What's new

America’s venerable B-52 bomber vs. Russian S-400 missile system: Who wins?

Zarvan

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
54,470
Reaction score
87
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan



The recent deployment of six B-52H Stratofortresses bombers from Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana at the U.S. European Command area became a real hot topic in the media and in experts community.

B-52s have conducted flights near the Russian border in Baltic Region that probably to the annoyance of the Russian military. Moreover, Russian fighter jets repeatedly conducted an intercept of U.S. Air Force B-52H Stratofortress bomber over international waters of the Baltic Sea.

As previously reported, the Russian army also moved components of its S-300 long-range surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems from Gvardeysk to Baltiysk, the westernmost town in Russia.




In a series of posts on Twitter on 22 March, military blogger Petri Mäkelä reported that Russian Defense Forces has deployed S-300 systems at the westernmost point of the enclave of Kaliningrad, near the border with Poland to counter potential air strike.

Against the backdrop of growing tensions between Russia and the U.S., many began to wonder who would win in battle of B-52 bomber vs. S-400 missile defense systems.

2309156.jpg

Airmen assigned to the 5th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron load AGM-86/B Air-Launched Cruise Missiles onto the wing of a B-52H Stratofortress at Minot Air Force Base, N.D., Nov. 3, 2015, during Exercise Global Thunder 16. Photo by Airman 1st Class Justin Armstrong
Developed in the 1950s, the B-52 heavy bomber has been the mainstay of the United States Air Force for 64 years. Venerable B-52 bomber saw service in Vietnam, Desert Storm, and the War on Terror in both Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria. And of course, he was a cornerstone of American Cold War nuclear deterrence for decades.

Even at his age, B-52 Stratofortress is capable of dropping or launching the widest array of weapons in the U.S. inventory, includes gravity bombs, cluster bombs, precision guided missiles, and joint direct attack munitions. The basic B-52 design evolved from an aircraft capable of dropping their bombs from 30,000 feet to the real Stratofortress that can launch long-range cruise missiles.

It is worth noting that Russian military sources claim that five U.S. Air Force’s B-52H Stratofortress bombers conducted a mock nuclear strike against targets in Russia, include Moskov and St. Saint Petersburg during training flights on 28 March.

D26gKPMX4AIe3ek-1.jpg

B-52H’s missile range when deployed over the Norwegian Sea
The training flight of U.S. B-52H bombers with Norwegian F-16 fighter jets over the Norwegian Sea was one of the examples of dummy cruise missile attacks outside the detection zone by air-defense radars, as well as outside the combat radius of MiG-31 supersonic interceptor aircraft.

The classic B-52 cannot penetrate adversary air defenses; therefore it needs the long-range missile. But, according to Airforce Technology website, B-52H is capable of carrying some missile systems, included AGM-86A air-launched cruise missiles (with range 1500 miles), AGM-84 Harpoon missiles (with range 77 miles), AGM-86C conventional air-launched cruise missiles (with range 1500 miles) for the full range of strike operations.

A total of 744 B-52s were built with the last, a B-52H, delivered in October 1962. “H” modification is the only variant still in use by the U.S. Air Force.

Even though B-52 is the oldest aircraft in the history of the Air Force, it still remains deadly for enemies of the United States around the world.

%D0%A1-400_0131-min.jpg

Photo by Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation
As for Russian S-400, it is one of the most modern and controversial defense missile systems in the world currently.

S-400 surface to air missile system, previously known as the S-300 PMU-3, developed in the 1990s by Russia’s Almaz Central Design Bureau as an upgrade of the S-300 family. It has been in service with the Russian Armed Forces since 2007. Open sources report the S-400 uses four missiles to fill its performance envelope: the very-long-range 40N6 (248 miles), the long-range 48N6 (155 miles), the medium-range 9M96E2 (74 miles) and the short-range 9M96E (25 miles).

But a recently published reportby the Swedish Defense Research Agency, commonly known as FOI, questioned the capability of modern Russian S-400 anti-aircraft system.

In closer inspection, Russia’s capabilities are not quite as daunting, especially if potential countermeasures are factored in.

The analysis shows that the actual range of the new Russian anti-aircraft system is actually only 90-125 miles. Against low-flying missiles launched from a B-52 bomber, the S-400’s range may be as short as 12 miles.

35078131_2104518259790919_6898204732825796608_o.jpg

Photo by Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation
According to a report, the missile with a purported 248-miles range, the 40N6, is not yet operational and has been plagued by problems in development and testing. In its current configuration, the S-400 system should mainly be considered a threat to large high-value aircraft such as AWACS or transport aircraft at medium to high altitudes, out to a range of 125-155 mile. In contrast, the effective range against agile fighter jets and cruise missiles operating at low altitudes can be an as little 12-20 miles.

Moreover, despite its sophistication, an S-400 battery is dependent on a single engagement radar and has a limited number of firing platforms. It is thus vulnerable both to munitions targeting its engagement radar and to saturation attacks. If and when the 40N6 missile goes online, its 248-miles technical range cannot be effectively exploited against targets below approximately 3000 meters unless target data can be provided and updated during the missile’s flight by airborne or forward-deployed radars.

As a result, only a real conflict can give an exact answer. It is not easy to fully predict who would win in an epic battle between a B-52 bomber and S-400 missile system. Thousands of other factors, such as the weather, crew, electronic warfare, and more, can affect the real situation.

https://defence-blog.com/army/ameri...vs-russian-s-400-missile-system-who-wins.html
 
.
for low flying objects, obviously you dont use S400. its used for new 5th generation doctrine, as they want to use awacs radar only and share the information with 5th generation jets. but if s400 can shoot them from far away, it will push f22 or f35 open their radar which will also mean that they will be shown in the radar screen
 
.
Not a fair comparison.


A single B-52 can unleash multiple standoff munitions [~20 x ALCM] on potential targets across the region from literally hundreds of miles away = 20 potential targets dealt with in a single sortie.

Case in point: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/06/politics/us-b-52-bomber-afghanistan-record/index.html

B-52s in their current forms, are absolute monsters packing lot of gear and surprises within.

A fleet of B-52s can clean sweep entire layers of defenses on the surface with a massive barrage of standoff munitions from a safe distance (saturation attacks).
 
Last edited:
.
Hi,

What this article does not tell is that these B52's have been upgraded with a new total EW package---stealth paint---.

It can fly low---pop up launch its weapons from standoff distanxces and be gone even before the enemy knew it was there---.

For that very reason---I have been talking about the inclusion of the JH7A's in the pakistan navy strike columns---.

LRSAMS are not at their very best against targets that are flying low---over the ocean---and delivering goods from standoff distances---.

I believe that in another year or two---"prominent" THINK TANK members on this board would make the same suggestion that I made years ago and claim it as their own---without acknowledging my efforts---. I am not talking about the doctor---but maybe I am---.
 
.
Hi,

What this article does not tell is that these B52's have been upgraded with a new total EW package---stealth paint---.

It can fly low---pop up launch its weapons from standoff distanxces and be gone even before the enemy knew it was there---.

For that very reason---I have been talking about the inclusion of the JH7A's in the pakistan navy strike columns---.

LRSAMS are not at their very best against targets that are flying low---over the ocean---and delivering goods from standoff distances---.

I believe that in another year or two---"prominent" THINK TANK members on this board would make the same suggestion that I made years ago and claim it as their own---without acknowledging my efforts---. I am not talking about the doctor---but maybe I am---.
Well said, bhai. Appreciated.

EW capabilities of B-52 highlighted in brief:-

"The B-52H is equipped with a wide range of electronic warfare equipment. The ITT AN/ALQ-172(V)2 electronic countermeasures system features multi-band threat recognition and multiple threat jamming. The AN/ALR-20A radar warning system detects and prioritises multiple threats.

The Northrop Grumman (Litton) AN/ALR-46 digital warning receiver detects radar emissions in the 2GHz to 18GHz band, and can simultaneously identify up to 16 radar signals. Northrop Grumman’s AN/ALQ-155 jammer power management system gives 360° coverage in D,E,F,G, and H radar bands.

It is also equipped with Motorola AN/ALQ-122 multiple false target generator, AN/ALT-32 noise jammer and Northrop Grumman AN/ALQ-153 tail warning set, which is a pulse Doppler threat warner.

12 AN/ALE-20 infrared flare dispensers and eight launchers for the AN/ALE-24 chaff dispenser are fitted."


Link: https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/b52/

B-52 is packing many surprises within - absolute monsters of warfare.
 
.
The S-400 are lethal versus relatively slow moving B-52. The problem is USAF will hunt down the S-400 by other means rendering them useless
 
. .
The S-400 are lethal versus relatively slow moving B-52. The problem is USAF will hunt down the S-400 by other means rendering them useless
B-52H does not even need to get close to an S-400 system to take it out, a salvo of long-range ALCM will solve the problem in its case from a safe distance.

Look at the respective ranges of each long-range ALCM in the inventory of USAF.

AGM-86B = 2500 KM
AGM-86D = 1320 KM
AGM-158B = 1000 KM
AGM-86C = 950 KM
AGM-158A = 370 KM

And check the payload capacity of B-52H: https://www.stratofortress.org/current-operations.htm

Russian conventional war-fighting capabilities are nowhere close to American at present - even Russian leadership acknowledge this fact begrudgingly. Futile comparisons.
 
.
B-52H does not even need to get close to an S-400 system to take it out, a salvo of long-range ALCM will solve the problem in its case from a safe distance.

Look at the respective ranges of each long-range ALCM in the inventory of USAF.

AGM-86B = 2500 KM
AGM-86D = 1320 KM
AGM-158B = 1000 KM
AGM-86C = 950 KM
AGM-158A = 370 KM

And check the payload capacity of B-52H: https://www.stratofortress.org/current-operations.htm

Russian conventional war-fighting capabilities are nowhere close to American at present - even Russian leadership acknowledge this fact begrudgingly. Futile comparisons.

Hi,

Modern upgrades has done marvels to the ability and capability of the B52's---.

These upgrade are not limited to the B52's only but to the B1 bomber and the B2 Bombers as well---.

With the american systems---we can only talk about what we know of---hear or read about---the surprise is about what we are not told about---.

If you look at the size of the aircraft then think about how massive the jamming capabilities of this aircraft would be---. Then there is the radar absorbing paint.

The same principal could have been used by the Paf for the JH7A type aircraft---to hit the enemy flank---.
 
Last edited:
.
I wish B-52s or some other sort of bombers similar to them were in PAF service, I've always had a thing for these big bombers.
 
.
It's not even a comparison. They shoot down a B-52. We wipe Russia off the face of the Earth. That also means they retaliate. End of the World!

Useless thread. Warmongers and Keyboard Warriors will love this though. Just finished doing laundries at 5am. Goodnight people! :usflag:

I wish B-52s or some other sort of bombers similar to them were in PAF service, I've always had a thing for these big bombers.

Same here I like it big like the "wife" bwahahahahahaha!

Kidding aside, what will you have the B-52 for? You guys have all the delivery systems you need to deter your traditional enemies.
 
. .
I wish B-52s or some other sort of bombers similar to them were in PAF service, I've always had a thing for these big bombers.

Perhaps the PAF can develop something similar at some future date
 
. .
Who wins? The B-52 -- EVERY TIME.

The B-52 started out as a bomber -- a vehicle that deliver bombs. What a shocker, eh? :lol:

Somewhere along the way, the B-52's utility increases to the point where getting rid of it is like trying to herd cats. So what make an aircraft so resilient? People have got to understand that the B-52 without ordnance is useless, just like a bomb without a carrier is worthless. This means that in order to understand the B-52, one must go back to the old adage: The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

A B-52 with ordinary gravity 'dumb' bombs is no different than the WW II era bombers like the B-17 and B-29. But a B-52 with 'smart' bombs is a completely different beast mainly because the 'smart' bombs do not require the B-52 to be within the threat zone of any air defense network, including the S-400's. And a B-52 with air launched cruise missiles will destroy any target.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom