Australia 'should be taking a look' at B-21 Raider
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 гру 2022
- ASPI Senior Analyst Marcus Hellyer says Australia "should be taking a look” at the new US B-21 Raider stealth bombers.
“The first thing it would give us is range and the big challenge our military is facing at the moment is it's fundamentally outranged by Chinese military capabilities,” he told Sky News Australia.
“B-21 would give us about 5,000 kilometres of range … so anybody who wanted to think about operating against Australia would have to factor in that we could reach out and strike them first.”
“It can probably carry about six times as much as the F-35 Strike Fighter that Australia is acquiring.”
I have been saying this for a while now, we certainly need a long range stealth bomber for our Region. They will be able to respond very quickly and we won't have to wait 65 million years to get a sub if we are lucky.
Quite right, in the 60's-early70's the FIII put the wind up Indonesia and a couple of other hostile neighbours
We could get the subs in 10 years if built overseas.
@@alexlanning712 Spot on the F111 freaked them out!!!
@@aussiefan354 The funny thing is, back then, it only had iron bombs
6-8 USAF B-52's to be stationed at Tindal in NT
The B-21 Raider has a range of 9,600 km with 10 tons of bombs. From Tindal Airbase in Darwin it could defend Taiwan on a single tank of fuel.
yeah what a smart idea lets just start a war against a country with nuclear capabilities, you think they will not shoot back to ....
only 9,600?
Range of B-2 Spirit is 11,600Km and the B-21 Raider is said to have a much higher range.
Also says in the wiki that B-21 Raider will have a longer range than B-2 Spirit
While bombers are nice, fleets of fighters and subs, along with other force multiplying war tech is the way to go. Air craft carriers, drones, etc. Also, turning the CCP into a pariah nation by removing all your manufacturing from their country is a good way to go as well.
Like they said in the video, what they need is range. You just do not get that with a fighter, period. They already have F-18s and F-35s in those regards and you cannot just build a single aircraft carrier for a reasonable price esp. w/ no prior experience doing so. Agreed on pulling back manufacturing - that will hurt them most if done broadly by the west.
Personally, I would prefer to give our amphibious forces a real bite. LO1 and 2 are dedicated amphibious ships, we should have LO3 and 4 as F35B carriers, LO1 and 3, LO2 and 4 assigned to each other. This would give us a long reach standoff ability that would help to protect our land forces and helicopers.
Unfortunately we don’t have the naval fleet to form carrier fleets around these LHD’s. That’s the biggest problem. It takes no fewer than 6 boats including subs to protect a carrier.
You need strategic capacity before you worry about tactical capacity. To have amphibious capabilities we would need a non-laughable amount of air and sea power.
Better off building drone escort destroyers.
Big ships are big targets especially when there's hypersonic anti ship missiles on the table.
We need Indonesia, New Zealand, PNG, Malaysia, Singapore and the Philippines to beef up our region.
We need to have a territorial alliance and joint manufacturing industry.
We need to ensure that Northern Aggression will be stopped by either one of our neighbours and that our shipping lanes remain open.
Ships need crews, @@troycassidy6177. Unlike a Predator or Reaper, you can't really automate maintaining and responsively operating 15,000+ tons of warship.
@@troycassidy6177 We need all of the above, mate. Not just drones or just missiles or just long range stealth bombers. We need a layered defence that has a long range strike capability delivered from by ground, sea and air in any weather, day or night.
I’m thinking a lease arrangement would be best locked into future platforms development we definitely need a long range deterrent that’s up to Richard to work out with the us
5000 kilometer range!? That's 3106 miles!!! THAT'S LONGER THAN THE LENGTH OF THE US!!!
I don’t think the exact range of the B 21 has been publicly stated yet.
The B-52s range is significantly bigger than that. But that 5000km range is just a random number we have no idea what engines it has so we cannot calculate it's range based on size alone. We need more information but one thing is certain, it's range is significantly larger than any current bomber and likely most future bombers.
Thanks to all the defense analysts commenting on this video. Keep up the good work!
ASPI is an American marketing company.
What benefit does it give if you have someone in the military who calls the enemy in advance before it attacks .
I still can't say if General Milley was wise to not provoke an accidental conflict with China, or a traitor for telling a foreign nation what is going to happen ahead of time.
Same engines as F35. Range and penetration better than the F111.
His maths does not add up, how many longer range missiles do you have to expend before you have spent more than the cost of the bomber and its maintenance? 🧐
sure but we must remember Xi's aggression in the South China Sea and Solomons is something we ignore at our peril
*something we continue to ignore and memory hole at our peril,@@kerrysavas7805
1 B-21 Raider cost the same as about 333 LRASM missiles which might be expended in 20 sorties.
There is talk of putting air to air missiles on it. If its got any speed to it that might take it to a interceptor bomber type able to get across Australia on a single tank
So say we all
No we shouldn't, it's way too expensive and has limited use
A platform with similar range and payload to the F-111C, optimised for survivability by means of stealth would be adequate for Australia's needs. Essentially, a "bomb-truck" for LRASM. It's the missing link in our 'kill-chain'.
However, the B-21 is likely an overmatch for our requirement - and could therefore enflame tensions. There's no point in saying, "No we wont bomb China", and, "No, we wont put nukes on it". From China's perspective the aircraft can potentially do both those things. That would shift China's calculus away from 'deterrence', and into the realms of "pre-emptive nuclear strike". A smaller, more numerous, and cheaper to operate aircraft would be better IMHO.
Nonsense, they're talking about capabilities at great ranges here and we shouldn't roll over and show China our bellies just because they have nukes.
Australia is taking a very close look at not only the B-21 but also the NGAD fighter to complement our current fleet.
To be able to afford the B-21 in numbers to provide a credible tactical/strategic weight, if (and it's a bloody big if) the US would be willing to sell it to us. We would basically have to disband the army and scale back the navy to the SSN's and perhaps 3 or 4 major fleet units (MFU) essentially the Hobart Class we have now and whatever their future replacement is. There also would perhaps not be any 4th combat squadron of F-35 as is on the cards and the Rhino's and Growler fleets would possibly not be replaced.
@@andrewg3238 nonsense. We only need 12 of them. If they’re $500 mill each that’s $6 billion. Even a fleet of 24 if we replaced our F-111 fleet airframe for airframe it’d be only $12 billion. We can afford it.
It cost roughly 665 million usd to build plus us is not going to give it to us for build cost. Australia might have to pay 900 million usd plus per aircraft.
@@xxrustyxx_6977 nope. Not that much. We can afford it anyway. But we won’t pay that much. Economies of a scale.
@@smeary10 Yes we would. It will take a while for prices to come down. America sells their weapons at a huge mark up. In saying that I would rather spend 1 billion dollars plus, than say 10,15 or 20 billion on subs.
I don't see why the US doesn't sell or lease their retired aircraft carriers to their allies instead of moth balling them, especially when they're in perfect working condition.
But they do this for some ships, refurbishing and renaming them before giving to allies.
As for aircraft carriers, I guess the allies don't want them due to massive operational costs.
Usually they are not in perfect working condition. Not after a service life of around 50 years as is the intention for modern carriers like the Nimitz Class. The US Navy essentially squeezes the life out of them since they are such a huge investment. The boats would need to go through a lengthy and expensive complex overhaul and refueling the multiple reactors onboard even to have it as an option, assuming the above statement about the hull and systems being shagged was not true. As for selling or leasing them to allies, there is the minor issue of the fact that every current and future planned carrier is nuclear powered. That is a technology the US has up until recently only shared once in the last 60 odd years. Who exactly are they going to lease them too?
With aircraft carriers , you have to buy fighter jets, helicopters, supplies ships, thousands of personnel have to train , and escort ships & submarines to protect the fleet.
Where do you find hundreds of experienced navy pilots ? Where does money come from ?
You talking about the whole navy fleet, not just not one ship.
@@tripledelight8104 they already train with the US navy. It wouldn't be that much of a leap especially if the Australians are committed.
Australia is not "Having a look" mate.
We are already in talks to be the first nation to buy these bombers.. Its been in plenty of papers.
America wants Australia to be a stepping stone to the Pacific, that's why we are taking on housing 8 B-52's at Tindle Airbase. Australia is at the top of the list to buy into the B-21 program.
ONE BILLION dollars per plane (so far) & it's not due for it's first test flights until 2024.
F-111C replacement is an unresolved business.
Yes. As an American I have heard we WANT you guys to have them. It's just working out the details
@@alanhamford2538 it's beginning flying the first half of 2023 and it's about $500-$600 million USD per aircraft with much cheaper maintenance and easier upgrades due to open architecture on the software side so no more having to wait for this expensive entire block of upgrades every x number of years.
@@alanhamford2538 2023 but close enough.
You could consider Australia’s position similar to Ukraine, if your neighbour can pummel you over the fence knowing you can’t hurt them, they are more likely to try. If Ukraine (Aus) had the capacity to step into the neighbours yard and cause havoc it creates pause and uncertainty. We need to be able to do harm even though we would not be a first strike aggressor. Subs and B21 would be the insurance we all hate paying for but are bloody thankful we had it if we need it……….
It be a good idea. But will Washington sell them a squadron is the question
How many 25 million dollar hypersonic missiles can you buy for the ‘initial start up cost of 25 billion’ for the B-21
Talking us into a war isn't a strategy for a peaceful Asia pacific we are better of engaging in productive meaningful dialogue with all regions and countries of course military acquisitions are important but to be realistic any ICBM would hit Australia easily.
Too cheap we need to spend money on something, anything.
It’s all about area denial.
The threat of the bomber makes an adversary think twice.
Taking us into war? 🤣 That would be accomplished by remaining essentially defenceless.
Weakness is the ultimare provocation.
@@Azraiel213 we are defenceless we can't or won't even manage our own essential services without crippling our own society ! as I said defence acquisitions are important but ask yourself this if you can't produce design or deploy anything in a country that has enough mineral assets to power 1/2 the planet what hope do you really have, I've watched the decline of every manufacturing industry in this country happen over the last 30 years only to be replaced by some form of clepto UTOPIANISM where the banks and investors take it all , amass huge portfolios for themselves and keep everyone else struggling for the crumbs . A Defensive mobile missile strategy first in conjunction with other willing partners would be our best approach to regional security . A nuclear attack bomber force as a deterrent ? Stealth by nature is a sneak attack on an enemy,the same precurser to the Pacific War of the 1941 45 culminating in the first use of the Atomic bomb.
@ 5000 kms range it can only reach Indonesia & return. All for one billion dollars (so far) each.
Sorry Aussies we love you but we are not gonna sell these
Seen it on STAR WARS 45 YEARS AGO !!!
Thank you very much !!!
I saw a b2 spirit leaving Melbourne 4 years ago lol before covid...
Good luck getting it 😂😂😂
Australian could never afford it with their defense budget.
Big money.
The B-21 costs $A800m each so we could buy 24-36. Range is 6000 miles. Which is much greater then the 500km (3100m) quoted. LOL
Another Doolittle escapade ?
@@joekerr9036 No, he used carriers and B-25s.
I think Australia look at their own stealth technology Kratos and Boeing Loyal wingman; all manufactured in Australia. Definition of Sixth Generation military jet...
Sorry my guys no way the USA sells you a b21 maybe a b2. Theyll just use your island as a launching point.
I will go with Virginia class subs (Block V) over B-21. The subs cost 5x of that B-21 ($3.5Bil vs $700mil) but can carry 7x more cruise missiles with longer range like Tomahawk. Plus a submarine is definitely more stealthy than any stealth aircraft.
That’s spending more money for less capability and flexibility though. The B 21 is a lot more than just a bomber, it’s an enormous sensor suite serving as a mini AWACS among other features that have not really been publicly discussed. Such as its electronic warfare suite.
A single Virginia class sub may give you more destructive power than a single B 21, but 5 are going to give you more overall capabilities and options for strikes than one Virginia class sub.
B21 is faster and it is said it can strike in every part of China
You've gotta factor in that the B-21 can go on a mission and return the next day, a submarine would be gone for months.
How are we crewing all these subs?
Why? The Australian military doesn't have the capacity to maintain or arm the things. We also have no logical reason for a long range bomber capability.
If I don't get my lot of land and own home I WILL blow this aircraft up once it sits in the hangar (and no military bases are not hard to get onto and uniforms can be bought on eBay 😅) I will have my temper tantrum known.
And F35 on modified Helocarriers can fulfill the same missions as B-21 does.
RAAF has long-range F111C fighter-bombers.
Why?
The Tanks will park a few here in the NT anyway given time!
Why can't the ossie design their own bomber plane?
"ossie, NO idea"
Amazing how this German WW2 wing design has evolved.
Jack Northrop was the first to use the "flying wing" design in the 40s in the U.S.
The Horten flying wing..
@@extra4323 yep extra is correct. This plane is called the northrop- grumman b21 after northrops 1940s flying wing design. Not the horton
In my garage, and it is a very big one at that. But why a big one, I heard you asked. Most families are stretching it a bit by having 3, and most families are likely to have garages for two cars.
Well, I have vision. In my garage, there will be a Lamborghini, a Ferrari, a Rolls Royce, a Bugatti Chiron Super Sport, and that is just in the corner for cars. At the other end, I have a couple of super yachts, jet skis, and would you believe it, behind the main garage, I have a hanger for my private jet. There is room for a couple more of them.
....then I woke up with a giant hangover. I had been drinking way more than I should have had. I was fantasizing about things I have always wanted to have, but could never earn enough to pay for them. I realized that on my meager wages, having two cars is stretching it, all the rest I was fantasizing should be left to the unrealistic wishes "one Power ball, and I will...". From $75 Billions now blew up to $175 Billions just for the submarines, how in heaven is Australia able to stretch it budget any further? Unrealistic shopping list is the domains of "defence experts", responsible governments should keep away from them because they are just like myself, fantasizing because they won't have to pay for it.
I guess Australia want to replace the F111's.
We should be focusing on defense assets locally produced, not a bomber that is only useful as an attack aircraft, if we need to strike a target we can call the US for help, this is about bleeding our taxes to stuff the pockets of the MIC.
Well, if you’re smart, you can invest in the MIC and make money too.
Australia will house the greatest strategic thing on the planet.
Imagine the cost of operations for this thing!
I mean really?
Supposedly, it will cost less to operate than the B2 since there is no need for a climate controlled hangar.
@@shaider1982 "Supposedly" ... I like it.
Manned aircraft are so 20th century.
A whole lot cheaper than running a sub
Stealth technology is already redundant and obsolete. Either our spy agencies are sleeping at the wheel and or the gutless govt is totally oblivious, but China with its satellites can do short work of any airborne threats.
Sadly, that item is unlikely to be available to anyone else; don't hold your breath.
Even B-2 spirits would be a pretty grand addition
Shift have kept the F 111"s.
By the time we made the decision to get these they would be old technology. We need to be building our own WMD🤷♂️
Rubbish.
Imagine taking a joyride in this thing
Yeah it would be something else.
@@HelloWorld-ns7gt I’d want to play with the buttons. If it even has buttons. What does this one do? Whoops, sorry Beijing
@@daheikkinen I would be hollering like Slim Pickens as he rode the bomb down in Doctor Strangelove.
B21 sound good however ,I would still have diversity in defending Australia and not placing all eggs in one basket . We lost the F111 and I feel we still need to have that ability but life is about a compromise without compromising yourself , just my view.
The US wouldn't sell the F-22 to even its staunchest allies. Will it sell the Raider?
Go On Australia take a Look at it. Just Don't Buy it. 😂
Why would Australia want a long range strike weapon? The US would happily provide you it's Navy for a nuclear capable military base. The US would probably pay you for the honor. Is Townsville a deep water port?
Tempest next, save your money
Looks unlikely to eventuate on a reasonable production scale
Well my opinion is they should have kept and upgraded the f111,s. Then instead of the problematic f35,s australia should have got the f15ex, which would have been a he'll of alot cheaper. This guy is why we got the Collins class sub and f35 both terrible decisions. No point, The bomber is a waste of money we would not be able to afford the numbers needed to make a real difference
i would hope like the f117, B2 and f22 the USA would not export such important technology
Yup
Great idea but with coal, gas and oil no longer on the scene what will we use to pay for these, Tikki green stamps?
These two "debating" if Australia should buy the latest US nuclear stealth bomber is like 2 homeless guys in the Koenigsegg dealership debating trim options.
Ahhh gees I wish I could give this comment a thousand thumbs up.
Australia should build at least 4 SLBM with the help of it parters & station 50% of B-21 at its soil then China will ultimately shout up
Just park a submarine off its enemy bases and attack with tomahawks. Australia is getting them.
Standoff range. Perfect for Australia.
In which case stealth not needed so a much cheaper bomber can be used
we're looking at world peace around the corner , will this aid in Australia's Space travel at all ? we have no enemies that will get past Space Force anymore , US will always have the best because they are heading Space Force & The Earth Alliance
It’s not worth the moneh unless nuclear armed.
Hitler's design
The B-35 was the brainchild of Jack Northrop, who made the flying wing the focus of his work during the 1930s.
:) You really did it? Thank you for promoting.
I made nice flying wing 3D model some time ago inspired on Bagera3005 design. I uploaded to Sketchfab and shared for free. And someone downloaded it and made 3D animation. And now different media including you are using this to show concept of B-21 Raider.
Please remember it was just my design vision of flying wing bomber. :)
That thing is so fucking cool
For some reason these so-called defense analysts developed a taste for really expensive toys lol. How about an aircraft carrier or two?
He laughed at his own words, we probably should too.
We already have 2 how many do you want?.
Well its just under 5k Miles To Beijing China, With One Or Two Refueling's it could be a done deal.
After bombing China,
DF41s -------------------------------> Sydney, Canberra, Melbourne, Adelaide, Brisbane, Perth, Darwin, ....
I bet you think bombing the Chinese would not elicit a response from them.
Think harder, kid !
Chris Bowens first question would be " Dose it come with batterys?"
i think the plane is great but should give joyrides to children who have experienced nothing aswell otherwise it’s jyst showponying big time
😒👍
It sounds like a good idea the cost is worth it for national security the world is too hot we need to keep Australia safe no matter what the cost
Wasn’t there a bit of grousing over the cost of the sub deal? I think these bombers a tad more pricey
Virginia class submarines are around $3 billion per unit (or 3.5 with the upgraded module). The B 21 is going to be *considerably* less expensive per unit than that. Even the B2, which is/was much more expensive than the B 21, is roughly $1 billion cheaper per unit than a Virginia class sub.
@@mobiusflammel9372 certainly makes sense~ bottom line, a thrift store budget, is a thrift store budget
Australia needs at least 30 plus B - 2 1 RAIDERS
🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺 🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺🔺
Oh yeah and we can afford that easily given the US with its vastly larger defence budget has suggesting it will purchase 100 of this aircraft type only.
@@andrewg3238 I Don't want to Speak Chinese, Maybe you do
24 B-21 to replace 24 F-111C for 1 to 1 airframe replacement.
ADF doesn't need B-21. Just F-35 on modified helocarriers will do wonders.
B-21 handles longer wavelength radar better than F-35s.
Australia has to first finish building their quarantine camps. After that, yes !
A range of 5000 km does not beat a missile with a range of 7000 km and runways are not stealth. Just my two cents worth.
Would it be more useful to invest in air tanker planes to put down wildfires?
our coast line has always been a defense structure headache ..since before Federation countless Governments have ridden on the coattails of the Commonwealth like a safety net its time to develop and defend our right to exist .. just as Israel ...
China is our greatest threat and the Pacific Islands are now aligned With China ,, coastline defense systems example DOME system coupled with high tech early warning defense satellite systems while long range Stealth B-21 Raider would be a nice addition to the 35's launched from Platforms like Adelaide .. or Canberra .. also the Boeing airborne and deep sea attack Drones fully equipped ... as well as Nuclear Attack Submarines .. perhaps Virginia Class with the VLT tomahawks .. or 2 retiring Converted Vanguard SSBN to designation SSGN for those that bourck at the Idea it may be time to wake up that China is already a Nuclear Power flexing its Muscle against what they consider to be a weak Nation this is why they condemn AUKUS Nuclear Attack Submarine Program .. sighting Non Proliferation Treaty
BRING BACK THE F-111
He has compared the costs of a Hypersonic missile with a subsonic bomber.
Arguably a much better investment of that vast amount of money would be to build a cruise missile factory and then start developing and extending the range of missiles we build here.
Build here, your kidding right
@@dmarti3 We build drones, we can build cruise missiles. the initial budget you are competing against is over 20 billion plus operating costs.
@@dmarti3 : We are building hypersonic scramjets here.
Just by a bunch of Tiger Moths, that'll scare China from the stupidity lol.
You're dreaming if you think that is going to be for sale.
Lol
Not a chance would the US export this tech!
Boeing Loyal Wingman has Northrop's wing design. 😂
How about no .
LOL with the whole Sub thing and other bad efforts i dont think Australia even has a strategic plan outside of hope the US defends them against China
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I mean will it get usage?!! All these billions and billions in weapons over the years, and most of it sees no real usage, smh what a waste
The primary 'usage', hopefully, is that it deters the enemy from attacking you in the first place.
Secondary usage is that if they do, at least you have something to fight back with.
No way the US would sell this to anyone! End of story.
Hello how are you doing today?
The US sold long-range F-111 fighter bombers to Australia when it was new.
2 stooges LOL.
They won't sell it to anyone
🤣🤣
Maybe we should be concerning ourselves with investing in the best Integrated Air Defence Systems in the world?
Pretty sure for the right price, Rostec would design & build an off the rack system for us...at a fraction of the cost!
Why does Australia seek to project power with this capability, if not to provoke?
I like your thinking............
@@rodneymiddleton1044 I hear the S-500 Прометей 'Prometheus' might not be available right now to unfriendly partners. Maybe some former Ukrainian S300's??
@@rodneymiddleton1044 You wouldn't have Viktor Bout on speed dial would you?
No air defense system will ever be able to give 100% protection. Best case scenario with drones and low level hyper speed missiles 80% would be considered a good success rate. What happens after the air defense is taken out? Every Country knows stand off weapons that can also take out air defenses of the aggressor gives them equal footing. Using only defensive weapons buys you little time to counteract the aggression before your defense fails. Playing defense only never scores goals and having an offense that can't cross midfield is next to worthless 🤷🏻♂️.
@@jimmy_wang_ Exactly! That's like a boxer in the ring taking punches but never swinging at the opponent, eventually that boxer will be knocked out cold. Playing defense with no real offensive weapons that can punish the opponent is a sure way to be knocked out cold as well.
22nd, 11 December 2022
Want something new on electric range wise 24/7 drone system not a bomber. American nuke missile defence system and attack one bomber???.
The B21 is beyond our capabilities to man, maintain and pay for.
Ran the number's and you have a point , then I remembered that we have US B- 52 Bomber's in darwin already , for training and ongoing rotation , ipso facto Australia does not need to buy the the B21 we can By buy into the USAF's B-21 program instead , it is possible that a situation could be worked out where Australia provides a number of pilots and other support personnel to existing B-21 units. In exchange, a rotational deployment to Australian shores could be set up by the USAF for a prescribed amount of days per year or even something more permanent . The U.S. has already run multiple rotational deployments to Australia. The RAAF would benefit from the B-21 program without having to purchase aircraft.
@@robot336 And who has operational control of the aircraft? What if the particular mission or conflict was one the Australian government or people of the day were not inclined to involve ourselves with. I am not entirely sure that the RAAF pilots or even maintainers would be comfortable with not having an Australian voice in the operational chain.
Yeah I don't want taxes to go any higher
The B-21 makes a lot of sense for us but why arm it with contemporary conventional missiles when experience in Ukraine is showing the need for better air defence systems against missile attacks? Why not arm this aircraft with hypersonic missiles which air defence systems will severely struggle to cope with?
I think before you start dreaming of the RAAF with the B-21 you might want to consider which hypersonic weapon you want to load into its bomb bay since that seems to be a requirement in your suggestion. Considering there is no such currently operational weapons system amongst the western allied nations.
@Robert is a 2 cent CCP troll who supports Xi Jingping. Robert applauds the Uyghur genocide, forced labor camps and supports an invasion of Taiwan.
American is not gonna to sell any strategic bomber to any country. There are so many top secrets technology not transferable. Looks at f-22, forbidden to export.
England is a very close friend of the US, and they couldn't get any .
@@andrewg3238 The Americans are currently trying to catch up in the hypersonic missile race and so one should be available in the next couple of years.
@@robertdavie1221 What is an x15 Bob? I asked you the same question months ago, you refused to answer.
This bomber is designed for a massive military like US not a tiny one like AU. You'd need a ton of support for a meaningful fleet of these. B2 I think was $2B a unit from $700M estimated. Considering how expensive F35 ended up being B21 will cost a lot more.
100%. Not to mention that the F-35s are plagued by EMF interference, ejection seat malfunctions, most of the electronic components are made in china.
What we need first and foremost is to re-introduce national service for EVERYONE, a decent early warning hypersonic missile air defense system, to name a few.
These things are totally useless and redundant. China, Russia have satellite technology capable of engaging and destroying any airborne threat. Stealth means absolutely 0.
Thats exactly what the B21 is designed for.
A much cheaper alternative to the B2.
Here's a different opinion of it from The New Atlas ua-cam.com/video/Zq9li-2W-Yc/v-deo.html
A souped up Horten H.XVIII. We should set our uni students to design and build them for ourselves.
How far is Darwin from our mainland?
Manned aircraft are so 20th century.
The B21 can be flown unmanned.
@@buildmotosykletist1987 So that's ONE BILLION dollars per drone?
@@alanhamford2538 : Yep, something the CCP could not afford even if they could steal the technology to build one.
@@buildmotosykletist1987 The price 2 years out before first test flights is ONE BILLION each. Russia& china have super high tech air defense systems. The Raider will be a dead one billion dollar duck by the time to perform comes around.
@@alanhamford2538 : They have to see it and 'target' it before they can defend against it. Neither the PLA nor Russia can do that.
And who is going to pay for that?
Well, if each Australian chips in and put $5 in, then we can afford the down payment.
We have been roped into nuke subs, give us a break.