Provided it is escorted by EA-6Bs to jam the low band search radars that can detect them. The mission capable rate for the B-2 fleet is still hovering around 40%.
The mission capable rate is so low only because someone keeps keying the paint job while it's parked.
Question: does the enhanced payload, regardless of the size of the bombs..mean that the bomb-bay doors are deployed longer, which then makes the B-2 visible on enemy radar, and thus more vulnerable? This would NOT seem to be an issue over Afghanistan, for example... where the new technology is an obvious force multiplier, because there is no threat to the B-2 from the ground..but sending the plane over Iran, to target scattered nuke sites...well, if the plane is unstealthy five times longer than before..( am I correct in assuming it would take 5x as long to eject 5x the # of bombs?) there would seem to be much greater risk to the aircraft..
Now, if we ever have to go against the Chinese (or for that matter a country that has some modicum of real capability) then it would make sense for the Spirit to have such a low readiness level (after all they have to make sure that it's VLO nature is at tip-top shape). However the US hasn't faced a competent military in several decades now. The Iraqis in the first Gulf War 'performed' better than they did this time, but they were still woefully inadequate to deal with the US; and the Yugoslavian Clinton debacle did show that those guys could come with ingenious stratagems, such as using clever camouflage to make black plastic look like roads and bridges from above, using microwaves to simulate radar sites, and making us think we bombed hundreds of tanks when the real number was far lower ......but the result was still the same, namely a curb-stomping by Uncle Sam.
We haven't faced a really competent and capable enemy in a long time, with China being the only one that has potential (in the future) to being significantly more capable than the various nations we have had to spank.