Originally Posted by
UAL T38 Phlyer
Not satisfied that the F-35 will bankrupt the US and military, the Air Force ups the ante with a program projected to cost $60 Billion.
Wait for it; next will be the selection of the T-50 to replace the T-38 instead of a cheaper and more practical airplane for UPT (like the L-159).
B-52: bomb-truck; lots of bombs and loiter.
B-1: conventional-only; not a bad bomb-truck, but fewer bombs, less loiter, more expense.
B-2: in theory both conv and nuke. Limited conventional bombs; rumored to cost more than $100,000 an hour.
Yup....B-21 makes perfect sense....
UAL,
You are completely clueless on the current bomber force. You state that the B-1 carries fewer bombs? Not so, B-1 can carry 24 GBU-31s, those are 2,000 lb JDAMs if you don't know your nomenclature. Or they can carry 24 JASSM cruise missiles making it one hell of a bomb truck.
You then go on to cement your ignorance by stating the B-2 has limited conventional bombs. What a joke. The B-2 has the most diverse and capable conventional load out of any of the bombers. Let me illustrate. A single B-2 can carry and in one pass deliver 80 x GBU-38s (500 lb JDAM's). Or with the rotary launchers installed it can carry sixteen of any combination of the following:
GBU-31 (2000 lb JDAM)
JASSM cruise missile
JSOW
GBU-28 (5,000 lb penetrator)
Furthermore, it can carry two of the 30,000 lb GBU-57 bunker busters.
Your posts are usually well thought out and factual but this one of yours was so misleading and so devoid of facts that it had to be corrected by someone who actually knows a thing or two about the bomber fleet.