US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

H

HighGround

Senior Member
Registered Member
TerraN_EmpirE said:
Considering that the U.S. has flying B21 prototypes and its existing B2 fleet compared to Chinas still vapor H20… Xi’s translator did hear correctly.
Still it was a hilarious choice of image to use. To be fair of all the despots in Czar Vladimir’s Pokédex Assad at least has a trade he can fall back on. Given Russian casualties I am sure Dr. Assad can open up his eye surgery clinic.
Click to expand...
Fair enough about the B-21, but calling H-20 vapor is harsh. Very little information on that program.
 
TerraN_EmpirE

TerraN_EmpirE

Tyrant King
HighGround said:
Fair enough about the B-21, but calling H-20 vapor is harsh. Very little information on that program.
Click to expand...
Vaporware
- software or hardware that has been advertised but is not yet available to buy, either because it is only a concept or because it is still being written or designed.

So it fits the definition. Same for American NGADs.
 
B

bebops

Junior Member
Registered Member
Per unit cost of B-2 & B-21 (per Air Force)Listed base year dollars:Adjusted 2024 dollars:
B-2 Spirit:$1,157 million base 1998$2,250 million
B-21 Raider:$692 million base 2022$749 million

These are rough price estimate. very expensive planes. B-21 is not much cheaper. After each yearly adjusted, the price tag increases. 2025 price might be 775-800m for B-21. Nationalinterest also stated the same price for B2.

JH36 might cost 300+ mil each given that J20 2 engine cost around 120mil. A 3 engine JH36 is still substantially cheaper than compared to a B-21 2 engine bomber.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
vincent

vincent

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
HighGround said:
Even if this was feasible on a manufacturing level, it's getting increasingly more dangerous on a fiscal level. The country is running a budget deficit of $1+ trillion dollars every year. This is nearly ~3.7% of GDP today, dangerously close to the GDP growth rate. Possible future tax cuts, increased tariffs, inevitably increasing social spending, and your proposed military expenditure expansion... this will likely outpace GDP growth.

Increasing Debt-to-GDP ratios is all fine and good, and we don't really have a clear idea on how far we can push this lever, but it is risky. The solvency of United States is ultimately dependent on USD's primacy as a reserve currency and our dominance of the global economy and financial system. It is increasingly dangerous to strain this status quo.

The Pentagon likely has an enormous wish-list for things it needs to compete and possibly defeat China in its own turf. I don't think we are capable of fulfilling that wish list even if we spent the money, and I am becoming increasingly convinced that it's also fiscally irresponsible to do so.

I'm not a debt hawk, debt was not an issue in 2008, but it has become a bigger issue as the years have gone by, and it is most definitely an issue now in 2024. There are no easy answers to our strategic situation, but in times of uncertainty, I believe it's best to bide your time and focus on the fundamentals. IMO, it is unfortunately a time to look inward, even if that means abandoning many of our security commitments.
Click to expand...
The interest payment is already higher than the Pentagon budget, and now the long-term interest rate is going back up. Good luck maintaining the size of the US military.

1736545417633.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top