Reply to thread

Message

The sense I get from that figure, and the fact that one of the other articles that discussed referred to weapons integration being part of the program, is that the B-2 force is considered a hedge for a conflict this decade, before a force of B-21s can replace it one for one, or at least payload for payload. Also it seems likely to me that this means B-1s are in fact being cut first. The choice of the first B-21 base always implied this, but various divest dates for the B-1 and B-2 force that the USAF released seemed to contradict each other. Spending half the cost of a new B-21 on every B-2 seems to indicate that type will retire after the B-1s do, otherwise there's too little return on the investment.

[QUOTE="Josh_TN, post: 677181, member: 15394"] The sense I get from that figure, and the fact that one of the other articles that discussed referred to weapons integration being part of the program, is that the B-2 force is considered a hedge for a conflict this decade, before a force of B-21s can replace it one for one, or at least payload for payload. Also it seems likely to me that this means B-1s are in fact being cut first. The choice of the first B-21 base always implied this, but various divest dates for the B-1 and B-2 force that the USAF released seemed to contradict each other. Spending half the cost of a new B-21 on every B-2 seems to indicate that type will retire after the B-1s do, otherwise there's too little return on the investment. [/QUOTE]

Verification