Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit

If B-2s are sitting out in the open like that, one wonders what is in the hangars. More B-2s, or something else. Alternatively nothing (interesting), and they are purposely left out to send a message. Food for thought anyway.
 
Black Dog said:
If B-2s are sitting out in the open like that, one wonders what is in the hangars. More B-2s, or something else. Alternatively nothing (interesting), and they are purposely left out to send a message. Food for thought anyway.
Click to expand...

Only six B-2s were tracked, and one put down in Hickman. The shelters are empty; these are being displayed as a threat.
 
Josh_TN said:
Unrelated. The new U.S. administration wants to curb Irans nuclear program, and as a secondary goal end Houthi And The Blowfish’s attacks on shipping in the Red Sea. The deployment likely would have occurred even if China sat on its hands.

I think there will be a lot of B-2 related news to write about within a month or so.
Click to expand...
Not like B-2s haven't been sent to deal with Houthis before...



Black Dog said:
If B-2s are sitting out in the open like that, one wonders what is in the hangars. More B-2s, or something else. Alternatively nothing (interesting), and they are purposely left out to send a message. Food for thought anyway.
Click to expand...
Purposely left out to send a message: "The US is officially getting annoyed by your bullshit. Knock it off or it's going to be bad."
 
And quite right too Scott Kenny. It is about time that we got tough with them all.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Not like B-2s haven't been sent to deal with Houthis before...
Click to expand...

Yes, but not in these numbers and not based locally. The message being sent is that B-2s will operate with a high turn over rate in your hemisphere, and we have packed up everything we need to do that and stored that locally. That is a much different strategic posture than flying a couple aircraft in from Whiteman, and it is a sledgehammer when the Houthi are a mouse. The message and who it is being addressed to are unmistakable.
 
As for the politics of it - not sure that the U.S. needs another war or that it w Be here if JCPOA was still in effect. But I think the administration has thrown so much firepower at Diego that at this point we are just waiting for when B-2s get used, not whether they will or not. Iran and the U.S. are as far apart as Russia and Ukraine in terms of desired outcome. Barring the Trump admin picking up its toys and going home to sulk, this can really only end with this thread having a lot of news items.

The rumors I’m hearing are that there are only two camps of strategic thought at the White House: “bomb Iran if we don’t get a deal in a month”, and “just bomb Iran”.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Not like B-2s haven't been sent to deal with Houthis before...
Click to expand...

Indeed, but that can be done (and was done) from CONUS with full loads of JDAMS. Now if you want to carry two of something bigger the fuel load comes down and you want to launch from Diego...

Purposely left out to send a message: "The US is officially getting annoyed by your bullshit. Knock it off or it's going to be bad."
Click to expand...

Exactly, how deep of a hole can 10-12 MOP's make... That one isn't directed at the Houthis.
 
IMO, basing at Diego implies a lot of repeated strikes. Less turn around time. B-2s were used on Yemen before, but this build up implies more of a constant cadence of B-2 activity, not a few round trips from Whiteman. I think all the necessary assets for a sustained campaign have been moved in theater.
 
Josh_TN said:
IMO, basing at Diego implies a lot of repeated strikes. Less turn around time. B-2s were used on Yemen before, but this build up implies more of a constant cadence of B-2 activity, not a few round trips from Whiteman. I think all the necessary assets for a sustained campaign have been moved in theater.
Click to expand...
Diego is at best 1/3 of the total force per day for continuing ops. If you want to surge things, you'll be on the Arabian Peninsula. Sometime long ago I supported bomber operations out of Diego (don't touch the Queen's cocks!). That became too cumbersome, so we operated from a classified location, now declassified as Al Udeid. Not really sure in the current mess you want to go to the "Deid", but there are other locations where bombers have used that aren't someplace Iran can see from their southern shore.
 
No B-2's available for Australia to buy until maybe when a sufficient number of B-21's are available for USAF. In general regarding B-2 maintenance and upkeep (excluding LO maintenance), the aircraft for it's design complexity has been and is pretty reliable from the aspects of avionics, hydro, fuel, landing gear, mechanical systems, etc. This is from experience being involved with the B-2 for 10 years involving subsystems development. The B-2 still has a lot of life in it, beyond 2030, it's not even close to approaching it's end of structural life that's for sure. If the USAF can upgrade the B-2 with B-21 LO and if allowed, the Aussies could potentially purchase some, the cost, that I don't know.
 
Hydroman said:
No B-2's available for Australia to buy until maybe when a sufficient number of B-21's are available for USAF. In general regarding B-2 maintenance and upkeep (excluding LO maintenance), the aircraft for it's design complexity has been and is pretty reliable from the aspects of avionics, hydro, fuel, landing gear, mechanical systems, etc. This is from experience being involved with the B-2 for 10 years involving subsystems development. The B-2 still has a lot of life in it, beyond 2030, it's not even close to approaching it's end of structural life that's for sure. If the USAF can upgrade the B-2 with B-21 LO and if allowed, the Aussies could potentially purchase some, the cost, that I don't know.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't expect Oz to want to pay for B-2 coatings maintenance, so a refit with B-21 RAM tech would likely be required.
 
Forest Green said:
breakingdefense.com

Australia should talk to Washington about buying B-2 stealth bombers - Breaking Defense

Australia should acquire B-2A stealth bombers to help defend against China, argue Euan Graham and Linus Cohen of ASPI.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
Click to expand...
I saw that this morning and read it for the novelty value. Note that the article proposes this comes as part of a 50% increase in Australian defence spending to 3%, yet just a couple of months ago ASPI (ie the same think-tank) was saying that increasing defence budgets past the 2.4% expected would be difficult. They seem to have a problem in joined-up thinking.

www.aspistrategist.org.au

Australia can’t easily lift defence spending to a Trump-satisfying level | The Strategist

US President Donald Trump has called on NATO members to lift their defence spending from the current target of 2 percent of GDP to 5 percent. ‘They could all afford it,’ he said, warning that the ...
www.aspistrategist.org.au www.aspistrategist.org.au
 
Scott Kenny said:
I wouldn't expect Oz to want to pay for B-2 coatings maintenance, so a refit with B-21 RAM tech would likely be required.
Click to expand...

I doubt B-21 tech can be retrofitted cost effectively. F-35 RAM is actually baked into the structure in the literal sense.

The other problem is that the avionics are already hopelessly obsolescent and hard to upgrade; a recent attempt to replace the defensive electronics system was scrapped after a $2 billion effort.

Based on the base modification schedule, it looks like the LRIP B-21s will replace about 40% of the B-1 force to allow the survivors a source of canibalized airframes and the full rate production removes the B-2 from service within a couple of years after that.
 
Josh_TN said:
I doubt B-21 tech can be retrofitted cost effectively. F-35 RAM is actually baked into the structure in the literal sense.

The other problem is that the avionics are already hopelessly obsolescent and hard to upgrade; a recent attempt to replace the defensive electronics system was scrapped after a $2 billion effort.
Click to expand...
Excellent points.

So Oz would be looking at what, ~24x B-21s?
 
Scott Kenny said:
Excellent points.

So Oz would be looking at what, ~24x B-21s?
Click to expand...
I don’t think they are interested in spending the money and it’s unclear if the U.S. would offer, but B-21s would make far more sense than taking on the obsolescence and supply chain issues of B-2. It also would likely offer much improved capabilities and a continual upgrade path with the U.S. machines, where as B-2s are pretty much at a dead end after the next contracted NG upgrade to complete by 2029 even were they to remain is US service.
 
Another issue: RAAF would lack sufficient tanking assets and the B-2 would lack the range to make it much further than the coast of the SCS. B-21 likely has the hange to operate without tanking, but there are a host of issues with adopting it even beyond cost and classification.
 
Josh_TN said:
Another issue: RAAF would lack sufficient tanking assets and the B-2 would lack the range to make it much further than the coast of the SCS. B-21 likely has the hange to operate without tanking, but there are a host of issues with adopting it even beyond cost and classification.
Click to expand...
Doesn't the B-2 have a ~6000nmi range? So ~2500nmi combat radius?
 
It would be crazy for the RAAF to even consider buying the B-2 as it is getting on in it's years, if they want a long range stealth bomber the next best thing would be to go for the newer B-21.
 
It's obviously a silly idea. The Aussies could just contribute funds to expand B-21 production, which is presumably what the Americans would prefer as well.
 
Josh_TN said:
I doubt B-21 tech can be retrofitted cost effectively. F-35 RAM is actually baked into the structure in the literal sense.
Click to expand...

On the F-35 the “structure” is not absorbing, it is reflecting. RAM is still applied on top of that, it is not part of the structure other than in discrete areas.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom