Quote:
|
Originally Posted by hello
That's possible, but there is more chance of the B-52s getting detected and attacked there.
|
At 2,000nm?
Quote:
|
Also, can a single B-52 carry 16 AGM-129s?
|
12.
Quote:
|
I said 336 in a SINGLE SORTY.
|
58 B-52s - the number now - multiplied by twelve comes to 696 missiles. So you could have 8 missiles per bomber, or instead have 39 fully-loaded B-52s.
Quote:
|
Well right now there B-52s would carry 460 and finish it off in one go,
|
The point eludes me.
Quote:
|
B-52s would need lots of extra tanking
|
70 KC-10s and over 600 KC-135s not enough for you? They wouldn't need 'lots' of extra tanking. These are B-52s attacking from up to 2,000nm, not F-16s dropping bombs.
If I remember correctly, it was the B-52 which kept nuclear weapons aloft 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year until 1990.
Quote:
|
and escorts if they plan on inflicting the kind of damage B-2s can by themselves and a few tankers.
|
To suggest that all 21 B-2s would be absolutely invulnerable in the face of the most advanced air defences in the world strikes me as a tad arrogant.
Regardless, that scale of nuclear attack - hundreds of warheads - using aircraft belongs in the pages of Clancyesque war films and the popular (though uninformed) imagination.
The Ohio class exists for a reason.