Skybolt enters service, now what?

isayyo2

Lurker alert
Joined
Nov 24, 2011
Messages
715
Reaction score
1,055
I'd love to hear everyones thoughts on the topic; if Skybolt enters service, what differences if any does it make?

For SAC and USAF, it gives them an airborne deterrence rivaled only by the equally impressive Polaris program. But Vietnam still occurs, and conventional capabilities are still a necessity.
For the RAF, it gives their manned bombers a significant punch without the need for expensive silo or submarine based missiles.

For the Soviets, is the weapon a nightmare? American bombers can prowl well outside their air defense bubbles, existing interceptors do not have the range to intercept them before launch. Do heavy aircraft like the Tu-128 become the PVO standard?

For Boeing, are additional B-52H orders possible? Could pre-G models reasonably carry the Skybolt, or are additional TF33 B-52s needed for SAC?

Going forward, what would SAC's future requirements look like? SRAM seems unneeded, but ALCMs would probably still occur?
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
9,698
Reaction score
4,985
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
At best a B-52 could carry 8 of the Skybolts, but rather more of the SRAMs and/or gravity bombs. The smaller weapons give a lot more flexibility in terms of targeting and warheads, so I don't know just how big the Skybolt fleet would end up being. Might even go with a non-B-52 carrier like the C-141.
 
Last edited:

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
4,507
Reaction score
3,580
Website
beyondthesprues.com
I suggest a reading of this book if you are interested in this topic:

9781781557044.jpg
 

royabulgaf

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
589
Reaction score
183
Well, with the Skybolt in SAC service, the B-70 would be a non-starter. The FB-111H would go into production instead oof the B-1.
 

uk 75

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
4,134
Reaction score
3,362
My understanding of UK planning was that the Sjybolt was due to give way in the 1970s to a submarine based missile system.
Money was tight in the UK so that the force would soon have been limited to 48 Vulcan B2 aircraft. The proposed VC10 Poffler force would have competed either with Polaris or an Anglo French SLBM.
 

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
2,260
Reaction score
2,099
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
More money put on not-exactly-very-good rocket for bomber fleet. Less money for USAF to spend on ICBM's. Since the role of USAF bombers as second-strike deterrence was diminishing fast in 1960s, basically USAF would meet 1970s in even worse state, than in real life.

My conclusion - the good probability of USAF losing nuclear deterrence role to the Navy, like in Britain.
 

Similar threads

Top