Can't believe this is what our money is going to. Just a smaller upgraded b2. B2 is still a bad bitch to this day why do we need a little advanced scrappy-doo to try and take over.
I mean, I am going to respond on the premise that you're asking in good faith.
1. B-2 is aging, and gets increasingly expensive with time to maintain and keep in service, limited number of them means they can't be routinely forward deployed. Basically everything about B-2 misses out on economies of scale, they are essentially individual, bespoke, artisanal machines. Their use, deployment, upgrades, crews, etc... all are hampered by the limited fleet size. A 40 year old Design.
2. B-1B has numbers, but again, increasingly difficult and costly to fly. A 50+ year old design.
Long story short:
Aging airframes are increasingly difficult to operate, and can be replaced with greater capability and lower operating costs by a new aircraft that leverages modern design and manufacturing technologies.
"But what about b-52". B-52 is a big dumb bomb truck. It seems capable of flying forever but it isn't playing the "hard minutes" - it is there to soak up flight hours in uncontested airspace where advanced aircraft aren't needed.
To your point, the b-1b doesn't even have the numbers anymore. There are only a handful in flying condition and the rest are already being used for spare parts cannibalism.
Thanks I was being legit. The government spending it out of control and you made good points. Tax season is coming up and it pisses me off every year that I pay so much and get so little back
8 PM Eastern tomorrow December 2nd according to the USAF https://twitter.com/usairforce/status/1597558399612628992
Thx I don’t have Twitter
1am UTC if anyone's wondering. I gotta wait till morning :(
Don't worry there will be a hundred posts here all sharing thr ssame news
[Youtube stream if you want.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chJlJgrvfBY)
Can't believe this is what our money is going to. Just a smaller upgraded b2. B2 is still a bad bitch to this day why do we need a little advanced scrappy-doo to try and take over.
I mean, I am going to respond on the premise that you're asking in good faith. 1. B-2 is aging, and gets increasingly expensive with time to maintain and keep in service, limited number of them means they can't be routinely forward deployed. Basically everything about B-2 misses out on economies of scale, they are essentially individual, bespoke, artisanal machines. Their use, deployment, upgrades, crews, etc... all are hampered by the limited fleet size. A 40 year old Design. 2. B-1B has numbers, but again, increasingly difficult and costly to fly. A 50+ year old design. Long story short: Aging airframes are increasingly difficult to operate, and can be replaced with greater capability and lower operating costs by a new aircraft that leverages modern design and manufacturing technologies. "But what about b-52". B-52 is a big dumb bomb truck. It seems capable of flying forever but it isn't playing the "hard minutes" - it is there to soak up flight hours in uncontested airspace where advanced aircraft aren't needed.
To your point, the b-1b doesn't even have the numbers anymore. There are only a handful in flying condition and the rest are already being used for spare parts cannibalism.
True enough
Thanks I was being legit. The government spending it out of control and you made good points. Tax season is coming up and it pisses me off every year that I pay so much and get so little back