4 ms·

"Also that simplicity is king. Complexity is the enemy." That's what worries me about a lot of the shiny, super high tech, super expensive weapons systems of t

"Also that simplicity is king. Complexity is the enemy." That's what worries me about a lot of the shiny, super high tech, super expensive weapons systems of the US. These are fine against an overmatched enemy when you can fly back to a safe place for doing the necessary maintenance. This may change when there is a war against a capable enemy that can strike closer to home. The US has always had the advantage that the homeland was safe but that may change in the future. And once you lose a B-2 bomber it's very hard to replace.

nradov 2y ago
It's literally impossible to replace a B-2 bomber: the production line was shut down years ago and much of the supply chain no longer exists. Existing B-2's (there are only 19 still in service) will be gradually replaced by new B-21 Raiders. One of the long standing problems with US defense procurement is that they build a batch of something, then cut off all orders and dismantle the production line in order to free up funds to develop a successor model. This is tremendously risky because it leaves a gap of many years when it's impossible to replace attrition losses. If the US is going to maintain a credible deterrent against China then something has to change. Either defense spending has to go up or we have to drastically scale back activities in other areas. And no, cheap AI drone swarms won't replace the capabilities of something like a B-21.
- FpUser 2y ago
  >"If the US is going to maintain a credible deterrent against China then something has to change. Either defense spending has to go up or we have to drastically scale back activities in other areas. And no, cheap AI drone swarms won't replace the capabilities of something like a B-21." Assuming the US would actually need B21 capability in a war with China. Those will be probably blown up from the sky very fast. Besides I doubt wars with China and / or Russia will be limited to conventional means. Will probably escalate to nuclear very fast and then everybody is royally fucked.
  - runjake 2y ago
    I think any war with China would be predominantly economic and cyber. I don’t think it’s viable for either party to perform a mainland strikes and I don’t think it would become nuclear, but who knows. If things escalate during the current POTUS’s term, I think it will come down to meetings and deal-makings, because that is POTUS’s passion and preferred way. I think any war with Russia would be, well is, economic and cyber and proxy wars.
    - spankalee 2y ago
      > I think it will come down to meetings and deal-makings, because that is POTUS’s passion and preferred way Current POTUS is an egomaniacal moron. Things could very easily get out of his control, especially as he dismantles the US government and sources of influence throughout the world.
    - FpUser 2y ago
      >"I think it will come down to meetings and deal-makings, because that is POTUS’s passion and preferred way." Don't you think it looks more attractive than going up in flames?
    - rbanffy 2y ago
      > because that is POTUS’s passion and preferred way. Just like he surrendered Ukraine to Russia. An amazing deal for everyone involved, except Ukraine.
  - ge96 2y ago
    > Those will be probably blown up from the sky very fast. Why do you say that? I'd think B21 is better (stealthier) than B2. I think there is a story about a B2 dropping a dud on NK undetected granted NK vs. China
  - nradov 2y ago
    Nah. Everything we know about the B-21 indicates that it's probably pretty survivable against the Chinese air defense system. Especially for stand-off strikes near the Taiwan Strait where it wouldn't have to overfly radar stations. The design was literally optimized for exactly that purpose. Ironically the B-21 is probably safest in the air. The greatest kinetic threat is on the ground because forward air bases generally lack hardened aircraft shelters or effective missile defense. This is another reason why maintaining deterrence against China will require a major increase in defense spending or realignment of priorities. The whole point of procuring a platform like the B-21 is to never have to use it. The strategic calculus is that just having it gives the US a range of conventional options short of global thermonuclear war, and thus forces adversaries to be more cautious.

nradov 2y ago

It's literally impossible to replace a B-2 bomber: the production line was shut down years ago and much of the supply chain no longer exists. Existing B-2's (there are only 19 still in service) will be gradually replaced by new B-21 Raiders. One of the long standing problems with US defense procurement is that they build a batch of something, then cut off all orders and dismantle the production line in order to free up funds to develop a successor model. This is tremendously risky because it leaves a gap of many years when it's impossible to replace attrition losses. If the US is going to maintain a credible deterrent against China then something has to change. Either defense spending has to go up or we have to drastically scale back activities in other areas. And no, cheap AI drone swarms won't replace the capabilities of something like a B-21.

FpUser 2y ago
>"If the US is going to maintain a credible deterrent against China then something has to change. Either defense spending has to go up or we have to drastically scale back activities in other areas. And no, cheap AI drone swarms won't replace the capabilities of something like a B-21." Assuming the US would actually need B21 capability in a war with China. Those will be probably blown up from the sky very fast. Besides I doubt wars with China and / or Russia will be limited to conventional means. Will probably escalate to nuclear very fast and then everybody is royally fucked.
- runjake 2y ago
  I think any war with China would be predominantly economic and cyber. I don’t think it’s viable for either party to perform a mainland strikes and I don’t think it would become nuclear, but who knows. If things escalate during the current POTUS’s term, I think it will come down to meetings and deal-makings, because that is POTUS’s passion and preferred way. I think any war with Russia would be, well is, economic and cyber and proxy wars.
  - spankalee 2y ago
    > I think it will come down to meetings and deal-makings, because that is POTUS’s passion and preferred way Current POTUS is an egomaniacal moron. Things could very easily get out of his control, especially as he dismantles the US government and sources of influence throughout the world.
  - FpUser 2y ago
    >"I think it will come down to meetings and deal-makings, because that is POTUS’s passion and preferred way." Don't you think it looks more attractive than going up in flames?
  - rbanffy 2y ago
    > because that is POTUS’s passion and preferred way. Just like he surrendered Ukraine to Russia. An amazing deal for everyone involved, except Ukraine.
- ge96 2y ago
  > Those will be probably blown up from the sky very fast. Why do you say that? I'd think B21 is better (stealthier) than B2. I think there is a story about a B2 dropping a dud on NK undetected granted NK vs. China
- nradov 2y ago
  Nah. Everything we know about the B-21 indicates that it's probably pretty survivable against the Chinese air defense system. Especially for stand-off strikes near the Taiwan Strait where it wouldn't have to overfly radar stations. The design was literally optimized for exactly that purpose. Ironically the B-21 is probably safest in the air. The greatest kinetic threat is on the ground because forward air bases generally lack hardened aircraft shelters or effective missile defense. This is another reason why maintaining deterrence against China will require a major increase in defense spending or realignment of priorities. The whole point of procuring a platform like the B-21 is to never have to use it. The strategic calculus is that just having it gives the US a range of conventional options short of global thermonuclear war, and thus forces adversaries to be more cautious.