2016-10-26 09:10:04 UTC
This current/up-coming "stealth bomber" project of Northrop Grumman's, to build the next generation stealth bombers to replace the MOST EXPENSIVE stealth bombers we've ever built --- around $2B each, the old ones, the B-2's --- is just a purely military works program for well connected companies who employ hundreds of well connected former law makers from D.C. and their families.
((((.... Just so we have some basis in this issue: I've kept up on reading about and studying what I would call "top end" military issues since college days, when I took a few classes on NUCLEAR ARMS DISCUSSIONS and have been interested in staying up to day on national military developments, even though I am NOT at all interested in the day to day issues of military involvements in third world situations....))))
Why do I think this current/future stealth bomber project is a waste of money:
First, the current B-2 stealth bombers:
We have in current possession 20 of these, each costing roughly $2B dollars, the most expensive flying aircraft ever designed. These were NOT and ARE NOT designed to drop bombs on AK-wielding, camel and Toyota riding terrorist groups. Instead, they are built to EVADE sophisticated radar and avionic systems deployed by advanced nations like China, Russia, etc.
ANY plane ---- even those relics from the 1940s and 50s ---- could drop bombs on AK-47 wielding terrorist groups who don't have advanced radar and avionics and fighter jets.
In other words, the ONLY TIME you will need to resort to using airplanes that cost HUNDREDS of millions to BILLIONS of dollars, per unit, is when you had to fight nations that have modern navies, air forces, and other military branches that have sophisticated weapons and technologies comparable to your own...
And THAT is precisely, not so ironically, WHY it is a waste to build these incredibly SLOW flying, ultra expensive "stealth" bombers.
But even if they could be built to fly, say, 1,500 to 2,000 MPH --- which they CAN NOT be easily built to do, due to the nature of their cargo loads as well as how they are restricted to fly and, FURTHER, let's say they could easily EVADE Russian and Chinese radars and other defensive systems --- those speeds are USELESS. That's up to about Mach 3.
Here's why such speeds --- and even faster ones, up to 2 o 3 times faster than Mach 3 --- are useless:
China and Russia have INTER-CONTINENTAL BALLISTIC MISSILES (ICBMs) that fly up to Mach 25 or so.
Why would the USA or any one needing to resort to either fighter jets (like the F-35 or the F-22) or stealth bombers delivering either very powerful conventional or small "tactical" nuclear missiles to Russian or Chinese bases, either inside Russia and China or elsewhere where they have hundreds to thousands of soldiers?
And to do it STEALTHILY? Really?
You actually think Russian and Chinese militaries WON'T KNOW if one or more of their "top secret" military nodes or bases had been catastrophically destroyed by some stealth fighter jet or bombers WHICH HAVE EVADED their radar systems?
And you think they'd just sit down to scratch their heads, as to what to do, since they didn't know, COULDN'T KNOW, "who done it"?
Of course not! They'd know IMMEDIATELY.
Dropping highly destructive, large, powerful, and highly accurate missiles and bombs ON Russian and Chinese military, using covert means, could only mean no more than 5 or so nations, including Russian and Chinese themselves.
The other 2-3 nations on earth that could do that are basically, Japan, France, and Britain.
And since Japan does not have nuclear bombs or missiles, if such weapons were dropped (on Russia or China), the potential enemies are reduced immediately to just three: France, Britain, and the USA.
(Israel, Pakistan, and India also have nuclear bombs and missiles; but it very doubtful any of these nations would drop them, using stealthy modes, on either Russia or China. It is, of course, conceivable that a truly crazy Russian or Chinese leader COULD ordered nuclear bombs or missiles dropped ON THEIR OWN military bases; but that's bordering on TWILIGHT ZONE shows... so it's hard to argue like that with a straight face. It is MORE LOGICAL to argue that if THAT were to happen, it's likely an act from OUTSIDE of Russia and China. PLEASE, NOTE, the REVERSED situation is also true: if a nuclear missile or nuclear bomb fell on American, French, or British soils, it is MORE LIKELY THAN NOT that it's by another sophisticated nation... and since the USA would be the LEAST likely to do that, Russia and China are going to be the chief suspects, and so on and so forth.)
Now, then, back to why building STEALTH BOMBERS that cost hundreds of millions to BILLIONS OF DOLLARS, per unit, is a total waste of tax payers money: they will NEVER BE USED as intended: to penetrated powerful nations that also have defensive measures REQUIRING those "stealth" technologies in the first place.
Again, if you intend to bomb small nations of mostly second and third world status in technological sophistication, or if the bombing is mostly against small groups of terrorists and other irregular armed groups, virtually ANY FLYING PLANE could do it... so, again, building and maintaining dozens to hundreds of airplanes that cost hundreds of dollars to billions of dollars, each, is a total waste of money.
On the other hand, if the USA, again, WERE TO USE such expensive, stealthy planes to bomb enemy countries like Russia and China that also have sophisticated offensive and defensive systems --- and let's say out "stealth bombers" go through and dropped those deadly payloads on Russian and Chinese targets --- what do you think the Russians and Chinese COULD DO and WOULD DO, in return?
Yep: they WILL RESORT TO THEIR FASTEST MISSILES, ICBMs, which fly up to 8 times as fast as the fasted fighter jets in the world.
What does that mean? It means that when our slow Stealth B-2 bombers, F-22, and the new and even "more advanced" Northrop Grumman bombers return to the USA, after their "successful" bombing runs, THERE LIKELY WON'T BE ANY AIR FIELDS TO LAND ON, since doing such a deadly thing against Russian and Chinese military bases would CONSTITUTE an "existential" threat to them --- meaning their existence was put at real risk --- they WOULD RECIPROCATE WITH HIGHLY PREJUDICIAL ACTIONS by lopping their incredibly fast "defensive" missiles our ways...
And while China may only have a couple hundred nuclear missiles and bombs (an with today's highly deadly THERMONUCLEAR BOMBS/missiles, "a couple hundreds" are more than enough to destroy much of the world), Russia has a couple thousand of them, much more than what America has.
Now, then, it is clear these highly expensive "stealth bombers" don't really ultimately have any use. Such large amounts of resources should be, IF THEY MUST BE CHANNELED TOWARD MILITARY USE, allocated toward the less expensive kinds that COULD BE and WOULD BE used towards NON-SUPER-POWER nations, where MOST of our fighting would be against.
Neither China nor Russia is going to be intimidated by American stealth bombers. Again, using stealth bombers against either Russia or China INVITES IMMEDIATE large scale deaths and destruction to the USA or any country that did it, whether "out in broad daylight" or in the dark of night in "covert" and "secretive" runs.
If the INTENTION is to play real-life "chess games" with them, then having a lot of air craft carriers and battle groups ---- traditional military power projection methods --- and putting them, both tactically and strategically, in crucial places, like the SOUTH CHINA SEA, international waters that China claims as its own private waters, as if simply to say: We are here, on international waters, and we don't do as you demand....
SUCH ACTIONS are useful, since there is no way China is going to resort to physical, military activities against such mighty, traditional show of force. The most they could do is also put their own vessels PHYSICALLY next to ours, all in INTERNATIONAL WATERS...