Have Bombers become obsolete in Modern warfare?

[AJSINGH]

I think with todays longer range and precision strike weapons like cruise missiles and LGBs, bombers again come into equation.

Imagine if India fields a big bomber loaded with Brahmos/Nirbhay precision cruise missiles. It can wreck havoc in enemy domain with flurry of deep precision strikes being well within Indian territory hence no risk of SAMs.

I believe it would be a safe, cheaper yet very effective way of neutralising enemy defences and sensitive installations with no requirement of fancy and expensive stealth features. If we can develop a squadron of such bombers, it will cause a serious re calculation in enemy camp

true but isnt it safer to lauch cruise missile from land first and then deploy bombers later

 

[lodaxstax]

true but isnt it safer to lauch cruise missile from land first and then deploy bombers later

firing CMs from well within our territory is just as much safer. gurus can shed more light on the advantages of firing from Air but i think firing a salvo from air on specific targets with better visibility, reach and targetting would be some of the benefits. The IAF wants air launched brahmos.

 

[AJSINGH]

firing CMs from well within our territory is just as much safer. gurus can shed more light on the advantages of firing from Air but i think firing a salvo from air on specific targets with better visibility, reach and targetting would be some of the benefits. The IAF wants air launched brahmos.

some time back , i read that ,if a country is going to war then the following sequence of attacks takes place
1-Land launched cruise missile to destroy known enemy SAM station ,ammunition dump and other vital targets
2-Recon mission by aircraft (entering enemy area to limited extent ) and followed by other destruction of enemy site
3-Air dominance and destruction of airfields ( done by air launched cruise missiles)
5-Brining in strategic bombers to finish the rest of the job

now since Stealth aircraft are around these can do the initial bombing raid to destroy the SAM sities

 

[nrj]

With substantial MIRV around & the precise CEP, Bombers job is achieved by IGMDP for India. No need to waste fighters or valued pilot lives.

Dodging SAMs or Aerial threats to the Bombers/fighters is needless when un-interceptable MIRVed missiles are present in inventory.

 

[AJSINGH]

With substantial MIRV around & the precise CEP, Bombers job is achieved by IGMDP for India. No need to waste fighters or valued pilot lives.

Dodging SAMs or Aerial threats to the Bombers/fighters is needless when un-interceptable MIRVed missiles are present in inventory.

simple question , why did USA not use MRIVed missile when it did bomb raids in afghanistan

 

[nrj]

simple question , why did USA not use MRIVed missile when it did bomb raids in afghanistan

Did you read the post? I'm mentioning Indian perimeter.

 

[AJSINGH]

Did you read the post? I'm mentioning Indian perimeter.

look MRIVed missiles cannot completely replace bombers , plus strategic bombers only fly when there is complete air dominance or partial , it is very calculated risk whenever any Air force decides to deploy bombers , like USAF ,it used to call B-2 bombers from all the from their base in America to do precision bombing in Iraq

 

[nrj]

look MRIVed missiles cannot completely replace bombers , plus strategic bombers only fly when there is complete air dominance or partial , it is very calculated risk whenever any Air force decides to deploy bombers , like USAF ,it used to call B-2 bombers from all the from their base in America to do precision bombing in Iraq

When did I say MIRVd missiles will completely replace Bombers? Do you have selective reading syndrome?

 

[AJSINGH]

When did I say MIRVd missiles will completely replace Bombers? Do you have selective reading syndrome?

by you " No need to waste fighters or valued pilot lives. " you did not say otherwise

 

[nrj]

by you " No need to waste fighters or valued pilot lives. " you did not say otherwise

Stop quoting in one-liners. Complete what you mean to say. Don't come up with concepts I didn't talk about. Moreover, I was not replying to you in that post.

Short ranged Supersonic/Hypersonic missiles will do the exact thing, they are ejected to do.
A2G capability of fighters is enhancing every day.
I see Strategic Bombers job reduced in Indian war perimeter.

 

[AJSINGH]

Stop quoting in one-liners. Complete what you mean to say. Don't come up with concepts I didn't talk about. Moreover, I was not replying to you in that post.

Short ranged Supersonic/Hypersonic missiles will do the exact thing, they are ejected to do.
A2G capability of fighters is enhancing every day.
I see Strategic Bombers job reduced in Indian war perimeter.

what about against china? we do not have any long range missile in active service , there strategic bombers Like Tu160 can do that job

 

[nrj]

what about against china? we do not have any long range missile in active service , there strategic bombers Like Tu160 can do that job

Its matter of days now when long range missiles will be active from underground silos to deepest submarines.

Use of Bomber/fighter depends what type of ground attack role is required in the particular situation.

 

[AJSINGH]

Its matter of days now when long range missiles will be active from underground silos to deepest submarines.

Use of Bomber/fighter depends what type of ground attack role is required in the particular situation.

submarine -long way to go
land based missile - short time for active duty
immediate solution- strategic bombers

 

[Agantrope]

Its matter of days now when long range missiles will be active from underground silos to deepest submarines.

Use of Bomber/fighter depends what type of ground attack role is required in the particular situation.

I have to say no. Say in the situation a country's tank is rolling into the another. Will the ATGM/ATM works, NO. Bombing only reduces/nullifies the crunch of the rolling armour. Also it will be used to destroy a very large army advancing when other options like Tactical nukes are not considered.

What's the cost of a Cluster bomb and a Cruise Missile?

 

[nrj]

submarine -long way to go

K-X is almost reality now... Next year will end all doubts.

immediate solution- strategic bombers

What strategic bombers? Do we have B-2s to evade every enemy radar (& I'm not sure B-2 does evade also) What perimeter can these present bombers cover? What is weapon complements on these bombers? Is it enough to invade enemy airspace & come back? What level of escort will these Bombers need?

 

[nrj]

I have to say no. Say in the situation a country's tank is rolling into the another. Will the ATGM/ATM works, NO. Bombing only reduces/nullifies the crunch of the rolling armour. Also it will be used to destroy a very large army advancing when other options like Tactical nukes are not considered.

What's the cost of a Cluster bomb and a Cruise Missile?

Bombers can not be replaced totally by any present available means. I'm not favoring dumping all the bombers.

As mentioned the, the specific war scenario will only call the use of bombers or not.

 

[AJSINGH]

K-X is almost reality now... Next year will end all doubts.



What strategic bombers? Do we have B-2s to evade every enemy radar (& I'm not sure B-2 does evade also)
What perimeter can these present bombers cover? What is weapon complements on these bombers? Is it enough to invade enemy airspace & come back? What level of escort will these Bombers need?

K-X has only 700km range
we do not need B-2 to , we need decent size bombers ( neither too larger nor too small range bomber ) Tu22m would be good solution( 7000km range) These were most commonly armed with long-range cruise missiles/anti-ship missiles, typically one or two Raduga Kh-22 anti-shipping missiles , for fighter escort we already have Su30MKI to provide necesarry escort .

 

[nrj]

K-X has only 700km range

K-X is Agni 3 SLBM with range of 3,500 km- 5500 km depending upon warhead size.

for fighter escort we already have Su30MKI to provide necesarry escort .

How about only MKIs alone with Nirbhay (1000km @ 0.7 Mach) & Brahmos (300Km @ Mach 3)?

 

[AJSINGH]

K-X is Agni 3 SLBM with range of 3,500 km- 5500 km depending upon warhead size.



How about only MKIs alone with Nirbhay (1000km @ 0.7 Mach) & Brahmos (300Km @ Mach 3)?

Nirbhay is vulnerable to interception , Brahmos range too small for interior targets because if you want to bomb economic center then they all are on the eastern sea board

 

[nrj]

Nirbhay is vulnerable to interception , Brahmos range too small for interior targets because if you want to bomb economic center then they all are on the eastern sea board

You are talking with some already canvased specific war situation in your mind.
Why won't long range missiles take out economic centers?