JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Probably not a bad idea considering the growing threats posed by NK and Iran. Hopefully showing a strong offensive capability will preclude the need to use our strong defensive capability. No one will benefit from a nuclear war.
 
Interesting read... Long range bombers will be on 24 hour alert for the first time since the Bush 41 administration... just another sign of the dynamic power shifts throughout the world...

Where's the nearest fallout shelter again?
 
All the darned weak-kneed Leftists don't seem to understand. These saved our @$$es so many times that I can't even begin to count them! Unfortunately, we have a lot of "Portlandia" in our community that can't seem to remember this.

We performed the original 1938 radio broadcast version of "The War Of The Worlds" this week on stage. Many of the performers on stage are of the Leftist persuasion. (One even served on board ship during the Vietnam Conflict). They can't seem to get it through their thick skulls that we really won the Conflict. (They bought the big lie).

We need to be prepared for the eventuality of war.
 
Not that we have enough to cover all the missions asked of them... we need to start cranking out BUFFs and Bones like rabbits pop out babies.

#BringBackSAC
B52s? Naw. Build more B-2s, at the least, back to the original contract number of 132 instead of 21... by the way Northrop is supposedly developing the next gen long range bomber, the B-21 :rolleyes: we shall see if Congress cuts budgets once again.

F-22 was intended to replace F-15Cs but Congress cut number ordered so prices went up on the individual planes... same for the F-35, with additional problems of perfecting tge tech for the USMC and USN versions :rolleyes:
 
Actually, the BUFF has capabilities that neither B-1 or B-2 do, ditto B-1 re the others. All B-21 looks like it's gonna be is a hotrodded reinvent-the-wheel of similar planform and layout to the B-2... for which they might as well have just dusted off and updated the B-2's design rather than waste the taxpayer's money for a whole new from-scratch R&D process that's going to lead to the same basic thing.

There's a reason why SAC designed the final revision of SIOP around a Bomber Triad, because each of the bombers' different capabilities making them suitable for different roles, rather than this Pound-Square-Pegs-Into-Round-Holes One Size Fits All
 
Yea well, the B-52 is slated to stay in service til 2045, by which the next gen B-21 is supposed to be in full production... as far as I can read of the B-21 requirements.. its supposed to be 1) more affordable ( gee I wonder :rolleyes: ) 2) smaller than B-2 and using a pair of a derivative of F-35 engine, 3) more advanced, and capable of networking with unmanned craft
4) replace the B-52, some B-1s and complement the existing B-2s (are they goig to reopen the assembly line to make attrition replacements ever??? 30 more years on just 20 B-2s is not gonna improve maintenance much)
Think SAC has been replaced with Global Strike Command which also seems to include the USAF Space Command and the nuclear and long range strike portion of the Air Combat Command... in essence, a new version of SAC.
 
And it's still the goddamn TAC Pointynose Mafia p*ssing on their betters. Why'd they have to waste the time and money standing up a whole new Command and developing all new heraldry and crap when they could have just reactivated the old?

Fighter pilots, bunch of B*tchy Little Girls... and that was the take of a college prof who once commanded a squadron of 'em, too!
 

Upcoming Events

Oregon Arms Collectors March Gun Show
Portland, OR
Tillamook Gun & Knife Show
Tillamook, OR
"The Original" Kalispell Gun Show
Kalispell, MT
Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top