This will be another colossal waste of money if they ever build it. These are just pork projects. If china wants decides to attack Taiwan give them some nukes. That will end the war immediately. mutually assured destruction. No fighting.
My mistake I corrected before you posted. You are high if you think they held air superiority for all of the reasons I pointed out. (That you havent even argued probably because there is no counter beyond your long meandering posts). It is a classic example if why having too few of even the very best hardware isnt good enough.
Insanity in action. B2 was designed to be Jason Bourne of the sky, slipping in undetected on a solo infiltration mission that incapacitates enemy air defenses. Never panned out. And here we are again. B21. Woo-hoo.
To those speaking on drone fighters -- they're here and bombers I would imagine aren't far off either.
Should this thread be in the D&D? I would like to know more about this program and its cost but I'm initially skeptical of the need for it. While strategic systems are still needed given what we've seen in the last 20 years the military should be more focused on developing a more mobile and flexible force to deal with asymmetric warfare and support humanitarian missions. A battle between great powers while not impossible isn't as likely now and war between the US and the PRC is very unlikely. The threat of the PRC and its capabilities are frequently overplayed in these type of discussions. The PRC can't invade Taiwan without a lot of difficulty having to do with that Taiwan is very well armed as advantages of defending it's own territory. The PRC also still doesn't have as modern of a navy or an amphibious capability that would be needed. While the PRC blue water navy is improving it still isn't anywhere near the US. More importantly though than differences in technology and capabilities is that in the last 10 years relations between the PRC and Taiwan have greatly improved with direct ties and billions of trade between the two parties. The PRC leadership is pragmatic and unlikely to risk both severe damage to its economy and the loss of many Chinese lives to take Taiwan. At the same time Taiwan's leadership and population has also been cautious and that is one of the main reasons why even under the very nationalist DPP party Taiwan hasn't outrightly declared independence and most polling shows that Taiwanese are fine with the current ambiguous relationship with the PRC. As far as other threats from the PRC. While there has been much sabre rattling and protests the PRC has also been fairly restrained in approach to Japan. Trade and other economic ties between the two countries are very valuable and a war between them would not only devastate both their economies but also the global economy. Other than some air flights over the Diaoyutai / Senkakus the PRC hasn't taken many aggressive moves regarding those islands. If anything Taiwanese and HK people have taken a harder line on the islands and most of the protest flotillas directed at the Japanese are from made up of those people not mainlanders. Regarding the South China Sea the PRC has been aggressive but at the same time the US and ASEAN nations haven't taken any major pushbacks. As I pointed out in other threads while these moves by the PRC are provocative it is a mistake to read them as being a sign of major Chinese territorial expansionism. I think this is one reason why the US and ASEAN nations haven't done more. I don't think the US is willing to go war over the Spratlys. The biggest issue though regarding the likelihood of the PRC turning from a global rival to an outright enemy in a shooting war with the US has to do with what is going on internally in the PRC. There are some very real signs of weakness within the PRC in the economy and many other issues regarding the environment and social upheaval. The CCP frequently plays the nationalism card to keep the PRC united but that can only go so far if things do turn bad with the economy and if they can't keep on improving the quality of life for most Chinese. For the PRC to fight a war of aggression would both take away a lot of resources for continuing to develop the country while also destroying an economy that still needs foreign trade and investment. Many pro-PRC people like to say that the Chinese people can handle far more suffering given Chinese history in the 20th C. Given though that most Chinese have now grown up in a time of increasing prosperity and improving lifestyle I'm not actually sure that would be true. From studying and spending time in the PRC I don't think that a war is something that the leadership is eager for.
So this is a replacement for the B-52 which was around before you were born and currently will have to be used until 2040 at least. Do you want to build a replacement or give up your ability to deliver weapons?
Consider we have many other platforms to deliver weapons not having a new strategic bomber won't mean we can't deliver weapons. Further there is the option of building more B-52's with upgraded electronics and avionics. The question of if we need a whole new fleet of strategic bombers has to be weighed with the cost and the eminent threats we might face where we really need a whole new strategic bomber platform.
Existing aircraft with new advanced stealth cruise missiles are way more cheaper and just as effective.
this is a lie as the current b-52 is nothing like the original delivered in in the 50's. it has had many advances and upgrades because of how cheap and effective the platform is. so no, they're not replacing a 60+ year old aircraft, give me a break.
Deliver with a C-5 galaxy? I meant actually using them. You prefer non-stealth aircraft AND you want to fly the B-52 till 2060+(?). 100+ year old aircraft's survivability would prevent it from doing any missions. It is already scheduled to go past 2040. How much further do you want to push that?
Yeah just the same airframe, payload, range, radar cross section, engines, cruise speed, green CRT screen/steam gauge cockpit. Nothing like the original at all.
This reads like one of those Newsmax fear mongering articles. Just reaching for reasons to continually feed the military. Debt be damned. Continue this never ending desire to police the world and always looking for a fight. The day a B-21 flies in to bomb China or Russia will be a very bad day for all.
Ignorant people can't connect the dots between having a nuclear deterrent and no world wars or threat of invasion for more than half a century. Nuclear weapons (and the ability to deliver them by air/sea/land) are the only weapons used every single day, to deter our enemies and keep the peace.
"Long meandering posts" - Now I remember why I have had you on ignore. You don't pay attention, you aren't nearly as informed as you think you are, and you are absurdly impolite. I'm sorry I wasted my time with you.
New B-21 is needed to continue this deterrent? I think we still have plenty capabilities to deter! And while we are at deterring the like of China and Russia, we have been hit by extremist terrorists that these bombers have ZERO chance of stopping. We need to be smarter with our spending and focus our spending and technology to target these terrorists threats more than to build more B-21 stealth bombers to fight Nations that are still very much deterred to attack us with our current capabilities.
Waste of money, we need roads, bridges and schools. I remind you of the F-35 http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/16/politics/f-35-jsf-operational-costs/
