LRSO (Long Range Standoff) Cruise Missile

Agreed. I was just thinking that B-21s will account for the rest of that LRSO inventory, eventually. Neither the LRSO-capable B-21s nor the final 500 LRSOs themselves will arrive all at once, anyway.

Well also there is presumably the possibility of more than one strike on the part of the B-52s, but yes by the time all thousand or so LRSOs are completed, B-21 integration will probably be a thing.
 
A thousand LRSO missiles Josh_TN? By the time that the last LRSO enters service the next bomber to replace the B-52 will be gettting designed and built.
 
A thousand LRSO missiles Josh_TN? By the time that the last LRSO enters service the next bomber to replace the B-52 will be gettting designed and built.

Probably not; they are currently slated to operate until 2040+. I can’t imagine LRSO production extends past the early 2030s.
 
Never say never Josh_TN, it all depends on what happens in future politics in the US by the time the 2040s comes around.
 
Roughly how long did it take to "integrate" the original ALCM with the B-52? Any ideas? I suppose as a more sophisticated weapon, it might take more time for the LRSO to be IOC with the B-52s. However, on the B-21, I would not be surprised if nuclear munitions are a top priority for the aircraft. As @FighterJock noted, early models of the B-2 were nuclear-capable from the get-go. In fact, as I remember, one of the "criticisms" of the B-2 was that it was "irrelevant" to the needs of post-Cold War theater commanders as it could "only" carry free-fall nuclear bombs or conventional ones. By the end of the decade, though, it could carry an impressive array of precision-guided conventional munitions, including ones with stand-off capability I believe.

Of course, the AGM-69 SRAM was intended for use on the B-2. It was the main weapon of the B-1B but I think designed with a LO penetration bomber in mind from the beginning.

 
The B-2 was a Cold War bomber designed as a nuclear bomber with barely any consideration to conventional capabilities. I don’t think it’s evolution informs the B-21 in any way.
 
I'm not quite I understand what you mean in that the B-2's evolution won't inform or apply to the B-21's . . . in one area, the development of the LO tech, then of course the B-2 (and the F-117 and all "stealth" aircraft before it) will contribute to the B-21. Now, if we're talking weapons systems integration, yes, as the first post-Cold War bomber, the B-21 is going to be intended from the drawing board to be dual role. That is distinct from the B-2, yes.

However, the B-21 was central to the nuclear modernization program that accompanied the ratification of New START. With the LRSO. Although if the LRSO is cancelled in some very (very!) misinformed decision, I'm sure the Air Force will still try to make it fit into the nuclear OPLANs relying on its LO to penetrate and then drop a bomb IVO the target. Though I'd wager that within 15 years the Chinese will have LO-detection capability that makes that mission highly risky.

Anyway, we may be saying the same thing. If not the LRSO, the B-21 is going to gain the capability to drop the B61 either from day 1 or shortly thereafter.
 
I'm not quite I understand what you mean in that the B-2's evolution won't inform or apply to the B-21's . . . in one area, the development of the LO tech, then of course the B-2 (and the F-117 and all "stealth" aircraft before it) will contribute to the B-21. Now, if we're talking weapons systems integration, yes, as the first post-Cold War bomber, the B-21 is going to be intended from the drawing board to be dual role. That is distinct from the B-2, yes.

However, the B-21 was central to the nuclear modernization program that accompanied the ratification of New START. With the LRSO. Although if the LRSO is cancelled in some very (very!) misinformed decision, I'm sure the Air Force will still try to make it fit into the nuclear OPLANs relying on its LO to penetrate and then drop a bomb IVO the target. Though I'd wager that within 15 years the Chinese will have LO-detection capability that makes that mission highly risky.

Anyway, we may be saying the same thing. If not the LRSO, the B-21 is going to gain the capability to drop the B61 either from day 1 or shortly thereafter.

I don’t know how effective LRSO will be or what the PRCs defense will consist of. I am however confident that the USAF is focused on a conventional penetration bomber. Nuclear delivery is planned but not a priority, because the MM3 force and USN are the primary ways of fulfilling that need.
 
Nuclear delivery is planned but not a priority, because the MM3 force and USN are the primary ways of fulfilling that need.

Nope. The triad is still a thing, for very good reasons. Heavy bombers are vital and will continue to be.
 
I don’t know how effective LRSO will be or what the PRCs defense will consist of. I am however confident that the USAF is focused on a conventional penetration bomber. Nuclear delivery is planned but not a priority, because the MM3 force and USN are the primary ways of fulfilling that need.
The three legs of the triad all have different roles:

Land based missiles are a first strike threat, because they're supposed to be more accurate (launching from a fixed position) and are a very obvious priority target if someone else launches first. They are use or lose.

Sea based missiles are the guarantors of Mutually Assured Destruction. You don't know where they are until they launch, and there's enough firepower there to erase whichever country launched on the US.

Bombers are the Threat warning indicator to the rest of the world. Want to make it obvious that the US is raising DEFCON? load and launch the bombers (or just launch them if you're bluffing).
 
The three legs of the triad all have different roles:

Land based missiles are a first strike threat, because they're supposed to be more accurate (launching from a fixed position) and are a very obvious priority target if someone else launches first. They are use or lose.
Submarines are the first strike threat because they're closer to the target,
 
No, they're the untargetable reserve. And prior to Trident, weren't accurate enough to hit single military facilities anyways.

Well realistically there are probably first strike options written up for these missiles, if only because they almost halve the flight time. I can’t believe there isn’t a card in the football for that, even if it’s use is unlikely.
 
No, they're the untargetable reserve. And prior to Trident, weren't accurate enough to hit single military facilities anyways.
they're ships, and as ships they're movable assets.
I.e. they're both.
 
Not in how the crews are briefed on it.

If we ever got launch orders, we were expecting that the US was already gone.
Expectations and morals are something else.
US boomers take de facto offensive/coercive stances from time to time. Last time wasn't that long ago.
 
I can easily see the expectation being that there was nothing left but the command authority in the case of a SSBN launch, because that is by far the most likely scenario. But I would bet a kidney that there are a raft of offensive options pre determined for the Trident forces as well. Five years ago they test launched a missile that was pretty unmistakably a depressed trajectory.
 
Expectations and morals are something else.
US boomers take de facto offensive/coercive stances from time to time. Last time wasn't that long ago.
When Kentucky visited Korea? Yeah, that was beyond rare when I was in. The only time Ohio-class boats visited Pacific countries before then was SSGNs.

Pacific SSBNs only visited San Diego or Pearl Harbor. The Atlantic boats did sometimes visit other countries besides the UK, Kentucky had visited Rota shortly before they went around the Horn to the Pacific.
 
You’d have to think the W76-2 has a first strike set of targets. Something you absolutely have to kill in the shortest time possible.

Iranian or N. Korean missile we get late intel might have a nuke on it?
 
You’d have to think the W76-2 has a first strike set of targets. Something you absolutely have to kill in the shortest time possible.

Iranian or N. Korean missile we get late intel might have a nuke on it?
That's the 10kt version, right?

Those may have first strike cards in the Football, but I don't expect for full launches to exist as a first strike capability.
 
So what will that mean for the future of the LRSO?

Probably nothing. It looks like they are just moving money and scheduling around to fix this years budget. I believe I read recently that LRSO has already gone through some successful testing...here it is:

 
Thanks Josh_TN, I did not know that the LRSO had already been tested and with a mock nuclear warhead as well during one of the tests.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom