are stealth bombers overrated?

are stealth bombers overrated?

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Not for their intended roles. Which was to hunt and kill mobile launchers. To bomb shitskins in the liter box? yeah, which is why they weren't used. Anyone saying different just copes that they can't produce their own.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Not for their intended roles
      their role is to strike high value strategic targets without warning. this is always accomplished after primary detection systems have been disabled by cruise missiles or other stealth attack aircraft.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Their role was to fly over the USSR and hunt mobile launchers, with the USSR still having active SAM systems. Nothing the USSR/Russia nor China has can even detect it.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          LOL they can easily detect an F22. Detecting this bloated piece of shit is trivial.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Israeli F-35s have been bushwhacking past S-400 and Krasukha EW for years. Russia protested up down and backwards but was never able to electronically impede their missions and never fired a single missile.

            Vatnik cope is the flavor of the season this Independence Day.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              NIce headcanon.

              >LOL they can easily detect an F22
              They can't even detect the roachdrones which have a much, much bigger RCS. Also, proof?

              L band radar plus a $20 DSP renders a 100 billion dollar program obsolete.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Why haven't they done it in Syria then?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Because the S-400 can't detect the F-35. The 92N6E “Grave Stone” is an I/J-Band running at 8-20GHz, which the CNT composite RAM of the F-35 absorbs quite well.

                >The F-35 also has excellent RAM bonded to the composite panels, making it extremely difficult to detect - if not impossible.
                >The composite absorbs radar in a frequency range from about 0.10 Megahertz to about 60 Gigahertz. The CNT-infused fiber material forms a first layer that reduces radar reflectance and a second layer that dissipates the energy of the radar.
                >Radar absorbing composite materials of the present invention are particularly effective, for example, in the L- through K-band as described herein further below.
                https://patents.google.com/patent/US20100271253

                https://www.ineffableisland.com/2010/06/lockheed-martin-discloses-carbon.html
                https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=197759
                https://www.key.aero/forum/modern-military-aviation/136859-advanced-in-ram-make-low-frequency-radar-much-less-effective-in-future
                https://theaviationist.com/2020/07/05/new-and-old-f-35-coatings-compared-in-recent-photo-of-two-italian-lightning-ii-jets/
                https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=53014

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >L band radar plus a $20 DSP renders a 100 billion dollar program obsolete.
                Nice head cannon. Now, for the actual proof?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                He's not wrong; L-band radars can pick up that there is /something/ out there. However, the required antenna size prevents it from being mobile, at which point it becomes Tomahawk bait.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >He's not wrong
                Based on what, exactly?
                >L-band radars can pick up that there is /something/ out there.
                Do you have any proof of this? The wave length is 15-30cm, which is much smaller than the body of the B-2. Which in theory would allow it to absorb the waves.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >LOL they can easily detect an F22
            They can't even detect the roachdrones which have a much, much bigger RCS. Also, proof?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      why does it flying look so fucking alien?

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    yes, but only because the volume of fire is too low and you need dozens of them for a real conflict.

    also
    >subsonic

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      80 500lb JDAMs individually targeted by pinpoint GPS is low? It's not WWII where you need a mile wide bomber formation to destroy one target because of shit accuracy, anymore.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    compared to what?

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >are stealth bombers overrated?
    only if you're a Serb

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      that wasnt a B2

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        still a stealth bomber

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          it was a stealth attack aircraft
          and it carried out, what, 20,000 sorties with 1 shootdown

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >it was a stealth attack aircraft
            ah you're gonna thecnicalicaly me because it uses F so its not reeeeally a bomber

            The most primitive stealth bomber, designed before we even got into computer RCS modeling with literally the worst RAM ever.

            It's a stealth bomber like the Model T was a car.

            >It's a stealth bomber like the Model T was a car.
            so a stealth bomber

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >so a stealth bomber
              Yes, one two generations ahead of the F-117. Which means no, not the same.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                oh i didn't know a Model T stopped being a car when a new one is made, what other pearls of wisdom are you sharing next?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Compared to newer cars, it might as well be. That's like saying a P-51 is the same as an F-15. Your just retarded. It's okay, though.

                why does it flying look so fucking alien?

                Because it is compared to Russian or Chinese bombers.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >it might as well be.
                good thing you wanting something doesn't change the fact it's still a car, it being more advanced has zero (0) bearing on this conversation

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Your autistic ass who is more concerned with word categories than fundamental differences in performance has zero (0) bearing on this conversation.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                bro i just said that an F-117 is a stealth bomber, and then you go on an autistic fit because AKTUALY IT ISNT BEKAUSE MUH MODLE T

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                not that fag but you are autistic 12 year old please leave.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                The entire point of saying that was to show that they technically have the same name but are totally different machines on a practical level.

                I'm sorry it rubbed you wrong like a pair of glasses with no foam on the granny strap.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You may have autism

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                good lord you need to get some irl friends

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >it being more advanced has zero (0) bearing on this conversation
                How doesn't it? The F-117 not only lacked the RAM of the B-2, it also lacked any EW capabilities and needed to be escorted by Prowlers to jam enemy radars. Furthermore, it used old pop-out Radar Locating System (RLS) sensors to detect enemy radars - which increased its RCS when deployed, leading to only being used in certain areas of a bomb run. The B-2 uses composites more than RAM to control RCS, carries it own EW suite, and a much more sophisticated Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) that uses conformal antennas to detect and jam enemy radar. The F-117 didn't even have a radar, unlike the B-2. Can you explain how it doesn't have any bearing on the conversation - other than you not wanting it to?

                https://www.key.aero/forum/modern-military-aviation/145594-f-117-nighthawk-s-flip-down-radar-locators

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Imagine piloting one of these. You never get to drop a bomb, but you train for it and get to fly around in one of the coolest fucking things to come out of Roswell to date. The next best thing to an SR-71. This is the only conceivable reason to join the chair force.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Imagine piloting one of these
                Would be pretty comfy. Only if we had chosen its little cousin, the YF-23.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >stop!
                >my dick can only get so erect

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                To get that picture, the B-2 pilot wasn't allowed to tell the YF-23 test pilot when he would land, so they played a guessing game and bent the rules a little to get it. The test pilot also worked on the B-2 program.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >one of the coolest fucking things to come out of Roswell to date.
                Play KSP and experiment with making tailless flying wings. You'll find the B-2's yaw authority is simple physics and it isn't that alien. The flight control computers on the B-2 are beasts made by the finest whyite engineers though. And humans knew about stealthing with carbon paste since the 40's.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >This is the only conceivable reason to join the chair force.

                speak for yourself, i was always utterly captivated by the concept of supersonic bombers. they took the coolest thing ever in the xb-70 and designed it to fly nape of the earth? mach 2 under enemy radar with a nuclear payload?

                i'd accept a suicide mission to moscow without a second thought because all the blood would be in my dick at the sheer prospect of taking a b-1 into ussr territory

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Dive bombers (ye olde junkers 87) have always been distinct from strategic bombers. Even after multirole and carrier based aircraft made the distinction blurry, the A-10 and other ground attack aircrafts (frogfoot) are strictly not bombers.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                is moving goalposts all you do? i never mentioned any particular plane, only that its stealth and a bomber

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              can you serb subhumans ever shut up

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          The most primitive stealth bomber, designed before we even got into computer RCS modeling with literally the worst RAM ever.

          It's a stealth bomber like the Model T was a car.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Hey, my grandpa helped work on the Nighthawk. Evidently he also refused to take welfare when he fell on hard times despite having paid into it with taxes, and was a bit of a shitbag, but still neat.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          That's like saying a Model T is the same as a Ford GT.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          That’s like saying a model T is equivalent to a mustang. have a nice day.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >thats like saying FORD BRAND MODEL T is a literally horse less carriage when we there have been LUNAR ROVERS on the MOON

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Be gentle PrepHoleomrade, autistic people have a very hard time dealing with things that don't fit a black and white characterization. It's not his fault he's mentally defective.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No they're actually underrated. There is a rumor a B2 dropped a single leaflet on Kim's actual IRL door step at exactly the right time that basically just said "fuck off" but obviously I can't confirm that

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If they worked, Russia would field them already.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Russia doesn't field optics

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Russia doesn’t even field socks.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You get the worst of both worlds; they've tried, are still trying, and can't even crack F-117s stealth performance.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >if they had a single working stealth plane, Russia would field them already

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >targeting pods
      >PGMs of basically any kind that isn't SACLOS or laser guided
      >PGMs of any kind in any quantity that isn't old soviet stock
      >optics on rifles
      >night vision
      >hell modern rifles
      >boots
      >socks
      >encrypted radios
      Apparently all of these things do not work or exist based on your logic.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Imagine how many SDB's you could fit in that thing.
    >yfw your enemy thinks you're using cluster bombs
    >yfw it's actually just hundreds of individually targeted PGMs caving the skull in of every moron there

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Around 192
      https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/sdb.htm

  8. 1 month ago
    afatoldman

    Given both the U.S. and China are developing new ones, I'm gonna say no.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Sort off. They're not going to overfly a location and drop bombs on it but they can launch saturation attacks with stealthy cruise missiles. By the time the Search Radars spot them it'll be too late to shoot down all the JASSMs.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      If anything, it is overrated because most morons talking about military tech in public see stealth as magic.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        True, it's either "Stealth is a Meme" or "Stealth is I Win Button". In reality, stealth is like wearing camoflage. It dramatically cuts down on detectability but you can still be seen at close range and it doesn't help if you've got your radar lit.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >it doesn't help if you've got your radar lit
          >what are lpi radars

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Difficult to tell until we see a big conflict where they're employed.
    Also: while everyone loves to compare stealth aircraft to non-stealth aircraft, in reality the main competitor is "cheap, mass-producable missiles + stealth recon drone" combo. Europeans went with longer range A-A missiles, Russia is spamming cruise/ballistic missiles and is trying to get into the "cheap strike + cheap recon drone" game.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I want to fuck the B-2

Your email address will not be published.