IIRC some of the newspapers (Antelope Valley Press) reported that it would have been more of a "metal" aircraft - as we know that statements was just plain silly based on the way their aircraft was built and assembled.
Can you imagine the engineering, drawings, jigs, stress testing, etc, that would be required? If they wanted to save money, and improve performance, they would have not made the change to include the terrain following requirements. It will probably never be used. This couldn't be undone.
I guess they have to still train for it (the low-level high speed flight) but surely these days that is reduced to the absolute minimum?
They have the B2 (which surely has many upgrades ahead of it yet) for the more 'sophisticated' part of any credible future scenario (although quite how anyone actually uses these nuclear forces to any credible end resulting in anyone's survival is beyond me).
It would seem fairly obvious that what they 'need' is a bomb-truck (like the B52), but I bet it gets inflated into something neither quite one thing nor the other costing several magnitudes more that it ought.
Always liked the B1 (A B), great looking planes the noise when the 4 burners are lit they're climbing fast is incredible, similarly the Russian Tu160 Blackjack is another great looker (but as, on the surface at least, being a scaled up B1 why wouldn't it?).
They didn't buy the "extra" B-2's but it looks like they may be considering buying some more F-15s and F-18s, IF the news articles have a shred of truth in them. If they do, I wonder if the avionics will be "upgraded" as well.
An F-18 or F-15 with F22 or later F-35 avionics would be formidable.
Un-named sources, not an inkling of truth to this at the present time. It's almost laughable to think that the F-15 production line could be reopened at a cost savings.