US Demonstrates Air Power in the Indo-Pacific Region

[FOOLS_NIGHTMARE]

Amid growing tensions in the Taiwan straits and South China Sea, the US is trying to flex its muscles by showing off its fancy toys. Whether it has the appetite to challenge the Chinese is yet to be seen. Realistically and historically the Chinese are not even slightly perturbed by such displays. Nevertheless such demonstrations of airpower end up just attracting the air enthusiasts.

 

[vi-va]

B-1 Lancer readiness is in the toilet, here’s why
Only 6 of 61 US Air Force B-1B Strategic Bombers Are Fully Combat-Ready

B1B sucks, even US air force dislike it. B1B is not supersonic, nor stealthy. Variable-sweep wing is an outdated design, not reliable, maintenance is very expensive.

US would rather go with grandpa era B-52 instead of junk B1B. or maybe B21 which need at least more than a decade to start produce.

It's very outdated design and tactic. Low latitude penetration is suicidal when AWACS are widely adopted.
B1B is expensive, less efficient, high maintenance, low readiness.
B1B is a burden, not a asset.
USAF will get rid of those crap soon.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

B-1 Lancer readiness is in the toilet, here’s why
Only 6 of 61 US Air Force B-1B Strategic Bombers Are Fully Combat-Ready

B1B sucks, even US air force dislike it. B1B is not supersonic, nor stealthy. Variable-sweep wing is an outdated design, not reliable, maintenance is very expensive.

US would rather go with grandpa era B-52 instead of junk B1B. or maybe B21 which need at least more than a decade to start produce.

It's very outdated design and tactic. Low latitude penetration is suicidal when AWACS are widely adopted.
B1B is expensive, less efficient, high maintenance, low readiness.
B1B is a burden, not a asset.
USAF will get rid of those crap soon.

the entire bomber fleet is actually a white elephant at this point. suited only for attacking unarmed enemies that can't hit back.

As much as they hate the B-1, it is their only bomber capable of standoff operations using their latest anti-shipping missile LRASM right now. Their F-18s are still armed with Harpoons, while their B-52s have absolutely zero chance of successfully getting within LRASM launch range and surviving. Their B-2s also can't carry the LRASM.

2 Long-Range Anti-Ship Missiles Test Fired From B-1B Successfully Hit Moving Ship

U.S. defense firm Lockheed Martin successfully hit a moving ship with two long-range anti-ship missiles during a recent test.

thediplomat.com

Readiness declines in aging, overworked fleet

The repercussions of budget cuts, aging and long service in Iraq and Afghanistan are reflected in the most recent mission-capable rates of the Air Force fleet: grounded trainers and the important B-2A Spirit least ready for flight of all.

www.militarytimes.com

the B-2 being subsonic and stealthy trades off alot of capability in terms of standoff weapons mounting while the B-52 is a gas guzzling piece of shit that is basically only still in use because it is good at bombing the defenseless and they already paid for it.

 

[GumNaam]

every single one of these american aircrafts can be really shot down with HQ9 SAM missiles with the exception of "maybe" the f35 and even that's doubtful. being far away from home in front of an enemy that is playing on home turf has some severe disadvantages.

 

[Figaro]

B-1 Lancer readiness is in the toilet, here’s why
Only 6 of 61 US Air Force B-1B Strategic Bombers Are Fully Combat-Ready

B1B sucks, even US air force dislike it. B1B is not supersonic, nor stealthy. Variable-sweep wing is an outdated design, not reliable, maintenance is very expensive.

US would rather go with grandpa era B-52 instead of junk B1B. or maybe B21 which need at least more than a decade to start produce.

It's very outdated design and tactic. Low latitude penetration is suicidal when AWACS are widely adopted.
B1B is expensive, less efficient, high maintenance, low readiness.
B1B is a burden, not a asset.
USAF will get rid of those crap soon.

Yes but the B1B is still much superior to the H-6K offers ... the Chinese bomber force will only be effective once the H-20 becomes operational. Until then, I don't really see the H-6K performing very well besides its LACMs. The most lacking area in the PLAAF besides its refueling capability (which is already been improved by the Y-20U) is its relatively incapable bomber fleet.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Yes but the B1B is still much superior to the H-6K offers ... the Chinese bomber force will only be effective once the H-20 becomes operational. Until then, I don't really see the H-6K performing very well besides its LACMs. The most lacking area in the PLAAF besides its refueling capability (which is already been improved by the Y-20U) is its relatively incapable bomber fleet.

The B-1 is good for a mid-range (250-500 km) standoff missile launcher, which is why it was the first to be equipped with LRASM.

B-2 has size constraints on missile size due to requiring internal mounting and payload, while B-52 can't survive within even 500 km of ground targets due to being totally unsurvivable against even rudimentary air defenses and combat air patrols. They need much longer ranged weapons which translates to lower yield, larger size and less numbers in the air.

 

[vi-va]

Yes but the B1B is still much superior to the H-6K offers ... the Chinese bomber force will only be effective once the H-20 becomes operational. Until then, I don't really see the H-6K performing very well besides its LACMs. The most lacking area in the PLAAF besides its refueling capability (which is already been improved by the Y-20U) is its relatively incapable bomber fleet.

when we compare weapons we can't ignore cost-effectiveness ratio. B-1B sucks because of very low cost-effectiveness ratio, which means if you have same amount of money to invest, you get better return on other weapon system.

B1-B will be the first to retire compare with grandfather B-52 and B2. While H-6k will last longer than B-1B in PLA, until we have mass produced other bomber.

 

[Rollno21]

Is democracy coming to China ,looks like it ,everyone uniting .I heard many countries don't want to endorse one china policy.

 

[GumNaam]

Is democracy coming to China ,looks like it ,everyone uniting .I heard many countries don't want to endorse one china policy.

1. it's not their place to endorse or reject it. they only have the right to accept it, willingly or unwillingly, no choice.
2. "democracy" is a dying system that has been exposed as an elaborate con game...

 

[Rollno21]

1. it's not their place to endorse or reject it. they only have the right to accept it, willingly or unwillingly, no choice.
2. "democracy" is a dying system that has been exposed as an elaborate con game...

1) if it was the case China would not start screaming if some state leaders meet his holyness Dalai lama.

2) if it did not work in your country that dsnt mean it dsnt work for everyone.infact if you are free and do what you want is only possible in a democracy .if you want to be told how you have to live and what to say by the state good luck to you

 

[Figaro]

Is democracy coming to China ,looks like it ,everyone uniting .I heard many countries don't want to endorse one china policy.

I suggest India show some teeth and be the first to not adhere to the One China Policy ... as usual the Indians talk the talk but never walk the walk.

 

[Rollno21]

I suggest India show some teeth and be the first to not adhere to the One China Policy ... as usual the Indians talk the talk but never walk the walk.

Are you dumb ,India has long time back told China officially ,India will endorse one china only when China endorses one India .google it if it works in China .

What does training tibetans and they facing Chinese army at lac mean.

 

[GumNaam]

1) if it was the case China would not start screaming if some state leaders meet his holyness Dalai lama.

2) if it did not work in your country that dsnt mean it dsnt work for everyone.infact if you are free and do what you want is only possible in a democracy .if you want to be told how you have to live and what to say by the state good luck to you

1. in case you haven't noticed, democracy hasn't worked for your country either. and I'm not free to do what I want...I speak as an american who has to give up more than 1/4 of his salary to taxes that get wasted in making interest payments...basically work almost 4 months outta the year for free so democracy can go to hell in a hand basket since it doesn't give me anything I can't get on my own.
2. if dalai lama is considered as a terrorist by China and a traitor then of course they'll object...normal expected reaction. besides, nothing holy about a little sometimes worn out worm who ran away instead of standing his ground for his people who he chose to abandon to enjoy a luxurious lifestyle in the crumbs of his western masters.

 

[Rollno21]

1. in case you haven't noticed, democracy hasn't worked for your country either.
2. if dalai lama is considered as a terrorist by China and a traitor then of course they'll object...normal expected reaction.

1) give me any other alternative which is better .
2) calling Dalai lama a terrorist for Buddhists is equal to calling prophets from other religion as terrorists .Atleast know why they claim Tibet.

 

[GumNaam]

1) give me any other alternative which is better .
2) calling Dalai lama a terrorist for Buddhists is equal to calling prophets from other religion as terrorists .Atleast know why they claim Tibet.

no body considers him as a prophet, even the average budhist doesn't consider him as anything but a politician & at most, representative of Bubudhism, nothing more.
2. alternative? lol...look at China.. you can't deny the fact that their system works & works very effectively.