The Pentagons newB-21 treasury raider

[Motor City]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WM7HHc7MCm4

[ZoWie]

Ahhhh yes. The old political tactic known as, "When all else fails, order another bomber."

That one won't go away because it works. The only failures are when they try to find a viable mission for human-piloted bombers in an air war strategy that's more about drones and missiles. The victories come from the domestic volleys of words, which after all are the new bombs and bullets according to the pundits at the Army War College. It'll get aircraft plants humming, it will raise the Dow and NASDAQ, the Nooz will do its usual propaganda offensive, and the world will be saved again, at least on Twitter and the Nooz (not much difference anymore).

[Number6]

Ahhhh yes. The old political tactic known as, "When all else fails, order another bomber."

That one won't go away because it works. The only failures are when they try to find a viable mission for human-piloted bombers in an air war strategy that's more about drones and missiles. The victories come from the domestic volleys of words, which after all are the new bombs and bullets according to the pundits at the Army War College. It'll get aircraft plants humming, it will raise the Dow and NASDAQ, the Nooz will do its usual propaganda offensive, and the world will be saved again, at least on Twitter and the Nooz (not much difference anymore).

I'd like to see the specification on what the new bomb can and can't do before making a decision on whether we need a new $600 million (more likely $700 million) bomber. If the new bomber has better stealth capabilities, longer range, improved payload capacities/configurations, etc.. then it might be worth it. The Air Force is still flying B-52 bombers from the 1950s and if the bombers were people they'd be eligible for Social Security. Also consider this, the last "new" bomber is the B-1 built in 1986. How can the U.S. fight future wars if we don't keep up with new developments in radar, technology, and offensive/defensive weapons' systems. This necessitates us to invest in improving existing aircraft as well as developing and deploying new aircraft because we know the world isn't idyllic with everyone living in peace and those who would challenge us militarily are improving their military to take us on.

[Libertas]

Who would we fight in this war?

Nukes kinda make conventional war obsolete, for instance Putin doesnt do this shit if Ukraine could nuke his ass.

[Number6]

Who would we fight in this war?

More than likely China but, IMO, neither side wants war or would go to war against each other but then again you never know.

Nukes kinda make conventional war obsolete, for instance Putin doesnt do this shit if Ukraine could nuke his ass.

So far, the countries with nuclear weapons haven't used them since we dropped two atomic bombs on Japan in 1945. Yeah, you hear crazy talk from North Korea and Putin about using them but they both know if they use nuclear weapons against another country with nuclear weapons then they will be on the receiving end of a nuclear attack.

Conventional wars will continue especially among the non-nuclear countries. Iran and Iraq went to war using conventional weapons and that lasted eight years. Russia and Ukraine are currently engaged in a conventional war. With climate change affecting the world in terms of food production and water availability I could see conventional wars breaking out on the African Continent as well as in the Middle East. Conventional wars in one part of the world can cause countries on the other side of the world to become involved militarily and this can threaten U.S. security/interests drawing us into the war.

[Libertas]

Right, so if we have thousands of nukes I dont think we need more bombers.

There was a time I did, dont get me wrong. I am not one of those liberals who thinks that everybody can just get along, etc.

40% of this country has proven that some humans are not capable of peace.

[Number6]

Right, so if we have thousands of nukes I dont think we need more bombers.

There was a time I did, dont get me wrong. I am not one of those liberals who thinks that everybody can just get along, etc.

40% of this country has proven that some humans are not capable of peace.

The U.S. and Russia over 90% of the nuclear weapons in the world. The U.S. has 5,550 and 2,361 available while Russia has 6,257 weapons.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/count ... by-country

That's more than enough weapons to destroy the world a couple times over.

[bradman]

Right, so if we have thousands of nukes I dont think we need more bombers.

There was a time I did, dont get me wrong. I am not one of those liberals who thinks that everybody can just get along, etc.

40% of this country has proven that some humans are not capable of peace.

[bold] It's the difference between something that we avoid using and something we need to use.

[ZoWie]

I'm just saying, what's the mission? Where do human piloted bombers fit into the current military strategy? How do we avoid the usual massive cost overruns and delays which usually make the plane already obsolescent when it's finally delivered? Does the Air Force express a need for the aircraft? They haven't always done so.

These are questions that I lack the facts to answer.

[ProfX]

I just hope after spending all those billions, the damn thing can actually fly.

Those problems plagued the B-2 for a very long time.

[Number6]

[bold] It's the difference between something that we avoid using and something we need to use.

It's better to have it when you need it than to need it and not have it. Like I said, I'd like to see the specs on what it can do before saying it worth it.

[Number6]

I just hope after spending all those billions, the damn thing can actually fly.

Those problems plagued the B-2 for a very long time.

All aircraft have or had problems, that's nothing new. Look at the V-22 Osprey and the problems it had before it finally made it into the military inventory. Planes are like new car models in that the first model year is when most of the problems are discovered and two years later there are few problems.