The world's bomber aircraft, page 4
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 19-9-2006 @ 12:07 PM by crgintx
Originally posted by kilcoo316
You lot still aren't reading what I'm saying.

The B-17, B-24, B-25 & B-29 all penetrated hostile airspace without fighter



If you think a few FB-111s are gonna clear out big lanes in the Soviet airforce to allow B-52s to trundle through, I'll leave you all to it, your obviously in a fantasy world!

[edit on 19-9-2006 by kilcoo316]


Need I remind you of what a civilian pilot did in the 1980's to the much vaunted Soviet Air Defense system. He flew all the way to Red Square. At 500 kts below the radar screens a B-52 could have easily penetrated Soviet airspace if it wasn't detected. B-52 crews were trained to avoid radar detection as were Soviet bomber crews. Electronic intelligence recon missions, satellite photos as well as active radar suppression missions were all part of the plans to strike back in the event of nuclear war with the Soviets. The Soviet Air Defense system were thinking like the French did after WW1 with its Maginot line. They relied heavily on fixed ground based radar systems for target identification and vectoring. I believe that they didn't even put radar on their interceptors till the Mig-21 came about. Once those ground based radars are destroyed or rendered ineffective, even with radar until the fighter makes visual contact he doesn't know if he's shooting at a bomber, passenger airliner or a decoy. The Soviets knew they had way too much air space to defend even with their huge defense systems.

Admin edit - Removed bold tag from entire post.

[edit on 19-9-2006 by SimonGray]


reply posted on 19-9-2006 @ 04:30 PM by StellarX
Originally posted by crgintx
If I recall correctly we had 400+ B-52 in the early 80's. Each could be equipped with at least 12 cruise missiles.


Actually less than 250 were operational by 1983 and while they could carry as many cruise missiles as you say the DIA did not apparently consider this enough to make them effective by the start of the 80's.

If 25% of these bombers got through, that 100 bombers with 1200 cruise missile being launched into the former USSR.


Of the few that would likely survive the initial strikes on air fields by FOBS/SLBM's ( or were on alert/patrol at the time) i do not think 25% or even 50% would have gotten even close to breaching the fighters sent to engage them and whatever missiles or planes got past that would still have to breach the dense air defenses in Western/European Russia. Remember that even modern cruise missiles can be shot with rather ancient air defense weapons as the Serbians proved quite well.

That not including the 8 SRAM and 4 gravitiy bombs they carried internally at the time. This was that standard strategic nuclear load they carried at the time. The B-52 pilots knew they were pretty much on a one way mission.


Both I and the DIA had/have doubts about just how effective Sram's would have ben against a layered air defense system...

But you've forgotten that FB-111's from Pease and Griffis AFB would have preceded the BUFF's to punch holes in the Soviet air defense system to clear lanes for them fly through.


They would have had to contend with strategic fighters and the same air defenses with those fighters getting time to land and refuel ( given proper amounts of dispersed airfields to survive the nuclear exchange) and probably reengage before SAC bombers could arrive en mass. Remember that American aircraft simple can not do what Russians one can in terms of grass landings and the like and their forward air bases in Europe would just get destroyed even faster by spetnaz and short range ICBM's. Whatever the case may be you can not nuke all the air defense sites and radars ( you would run out of warheads long before they run out of radars/air defenses) while they can surely target the few dozen air bases that could operate these theater bombers.

Any way you look at it a full out bomber only nuclear attack against the Soviets would have been devastating.


Well i can assure you that i have looked at it in more ways than you have and i did not get the impression that it would have been 'devastating' in the sense that the USSR would have just fallen apart. In strategic weapons and defenses the USSR were rather far ahead by the early 80's and imo had not only a clear advantage in most strategic weapons but also the passive civil defense capacity to absorb whatever blows they could not prevent their enemy from landing...

Let's not forget that the Navy would have launched the SLBM's first and by the time the BUFF's got there the ICBMs from the USA would have struck many targets.


Agreed but these SLBM's do not each fire at once and the missiles arrive spread out over time and space meaning they can be attacked by the SA-2/Sa-5/Sa-10 types of weaponry which would have ample time to reload before the Sac bombers arrive while there would be no ports to return to for the surviving US strategic boats.

There's hasn't been a bomber raid without fighter escort since WW2. So I still believe that BUFF fleet is probably the most effective bomber in the USAF today.


Which is not saying much considering it's age and the war it would have had to fight for most of it's service life.

If you want to check out some of my previous arguments on this and related topics...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Stellar
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^



Eerie Second World War RAF fighter plane discovered in the Sahara
  Posted 15 days ago with 8 member flags
Stealth chopper based in Nevada
  Posted 14 days ago with 4 member flags
HIFiRE Scramjet Research Flight Will Advance Hypersonic Technology
  Posted 13 days ago with 2 member flags