It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

USAF selects three bases to station the future B-21 fleet

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2018 @ 05:13 PM
link   
The USAF has selected Dyess Air Force Base, Texas; Ellsworth AFB, South Dakota, and Whiteman AFB, Missouri to base the new bomber. None of these should be a surprise. Both Dyess and Ellsworth have units that fly the B-1B and Whiteman AFB is the home fo the B-2 all of which are to be replaced by the B-21. Barksdale AFB, Louisiana and Minot AFB, North Dakota will continue to host B-52 that will remain in service till 2050 (or perhaps even longer)

That of course does not include forward deployed units and I would not be shocked to see the B-21 as a frequent visitior to Guam, Hawaii, or Diego Garcia if procured int he numbers indicated.

www.flightglobal.com...




posted on May, 6 2018 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT

I'd like to see the B52 retire in 2052, if I had to pick a year, that just feels right.



posted on May, 7 2018 @ 02:14 AM
link   
If she gets to Guam she can definitely get to Tindal and Amberly..



posted on May, 7 2018 @ 04:07 AM
link   
Having worked on the buff, and the B-1 I cannot wait to see the B-1 go to the bone yard, I loathe that airplane. When I was at ellsworth we had people volunteer to deploy so they would work less.
edit on 7-5-2018 by Irishhaf because: spelling is hard when you first wake up



posted on May, 7 2018 @ 05:53 AM
link   
i'm pretty sure this new bomber will only need bases on american soil, the old american strategic military paradigm is going to begin undergoing a dramatic shift with this bomber.

global reach fighters, bombers, drones, missiles, orbital artillery satellites, etc is the future. projecting power from our own soil instead of through carriers and foreign bases.

this will be the start.



posted on May, 7 2018 @ 06:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: namehere
i'm pretty sure this new bomber will only need bases on american soil, ...
They probably end up basing more of them abroad given its reduced range compared to other strategic assets and shrinking tanker fleets...

The B-21 is not the PGS asset of the family.



posted on May, 7 2018 @ 07:18 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger
Thats almost exactly the point I was going to make. I can see a bomber detachment being deployed to Darwin, Tindal or one of the bare bones bases (upgraded of course) like Curtin or Scherger on a regular or possibly permanent basis, Amberley possibly although its a fair bit further south.



posted on May, 7 2018 @ 07:26 AM
link   
a reply to: namehere
I'm pretty sure you are exactly wrong. Currently there are no global reach fighters, these new bombers cannot circle the earth at hypersonic speeds and I'm pretty sure there is no publicly avowed orbital artillery as it would violate massively a whole bunch of treaties and conventions the US signed up for.

Forward deploying your bomber fleet into the Asia-Pacific or Western Europe buys massive amounts of time in either a first strike or retaliatory strike scenario. It also creates large headaches for the Russian or Chinese PLAAF should they feel like flexing muscle. Retreating into continental United States is about as dumb a move as one could make.



posted on May, 7 2018 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: namehere

The B-52, B-1, and B-2 have all launched from the US mainland to bomb targets in the Middle East, and in the 90s, Yugoslavia. They still forward base all three of them.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join