Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Northrop Pitches Concept To Ready 16 B-2s For Stunning Attack On Iraq
Inside The Pentagon | July 25, 2002 | Elaine M. Grossman

Posted on 07/25/2002 9:40:53 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen

Northrop Grumman has briefed senior Pentagon advisers on a concept for helping the Air Force ready two squadrons of its B-2 stealth bombers in time for a potential U.S. war against Iraq, according to sources familiar with the plan. Company officials reportedly hope their efforts might lay the groundwork for an unprecedented use of 16 B-2s on the first night of the war, unleashing such a level of destruction that the Iraqi leadership is virtually paralyzed by "shock and awe" at the outset, in the words of stealth bomber proponents.

Bush administration officials have expressed an interest in expelling Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's regime and ridding that nation of weapons of mass destruction. U.S. government officials have met skepticism in Congress and abroad, though, about the military and political feasibility of undertaking such an attack.

Stealth bomber advocates say the massive weapons-carrying potential of the stealthy B-2 could be the administration's ace in the hole, if 16 or so aircraft are used from the first hour of war and beyond.

But as it stands, the B-2 is ill-prepared to undertake this kind of mission in such great number, Air Force officials acknowledge. As of last month, the service's 21 B-2s had only a 42 percent mission-capable rate, meaning just eight or so planes were ready to perform at least one of their assigned operational missions, these sources said.

To use 16 bombers at the war's outset currently would be "a stretch," said one defense expert. One of the aircraft was heavily damaged a few weeks ago when its landing gear collapsed, and another three B-2s are in depot, according to sources. Remaining B-2s need parts replaced and must be put into "pristine condition" before deploying for war, the defense expert said.

Inability to meet stealth, or "low-observability," requirements is the single greatest driver for the low B-2 readiness rates, Air Force officials say. The aircraft's composite skin needs what are often time-consuming repairs before it can meet expected standards. In fact, were low-observability requirements not a factor, the plane would remain relatively ready, boasting a rate closer to 80 percent mission-capable, according to service officials.

Experts trace the lagging stealth maintenance to a limited number of Air Force maintainers who specialize in repairing the B-2's unique low-observable skin. Composite-repair specialists are stretched thin across the B-2 fleet and the service's other stealthy fleet, the F-117 attack aircraft. And between recent operations in Afghanistan and a heavy training schedule to keep flight crews ready, the aircraft are often not available for a lengthy maintenance process.

Maintenance crews must strip off skin damaged by repeated flights and by a need to access aircraft parts that lie underneath. New skin must be grafted on in layers that require time-intensive smoothing and curing. The end result must be an almost seamless contour that resists radar detection.

To address lagging maintenance on the B-2, a Northrop Grumman representative last week briefed a top policy advisory board to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on how the company might temporarily augment the Air Force's maintenance crews, sources tell Inside the Pentagon.

Few in the Air Force itself were familiar with the company's proposal, though. Service officials said it appears Northrop Grumman is seeking high-level support in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Air Force before offering a formal proposal.

Recently, Northrop lost an open competition to provide annual contractor support to the service in helping maintain the B-2's low-observability features, Air Force officials said. A small start-up company prevailed over the B-2 prime contractor -- reportedly to Northrop officials' surprise and chagrin -- because the competitor offered the work of some 30 maintainers at a better price, officials said.

Northrop Grumman was "way more expensive," said one, noting the winning competitor had lower overhead.

One observer cited an anticipated cost of $1 million for the current Northrop Grumman concept to help prepare bombers for a war against Iraq. But estimates may vary, with one official noting the idea remains in an early "conceptual stage."

With a view toward the long term, the Air Force is already undertaking a B-2 "mission-capable rate improvement plan," crafted by Northrop Grumman, according to service officials. Ultimately, the Air Force will replace the traditional repair method using tape and caulking material with a new approach using spray-on, radar-absorbing coating tested on the B-2 at Edwards Air Force Base, CA. The new method promises to save time and money, but the current plan is to introduce it slowly over a period of seven years as B-2s cycle through depot.

In the nearer term, there is little doubt the aircraft must undergo repair before deploying. But some say the contractor augmentation Northrop Grumman is offering may be unnecessary. The low mission-capable rates on the B-2 do not adequately reflect the bomber's actual readiness to be used whenever duty calls, said one official. The aircraft can be employed with less-than-perfect stealth against many adversaries and targets, this source said.

When the Air Force sent B-2s against targets in Afghanistan in Operation Enduring Freedom, the bomber maintained only a 60 percent or so mission-capable rate, suggesting it may be ready for war even when its low observability falls somewhat short of expected standards.

"The plane is always there when you need it," the official said, noting a number of B-2s are kept ready for short-notice deployment at Whiteman Air Force Base, MO, at all times.

-- Elaine M. Grossman



TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: miltech
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

1 posted on 07/25/2002 9:40:53 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
With the passive radio detection capability pioneered by Czechslovakia, and given to Iraq, there is no such thing as stealth any more. Therefore, let us send in ALL of our B-52s instead.
2 posted on 07/25/2002 9:43:52 AM PDT by Lazamataz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
The passive detection capability requires a very active RF environment. And that just doesn't exist in Iraq thanks to UN sanctions and the US Navy's enforcement thereof.
3 posted on 07/25/2002 9:51:23 AM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
"The passive detection capability requires a very active RF environment."

Incorrect. Television and FM and AM radio stations will work as the source for radiation. Why do you think the military took out all the TV and radio antennas in Bosnia?
4 posted on 07/25/2002 10:04:18 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
It's a statistical process. The more emitters you can baseline from, the better.

And yes, we'll blast TV and radio transmitters--because they can be used for command and control functions.

5 posted on 07/25/2002 10:07:10 AM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
For exactly the same reason they will be taken out in Iraq.
6 posted on 07/25/2002 10:08:45 AM PDT by ASA Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
let us send in ALL of our B-52s instead.

They could sell tickets to that show.

7 posted on 07/25/2002 10:10:19 AM PDT by dead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
Any aircraft that needs a controlled humidity environment in order to maintain its viability is not suitable for combat. The public and the air force got fleeced again or I might say YET.
8 posted on 07/25/2002 10:12:00 AM PDT by meenie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants; Poohbah; Lazamataz
STEALTH THREAT: Whoops! Phone signals may unmask a $40 billion flying secret.posts
9 posted on 07/25/2002 10:13:11 AM PDT by Dakmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dakmar
Sorry about that, try Here.
10 posted on 07/25/2002 10:14:49 AM PDT by Dakmar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Sh1t, send in both all the 52s and all the 2s and time it so the first bombs hit at exactly the same time that the first plane struck the WTC...9-11-02.

I want to see the destruction live on cnn, in real time.
11 posted on 07/25/2002 10:15:06 AM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dead; Lazamataz
Let us send in ALL of our B-52s instead. / They could sell tickets to that show.

You don't want a front-row seat.

12 posted on 07/25/2002 10:15:11 AM PDT by dighton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dead
That would be a humdinger.

You could be sure it would be the single most watched event in the history of mankind. Neil armstrong's walk on the moon would look like a saturday morning cartoon show in comparison.
13 posted on 07/25/2002 10:18:20 AM PDT by mamelukesabre
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
You send in the BUFs low level. Top cover should the Iraq AF dare to come up to tussle.

Carpet bomb one Republican Guard barracks with sub munitions and leaflets. The leaflet read, "We'll give you slaughter or you give us Saddam" Remember those Gulf War pictures of the mass charges of Iraqi troops, white flags in hand?

14 posted on 07/25/2002 10:18:29 AM PDT by Young Werther
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther
Thank you for using the correct one "F" version.
15 posted on 07/25/2002 10:26:57 AM PDT by ASA Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
So then it sounds like with passive detection it's not what you see but rather what you don't see.
16 posted on 07/25/2002 10:27:54 AM PDT by Texas_Jarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Jarhead
Correct. Passive radar looks for "holes" in the radio waves.
17 posted on 07/25/2002 10:31:48 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Detection is one thing. Tracking and guiding a missile to a target is another. It is very easy to hit a Buff with a radar guided missile. Very difficult to hit a low RCS platform.
18 posted on 07/25/2002 10:48:46 AM PDT by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes
See post fifteen.

And, regarding proper finish for a combat aircraft:

"the Air Force will replace the traditional repair method using tape and caulking material with a new approach using spray-on, radar-absorbing coating..."

I think that's what they did on my neighbor's house, peeled off in about six months.

19 posted on 07/25/2002 11:11:11 AM PDT by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
The aircraft can be employed with less-than-perfect stealth against many adversaries and targets, this source said.

Particularly when each B-2 is accompanied by two Marine Corps or Navy EA-6Bs to jam the very radars that a B-2 is supposed to be "invisible" to and for SEAD as it flies over hostile territory.

20 posted on 07/25/2002 11:22:26 AM PDT by SMEDLEYBUTLER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-27 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson