Welcome
Welcome to Military Power.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, join our community today!

Should the B-52 be replaced?, Legacy of a venerable bomber

Discussion on advances in Military equipment and weaponry over time.

Should the B-52 be replace? Please explain your answer

Yes
1
33%
No
0
No votes
Other
2
67%
 
Total votes : 3

Should the B-52 be replaced?, Legacy of a venerable bomber

Postby Shadow on Sat Aug 04, 2007 11:13 am

Should the B-52 be replaced? And if so, then what would the criteria be for its replacement?
User avatar
Shadow
Specialist
Specialist
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 1:03 pm
Location: Music City

Postby KnightTemplar on Sat Aug 04, 2007 12:11 pm

I think it should be retired, not so sure about replaced. The main mission for the B-52 is carpet bombing, which it is excellent at, but which is not really being done anymore. The B-52 is one of 3 "heavy" bombers (B-1 and B-2 are the others), and by far the oldest. If you are going to "replace" the B-52s you should do it with more of the other 2. Any new "heavy" bombers should be designed for carrying cruise missiles and guided bombs primarily.
User avatar
KnightTemplar
General of the Armies
General of the Armies
 
Posts: 1091
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 6:50 am
Location: Nashville, Tennessee, USA
How did you find out about Military Power?: Site Owner
Call Sign: Topher
Specialist: Aerospace

Postby Maximus the Destroyer on Tue Apr 29, 2008 9:04 pm

I think that the B-52 has outlived it's usefulness. It needs to be replaced. I think KnightTemplar is right in that it needs to be designed around cruise missiles and guided weapons. Stealth and speed are other key things it needs, though maybe range over speed.
User avatar
Maximus the Destroyer
1st Lieutenant
1st Lieutenant
 
Posts: 672
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2008 10:15 am

Postby Goliath on Wed Apr 30, 2008 5:15 pm

Well, I do agree that the days of dropping hundreds of bombs on a target to hopefully destroy it are gone, though, I can still see some uses for a system capable of "carpet bombing" so it is kind of a toss up for me. I think that at minimum it should have an updated automatic targeting system. I know the technology is there for it, but maybe not the need.
The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it. - George Orwell

America has never been an empire. We may be the only great power in history that had the chance, and refused – preferring greatness to power and justice to glory. - George W. Bush
User avatar
Goliath
Sergeant Major
Sergeant Major
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 1:12 pm
Call Sign: Tiny

Postby CrazyCatman on Mon May 05, 2008 3:20 pm

I have to disagree Goliath. I don't think there is a need for such a system. What are the ones you can see?
I detest life-insurance agents; they always argue that I shall some day die, which is not so.
User avatar
CrazyCatman
2nd Lieutenant
2nd Lieutenant
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 6:57 am
Location: Nashville, TN
Call Sign: Crazy Cat


Return to Equipment and Weaponry in History

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron