enough to slip through modern air-defenses and drop nuclear gravity bombs on enemy territory.

    That seems plausible enough

    renowned climatologist Bill Nye — and by climatologist, we mean guy who takes pictures of the Weather Channel on his TV and posts them to Twitter as proof of climate change.

  • B1 would seem far more suited to that


    (Well, nowadays)

    renowned climatologist Bill Nye — and by climatologist, we mean guy who takes pictures of the Weather Channel on his TV and posts them to Twitter as proof of climate change.

  • That's why the B-52s mission profile changed in the late 70's/early 80's from a high altitude nuke bomber to low level nuke bomber.

    Sort of, some of the B52 models during the cold war were optimized for low level penetration, but when the F111 came along, it was far superior at doing low altitude penetration attacks, faster, and more survivable than the B52. The B52s also were wearing down very quickly doing low altitude ops, it was costing the USAF a ton to keep them in that mission. Once the SRAM missile came online that was all she wrote for the real low level ops with the B52 so far as nuclear missions went, and it was back to high altitude operations, as it could carry swarms of those things and the entire point was to launch them from higher altitude outside of the range of the defenses they were going low to evade in the first place, and when the AGM68 entered service and replaced the SRAM, the B52 was pretty much out of the low level game.


    Must have been a crazy job during the cold war, being in a B52 crew, doing low level attacks, even simulated ones. That ride must have sucked for all the crew not in the cockpit facing forward with a window, ie everyone but the pilot/copilot.

  • It's simply because they fucking know any non-stealth bomber, even "low-alt penetrator" like B1B was supposed to be - will be destroyed seconds after entering a united Aircraft Defence reach, over Poland, Pribaltika or Arctics/Far East. And they still believe B2 can reach far enough to carry free-fall bombs. Try. What a bunch of thechnofaggot morons. So fucking self assured that their last ICBM was built in 1979, When i went to school.


    Guys, don't you see it's serious now?


    I have told you many times - over our country house i see formations of MiG-31s every half-hour, single planes may come for landing every five minutes, do you know what a MiG-31 is? Plus i see 27s performing there too, is same quantities, but usually not flying gear-retracted right over our house.


    And a single attempt of using a nuclear-capable bomber, or any nuclear-capable plane like F16 not even to drop anything towards RF or RB, but look like a "target dividing" now may result in a massive launch.


    Only You guys are responsible for all this shit.


    Your leadership forgot fear. Now it's You to pay for it.


    Discussing bomber fleet became idiotic after Korean war. After Linebaker 2 it became a criminal idiocy. Now it's simply a global suicide.

  • Quote

    Sort of, some of the B52 models during the cold war were optimized for low level penetration


    How the fuck can you imagine it?! With 100% radar coverage of Soviet borders and echeloned SAMs?!


    Suicide quarter-way missions?


    LAst time 52s went free-fall bombing - remember how many got burnt? By underfed almost-illiterate Vietnamese with already-outdated S-75s?

  • Sorry, mates.


    We are going to prevent your criminal regime from spreading "democracy" all over the world, and you know already that we are better then you. Your lame attempts to support ISIS and Al Quaeda in Syria, against a nationally chosen power, fwwding millions to terrorists, illegally occupying parts of soverign Syria all led to miserable failure, as it happened when you tried to fight my country.


    Go fuck youself in your hemisphere.


    No, now you deserve something less then a quarter-sphere. Isolated between two coasts. Disarmed. Chastised.


    You are a democracy, aren't you?


    Every single one of you is responsible for the lives of four million Vietnamese, millions of Koreans, Japanese and Germans your bloody democratically elected regime burnt in terror bombings, nuclear attacks and chemical genocide.

  • So why the fuck do you have all that "democracy endowments"?! Why the fuck do your bloody government pay people who openly say they want me, my family and friends killed?


    I don't fucking care about how you call yourself.


    You fucking voted many times for genocide of innocent people.


    And you all, every one of you, are not going to avoid punishment for your sane, deliberate decision to murder millions.


    You and so-called UK, nations even more murderous and genocidal than Mongols. Mongols were decent enemies and never avoided being responcible.

  • How the fuck can you imagine it?! With 100% radar coverage of Soviet borders and echeloned SAMs?!


    Suicide quarter-way missions?


    LAst time 52s went free-fall bombing - remember how many got burnt? By underfed almost-illiterate Vietnamese with already-outdated S-75s?

    Out of the 31 B-52s that were lost over Vietnam, only 17 were shot down, with an addition two B-52s scrapped due to battle damage. The remainder were lost in non-combat incidents.


    As a result of the Linebacker II raids, by December 27th, 1972, North Vietnam was essentially with out any SAM missile defenses and immediately asked the US to restart the peace talks.

    “Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official.”

  • Newly created posts will remain inaccessible for others until approved by a moderator.

    The last reply was more than 365 days ago, this thread is most likely obsolete. It is recommended to create a new thread instead.