Can it? What's the use if having any better technologies for the present or future? I guess we shouldn't strive to stay ahead of people. Sounds like you'll go far in life. Even the b-52 cost 30m and that's a pretty cheap plane.
Can it? What's the use if having any better technologies for the present or future? I guess we shouldn't strive to stay ahead of people. Sounds like you'll go far in life. Even the b-52 cost 30m and that's a pretty cheap plane.
irishScott
Lifer
- Oct 10, 2006
- 21,562
- 3
- 0
Ummm... Iran and Syria have relatively sophisticated AA systems. North Korea's not to shabby in this department either TMK. Older fighters have a much higher chance (albeit not that high) of getting shot down. B-2s and other stealth aircraft have a virtually 100% chance of avoiding even the most advanced AA systems. B-2s are also bombers and thus can carry higher payloads than fighters. Try flying any old-school bomber over a decent AA system and see what happens...
And jamming the radar isn't always possible...
Ok so does anyone else think we got that technology from Aliens?
Seriously though, how cool is that thing.
Waste of money? yeah.. screw military technology when a good part of the world would love to have a few B2's to use against the U.S...
Seriously though, how cool is that thing.
Waste of money? yeah.. screw military technology when a good part of the world would love to have a few B2's to use against the U.S...
I was stationed at Whiteman when I was in the AF. These birds are beautiful and technological wonders.
1. This is the first B2 Crash Ever. It's operating record is outstanding.
2. This was at Andersen AFB, Guam.
3. They don't roll off the ground with Nukes due to START
4. TCO is more like 2.5 billion
Let's be happy that both the pilots are ok. I don't envy them right now though - it's gonna be a tough investigation!
1. This is the first B2 Crash Ever. It's operating record is outstanding.
2. This was at Andersen AFB, Guam.
3. They don't roll off the ground with Nukes due to START
4. TCO is more like 2.5 billion
Let's be happy that both the pilots are ok. I don't envy them right now though - it's gonna be a tough investigation!
mugs
Lifer
- Apr 29, 2003
- 48,920
- 46
- 91
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-15_Eagle
"To date, no air superiority versions of the F-15 (A/B/C/D models) have ever been shot down by an enemy."
Sounds good to me
Originally posted by: LongCoolMother
You have a point. unless.... it crashes?
So the whole plane fleet is worthless because 1 crashes. Wow, great logic people use.
Might as well scrap every plane out there.
irishScott
Lifer
- Oct 10, 2006
- 21,562
- 3
- 0
Think I saw something on the history channel where the Soviets actually designed a naval cruiser that could take off from sea y and land again.
"The F-15E sustained two losses to ground fire in the Gulf War in 1991. One F-15E was lost in the 2003, Invasion of Iraq, probably due to ground fire."
http://www.flightlevel350.com/...15_aircraft_facts.html
You listed an air superiority fighter. The B2 is a bomber.
Sure, the F-15 costs less. But it's not going to carry 50,000 lbs of bombs thousands of miles, either. It's a different tool for a different job.
He clearly pointed out "air superiority versions (A/B/C/D models)" in his post. You're posting about the E model, the Strike Eagle.
I laugh at this whole thread line. Why? Because somebody says that 15m is the right plane. Then somebody else chimes in that the AS versions of the 15 are right to replace the B-2. Those versions are 2x the original 15m and aren't even a replacement for the b-2. Apples and oranges.
People are so odd sometimes.
no, they are right, your common ATOT user could easily spend the 1.2 bil much much more efficiently then the military.
/sarcasm
- Aug 23, 2003
- 25,375
- 142
- 116
When your tax dollars are paying the $1.2 billion price tag, it gives you a different perspective.
Maybe you're still in middle school? Post back with your opinion once you're old enough to file your federal returns.
I'm glad to hear Americans got their money's worth :roll:
You worried about the al-Qaeda Air Force?
Don't forget that when they developed the thing the Soviet Union was still around. It's not like they designed this to fight against a third world country. On the contrary, the fall of the Soviet Union is what kept the B-52 is service so much longer. It's more cost effective to fly and it does the job.
Since the B-2's were already purchased, what did you expect the government to do with them?
- Aug 23, 2003
- 25,375
- 142
- 116
"According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions," Rumsfeld admitted.
Military related expenses is a bottomless money pit sucking up 65% of our yearly national discretionary budget.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter