How much will be needed in the 2027, year in which nuclear certification on the new American bombers is scheduled, the deterrent triad of the United States? We know that the US has forecast a total expenditure of 55 billion dollars, in acquisition costs only, for a new fleet composed of 100 Long Range Strike-Bomber. The US Air Force wants a long-range subsonic bomber with high aerodynamic efficiency, the ability to evade all types of air defense and an RCS (Cross Section Radar) practically "nothing". The very low radar signature is a fundamental prerequisite of the new bomber. In addition to conventional weapons, the future bomber will have the capacity to transport nuclear warheads at considerable distances.
However, the new global capacity of the future nuclear triad requires reflection. The existence, in the vicinity of possible targets, of nuclear weapons ready for launch, is considered a strong signal in case of escalation. The United States, for example, perform shifts with B-2 and B-52 both in the UK and on the Isle of Guam. A strong signal for those who had in mind to unleash a nuclear holocaust on Warsaw or Los Angeles.
But how functional would the old asset of triple nuclear deterrence be between 10 years? American nuclear bombers, despite shifts, should take off, at least theoretically, from five bases in the world to hit the enemy. Bases that the enemy knows and that would probably make it unusable. Once in flight, however, a bomber stealth it might not even be detected, but how powerful would it be?
This cannot be said for the American nuclear terrestrial component formed by the Minuteman. The problem with terrestrial ballistic missiles is that Russians and Chinese (another enemy structured like an army in fact does not exist for the USA), know exactly where they are. For the fixed terrestrial strategic component, the problem is purely symmetrical. A single launch from one of the 400 silos deployed in Montana, North Dakota and Wyoming, would be detected immediately by the enemy who would launch a nuclear response before the missile even reached the target. A Minuteman, despite the billionaire update, will always remain bound by the fact of being geographically located in its silo. Then there is also a tactical problem. If the US declared war on the Chinese, they might not even rely on the LGM-30 due to the missile trajectory. The latter, in fact, to hit the Chinese should fly over Siberia. This could lead to a Russian reaction. An unwanted reaction.
Here then is the penetration of the enemy airspace by a bomber stealth with nuclear weapons, it represents the best option between the two. An attack, silent and invisible, capable of devastating the command network or beheading the political leadership of a country. But this is the same capacity that the US has with i Trident sub-launched. To understand the power of an Ohio class submarine, it would be wise to remember his death load. If an Ohio, from 12 thousand km away from the target, launches all its 24 intercontinental missiles Trident II, each of which equipped with eight W88 nuclear warheads from 475 kilotons, could wipe out between one and a half billion people from the face of the earth. If from the western Pacific, i Trident were launched against Beijing, the Chinese would only have a few minutes to react, probably would not be able to do so. It should be noted that due to the redundancy, the US always has eight Ohio at sea at any time. It means that the US is always ready to launch 192 ballistic missiles from the depths of the ocean, for 1536 warheads independent of 450 Kilotoni.
Even if the bombers represent "an occasional attack action", to think that their armament could behead the enemy forces is unlikely. In an era of severe military spending cuts, the US should bet everything on the submarine nuclear force, as does the United Kingdom (perhaps still preserving missiles on the ground, not so expensive to maintain online).
(photo: US Air Force)
