UAL,

This video of a B-2 dropping 80 GBU-38's (inert) over the UTTR was from September of 2003 -- 12.5 years ago. That capability has existed for a long time and the capabilities have only improved over the last 12.5 years.

Enjoy!

https://youtu.be/bjoMQRUWEe8

 

A little about the GBU-57 that I mentioned in the earlier post.

https://youtu.be/WlaIl9J14H4

 

Hardly.

Were this a regular Air Force debrief, I would use language not allowed by the TOU. As a Mod, I am required and compelled to take a more civil tone on this forum....which includes what I do when I tell someone he is in error.

Former here; I believe same for Ex.

I'm about most bang for the buck. I despise the F-35 because it seems opted for a worst-case scenario that has low probability of happening. But it reduces capability for the most-likely scenario.

So too the B-21. I'm sure it would be full of cool new bells and whistles, and maybe capabilities. But is it really necessary, or affordable?

I get you are most likely a bomber guy, and your screenname suggests you might be someone still affiliated who would be excited to see a new jet.

Here's a link on costs that I just saw by chance tonight. I was wrong; the BUFF is slightly more expensive to operate than the B-1.

I under-estimated the cost of the B-2.

11 A-10s could be operated for the same cost as one B-2. I would argue that is a better option for CAS.

Keep in mind: the Germans had the technologically most advanced Air Force in the world in 1945: Me-262 and Arado 234 jet fighter and bombers, respectively, and the Mach 5 V-2.

They also were running low on food and oil. They were running out of money.

(They lost).


Air Force plane cost per flight hour chart - Business Insider

 

I bet Thunder never placed a zap on a stripper's derrier in the Oclub. (Language adjusted to comply with TOS)

 

Ex:

Ever play "Canadian Rodeo" in the bar?

I did----once!

It apparently isn't as widely known as I once thought. If you need an explanation, I'll have to do it by PM (TOU, you know!).

 

Saw a rerun of "Dr. Strangelove" last night. Nothing scares the Rooskies more than "King" Kong & Darth Vader comin' at 'em in a BUFF!

 

I once had an aircraft commander that spoke exactly like that. Everything was "Rooskies."

 

Interesting to hear you say that. About 6 years ago, I had a conversation with an O-6 with a pretty big perspective on history. I thought at the time and still do that more new 4th generation fighters with the technology upgrades offered on the F-22 and F-35 would be money better spent to buy more airplanes as opposed to the small numbers of 22s we ended up with and the likely budget fights that will eventually cut the F-35 planned buy. He asked me what one of Nazi Germany's biggest weaknesses was? I pondered for a moment and thought the answer was Hitler's inept meddling with the Generals and their plans. The answer he told me was the Germans were masters at building technologically superior weapons in insufficient numbers to matter. Then I had the ah-ha moment when I realized that today the U.S. is building the same kind of "wunder waffen." We did not out tech the Germans, we out produced them. I remember reading once that one factory building B-24s at one point managed to get 1 plane per hour off the assembly line. I can't remember if it was a Consolidated plant or one of the auto plants that had retooled to help with the war effort.

 

But after the mass productions of WWII, the US, and most of the western allies, have more often than not been about the QUALITY over the QUANTITY.

Throughout the Cold War, NATO knew that the 'Rooskies' and the Warsaw Pact were going to throw huge numbers at us and that our quality of armament and the quality of our training were going to be our advantages.

Right or wrong......we won't find out until the bell has rung.

 

Ah...but quantity has a quality all its own.