US Preparing to Put Nuclear Bombers Back on 24-Hour Alert

madcow rocketry
Shop deals on ebay
Wildman Rocketry
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
fyrwrxz said:
As a kid, I was on bases where the air time from Russia was posted in all the front closets (closest to the front door) with air raid signal types listed. Yes, we had the 'duck and cover' futile practices in school. I have been out to dinner with the folks when a 'practice' air raid went off and grown men were throwing drinks on the ground and leaping over decorative railings to get to the crew trucks stationed outside the Officer's Club. This was a part of life and you just accepted you may never see your Father again. He racked up 20,000 flight hours (do the math!) circling the pole waiting for "go codes" to penetrate Russian airspace. I lived in a stone croft in Scotland with two mountain ranges between us and Holy Loch (Naval base with nuke-equipped subs) with no running water outside the quaint little town of Grandtown-On-Spey. Now I live in San Diego-one of several prime targets. I am saddened we have not gotten beyond this madness and still the sabre-rattling and political manoeverings continue. I've gotten jaded over the years and now am just fatalistic. I hope cooler heads prevail and the diplomats can ratchet things down a few notches. Nucleqar winter is NOT the answer to global warming. >rant off<
Click to expand...

Yup. We've seen where this slathering at the mouth with the finger on the red button mentality gets us. Some have proven they just love war without taking into account the consequences.
 
rharshberger said:
The B-52 may also have better range and loiter times unrefuelled. B52s are slower but have nearly double the combat radius, and they have nearly the same internal bomb load capacity ( 70 vs 75k lbs). We also probably have more B52s than B1s.
Click to expand...

That, and the fact that due to the START treaty, the B-1 has had its nuclear capability stripped. Only the B-52 and B-2 are nuclear capable today.
 
Winston said:
They probably steal our assessments.
Click to expand...
More likely they get 'em delivered free from some friendly "friends." Seems a lot of people feeling very "friendly" to them these days.

Of course, what we probably really have to worry about most is not Russian ICBMs, but an unmarked container ship or rental truck.
 
The Air Force hasn&#8217;t used nuclear &#8216;alert pads&#8217; since the Cold War. Now they&#8217;re being upgraded.
23 Oct 2017

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ering-cold-war-style-alerts-for-b-52-bombers/

Excerpts:

U.S. Strategic Command, which oversees the military&#8217;s nuclear weapons from its headquarters in Nebraska, denied that any discussions are underway to place B-52s on alert. A spokesman said that reports suggesting otherwise were mischaracterized.

The Air Force, likewise, downplayed that possibility. The service is neither planning nor preparing to put B-52s on alert, said Capt. Mark Graff, a spokesman. Ongoing efforts to upgrade alert facilities, munition storage areas, dining halls and other infrastructure are necessary to &#8220;maintain a baseline of readiness,&#8221; he said.
 
Steven said:
Yup. We've seen where this slathering at the mouth with the finger on the red button mentality gets us. Some have proven they just love war without taking into account the consequences.
Click to expand...

And who or whom is "some"? and how did they prove they love war?
 
muddymooose said:
That sucks, I was kind of enjoying the last quarter-century of not worrying about global nuclear war.
Click to expand...

While I understand your thinking I ask what has really changed? We still had Russian and likely Chinese ballistic missiles pointed at us. Bombers just add to the situation a little.


Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum
 
markkoelsch said:
We still had Russian and likely Chinese ballistic missiles pointed at us. Bombers just add to the situation a little.
Click to expand...
Yep, and the USAF now claims the quote from the General was misinterpreted/mischaracterized - no bombers to go on alert.

Mutually Assured Destruction has worked to prevent WWIII for 72 years now and there's no reason to believe it won't continue to work. Considering the vastly more ECONOMICALLY connected to the West Cold War v2.0 adversaries versus the completely isolated (economically and politically) Cold War v1.0 adversaries, WWIII is even LESS likely today than ever before because not only is self-preservation still a huge deterrent, there's now even a huge economic incentive to avoid nuclear conflict.
 
Winston said:
The Air Force, likewise, downplayed that possibility. The service is neither planning nor preparing to put B-52s on alert, said Capt. Mark Graff, a spokesman. Ongoing efforts to upgrade alert facilities, munition storage areas, dining halls and other infrastructure are necessary to &#8220;maintain a baseline of readiness,&#8221; he said.
Click to expand...

His great-great-grandson will train Ender Wiggin and Julian "Bean" Delphiki to lead Earth's forces against the Buggers!
 
Bat-mite said:
His great-great-grandson will train Ender Wiggin and Julian "Bean" Delphiki to lead Earth's forces against the Buggers!
Click to expand...

Ah yes, Ender's Game. What a great book. Also the other books in the series...highly recommended.
 
Winston said:
Yep, and the USAF now claims the quote from the General was misinterpreted/mischaracterized - no bombers to go on alert.

Mutually Assured Destruction has worked to prevent WWIII for 72 years now and there's no reason to believe it won't continue to work. Considering the vastly more ECONOMICALLY connected to the West Cold War v2.0 adversaries versus the completely isolated (economically and politically) Cold War v1.0 adversaries, WWIII is even LESS likely today than ever before because not only is self-preservation still a huge deterrent, there's now even a huge economic incentive to avoid nuclear conflict.
Click to expand...

Typical BS story. Do some homework first.
 
Hey Steven, I don't think your HOA will do you any good vis-a-vis the doomsday scenario. Sorry I couldn't keep my virtual mouth shut.



Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum
 
MarcoPolo said:
Hey Steven, I don't think your HOA will do you any good vis-a-vis the doomsday scenario. Sorry I couldn't keep my virtual mouth shut.



Sent from my iPhone using Rocketry Forum
Click to expand...

In the mean time, I'm enjoying what it does keep out. even as I type.
 
Peartree said:
Be very careful whose numbers you choose to believe and be aware of how they are derived and reported. I've seen several vidios in which someone was accused of "killing civilians" but which, under scrutiny, the "dead" in the video can often be seen breathing or moving around. Remember that biased reporting, from either side, should be suspect. Who developed and promoted that casualty figure? And does it distinguish between civilians killed by US military action and civilians killed by insurgents? Does it also account for insurgents, in violation of the Geneva Convention, of housing troops, and establishing bases in hospitals and schools? It's one thing to say how many people were killed, but an entirely different thing to be certain of who killed them.
Click to expand...

Thank you for this insight. As an Air Force guy, I can say we take great steps above and beyond what is required by rules of war to protect civilians. In Iraq, the enemy was slime. One guy joined the national guard, to get "even" they knocked on the door of his house and when wife answers through in hand grenades, killing his kids and blowing his wife's arm off (how do I know? We took care of her at Balad Air Base USAF hospital.) Enemy would intentionally hide behind civilians to try to catch them in cross fire then blame US for the deaths. Our tent hospital was the second best hospital in the entire country (Army hospital in green zone was first, it was in actual BUILDINGS) and we took care of civilians caught in cross fire, Iraqi Police and National Guard, POWs, as well as allied and US forces.

Terrorists are tough to fight, in part BECAUSE they ignore international rules of war. I am not saying US military forces always get it right, because we don't. But we TRY to minimize casualties whenever possible. Name me a country we have fought with since WW2 that has even made an effort? (And subtract Japan from the WW2 part.)
 
This answers my why B-52s instead of B-1s question:

No, the USAF Hasn't Put its Nuclear Bombers Back on 24/7 Alert, Yet
Just considering the plan might have benefits, but doing so would be costly and could risk accidents and provocations
BY JOSEPH TREVITHICK - OCTOBER 23, 2017

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zo...put-its-nuclear-bombers-back-on-247-alert-yet

The U.S. Air Force&#8217;s top officer General David Goldfein says the service is preparing to possibly put some of its nuclear capable bombers back on 24-hour alert for the first time in more than 25 years. With a major Pentagon-wide review of how the U.S. military positions its nuclear forces in process, it&#8217;s unclear how likely it is that this plan will ever come to fruition, especially given that it would require significant funding and other resources, could increase the risk of accidents, force reductions in other parts of America&#8217;s nuclear triad and the B-52's community's conventional weapons training regimen, and provoke unwelcome responses from potential opponents, including Russia and North Korea.

Goldfein talked about the potential for bombers going back on a standby posture during an interview with Defense One&#8217;s Marcus Weisgerber during the course of a six-day visit to Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana earlier in October 2017. The base itself is home to the Air Force&#8217;s 2nd Bomb Wing and its B-52H Stratofortress bombers and has existing alert facilities, but no longer has any nuclear weapons on site. After the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the United States ended decades of having the aircraft, as well as B-1 Bones and B-2 Spirit stealth bombers, ready to go at a moment&#8217;s notice for a nuclear strike. The B-1s are now no longer nuclear capable at all.

START (treaty) Lanced the B-1's Nukes

https://www.military.com/daily-news...ukes-but-bomber-will-still-get-new-bombs.html
 

Similar threads

Winston
Everything New We Just Learned About The 2020 Iranian Missile Attack On U.S. Forces In Iraq
Replies
0
Views
798
Winston
Winston
Winston
Ground Based Strategic Deterrent
Replies
2
Views
2K
Winston
Winston
Winston
Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty goes bye-bye
Replies
6
Views
1K
Winston
Winston
Winston
The Long Arm of the General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper
Replies
0
Views
593
Winston
Winston
Winston
A B-52H Nicknamed "Wise Guy"
Replies
1
Views
561
Bill Hanson
Bill Hanson

Latest posts

Back
Top