The Bone Flies Again in A-Stan

[mrkalashnikov]

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/11/21/cold-wars-b-1-bomber-emerges-as-effective-weapon-in-afghanistan/?icid=main%7Chtmlws-sb-n%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk1%7C185601

Pretty interesting article. The US is using the 50-yr-old B-1 bomber to support ground troops in A-Stan fighting insurgents.

[mriddick]

My son says they are quite impressive. On a side note on one of his first deployments one of those crashed and burned at his base. Before I even heard of the crash on the news I got a email from the USAF saying their was a incident at his base, he was safe and I'd hear from him shortly, perhaps the strangest contact I've ever got. Later I found out he was on the flight line and ended up in a bunker waiting the bombs to cook off from the fire. He told if that was a small taste of what they give the taliban he was glad to be on our side :)

[Helen Keller]

Yep theyre BIG

you'd be suprised how big those bomb bays are and how loud these things can be.

[crapshoot]

I read the article and I found this to be fairly gay.


Every effort is made to avoid having to drop a bomb -- including asking the ground commander if he can break contact with the enemy and go home. But sometimes there's no alternative.


What happened to shock and awe? Let the enemy go so you can fight him another day? Or they have the opportunity to roadside bomb our guys down the road?

That's some fucked up shit right there. Maybe if we were laying everything in that shithole country to waste, we wouldn't still be losing troops over there.

[mriddick]

I read the article and I found this to be fairly gay.



What happened to shock and awe? Let the enemy go so you can fight him another day? Or they have the opportunity to roadside bomb our guys down the road?

That's some fucked up shit right there. Maybe if we were laying everything in that shithole country to waste, we wouldn't still be losing troops over there.

My son tells me since obama took office they have to file flight plans with the Qutar government as if they were civilian aircraft and notify the Iraqi's of their flight plan, as you can guess the terrorist seem to know when we're coming since.... Also in Afghanistan they aren't allowed to drop flares if over populated areas amongst other nonsense. It's the obama rules of fighting...

[matshock]

I read the article and I found this to be fairly gay.



What happened to shock and awe? Let the enemy go so you can fight him another day? Or they have the opportunity to roadside bomb our guys down the road?

That's some fucked up shit right there. Maybe if we were laying everything in that shithole country to waste, we wouldn't still be losing troops over there.

Obama's media tails asre wagging the dog- they go apeshit when we hellfire a bunch of terrorists that just happen to be having a terrorist wedding or when we bomb a building that used to be a schoolhouse before it became a terrorist hideout (after the terrorists gassed the students there).

Dan Rather is setting the ROE- YES SIR, that is some fucked up shit right there.

[old Grump]

Well we got it half right. To bad politicians think they know more about conducting a war than the military.

[azhonkey]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuHHh6JNKVs

[Gunner1558]

Well we got it half right. To bad politicians think they know more about conducting a war than the military.

Don't think there is anything right about politicians having any say about running a war.

There should be no rules of engagement, just shoot back when you are fired on.

There have been fewer civilian casualties in this dust-up than in any war in the last 100 years.

IF the other side doesn't want its women and children harmed, they might want to start wearing uniforms that would identify them as combattants.

Seems as if the only people who care about their civvie losses are our military and the MSM..

[Penguin]

For some reason I thought we had retired all the B-1's. Guess I was wrong.

[old Grump]

For some reason I thought we had retired all the B-1's. Guess I was wrong.New engines new electronics different weapns and communications systems but same old tired frames. A good plane is hard to keep down. There are still DC 3's in the air that I probably rode in back in the early 60's. I keep waiting for them to drop nuclear power plants in the old battleships and recommission them with new gear. I understand why they don't but wow what a weapons platform.

As long as congress allows the president to send troops and spend money on his military adventures without a declaration of war we will continue to have politicians running the war from the oval office and not from battlefield generals on site. We haven't had a declaration of war since December 8, 1941 and December 11, 1941 against Japan and Germany. They are also the last two wars we won decisively because we went in to win with everything we had.

Worst mistake congress ever made in my opinion is the War Powers Resolution of 1973.


The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_50_of_the_United_States_Code) 1541–1548 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sup_01_50_10_33.html)) was a United States Congress joint resolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_resolution) providing that the President (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States) can send U.S. armed forces (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_the_United_States) into action abroad only by authorization of Congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress) or if the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States) is already under attack or serious threat. The War Powers Resolution requires the president to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for more than 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war). The resolution was passed by two-thirds of Congress, overriding a presidential veto (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_veto).We have been bent over the barrel ever since with congress and the White house in collusion. Note that it isn't them or their sons going to war, its us and our sons and daughters. Make it mandatory that a person has to have been in uniform before he can take office and there will be fewer of these kinds of misadventures.

:rant: Sorry about that, rant over.

[hazmat]

Oh, the B-1 ain't even stretched it's legs yet, compared to the B52. What the B-1 brings to the fight is speed and an ungodly payload (which dwarfs that of the old BUFF). Those nifty swing wing bombers are a fixture out here in western SD and seeing one on a low altitude high speed pass is something to experience. Essentially, you can't hear them until they are right up on you, and they are loud as hell when they do.

Consider this. The B-1 was designed as a low altitude, high speed pentration nuclear bomber. She can fly faster at lower altitudes than any other aircraft in our inventory. .9 Mach at 200 ft with a radar cross section of a flock of geese. Before the new close air support mission, crews would practice their low level skills by being 'bounced' by F-16s from the SD Air Guard. Tactics at the time said the bird was to go to 200 ft and hit the gas. Woe be unto a B-1 pilot who got zapped by an F-16.

B-1s have been dropping live ordnance since 1998, and they're getting better at it. Most friendlies now call upon 'The Bone' for shows of force, basically low altitude high speed passes to 'discourage' further aggression. So don't be too quick to throw the Bone under the bus.

[Penguin]

Good stuff to know. I had no idea that it was designed for low level bombing. I had always thought it was designed as a replacment for the B-52. I did know it was designed to penetrate sovit air defense systems to deliver nukes.

[daemon734]

There should be no rules of engagement, just shoot back when you are fired on.


I have never had a problem with being allowed to do that. Oddlly enough, what you exactly describe is fully allowed under the rules of engagement. I am always allowed to shoot when threatened.

I have yet to see firsthand the crippling effect of the current ROE that I consistently hear about online. It was the same when I was in Iraq, I would be on the computer in the MWR less than an hour after wrecking a house with a .50 reading all the stateide written stories about how our hands are tied and we can't do anything.

I have been less than 400m from B1 strikes on several occassions. They are indeed flying and dropping bombs on a regular basis. I have seen many devastating runs from the air both in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The only restriction on CAS that I have seen is that there must be a valid reason. When some JSS takes a single RPG to the hesco barriers and the shooter jams, and the station commander wants to drop JDAM's all over town I shed no tears when he gets denied, nor do I feel the cries of "unfair" from the backseat warfighters are legitimate.

We will never win this war constantly destroying the infrastructure and giving the enemy the PR advantage to turn the populace away from us. We simply can't carpet bomb the entire country and if there is nothing left when we leave somebody else will step in and rebuild, somebody that has a 99% chance of being hostile towards us.

[mriddick]

Well let’s not over dramatize the situation; I don't read anyone as saying the obama ROE are crippling, just if allowed to work to their fullest systems like the B1 might be more effective. And before someone jumps the gun on what effective is it could be as simple as the whole flight plan issue giving advanced warning to the taliban and doesn't have to refer to something as massive as carpet bombing...

[hazmat]

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/11/21/cold-wars-b-1-bomber-emerges-as-effective-weapon-in-afghanistan/?icid=main%7Chtmlws-sb-n%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk1%7C185601

Pretty interesting article. The US is using the 50-yr-old B-1 bomber to support ground troops in A-Stan fighting insurgents.

I've got a news flash for them, the B-1 has been conducting operations in both Afghanistan and Iraq since both conflicts started. In the first week of OIF, a B-1 from out here at Ellsworth dropped a JDAM on a site suspected of having SoDamn Insane hiding there. He wasn't, but the results were pretty spectacular.

One of the guys killed in OEF last year was an EOD troop from Ellsworth. A B-1 and crew from Ellsworth did a fly by show of force to get the enemy to break contact in that engagement. It was a pretty heart wrenching thing for the crew, knowing that one of the guys from their home station was KIA in that firefight.

[HDR]

Yep theyre BIG

you'd be suprised how big those bomb bays are and how loud these things can be.

You can see the shock wave.

[daemon734]

Well let’s not over dramatize the situation; I don't read anyone as saying the obama ROE are crippling, just if allowed to work to their fullest systems like the B1 might be more effective. And before someone jumps the gun on what effective is it could be as simple as the whole flight plan issue giving advanced warning to the taliban and doesn't have to refer to something as massive as carpet bombing...


Well either you have some misinformation or the Taliban ive seen get smoked by fixed wing were just kind enough to stick around after the warning.

[mriddick]

Well either you have some misinformation or the Taliban ive seen get smoked by fixed wing were just kind enough to stick around after the warning.

I take you didn't read the last sentence about it could ust a little thing like a simple drop in effectiveness, I never meant to imply it was an every case issue, or even applied the same to those he looked for in Iraq VS Afghanistan.

[1 Patriot-of-many]

"That's the point of the U.S. strategy in Afghanistan, after all: not to try to kill all the Taliban, but to protect the people."


WHAT THE FUCK?

[mriddick]

The original reason was to get osama and depose the taliban, but it's evolved into nation building and PR. As of now I'm not quite sure why any of our children are there.

[GunBum]

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/11/21/cold-wars-b-1-bomber-emerges-as-effective-weapon-in-afghanistan/?icid=main%7Chtmlws-sb-n%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk1%7C185601

Pretty interesting article. The US is using the 50-yr-old B-1 bomber to support ground troops in A-Stan fighting insurgents.

It didn't take its first flight until 23 December 1974, and didn't enter service until 1986, so how is it 50 years old?

[1 Patriot-of-many]

It didn't take its first flight until 23 December 1974, and didn't enter service until 1986, so how is it 50 years old?

The reporter is mixing up the B52 and B1?

[mrkalashnikov]

It didn't take its first flight until 23 December 1974, and didn't enter service until 1986, so how is it 50 years old?

David Wood, the author of the article states "The B-1 was designed almost a half-century ago...". In my world a "half-century" translates to 50 years. His words, not mine.

[ubersoldate]

Very cool. I was at Ellsworth AFB for a while and saw them alot, very awesome aircraft!
I hope they give our best wishes this holiday season to the Taliban.