Why pack a 747 with cruise missiles? Why not!?

[OldFogey]

Thought this article was kind of interesting.

https://www.sandboxx.us/blog/americas-plan-to-build-747-arsenal-ships-packed-with-cruise-missiles/

[Singlestack]

Thought this article was kind of interesting.

https://www.sandboxx.us/blog/americas-plan-to-build-747-arsenal-ships-packed-with-cruise-missiles/

Yup, saw that concept years ago, can make some sense.

Also saw something about 10 years ago that some called the "bomb truck". It is an unmanned high altitude drone that carries a number of precision guided munitions like satellite, laser, or radar guided bombs. It would be fairly massive with the idea being a very long loiter/on station time, where bombs could be "called down" individually at precision targets.

[JohnnyDrama]

" Why pack a 747 with cruise missiles? Why not!"

'cuase 'Murica!

I clicked on the article. The author makes some good points. As long as it's taken the F-22s and F-35s to get rolled out, I don't expect to see the B-21 in my lifetime.

Concerning the 747, I can see the program being developed, implemented, then all sorts of jacked up when someone decides to improve performance and expand the mission.

[def90]

Isn't the C5 close to the same size already and was in production at the time?

[BushMasterBoy]

Should have a nice large radar cross signature, making it easy to shoot down. I think even the B-52's are easy prey for the S-400 SAM system. Thats why we have nextgen fighters and bombers, to clear air defense systems out of the way.


https://www.airforcemag.com/article/0691electronic/

[MrPrena]

we got b1b and b52, but great article to send message to DPRK about cruise missle.

[earplug]

Consider the 747 as a replacement for many A-10 Thunderbolts. Or having the same job as a offshore bombardment vessel. All is fine if we control the airspace.

[Aloha_Shooter]

Consider the 747 as a replacement for many A-10 Thunderbolts. Or having the same job as a offshore bombardment vessel. All is fine if we control the airspace.

No, the value from the A-10 is in its long loiter time for CAS/TAS. Cruise missiles are great for hitting fixed targets, not so much for dispersed infantry and vehicles. Having a large platform to launch a shit ton of cruise missiles is a great idea for efficient and precise simultaneous destruction of a lot of high value fixed targets when you control the airspace but not so great outside those parameters. I liked the idea in "Flight of the Old Dog" better -- apply modern technologies to make a B-52 more survivable.

[Rucker61]

Should have a nice large radar cross signature, making it easy to shoot down. I think even the B-52's are easy prey for the S-400 SAM system. Thats why we have nextgen fighters and bombers, to clear air defense systems out of the way.


https://www.airforcemag.com/article/0691electronic/

It's a standoff weapon system.