Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Exactly!Then think about the 1000 bomber sorties in the ETO...
Ejection seats have a higher probability of killing female aircrew?the ejection seats kill women pilots..."
Who knows these days, I wouldn't be all that shocked: Admittedly it raises questions why we have the force we currently have in public. Some kind of modern day "Wunderwaffe"?The B-3, and others, are part of the secret force that the military does not want the public to know about.
You need to read up on the "alleged" issues with the F-35 ejection seat. Google, google, google....Ejection seats have a higher probability of killing female aircrew?
That's a pretty wide debate. With the exception of the B-52 large bombers are being operated with smaller crews and it seems the B-21 will retain a 2 man crew. I think the mindset is to still have a large bombardment vehicle that could be recalled or diverted. As we know autonomous technology has exploded so this has to be weighed against the need to man a large bomb dump truck that could saturate an area, or have this portable highway overpass dropping scores on precision weapons on the enemy.At $1B a copy for the B-2, that would certainly have bought a lot of Tomahawks or other guided munitions.
I have to wonder if the age of a large manned bomber has passed.
That's a pretty wide debate. With the exception of the B-52 large bombers are being operated with smaller crews and it seems the B-21 will retain a 2 man crew. I think the mindset is to still have a large bombardment vehicle that could be recalled or diverted. As we know autonomous technology has exploded so this has to be weighed against the need to man a large bomb dump truck that could saturate an area, or have this portable highway overpass dropping scores on precision weapons on the enemy.
Exactly! And I think the general public really don't understand how accurate this technology has become.In the latter scenario, each weapon could be independently guided to the target by real-time updates from offboard sensors and platforms. Frankly, in this scenario, I see little need for the "bomb truck" to be a manned platform.
Weight issues...FLYBOYJ said:You need to read up on the "alleged" issues with the F-35 ejection seat. Google, google, google....
Never knew that until now...With the exception of the B-52 large bombers are being operated with smaller crews
Yeah, but if that unmanned bomb-truck saturates an area due to a glitch in it's programming people will be pissed. I'm worried about when it becomes timed to couple automated systems with nuclear weapons to automated control systems that direct wars...I think the mindset is to still have a large bombardment vehicle that could be recalled or diverted. As we know autonomous technology has exploded so this has to be weighed against the need to man a large bomb dump truck that could saturate an area
Yeah, but if that unmanned bomb-truck saturates an area due to a glitch in it's programming people will be pissed.
TBH I was just thinking that it looks like a B-2 with a one stuck on the end.Hmmm...not sure this will go down too well with the negative-laden press. I'm just waiting for the first headline to read "B-21 - Looks Just Like a B-2" - looks the same, must work the same so why are we paying so much for this shiny new thing? All this and it can't manoeuvre with an F-16. Bound to be a failure!
Yes, but with a person removed, an error has that much more a risk of being disastrous. In some cases a person could tell the computer effectively "NO WAIT!!!"There's no more risk of that happening in an unmanned platform than there is in a manned platform. In all modern combat aircraft, the pilot interacts with the computer and it's the computer that does EVERYTHING.
Yes, but with a person removed, an error has that much more a risk of being disastrous. In some cases a person could tell the computer effectively "NO WAIT!!!"
buffnut453,
Yes, but there have been desires to have computers operate without a person in the loop
Each B-2 can carry 80 precision guided weapons, 20 B-2 can attack 1600 separate targets. Each 500 lb JDAM cost $25k or $40m per 20 missions . Each tomahawk cost $1,000,000 or $1.6B per 1600 missions. After about 13 missions, total cost expenditures would be equal to B-2 fleet cost. And the B-2s can be reused, tomahawks cannot. B-2 are also far more flexible for mission planning. While I agree that manned bombers should become obsolete, large platform stealth drones carrying attack weapons are not. This is strickly a thumb nail estimate but does show that cruise missile cost is driver in procuring weapons and can't be dismissed.At $1B a copy for the B-2, that would certainly have bought a lot of Tomahawks or other guided munitions.
I have to wonder if the age of a large manned bomber has passed.