B-2 In Action

[MIflyer]

On Wednesday night, U.S. B-2 Spirit stealth bombers launched strikes against Houthi positions in Yemen, according to three U.S. defense officials. The bombers, flown from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri, targeted weapons storage facilities, marking the B-2's first combat mission in the ongoing Middle East conflict and its first deployment in combat in several years.

 

[The Stannum Liberator]

Its so bizarre coming from my expertise in the "old bomber" like the B-10 through b-52. These new ones are just so nuts to me. Awesome Photo!

 

[SaparotRob]

I think the B-2 mission was a message for Iran. The Houthis couldn't stop anything the USAF wanted to use.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

I think the B-2 mission was a message for Iran. The Houthis couldn't stop anything the USAF wanted to use.

That's exactly what it was. The DoD press release made it very clear between the lines.

 

[MIflyer]

Note that it flew from Whiteman AFB. We don't need no stinkin' overseas airfields.

I recall reading that they put a lawn chair recliner between the seats to the rear so they can take a nap, one at a time.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

Note that it flew from Whiteman AFB. We don't need no stinkin' overseas airfields.

I was on a 12-man Prime BEEF firefighting team. We too were worldwide on 24-hr notice, air-transportable crash-trucks included. Call today, we can land tomorrow -- just in case we do want overseas bases in BFE.

 

[GTX]

B-2 Spirits Just Sent A Very Ominous Message To Iran

The B-2's strike on Houthi weapons bunkers was about sending a dire message that only the stealth bomber could send.

www.twz.com

 

[GTX]

Questions Linger Over Australia's Role In B-2 Spirit Strikes On Yemen

We now know that Australian air bases were used to support the Yemen strikes, although officials are tight-lipped about which aircraft types used them and how. We now know that Australian air bases were used to support the Yemen strikes, although officials are tight-lipped about which aircraft...

www.twz.com

 

[SaparotRob]

Good on ya', mate!

 

[fannum]

Note that it flew from Whiteman AFB. We don't need no stinkin' overseas airfields.

Thanks for the information. I thought tankers required overseas airfields.

 

[GreenKnight121]

Thanks for the information. I thought tankers required overseas airfields.

Whiteman AFB is in Missouri - ~1,000 miles inland from the US Atlantic Coast. The tankers could take off from a USAF base on the coast, rendezvous with the B-2 1,000 miles over the Atlantic and top it off - and the same coming back.

All aircraft using US bases only.

That's 4,000 miles (2,000 miles on each leg) added to the combat range of the B-2.
2,000 miles to the combat radius.

Or, in this case, fly west (more like 1,800 miles from the Pacific coast), then refuel from a tanker from Hawaii, then on to Oz - and return the same way.

 

[fannum]

Whiteman AFB is in Missouri - ~1,000 miles inland from the US Atlantic Coast. The tankers could take off from a USAF base on the coast, rendezvous with the B-2 1,000 miles over the Atlantic and top it off - and the same coming back.

All aircraft using US bases only.

That's 4,000 miles (2,000 miles on each leg) added to the combat range of the B-2.
2,000 miles to the combat radius.

Or, in this case, fly west (more like 1,800 miles from the Pacific coast), then refuel from a tanker from Hawaii, then on to Oz - and return the same way.

Yes, in the mission you cite, they could ... but that is not the case. Tanker units are based in Germany, Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Diego Garcia, Italy, Taiwan, Japan and many other places ... some often deployed rapidly to less common locations to support changing missions. There are currently over 600 tankers in the Air Force inventory, and much of the time over HALF of them are based overseas.

Be logical. There is little use for domestic tankers except for training. Their whole purpose is to support remote operations ... i.e. overseas ... and sending a tanker across an ocean to refuel just one airplane and return to CONUS is wasteful (fuel and resources) and risky.

Most of all, the B-2 is unique in its capability and range, and all those B-52 and B-1 missions needed either local bases (Diego Garcia, England, etc.) or multiple refuelings. Plus, those big bombers are a small % of refueling needs, with much shorter-range fighter bomber and tactical aircraft needing most of the support. Remember that when F-111s struck Libya out of England (due to political issues), they needed EIGHT tanker hookups for each strike aircraft to complete their mission.

 

[emu27]

Note that it flew from Whiteman AFB. We don't need no stinkin' overseas airfields

Oh, yes you do, for the tankers. Three 135's and a KC-10 were pre positioned at Cairns, Australia for a refuelling bracket there, they also refuelled over my home town of Darwin but don't know the assets used.

After the bomb drop the aircraft refuelled, topped off the engine oil and did a crew change without shutting down at Diego Garcia, arrived back at Whiteman AFB having logged 70 hours non stop.

 

[MIflyer]

During the Vietnam War B-52 bombing missions were launched form McDill AFB in Tampa, FL. First inflight refuelings took place over the GoM, so they could take off with full bomb loads and reduced fuel loads.

 

[fannum]

During the Vietnam War B-52 bombing missions were launched form McDill AFB in Tampa, FL. First inflight refuelings took place over the GoM, so they could take off with full bomb loads and reduced fuel loads.

The Navy and Marines did that for our F-4s when the Air Force corrupted McNamara's mandated Joint Service Supply system and scarfed up all the fuel transfer pumps ... a high failure rate item.
When we couldn't get enough for external stores, to keep up the mission rate, we'd fill all racks with ordnance (no A/A), operate close to shore or from Da Nang w/o center line tank, and grab the tanker right after launch, go after the Trail, tank up again before rolling in, again on way out, and often more. Quick and EZ with probe n' drogue!
Called ourselves "SuperBombers"!
Logged five quick hookups in one 1.5hr. hop.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

During the Vietnam War B-52 bombing missions were launched form McDill AFB in Tampa, FL. First inflight refuelings took place over the GoM, so they could take off with full bomb loads and reduced fuel loads.

Our MITOs at Carswell practiced the same: T/O full-up with practice rounds and light on fuel, immediate in-flight refueling to top the bombers up, and off they go.

 

[fannum]

Was a practice back in '50s at Barksdale and Big Springs in summer with B-47s, and continued with other birds in later years. Remember that early on, all played with RATO, but the abundance of accidents with fire and full bombers moved thinking to the tankers.
In the '80s, I dated a LtCol who'd spent her career in KC-135s, and she told of minute plus slow accelerating Kansas t/o runs with scary, early aborts taking up all of 13,000' in all events ... hopefully!
There was no kluge, cheat or workaround for the tankers. Under appreciated badly, and anyone I encountered at an O-club got at least a round on me.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Oh, yes you do, for the tankers. Three 135's and a KC-10 were pre positioned at Cairns, Australia for a refuelling bracket there, they also refuelled over my home town of Darwin but don't know the assets used.

After the bomb drop the aircraft refuelled, topped off the engine oil and did a crew change without shutting down at Diego Garcia, arrived back at Whiteman AFB having logged 70 hours non stop.

Your post reminded me that Britain is ceding ownership of Diego Garcia to Mauritius.

UK hands sovereignty of Chagos Islands to Mauritius

In a historic move, the UK gives up sovereignty of a strategic group of islands in the Indian Ocean.

www.bbc.co.uk

That's the end of any permanent British-owned military base in the Indo-Pacific.