More US Deployments

reply to post by Seek_Truth


Nukes won't be involved. The B-1 has actually been modified so they can't carry nuclear warheads anymore.

As for where they are, they're in the Pacific. I'm pretty sure I know where (not Wake), but I can't say. There are a few things I know that I can't say. Wake is logical, but there are no maintenance facilities, and aircraft with a wingspan longer than 60 feet won't have wingtip clearance.

Originally posted by Gazrok
reply to post by Zaphod58

 

Is it possible the flight of 7 contains escort fighters? I'm not familiar with the current arrangements, been a while since I was a military and defense contractor brat...

edit on 5-4-2013 by Gazrok because: (no reason given)

They would only have two at the most. The B-1 is a bad mofo. The escorts would have a different call sign. Now days they and the B-2 would only be escorted by Raptors out of the states.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Seek_Truth

 

Nukes won't be involved. The B-1 has actually been modified so they can't carry nuclear warheads anymore.

And where did you come up with that? All our bombers have the same bomb racks and arming systems. That's like saying a gun cant shoot hollow points.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Johnston

reply to post by Patriotsrevenge


No they don't. Under the START treaties our nuclear capable aircraft are limited, and the B-1 was removed from the nuclear mission a long time ago (back in the 1990s). But the bays are totally different between the bombers, both in size, and in layout. The so called "common" rotary launcher, is anything but. A B-1 rotary launcher can't be used on a B-2 or B-52, and vice versa.

Originally posted by RevRay
reply to post by Zaphod58

 

All this Mumbo Jumbo talk about what equipment we have and capabilities.
I want to know where our Trident's are. DO we not have a World Destroying Sub laying on the bottom within range?
No- one talks about what we have sitting on the bottom.
Carriers are huge targets and it only takes one Silk Work. Maybe the CSW will functionwhen needed and you'll make it. But I wouldn't trust the CSW.
If the North did manage to launch a missle or two and if these missles were to track to a target we'd shoot the Frak'in thing out of the sky.
Equipment gets moved everyday 24-7.

Only the Chief of the Navy and the President know where our Boomers are EVER! You can bet your behind we have two in good range of NK and China at all times. Not that they have to be close but closer is better for delivery time of their last presents.

reply to post by Patriotsrevenge


They wouldn't be escorted from the states. The fighters would require tankers to drag them all the way, and that means you see them coming. And the fighters aren't capable of making the jump across in one flight like the bombers can, so there's no way to escort them. They'll pick up an escort when they get closer to the target area, but not before.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by darkbake

 

Both the EC-135 (before it was retired) and the E-4B have the same ability. They were designed as mobile command posts in case the ground command post was either eliminated, or comms were taken out through EMP strikes.

So would they only be deployed if there was a risk of the ground post being eliminated or communications going down? Or is it standard procedure?

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Patriotsrevenge

 

No they don't. Under the START treaties our nuclear capable aircraft are limited, and the B-1 was removed from the nuclear mission a long time ago (back in the 1990s). But the bays are totally different between the bombers, both in size, and in layout. The so called "common" rotary launcher, is anything but. A B-1 rotary launcher can't be used on a B-2 or B-52, and vice versa.

The Ruskies tossed out the START treaty. How is the B-1 not capable from carrying a nuke? Just because they say its not suppose too?

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Patriotsrevenge

 

They wouldn't be escorted from the states. The fighters would require tankers to drag them all the way, and that means you see them coming. And the fighters aren't capable of making the jump across in one flight like the bombers can, so there's no way to escort them. They'll pick up an escort when they get closer to the target area, but not before.

That is what I was saying as they dont need one around here. Just when they are overseas.

reply to post by Patriotsrevenge


Because the data bus required for nuclear weapons is different than the ones used for conventional weapons. It requires more communications between the aircraft and the weapon. It was removed from the bombers that were removed from the nuclear mission. It can be reinstalled fairly quickly, but currently the weapons bays can't accept nuclear weapons, as they are now.

reply to post by darkbake


They're generally in the region if they're expecting something to happen.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Patriotsrevenge

 

No they don't. But the bays are totally different between the bombers, both in size, and in layout. The so called "common" rotary launcher, is anything but. A B-1 rotary launcher can't be used on a B-2 or B-52, and vice versa.

The bays are the same in total size. They may not have the same structural bolt up but they can carry the same bombs. That is the whole point of the Common launch rack.

reply to post by Patriotsrevenge


They can carry the same bombs, but that's not the same as saying they're the same bays. The common rotary launcher won't fit between aircraft. You can't say they're the same bays, because they're not. The total bay area is completely different between the aircraft, which is one reason they have such hugely different payloads. Have you actually seen the difference in payloads? The B-1 carries more than the other two, the B-52 more than the B-2.

They come in around 75000 lbs for the B-1, 70000 lbs for the B-52 and between 40-60,000 lbs for the B-2. Being able to carry the same bombs isn't even close to the same weapons bays. The B-1 has three bays, for a total of 146 feet of bays (long), the B-2 has two bays side by side, about 24 feet long each, and the B-52 has three bays that are joined together for about 159 feet of bays (long). How is that even close to same total area?

reply to post by RevRay

Door swings both ways. If NK was to launch and we countered with a sub launched or other asset, you think China or Russia would wonder where that track is heading, before it reached apogee? You think they would wait until then?

How many missiles would a "boomer" get away until it too was destroyed? Consider time between launches and that each smoke trail points all the way back to its exact location.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Patriotsrevenge

 

Because the data bus required for nuclear weapons is different than the ones used for conventional weapons. It requires more communications between the aircraft and the weapon. It was removed from the bombers that were removed from the nuclear mission. It can be reinstalled fairly quickly, but currently the weapons bays can't accept nuclear weapons, as they are now.

I highly doubt that last statement. We will probably never know for sure but to think our military would permanently disable our ace bomber is ludicrous. The ground crews could probably change that in a day or quicker.

reply to post by Patriotsrevenge


Note the "they can be reinstalled fairly quickly". Where did I say they "permanently crippled" them from the nuclear mission? As currently modified, they can not carry nuclear weapons. They can be returned to the nuclear mission if required, but they currently can not carry nuclear weapons.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Patriotsrevenge

 

They can carry the same bombs, but that's not the same as saying they're the same bays. The common rotary launcher won't fit between aircraft. You can't say they're the same bays, because they're not. The total bay area is completely different between the aircraft, which is one reason they have such hugely different payloads. Have you actually seen the difference in payloads? The B-1 carries more than the other two, the B-52 more than the B-2.

They come in around 75000 lbs for the B-1, 70000 lbs for the B-52 and between 40-60,000 lbs for the B-2. Being able to carry the same bombs isn't even close to the same weapons bays. The B-1 has three bays, for a total of 146 feet of bays (long), the B-2 has two bays side by side, about 24 feet long each, and the B-52 has three bays that are joined together for about 159 feet of bays (long). How is that even close to same total area?

edit on 4/6/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)

As far as the Diameter and length of rack to accept the same bombs. I know one has more bays than the other as they make nice shady spots when its hot

reply to post by Patriotsrevenge


But they are all different sizes. They're not even close to the same bays. They can accept the same weapons systems, but they're not even remotely close to the same on each bomber.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Which would make sense why they are where they are, to be re-modified (eg... changing a pin or two), and awaiting orders.