| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science & Technology |
| Next-Generation Bomber B-21 Raider VS The B-2 Spirit Stealth Bomber |
| 2021-10-11 |
| Posted by:badanov |
| #8 My hope is that the B-21 is easier to maintain than the B-2 The coating problem was solved with the F-35. See "F-35 fibre mat". The B-21 is designed to fight China. None of the fighters have the range after the initial exchange and loss of airbases like in Okinawa. A B-21 can get close to the coast with long range missiles and destroy military and infrastructure assets throughout the populated parts of China. A thousand stealthy cruise missiles per week will reduce even a country as large as China to a pre-industrial level pretty quick. |
| Posted by: Floper Clunk9372 2021-10-11 15:25 |
| #7 EMCOM VS. Stealth. How can you stealth a swarm and why would you want to? |
| Posted by: magpie 2021-10-11 15:05 |
| #6 Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider Swarm Technology |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2021-10-11 13:27 |
| #5 What is the prospective role of the B-21? Delivering mega-death by the kiloton through hostile airspace? Yes, it could do that -- but so could a cruise missile or ICBM. Fly world wide (with enough tanker aircraft, but that begs the question of where those will fly from.) and deliver conventional weapons? Yes, but as Mike put it: will we build enough to be "Tactically useful"? |
| Posted by: magpie 2021-10-11 11:43 |
| #4 literal thousands of personnel needed to maintain and fly them. My hope is that the B-21 is easier to maintain than the B-2 - especially the coatings! The B-2 have a reputation as a hanger queen with dozens of airmen assigned to visually inspect the outside aafter each flight. If we can avoid that the aircraft will have a much smaller footprint. |
| Posted by: Gerthudion the Rasher1031 2021-10-11 11:34 |
| #3 Their only purpose is to In the unlikely event they are used correctly. |
| Posted by: Skidmark 2021-10-11 10:18 |
| #2 Who the hell needs stealth bombers? Their only purpose is to start wars. Do we really need another war? Here's a crazy idea: let's defend America's borders. Insane, I know, but I bet you if we try it, it'll work. |
| Posted by: Omomolet Phutch9064 2021-10-11 07:34 |
| #1 ...The B-2 is - at the bottom line - late 70s and early 80s tech. All things considered it did very well, but its tech was steadily challenged from the start (especially its finicky coatings) and the USAF, to its credit, understood that. The B-21 is - so far (emphasis added) - doing very, very well because it is, and should possibly be called, a B-2 derivative with upgraded tech and capabilities. I think the real challenges will be: (A) Are we going to get the couple hundred aircraft we need, or will Congress in its never ending quest to cut money where it shouldn't instead cut the order to a tactically useless handful? (B) If we get all the aircraft, where are we going to put them? When USAF killed SAC at the end of the Cold War, it also got rid of most of the bases and infrastructure that could have supported them. The remaining bases probably can't be expanded enough to support 2-3 squadrons at 17-20 aircraft each, not to mention the literal thousands of personnel needed to maintain and fly them. And don't forget the political pressure there's going to be to base them in someone's district/home state that's far, far away from where they should be. Stay tuned... Mike |
| Posted by: Mike Kozlowski 2021-10-11 06:17 |