The B-1B is the backbone of America's long-range bomber force and can deliver massive quantities of precision and non-precision weapons against adversaries.
The dynamics between Europe and Russia have gone so south that mending fences looks like an uphill task—even as the US swings between sanctions and olive branches.
Centre for Science and Environment in new report makes case for rationalising GST on waste material, saying most informal operators can’t afford high tax & it also hinders recycling.
President of India has honoured 16 BSF personnel with gallantry medals for show of exemplary courage in the 87-hour ‘war’ between India and Pakistan that followed the launch of Op Sindoor.
Standing up to America is usually not a personal risk for a leader in India. Any suggestions of foreign pressure unites India behind who they see as leading them in that fight.
To begin with, I look forward to a time when India will own such a bomber. We donate so many engineers and scientists who probably work on these products. But, India seems to have run out of talent when it comes to designing and manufacture of these weapons systems. That sanctions come in the way of procurement of engines, other systems from abroad sound like lame excuses. If others can develop such subsystems, why can’t India too do it? I have the answer. In the early 1980s, India neglected electronic industries and lost the race. We don’t make high density ICs in India.
The B-1B “BONE” isn’t and has never been the “backbone” of the US bomber fleet. That would be the B-52 “BUFF”. The B-1’s MRR (mission readiness rates) have been dismal, throughout the life of the program. She is pretty sexy-looking but operational performance is the only thing that really matters. Routine and extended periods of groundings, aircrews going non-current, exorbitant repair and maintenance costs, etc. At times, out of the 100 aircraft acquired, there have been as few as 1 or 2 aircraft actually capable of performing the mission. Retiring the the B-1 can’t come fast enough for the USAF. Plagued with with so many problems since inception, she has been ready for the BONEyard since Day-1.
On the other hand, the B-52, along with her air and maintenance crews have established an incredible record of operational performance. 1950s technology, adapted from it original design as a high-altitude, strategic bomber to a low-level tactical bomber has been and still is the backbone of the bomber fleet. The USAF will continue to rely on the BUFF as the mainstay of the bomber force long after the Lancer has been retired in a few years.
To begin with, I look forward to a time when India will own such a bomber. We donate so many engineers and scientists who probably work on these products. But, India seems to have run out of talent when it comes to designing and manufacture of these weapons systems. That sanctions come in the way of procurement of engines, other systems from abroad sound like lame excuses. If others can develop such subsystems, why can’t India too do it? I have the answer. In the early 1980s, India neglected electronic industries and lost the race. We don’t make high density ICs in India.
Just the facts:
The B-1B “BONE” isn’t and has never been the “backbone” of the US bomber fleet. That would be the B-52 “BUFF”. The B-1’s MRR (mission readiness rates) have been dismal, throughout the life of the program. She is pretty sexy-looking but operational performance is the only thing that really matters. Routine and extended periods of groundings, aircrews going non-current, exorbitant repair and maintenance costs, etc. At times, out of the 100 aircraft acquired, there have been as few as 1 or 2 aircraft actually capable of performing the mission. Retiring the the B-1 can’t come fast enough for the USAF. Plagued with with so many problems since inception, she has been ready for the BONEyard since Day-1.
On the other hand, the B-52, along with her air and maintenance crews have established an incredible record of operational performance. 1950s technology, adapted from it original design as a high-altitude, strategic bomber to a low-level tactical bomber has been and still is the backbone of the bomber fleet. The USAF will continue to rely on the BUFF as the mainstay of the bomber force long after the Lancer has been retired in a few years.