4 ms·

B2 is much easier to intercept than ballistic missile. Also B2 has order of magnitude higher sticker price than ballistic missile. Good for bombing mujahedeen i

B2 is much easier to intercept than ballistic missile. Also B2 has order of magnitude higher sticker price than ballistic missile. Good for bombing mujahedeen in the mountains and bad against someone with SAM. But for such bombing you don't need a strategic bomber, even frontline bomber could be enough.

mmooss 1y ago
> B2 is much easier to intercept than ballistic missile. Also B2 has order of magnitude higher sticker price than ballistic missile. Good for bombing mujahedeen in the mountains and bad against someone with SAM. Where do people get these things? The B2 is awful for bombing low-tech insurgent forces - far too expensive to operate. Its whole purpose is defeating SAMs in particular and the best defenses in the world.
- hollerith 1y ago
  And the Pentagon likes the B-2 so much that they've developed a successor, the B-21: "By September 2024, three test aircraft were in service: one performing one or two flight tests per week, and the others involved in ground tests." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_B-21_Raider#Flight_and_testing:~:text=By%20September%202024%2C%20three%20test%20aircraft%20were%20in%20service%3A%20one%20performing%20one%20or%20two%20flight%20tests%20per%20week%2C%20and%20the%20others%20involved%20in%20ground%20tests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_B-21_Raider#F....
  - mmooss 1y ago
    Eventually you need new a new plane; that doesn't mean the old one is a failure. The US has only ~20 B-2s, to go with ~60 B-52s (originally built in the 1950s), and ~40 B-1Bs (~1980s tech). Only the B-2 could survive war with a peer, afaik; that was fine after the Cold War when there was no peer threat but now that China is a near-peer threat, the US needs many more bombers capable in a peer conflict and the B-2 production line was shut down decades ago (production was discontinued when the Cold War ended). They plan to build the B-21 in much larger numbers. Also, the B-21 was built for conflict with China, where distances are much greater than in Europe.
    - hollerith 1y ago
      Oh, I wasn't being sarcastic: I was trying to convey that B-2 has been a great success (at least in the eyes of the Pentagon). The B-21 looks almost exactly like the B-2 (but is half the size / weight).
nradov 1y ago
Nah. Conventionally armed ballistic missiles or small strike aircraft aren't effective against deeply buried hardened bunkers, like Iranian or North Korean uranium refinement facilities. Only something like a B-2 carrying a GBU-57 will be effective for holding such targets at risk. This is considered a strategic imperative so cost is irrelevant.

mmooss 1y ago

> B2 is much easier to intercept than ballistic missile. Also B2 has order of magnitude higher sticker price than ballistic missile. Good for bombing mujahedeen in the mountains and bad against someone with SAM. Where do people get these things? The B2 is awful for bombing low-tech insurgent forces - far too expensive to operate. Its whole purpose is defeating SAMs in particular and the best defenses in the world.

hollerith 1y ago
And the Pentagon likes the B-2 so much that they've developed a successor, the B-21: "By September 2024, three test aircraft were in service: one performing one or two flight tests per week, and the others involved in ground tests." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_B-21_Raider#Flight_and_testing:~:text=By%20September%202024%2C%20three%20test%20aircraft%20were%20in%20service%3A%20one%20performing%20one%20or%20two%20flight%20tests%20per%20week%2C%20and%20the%20others%20involved%20in%20ground%20tests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_B-21_Raider#F....
- mmooss 1y ago
  Eventually you need new a new plane; that doesn't mean the old one is a failure. The US has only ~20 B-2s, to go with ~60 B-52s (originally built in the 1950s), and ~40 B-1Bs (~1980s tech). Only the B-2 could survive war with a peer, afaik; that was fine after the Cold War when there was no peer threat but now that China is a near-peer threat, the US needs many more bombers capable in a peer conflict and the B-2 production line was shut down decades ago (production was discontinued when the Cold War ended). They plan to build the B-21 in much larger numbers. Also, the B-21 was built for conflict with China, where distances are much greater than in Europe.
  - hollerith 1y ago
    Oh, I wasn't being sarcastic: I was trying to convey that B-2 has been a great success (at least in the eyes of the Pentagon). The B-21 looks almost exactly like the B-2 (but is half the size / weight).

nradov 1y ago

Nah. Conventionally armed ballistic missiles or small strike aircraft aren't effective against deeply buried hardened bunkers, like Iranian or North Korean uranium refinement facilities. Only something like a B-2 carrying a GBU-57 will be effective for holding such targets at risk. This is considered a strategic imperative so cost is irrelevant.