Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/7/84; site ucbvax.ARPA Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!ucbvax!medin From: medin@ucbvax.ARPA (Milo Medin) Newsgroups: net.aviation Subject: Re: B-58, et. al. Message-ID: <2282@ucbvax.ARPA> Date: Sun, 30-Sep-84 15:41:42 EDT Article-I.D.: ucbvax.2282 Posted: Sun Sep 30 15:41:42 1984 Date-Received: Mon, 1-Oct-84 04:40:29 EDT References: <3188@rabbit.UUCP> Organization: University of California at Berkeley Lines: 65 *Flame on* Oh come off it!! The reason the B-58 was scrapped is because it was a nightmare to fly and keep in one piece, not because of a demphasis of bombers because of ICBM's. Just to inform you of a few minor differences of bombers and planes: 1) Bombers are recallable, if you make a mistake, you have a 2nd chance. 2) Bombers are retargetable in mid-flight. Once you set the targets into an ICBM at launch, you cant change it, even if you find out there is a more important target you want to hit. 3) Bombers can provide assesment of the attack and can provide intelligence info along the way as well. 4) Most of the megatonage is in the bomber force. All the biggies go into bombers, ICBM's are for counterforce strikes. 5) Bombers provide a way to communicate intent to the enemy. If you scramble a wing of bombers, the Russians can see you do it, and realize you are ticked off. If you launch ICBM's, the russians will see them too, and will probably react in a very unpleasant way. Of course, these trivial differences I'm sure wont change your minds, but some of us who work in the National Defense business do regard them as fairly important. With regards to Soviet Air Defenses, you are right, things are massively developed. But the B-1B has 1/150th the radar cross section of a B-52, tho its physically a little bigger, and lots bigger in payload. They can do really neat things when you have a low RCS like this. For example, there is a little black box that will take the radar reflection of the plane and project it onto the ground. Can you figure what this means if you shoot a radar guided missile at it. The B-1 is an extremely capable and agile aircraft, and will serve a VERY important role in our deterrent forces. And dont you forget, those Russian Bozo's took a long long time in shooting down that airliner over Soviet airspace (both times). Can you imagine what their performance would be under a full scale bomber attack? Sure the defenses are hairy, but you gotta use them if they are to be effective. You are right tho, there are a few politicians like Mondale who doesnt know diddly squat about strategic doctrine. At least the Reagan administration properly sees the importance of keeping alive the triad. *flame off* Oh by the way, I have never worked for Rockwell or a contractor for any of the B-1 subsystems. I have worked on nuclear weapons design and laser modeling, but not having to do with bomber programs of any sort. I work for NASA currently, on computer networks. I feel I am fairly objective on this issue, and I am a member of a professional Electronic Warfare organization (I'm an Old Crow), and keep abreast of developments in the field. Milo