Breaking: B-21 Bomber takes flight

[jhungary]

So... You're saying the Americans were flying their $100M (adjusted for inflation) stealth bomber willy-nilly?!

Are you sure that was actually the case and Americans weren't just trying to save their faces after the humiliating loss of cutting-edge military hardware by the hands of vintage Soviet-era radar system operated by a bunch of so called 'savage' Serbs?!

Well, if it was humiliating loss, there will be more than 1 for that 200 some sortie in Yugoslavia from F-117A and 1300 sortie overall, the fact is that there are only 1 F-117A was ever shot down means that is a outliner for the incident, it's just a simple logic. I mean if they can "see" the F-117A, wouldn't there be more being shot down even after Yugoslavia war in Iraq?

I mean I am not a good shot by mile, but I can still pull a double tap every once in a while, does that mean I can do that all the time? Sometime it just down to good ol' luck, and again, seeing only 1 out of 1300+ sorties went into trouble, it's only logical to think luck have every bit to do with it.

On the other hand, they didn't fly their aircraft willy-nilly, Yugoslavia is not really a big country and 1 side of it is facing the sea, there are limited approach to fly inside Yugoslavia. Which mean if you post enough people to act as "Coast Watcher" you will bound to see one flying into Yugoslavia for attack, you confused the term "Operational Limits" to "Willy-Nilly" but then seeing you already say you aren't a tactician, that's probably a given

 

[LeGenD]

Yet your behinds were kicked in both Vietnam and Afghanistan.

And the bullsh!t a.k.a Taliban are still walking, nay, alive and kicking!

US military did not fail in Vietnam:

Post in thread 'Turkish Military is better than IDF' https://pdf.defence.pk/threads/turkish-military-is-better-than-idf.779318/post-14617901

To give credit where due, Vietcong was an impressive force in its time. Vietcong had fought and defeated French forces in the 1950s, but American leadership made bad calls in Vietnam. The war was mistimed and American military gains were not used to negotiate freedom of South Vietnam like in the Korean War. But as I have pointed out in the linked post, US can influence entire Vietnam now.

Vietcong's most impressive demonstration of power was in 1979 when it invaded and occupied Cambodia and prevented Chinese attempt to liberate Cambodia. Vietcong was up against two adversaries in this war and prevailed.

Sino-Vietnamese War - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

But nobody recalls this feat.

US military did not fail in Afghanistan either. American troops have assassinated all those who were deemed responsible for 9/11 and plotting other attacks on American assets around the world (Al-Qaeda Network). Taliban are back because they have agreed to not support Al-Qaeda Network and focus on developments in Afghanistan instead. Pakistan wanted to preserve Taliban and Khan reached an understanding with Trump on this issue.

Trump says he could win Afghan war 'in a week … but I don't want to kill 10m'

President hosts Pakistani PM Imran Khan, who is seeking to have more than $1bn in US aid restored after Trump cut it off last year

www.theguardian.com

Trump did make his point very clear about all manner of options on his table. It is true.

War in Afghanistan was a low intensity war for the US that allowed American MIC to make profits and US forces to test different technologies.

Vietnam and Afghanistan are not good examples of what US can do in a high intensity war with its most advanced technologies in current times. Iraq and Yugoslavia are appropriate examples.

War in Taiwan might show what US can do in a high intensity war with its most advanced technologies (AGAIN). This is assuming that US is willing to protect Taiwan, or even needs to. US have found a way to damage Russia in Ukraine without firing a shot in the present.

Sun Tzu: "The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting."

 

[mike2000 is back]

Well even if you are sarcastic here. I am not.
Russia can definitely run over Ukraine if they employ all of their military might in the battlefield.
The objective may be to engage Ukraine in the war in the long run for God knows what reason.
Maybe it's stopping Ukraine to become part of EU or NATO.

Ahahaha.....im serious. Russia is just playing with Ukraine. Putin doesn't want to win the war. They just want to keep fighting and losing their soldiers there for the sake of it. Its all just a game.

 

[gambit]

And the "SHAPE," by design, has a large wingspan!

That thing has more in common with a kite than an 'actual' aircraft. So yeah, it better be stealthy and sh!t!

The design is a 'flying wing' but the span, or dimension, is not the point. The shape is the point, not the size.

Yet your behinds were kicked in both Vietnam and Afghanistan.

So when will the world's militaries change to their models?

Well, I'll give you a hint: There's a reason the likes of China and Russia are betting big on nuclear-capable hypersonic glide vehicles that can launch missiles into orbit, similar to the old-skool Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS), albeit with some twists.

Avangard (hypersonic glide vehicle) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The idea of delivering nukes via stealth bombers just sounds... goofy! No other country is bothering with the idea, which ought to give you a hint or two. Not saying it's impractical or anything but, yeah, it's too friggin' expensive!

And besides, we are no longer living in the 80's when stealth bombers were all hip and cool. But I bet your Boomer generals, who are losing the arms race as we speak, would like to disagree!

That is because they cannot afford it.

A missile is a throwaway weapon platform. An airplane is not. But not only that, you cannot project power and influence with missiles. For that, you need physical presence, and that is where airpower and aircraft carriers comes in. Just the knowledge that either or both are on their way to your border is enough to give any country pause, like how Iran is with the knowledge that two US aircraft carriers are quietly threatening them. Iran knows we have ICBMs, but those aircraft carriers are the real threats just by being there. Countries that can afford radar air defense have them. But against US? Pretty much useless.

So again...Your criticism of US airpower is based on ignorance of history and technical knowledge, of laziness, and last and worst, of arrogance.

... it's just a simple logic.

You are stressing his brains, buddy.

 

[mike2000 is back]

do not post brochure information, bud. I have posted declassified information that shows how effective stealth aircraft were in Operation Allied Force in 1999.

F-117A (Sortie – Engaged – Loss) ratio in Operation Allied Force = 743 – 2 – 1

B-2A (Sortie – Engaged – Loss) ratio in Operation Allied Force = 49 – 0 – 0

So Yugoslavian defenses were able to engage and defeat one F-117A in war? So this feat has made American stealth aircraft irrelevant in war? Absolutely not. Yugoslavian claim to fame was rather short lived as it suffered heavy losses and lost its grip on Kosovo in a matter of days. Propaganda draws attention to select feats away from the bigger picture, this is the problem.

Soviet technology (or Russian technology) is not bad. American technology is rather found to be vastly superior.

Well, its common knowledge that weak and powerless countries will obviously over celebrate any little blow they give to a far stronger adversary. Its normal human nature. If I fought mike tyson and managed to land one small blow on him then that itself will be a sort of victory for me and my supporters, we can use that to comfort ourselves and claim how we dealt a heavy blow to Mike Tyson , it doesn't matter that Mike Tyson beat the hell outta me, I will always stick to that one blow for propaganda purposes and try and look good to myself and others. It's a normal thing humans do when faced with a far stronger adversary.
So you don't have to explain in details how the US succeeded in decimating Yougoslavia military in just a few days of air bombardment. Even a fool who is neutral can see that. Obviously those who are biased will lean on the only one blow yougoslavia managed to land

 

[Fish]

Let's see:

The design is a 'flying wing' but the span, or dimension, is not the point. The shape is the point, not the size.

Dwelling into childish pedantry.

So when will the world's militaries change to their models?

Trying to hide incompetency.

That is because they cannot afford it.

A missile is a throwaway weapon platform. An airplane is not. But not only that, you cannot project power and influence with missiles. For that, you need physical presence, and that is where airpower and aircraft carriers comes in. Just the knowledge that either or both are on their way to your border is enough to give any country pause, like how Iran is with the knowledge that two US aircraft carriers are quietly threatening them. Iran knows we have ICBMs, but those aircraft carriers are the real threats just by being there. Countries that can afford radar air defense have them. But against US? Pretty much useless.

So again...Your criticism of US airpower is based on ignorance of history and technical knowledge, of laziness, and last and worst, of arrogance.

Primitive chest thumping while dancing around Russia and China.

You are stressing his brains, buddy.

Hallucinations!

What else do you wish to discuss?

 

[mike2000 is back]

That is because they cannot afford it.

A missile is a throwaway weapon platform. An airplane is not. But not only that, you cannot project power and influence with missiles. For that, you need physical presence, and that is where airpower and aircraft carriers comes in. Just the knowledge that either or both are on their way to your border is enough to give any country pause, like how Iran is with the knowledge that two US aircraft carriers are quietly threatening them. Iran knows we have ICBMs, but those aircraft carriers are the real threats just by being there. Countries that can afford radar air defense have them. But against US? Pretty much useless.

So again...Your criticism of US airpower is based on ignorance of history and technical knowledge, of laziness, and last and worst, of arrogance

No, he does knows everything you say, most of them are not stupid. It's just because of bias to be honest. If this was China that managed to finally unveil such an advanced stealth bomber you can bet we will have several threads by people like them running on PDF by now talking about how advanced and powerful China is and how China is the best in the world who can easily defeat the US/West who are lagging behind.
The fact that the Chinese are still trying for over a decade now to build a stealth bomber that matches the old US stealth bomber like the B-2 spirit should have told them how far the gap is between the US and them in this field. Yet they refuse to see this and try to claim how even the latest US stealth bomber is obsolute and meaningless. Seriously you shouldn't even argue with people like that.
They are just trolling

 

[gambit]

Dwelling into childish pedantry.

It is 'childish' only to YOU but not to anyone who at least studied the technical issues, if not actually was involved in the projects.

In designing a low radar observable platform, there are three rules:

1. Control of quantity of radiators​

2. Control of array of radiators​

3. Control of modes of radiation​

​

At the conceptual level, the sphere, regardless of physical dimensions, is the most obedient to the three rules. At the practical level, the flying wing SHAPE, not physical dimensions, is the most obedient to the three rules. I have been saying variations of this since '09 on this forum and to date, no one has successfully challenged them. What I said is not 'Top Secret'. That knowledge is available to Russia, China, and your Pakistan. And yet, Russia failed, China struggles, Iran faked it, and the rest of the world pretty much resigned to the knowledge that if the US wanted, we could and would control their territorial airspace at our convenience. You have no idea how terrible is that realization.

Trying to hide incompetency.

Sure. I will..uhhhmm...'agree'...with you that the US military is the most 'incompetent' in the world. In fact, on this forum, I hereby declare that the US military is soooooo 'incompetent' that no one should follow US in anything. Not technology. Not doctrines. Not anything. We should stand alone.

Primitive chest thumping while dancing around Russia and China.

Definitely we danced around them. Off their coasts and even inside their airspaces without them knowing it.

Hallucinations!

What else do you wish to discuss?

Your petty jealousy. Essentially, what you have is petty jealousy. The only criticism you have is American 'stealth' platforms cost too much. Then you dredged up debunked issues. What next? Are you going to say that 'stealth' was a Soviet invention?

No, he does knows everything you say, most of them are not stupid. It's just because of bias to be honest. If this was China that managed to finally unveil such an advanced stealth bomber you can bet we will have several threads by people like them running on PDF by now talking about how advanced and powerful China is and how China is the best in the world who can easily defeat the US/West who are lagging behind.
The fact that the Chinese are still trying for over a decade now to build a stealth bomber that matches the old US stealth bomber like the B-2 spirit should have told them how far the gap is between the US and them in this field. Yet they refuse to see this and try to claim how even the latest US stealth bomber is obsolute and meaningless. Seriously you shouldn't even argue with people like that.
They are just trolling

I do not know if you were around here when the J-20 debuted. If God exists, he probably facepalmed at the Chinese claims that defied His laws of nature. It was so bad that I had to label it 'Chinese physics'. Then the forum's Iranians got into the same act. Then the Russia supporters.

 

[HttpError]

What I see here in this thread is nations that can hardly develop a capable 4th Generation or a 5th Gen of their own are discussing why a Stealth bombers is not needed, as if all those smart people at LM and Boeing are just lunatics. Sometimes these keyboard scientists are just too much.

 

[Oldman1]

So... You're saying the Americans were flying their $100M (adjusted for inflation) stealth bomber willy-nilly?!

Are you sure that was actually the case and Americans weren't just trying to save their faces after the humiliating loss of cutting-edge military hardware by the hands of vintage Soviet-era radar system operated by a bunch of so called 'savage' Serbs?!

Just remember they still used stealth bombers to keep bombing Serbia even after the Serbs shot down one F-117. And they still testing the aircraft long after.

No idea why Yanks have a hard-on for flying wing aircrafts.

Should ask the Iranians, Russians and the Chinese why us yanks have hard on for flying wing. Besides those named but also other countries like Britain, France, etc.

 

[gambit]

Should ask the Iranians, Russians and the Chinese why us yanks have hard on for flying wing. Besides those named but also other countries like Britain, France, etc.

The issue is US. Not anyone else. If we do it, then it is an 'obsession', but if anyone else does it, then it is normal.

 

[jhungary]

It's predecessor the B2's only claim to fame besides exorbitant cost, half a billion a pop is bombing some sandal wearing half starving farmer carrying a 70 year old rifle.

In near peer adversary air space, it will be a sitting duck

The keyword here is near peer.

The issue is, even for B-2 you can't see a near peer solution for it, there are a lot of hypotheticals, but not actual near peer solution for it. And B-2 had been operationally used in Serbia, Libya and Afghanistan.

Now, before you say, "So what, those aren't highly advanced military" You really should think about it like this. Bolivia is not a highly advanced military either, do you think if Russia uses Su-57 in Bolivia or China uses J-20 in Bolivia the US would not be able to send asset (such as deploying Radar to Colombia or RC-135 rivot joint) to the area to detect it. And if the US cannot, then that is the exact meaning of not being a "Near Peer". That's the same as Russia and China a la the B-2. If they know how to detect it, they would have been able to do that when they flew in Afghanistan, which is right next to China, or Serbia, Which is full of Russian equipment and advisor.....

 

[SecularNationalist]

Ahahaha.....im serious. Russia is just playing with Ukraine. Putin doesn't want to win the war. They just want to keep fighting and losing their soldiers there for the sake of it. Its all just a game.

Why he would do that knowing that will make him lose all the support in the power circles of Russia.

 

[SaadH]

There are no ”near peers” around.

View attachment 998578

Indeed, that's why this money would be better off spent on American people and their well being, like housing, food and health security as well as education and infrastructure...

 

[White and Green with M/S]

Indeed, that's why this money would be better off spent on American people and their well being, like housing, food and health security as well as education and infrastructure...

It's deterrent against emerging threats from China and Russia and why you think we aren't doing that things to common people of USA?