Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
You and I both.
Why are we building a new bomber?
- Thread starter Henning
- Start date
You and I both.
RyanShort1
Final Approach
In Korea, NOT winning protected our freedom? In Vietnam, containment was the best way to win? The American soldiers fighting in those locations were brave, and I'm certain patriotic, and I sympathize and appreciate their valor, but in the end, they may have been told that preserving our freedoms was what they were doing, but I strongly question whether or not they were preserving freedom per-say. I'm tired of that rhetoric. They may have thought that was what they were doing, but winning never seems to have been the plan at the top, and that is what counts.
The guys in the Air National Defense system actually intercepting Russian patrol bombers on the coastline, THEY were preserving freedoms more than guys bombing villages in the jungles IMO. And yeah, "we" by electing officials, and allowing our Congress critters to fund the undeclared "wars" are culpable to pay the men who served for their time.
RyanShort1
Final Approach
^^^ And those pulling the strings with or behind the head guy - and the Congresses of both parties that have played along in this game for decades.
DesertNomad
Pattern Altitude
I blame congress too... And I vote Libertarian.
DesertNomad
Pattern Altitude
Exactly. And you are correct about Korea and Vietnam
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Once again I will tell ya, The military does what it is told.
Korea was stopped because Truman did not want war with China, then we could have beaten them.
VN was stopped when the American people placed too much pressure on the White house.
We could have won each of these conflicts easy. but the white house did not want to win.
olasek
Pattern Altitude
How do you know? Do you have clairvoyant abilities? I am not going to rely on your guesses and assurances.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Well maybe ?
We got a lot of technology from the space program, what will we the people get from this?
a new bomb dropper when we have the ultimate already?
any one remember ICBMs ? they are the ultimate bomb dropper.
We already have more assets than we can use, we are so far into superfluous power we have become impotent, because unless we are willing to end mankind, we cannot beat China by attrition. Russia and China spanked us in Syria, and just a bit ago, China spanked us with a reprimand in the South China Sea for coming with the 12 miles of the Spratleys. It will be interesting to see what they do on the next Challenge. China knows we can't beat them without going nuke, and they have nukes they can get here as well, plus Putin will back their hand, just like they were backing his in Syria. This is a perfect opportunity to turn over the Islam issue to them, and work on modernizing our own energy and production infrastructure to prepare us for the future, much as FDR did in the 30s. Without the WPA and TVA dam projects, we would not have had the energy capacity for the industry of WWII, especially the Manhattan Project. Without that investment, WWII would have been much different. But we don't want to invest in infrastructure, and the people we turned over stewardship to our society to won't do it. They wait for government programs and tax money to buy them infrastructure which is where much of our energy infrastructure comes from, the majority through defense contracts.
Let Russia and China deal with Islam, let's get our own stuff in order and producing food. When America actually had a strong real economy, it was predominantly an agricultural country.
We could eliminate the bankers altogether and trade food for consumer goods from China direct, and agriculture is something anyone can be involved in. Urban agriculture even provides a lot of social infrastructure benefits. Do something like this:
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/urban-agriculture-and-energy--2/x/10003213#/
DesertNomad
Pattern Altitude
I am basing this on the recent history of our military and the pointless nature of it all: Iraq, Afghanistan, Panama, Grenada, Somalia, Haiti, Georgia, Djibouti, Uganda, and most recently Cameroon... If you think throwing a few more trillion at the military is a good idea, by all means, vote for the people that will do that. I for one think that we should be defending our borders and little else.
Last edited:
You know what the best way to secure our borders is? Send out groceries instead of guns and end the war on drugs. Now they have food and the gangs that make there and here ****, disappear in irrelevance. With food and security at home, they won't come here. There is but one mandate for humanity that transcends religions and philosophies and that is we are to "be kind and take care of each other", and that is where we abjectly fail not only as a society but as a species. We are cruel and take advantage of each other, and that is a choice we make, and why we have to live our lives as barbarians still, because we won't choose to change to the unknown, and being kind and taking care of each other has rarely been tried although the benevolent monarchies of history did have great success with it. Unfortunately the last occurance was long enough ago it is beyond our institutional memory.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
You forget, the military has become a political wing of the oval office.
DesertNomad
Pattern Altitude
Which is why I think they have enough money and toys... and do not need any more. I agree with iHenning above too.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
Don't forget you deprive them now, you may regret it later.
we are now at a lowest point in history in world leadership. when you allow us to degrade farther you risk your freedom.
This discussion is a symptom of the problem, we are not united in the method for retaining our leadership in the communities of the world.
IMHO .... There isn't any single thing in Afag, Iraq, or the middle east worth one single drop of american blood.
we must at this time be ready for civil strife from with in.
and a new bomber will not help in this fight.
There is only one way to quit degrading, and it's not militarily, we cannot win against China militarily, we can only tie with annihilation. The whole Cold War objective was to make the Communists use up all their resources building weapons, so there's nothing for the shelves at the stores. That's what lead to Perestroyka, but even Russians haven't fully given up on communism completely, least of all Putin, and China is still strong and proud communist. You see, the method of trade and making profit doesn't define communism, having the profits of business pay the costs of society is defining feature of communism.
Imagine where both the Soviet Union and US had not entered an arms race, but a co-op to get mankind off the planet and out in space where we belong. In the process you'd end up developing the technology to feed the world. But instead, the centuries old game of financial Highlander across the aristocracy continued to be played. But surprise, China has the sword now, and they are ready to take control of the world, and they deserve it at this point.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
You talk of the Adam and Eve concept of a new world in a far away planet, Dream on super man, we talk of here and now.
Simple and painless to change, even allows for a smooth transition as well as competition.
https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/urban-agriculture-and-energy--2/x/10003213#/
It's actually very simple to provide a better option for people to choose from. It's just something that's never been done even though John Nash proved mathematically everyone ends up better off. It's really not required to have "losers", that is just an effect of the greedy never having enough.
Phoenix
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2015
- Messages
- 583
- Display Name
Display name:
Phoenix
Getting kinda Nuremburgy there. It is an all volunteer force, they chose to be told to perhaps do bad things. Still morally culpable. Buying a random soldier a cup of coffee so you can feel guilt free about sending him off to die for some stupid reason doesn't protect freedom or help soldiers. Spitting hippies did more for saving soldiers then the flag waving have lunch on me crowd.
Doggtyred
En-Route
The new bomber will be coming out of trials, the B2 will be retiring, and Boeing will be putting new engines and wings on the B52 fleet as they soldier on...
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
Doggtyred
En-Route
The B1 no longer has a nuclear mission because we have chosen for it not to... not that the airframe cant do the work. I remember sitting in an F16 cockpit mockup at Wright-Pat museum that had a "nuclear authorize" switch/annunciator...
Nuclear capability in an existing airframe isn't physically impossible, and if we chose to we could enable it in many of our current airframes that currently only have conventional missions. It is the aircrew training, security procedures, implementation and having the technical package that would be more onerous. The biggest hurdle would be do we have nuc weapons packages that are ready to be deployed in these legacy airframes, or is everything centered around the B2 and B52 now?
Penetration nuclear bombing is cold war mentality. If the balloon goes up the main nuclear strike force will be one-shot ballistic missiles - used mainly as a deterrernt. Once spent, the survivors will be fighting a contaminated conventional war.
The B52, the B1 and the B2 all have seen much utilization in conventional use. While the new platform will likely have a nuclear mission in its design, past experience shows that it will get significant conventional munitions releases over its lifetime.
I thought the SZ was closed. 
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,597
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
You might as well ask why do we need bombers at all. Why do we need this particular bomber? Because it'll be cheaper than operating two (B-1,B-2) independent bombers that we currently have. Two bombers that are getting old and will need to be replaced by the time this thing enters service. The "B-3" will be a continuation of what we already have but to a new level of stealth and range. The B-3 will bridge the gap between the B-2s nuclear capability and the B-1s conventional capability.
As far as usefulness on the current battlefield, the ground commanders in Afghanistan love the B-1 for CAS. Long loiter times and a variety of conventional ordnance. They're popular in the fight against ISIL as well.
As far as usefulness on the current battlefield, the ground commanders in Afghanistan love the B-1 for CAS. Long loiter times and a variety of conventional ordnance. They're popular in the fight against ISIL as well.
Frogs97
Pre-takeoff checklist
Henning, I generally like your aviation contributions to the site, and was glad to see you return from your forced sabbatical. But this is a pretty blatant attempt to prove your own theory in regards to the SZ. I disagree with many of your assertions, but love the out of the box thinking for getting things better ... but either way, this is the wrong site and wrong audience for this line of discussion.
I thought the SZ was closed.
Yes, but it's aviation related. So with SZ closed, where does this post go? Deleted?
steingar
Taxi to Parking
We're building a new bomber because the American people have somehow still not realized that they are dead-assed broke. We all want a robust national defense. but poor people don't always get what they want. And we've gone from being the number one creditor nation on Earth to the number one debtor nation.
Clark1961
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 17,737
- Display Name
Display name:
Display name:
Yes, but it's aviation related. So with SZ closed, where does this post go? Deleted?
At best it goes in Hangar Talk but there really is no need at all to discuss it on POA. In other words, please stop playing games.
Jimmy cooper
En-Route
Compared to what is normally spent on "green initiatives" the defense expenditures are certainly not..NOT! " chump change"!!! It's well known how this scam works. Things like the B bomber which Ronnie approved after carter had wisely cancelled it. The F 35, a total monetary disaster,( a trillion) , the idiotic osprey which, in combat, would prove a dunce. The list is endless. The bloated defense budget is kept in force by flag waving idiots who vote to reelect "on the take" pols and allow lobbyists to control expenditures. Meanwhile the roads go to ruin, getting us off oil energy is delayed and Idiotic balloons go astray ! It's all well known and republicans portray Eisenhower as someone " out of touch" ! Amazing.
Why on Earth would I do that? POA is nothing but a game, a device purely f entertainment value, why would I quit treating it as such?
Phoenix
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2015
- Messages
- 583
- Display Name
Display name:
Phoenix
What airplane do I need for my mission? Got a fiver in my wallet was thinking about one of these.
Clark1961
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 17,737
- Display Name
Display name:
Display name:
If you can't play by the rules then maybe you should find another venue.
bnt83
Final Approach
Building, designing new ___________ = engineering jobs and skilled labor jobs
Bomber seems to fit well.
Bomber seems to fit well.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,597
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
And that's the problem Henning. You treat POA as a game. Some of us actually come here to talk aviation; not politics or religion. Hopefully come here to learn something new as well.
Only you, could start a thread under the guise of an aviation topic and then gradually roll it into your own philosophical beliefs on humanity. Why is it so hard to stick to aviation on a forum dedicated to aviation?
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
And that's the problem Henning. You treat POA as a game. Some of us actually come here to talk aviation; not politics or religion. Hopefully come here to learn something new as well.
Only you, could start a thread under the guise of an aviation topic and then gradually roll it into your own philosophical beliefs on humanity. Why is it so hard to stick to aviation on a forum dedicated to aviation?
Keep in mind....when one know's everything....there's nothing to learn.
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2014
- Messages
- 9,771
- Location
- Broken Arrow, OK
- Display Name
Display name:
SoonerAviator
I still look at it as cost-benefit. We are spending $75B (minimum) to build a bomber to bridge some "gap" that exists operationally in the B1/B2 which don't seem to have much issue doing their jobs currently. How much repair/maintenance/upgrade could we do with the current fleet of B1/B2/B-52's for $75B? It's akin to the old excuse people pose when buying a new car. They spent $40K on a new car because the old one had a $2K repair once over the course of 5 years and it'll be "cheaper in the long run". When was $40K cheaper than $2K? It's the same with the military complex and the centralized healthcare. They say it will be cheaper in the long run, but it never is. Not by a long shot.
Unless there is a definite operational need for a new bomber, as in we found a giant hole which could be exploited immediately and would bring us to our knees, there's no reason for this project.
Building, designing new ___________ = engineering jobs and skilled labor jobs
Bomber seems to fit well.
Surely we have greater infrastructure needs that could employ those same people . . .
Last edited:
Jimmy cooper
En-Route
Building, designing new ___________ = engineering jobs and skilled labor jobs
Bomber seems to fit well.
It fits well if you mean building a new unneeded airplane that will go thru several cost overruns costing the taxpayers more billions but providing unnecessary work for thousands and thousands of defense employees in key voting states. A much more direct and logical approach would be our infastructure which is falling apart while we build roads in Afghanistan with borrowed money and fight needless wars. Real dumb.
Phoenix
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2015
- Messages
- 583
- Display Name
Display name:
Phoenix
Inform and educate us great wise one.
By that logic, neither does a wrecking ball. But sometimes they are needed to permit progress.
It is easy to overlook those events that never occurred.
It is evident to me that, but for our military, there would have been other catastrophic events in this world. But, since they didn't occur, I can offer no proof.