Posted on 11/14/2018 5:57:47 AM PST by Cheerio
The Air Force is mapping a two-fold future path for its B-1 bomber which includes plans to upgrade the bomber
Warrior Maven Video Report: How long will the B-1 Bomber remain in service? Will it retire when the B-21 arrives?
The Air Force is mapping a two-fold future path for its B-1 bomber which includes plans to upgrade the bomber while simultaneously preparing the aircraft for eventual retirement as the service's new stealth bomber arrives in coming years.
These two trajectories, which appear as somewhat of a paradox or contradiction, are actually interwoven efforts designed to both maximize the bomber’s firepower while easing an eventual transition to the emerging B-21 bomber, Air Force officials told Warrior Maven.
(Excerpt) Read more at defensemaven.io ...
Keep them as fast AA missile barges, to help low-payload F-35’s and F-22’s.
The B-1, like the Spitfire, is one of those exquisitely rare aircraft that has an exceptional aesthetic coupled with its lethality. It looks like it is flying even when idle on the runway, and seeing it in flight will leave a lifetime impression.
AND Trump will VETO anything he does not like.
But they will shut down the government, you say?
Trump will win BIGLY on that one!
“The far left commie DEMS now in charge of funding all programs need that money to implement socialism and Medicare for anyone alive on US soil. “
Depends where they will be built.
The B-1 75,000/lb internal bomb load, 50,000 external
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockwell_B-1_Lancer
The B-21 I have not found out the bomb load.
Does the TFITP use Bill the Cat as its logo?
Maybe we could sell them to Australia...
The B-1, like the Spitfire, is one of those exquisitely rare aircraft that has an exceptional aesthetic coupled with its lethality. It looks like it is flying even when idle on the runway, and seeing it in flight will leave a lifetime impression.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
As big as a B52 with greater bomb load and looks like a fighter plane. Much stealthier than most fighters, swing wing just awesome. I saw one try to go vertical over Jones Beach on Long Island. It was like watching the launch of a Saturn V overhead. I swear every grain of sand on the beach was bouncing up and down. Yes I would say very memorable!
The B-1, like the Spitfire, is one of those exquisitely rare aircraft that has an exceptional aesthetic coupled with its lethality. It looks like it is flying even when idle on the runway, and seeing it in flight will leave a lifetime impression.
Well said. The Spitfire is the most elegant airplane ever to take to the skies. The Packard Merlin V-12 completes the package....exquisite is the word. Watch the Spit’s on youtube sometime....airplane porn.
The B-1 was a heckuva bomb truck in Afghanistan during the active big campaigns against the Taliban.
Yep, the B-1s have some BIG engines.
The B-1, like the Spitfire, is one of those exquisitely rare aircraft that has an exceptional aesthetic coupled with its lethality. It looks like it is flying even when idle on the runway, and seeing it in flight will leave a lifetime impression.
...and I get to hear and see them almost daily. With a South wind, they fly right over my house on takeoff. Otherwise with a North wind, the sound travels right to my jet damaged ears.
The sound of FREEEEEEEEDOM !!!
I understand that the B1 has a larger bomb load than the B52 (correct me if I am wrong).
There are 66 B1s in service vs 75 B52s.
I am told that the B1 does not carry nukes. Is that true?
.... Why not use the B1 Fleet to replace the B52S?
Dang shame they pulled her nukes. Would have been much more effective.
I am told that the B1 does not carry nukes. Is that true?
As I understand it, the B1 was originally designed as a nuclear bomber, but has been used through modifications as a non-nuc bomber in the conventional wars we have been fighting. I believe it could still be nuclear capable with appropriate modifications.
B-1 lost its nuclear mission several years ago, to comply with the START agreement—and we actually proposed the change. However, the B-21 will not have that restriction, so we’ll be replacing a conventional bomber with a stealth platform that can perform both missions.
That’s assuming the Dims don’t win the White House in 2020. The feckless Adam Smith, incoming chair of the House Armed Services Committee, has already said he won’t support any new nuclear systems, including the next-gen ICBM to replace the 40-year-old Minuteman IIIs, and (presumably) the B-21.
If this country elects a Democrat as POTUS in two years, look for a return to the Obama days, with defense being absolutely gutted. If the B-21 survives, you will likely see a very small buy, perhaps along the lines of the B-2 purchase, which only totaled 20 aircraft.
Sell a half dozen B-1s and B-52s to Israel. Hell, sell them a half dozen B-1 stealth bombers.
Ditto, you beat me to it! Sell it to Canzuk, the Brits Canada and NZ could use them too! Think of the range it would provide:
Countries like Argentina, PRC and Russia would all have to keep them in mind when dealing with the Canzuk countries. They could be used for long range bombing cruise missiles and maritime missions. Remember when Russian ships showed up off Australia, how would that have played out if Aussie B1s buzzed them while they were still a thousand miles out?
How is it they expect to keep the 52s’ flying into the 2050s... (100 years after some of them were built) but folks are talking about retiring the B1s?
Also, how is it we got 700 B 52s built in 10 years, but only have 21 B2’s built in 13 years?
Seriously folks... tech is great, but why can’t we make weapon systems en masse anymore??
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.