USA is a joke

>claims to be a superpower
>can't even hold formation

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=aXQ2lO3ieBA
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_United_States_military_aircraft
aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20140623-0
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-111_Aardvark
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

K

lmao

fuck the JEW S A

Why doesn't your country take a similar picture then?

Oh wait Germany has no aircraft carriers. Too busy paying "immigrants" to be drug dealers and rape your women

...

You are already sacrifing american pigs for our freedoms. No need for any.

>German military
Pic related

>germany
>Modern germany
>sucking ahmed's balls while he's cums inside his daughter germany
>Making fun of world's #superpower ever

Some one in the West has to wear the big boy pants and be real men. The entire world knows you modern krauts lack both spines and testicles.

How does it feel to be militarily inferior to the fucking French, Hans?

how the fuck did you guys lose ww2

Like really you had shit going for you. the Allies were fucked but then you guys fucked up and now look where we are today. JEWS EVERYWHERE. This is all your fault.

LOL!

Take a tip from us, no airforce = easier to hold formation.

Silly Americans!

Why do we still use WWII era bombers?

i thought carriers arent supposed to be grouped together

it turns out starting a war on the world is a bad idea

Because they work

kek

B-52 is early cold war

we use it because it was supposed to be replaced 10~ years after it came out but the replacements all got cancelled for half a decade,

besides, it's still a good plane.

>decade

i meant centuries, shit

>US army
>not the laughing stock of the world

>What is invading Russia like a retard?

Because you only have 20 useless overpriced b-2 "stealth" bombers. And only half of them work. But hey, at least they are a but hard to detect by radar.

Yeah, I know it isn't technically a WWII era plane but it's ancient. It looks about as big as a fucking 747 and would make for an easy target.

Granted, I know dick about airplanes but pic related looks like ancient technology to me.

Kek

That's 20 more than you have, though.

delet this

You do know that the U.S has the biggest air force in the world right?

>number one superpower

Come back to me when you cover a quarter of the worlds land.

we also have the second biggest

>implying

Why do Europeans live in the past? That was over 100 years ago Nigel get over it. You over-extended your empire and couldn't stop rebellions. That's why you're as irrelevant as you are now.

...

You cut off the midget on the left

Yup. You are the worlds only superpower. You are the best. But no matter how you fuckin twist and turn it, the money for development and the price for that plane was fucking money down the drain. All of your stealth planes have been overpriced, overdue, too high maintenance and that is why you never ordered as many as you were supposed to. If I recall, America was supposed to have 400 b2, not 20. The same with the f-raptor, the same with the f-35.

Please ignore my retarded countryman. The ones of us with IQ's greater than our shoe size knows who is who and what is what.
Feet on the ground is where we shine (per capita) Bit war toys, not on our achievement made list

kek

Get him out of my military NOW

*big
big war toys. But I recon most of you saw through the typo

B-52 has 3.5x the payload of our biggest WWII bomber.

Ok. Why do you care so much? Are you from a company that contracts with the US air-force?

We also have the bone....

...

>implying you need to directly lord over areas
>not using military bases, covert regime changes, and economic power to get what you want

>Allies ally with the communists
>ITS GERMANYS FAULT THAT THERE IS SO MUCH JEWING GOING ON
I hate anglos so much.

I don't care. I answered a question.
>Why do we still use WWII era bombers?
And then you got offended by THE TRUTH!

There are more planes in the picture than your entire air force, kraut

based

...

But we have an airforce you fucking inbred.

My uncle just recently got one of those drones from the warehouse and has custom made a little nail gun attachment for it, NZRAF is currently in conversations with him to add it to their fleet so get your facts straight.

You probably live in Invercargill too.

We have plenty of other bombers besides the B-2 and B-52 but you made a huge deal about our stealth bomber being shit like you're trying to one up the USA or something. You seem to take pride in the fact that it was apparently a high cost program that didn't pan out and you act like I'm supposed to give a shit.

Came here to post this.

>>>>OP IS A FAGGOT

...

>Americans die for our country if we get attacked
I see nothing wrong with this.

You either get your security or your honor. You seem to be choosing security, which is okay, however you must reckon with the fact that you no longer have your honor.

>claims to be efficient
>can't even wipe out the Jewish race

Honour*

That's gay. The u isn't even necessary.

so this is the power of autism

>it was apparently a high cost program that didn't pan out and you act like I'm supposed to give a shit.
I don't. It just happens to be, that you clearly give a shit. I just answered a question.
youtube.com/watch?v=aXQ2lO3ieBA

Of course not , Bak-nah, because you are weak. You would never fight yourself, you'd leave that to America or the German citizens.

> Speaking the Queens English isn't necessary
> 60% white

Murrica, land of the mulattos.

I was simply wondering why we're still using a bomber from 1953. I don't give a fuck about our stealth bombers when there are plenty of other bombers created after 1953 that aren't the size of a 747 and fly at subsonic speeds. The stealth bomber being expensive doesn't answer that question. You're just being an annoying faggot. We only use like 40 B-52s, anyway. It's like we're keeping them in service for nostalgia factor or some shit.

^

I wonder if subs will ever start using 3d engines+a VR helmet with their sonar to help with spacial awareness like a spectator camera in a game. Reading blips on a screen doesn't seem to be the best way of understanding your distance and depth away from whatever target you're following.

GERMANY YES, YOU ARE SO TOLERANT

>Aren't the size of a 747
You're fucking stupid, stop talking.

B-52 is a strategic bomber, it's good enough for what we need it for. It's cheaper to keep them than replace them with B-1's, and they still have good enough capability to bomb sand niggers.

LRSB will replace some of them. 40 B52's is a fuckton.

a big target physically but it has a shitload of power to use in jammers and EW and it will never go anywhere hot without a dozen strike fighters with it.

>You're fucking stupid, stop talking.
No. Eat shit, faggot.

>B-52 is a strategic bomber, it's good enough for what we need it for. It's cheaper to keep them than replace them with B-1's, and they still have good enough capability to bomb sand niggers.

So we're only using them because we're fighting stone age enemies that don't have an effective counter to it? That answers my question. It's still a retarded decision when we'd probably retire them if we had to face a half-competent enemy. I just find it hilarious when Americans claim "herp derp X enemy is still using tanks/planes from 50+ years ago" when we're doing the exact same shit.

cuz they emp resistant

Real niggas fly black budget shit, they keep the old stuff for the goyim show

It's because they carry a lot of bombs, can travel anywhere on the planet, and generally get the job done.

We don't need tons of low flying stealthy bombers because we've gotten pretty good at shutting down radar, missiles, and other anti aircraft weaponry. That missile attack on Syria Trump ordered a couple weeks ago? Totally blinded the best shit Russia deploys. Afterwards Russia said that they're in Syria to fight terrorists, not protect Assad from outside attacks...because they literally can't.

such a great movie you can still watch it on you tube I believe

It's because they allied with the fucking nips

Most B-52s (74 out of the 87 in service) sit at bases like Barksdale, fully loaded with nukes. If we go to DEFCON 3 or higher, they go on scramble readiness like the Cold War.

We have another 110 sitting in The Boneyard mothballed and can be made flight ready in less than 48 hours in the event we think we need them.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_United_States_military_aircraft
You are the worlds only superpower and have.
B-1B Lancer Rockwell USA Jet Bomber 1986 62[2] Only supersonic bomber aircraft active in the U.S. Air Force.

B-2A Spirit Northrop Grumman USA Jet Bomber 1997 20 The USAF plan to operate the B-2 until 2058

And then of course.
B-52H Stratofortress Boeing USA Jet Bomber 1955 77 Slated to remain in service until 2045.
The majority of your bombers are from 1955, correct the record if I am wrong.

Germany literally cannot even get 9 fighters into the air at the same time.

That is formation for a carrier group. If you had one you'd know.

Your formations during WWII were blown to shit
As were your tanks, your guns, your woman

the power of autism.

Mate old technology was built solid and reliable. There is no reason to make a brand new plane when you can update a great plane with new tech.

>be kraut flying a yurofugger
>collide into civilian learjet and kill two
aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20140623-0

Yay!!

Wow, you faggots really are clutching at straws here, aren't you? Come back when you have an argument and less refugees.

>It's because they carry a lot of bombs, can travel anywhere on the planet, and generally get the job done.
Nope. It's because the b-2a program was a complete and utter failure. it was supposed to replace the B-52, but since America failed to build a decent bomber and just wasted your money linning the pockets of the military industrial complex, you still use it.
>There is no reason to make a brand new plane when you can update a great plane with new tech.
Then why did you do it?

The reason we don't build new bombers is because you use bombers AFTER you've achieved air superiority, so all you need is an airworthy truck bomb. Better to spend money on improving fighters and ground to air weaponry

Are you retarded?

Why would we need to invest into a new bomber program when 1954 upgraded bomber does the job just as good?

Stop posting. The age only matters when comes to air frame but since its been constantly upgraded you don't actually need to replace it.

C-130s are ancient as well but they have new wings, new engines, new cockpits that make brand new commercial aircraft look stone age

t. Someone who actually does aircraft maintenance for a living

Our YOUNGEST B-52H (tail number 61-040) is 55 years old (built in October of 1962) and has 24,000 hours on the airframe.

we have an airforce. They fly their wee biplanes in formation at all the shows.

I had 4 capchas and lied in every one

my god germany, sort your shit out.

They don't have to fly over enemy airspace and drop dumb bombs. Each B-52 can carry up to 72 nuclear or conventional cruise missiles. They can fire those from pretty damn far away and they would be protected by fighters and jammers.

We have thousands of other bombers that have been retired while the B-52 is still in active service, though.

Again, I don't know much about aircraft, but why was this bomber retired (a supersonic bomber capable of carrying nukes): en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-111_Aardvark

We have hundred of them just sitting around collecting dust.

This, laughable and false implication by the britbong.

tfw Germany can never have a big military because of the Treaty of Versailles.
It's ok, when Russia starts invading you again, the US will take care of you.

Because maintenance costs are too high.
You have to remember every aircraft we have has about 200 people servicing it and fixing it. If it gets too expansive (example is too many MAN HOURS or the parts are just stupid pricey to fix due to age / reliability)

B52 and C130s are very simple aircraft that is very easy to fix and maintain. They are cheap and do their job.

Fuck you

>Why would we need to invest into a new bomber program when 1954 upgraded bomber does the job just as good?
I don't know, BUT YOU DID IT. It is called the B-2. It just happens to be a failure of a plane, so you still use the old one.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-111_Aardvark
"The General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark was a supersonic, medium-range interdictor and tactical attack aircraft that also filled the roles of strategic nuclear bomber, aerial reconnaissance, and electronic-warfare aircraft in its various versions. Developed in the 1960s by General Dynamics"
Not a bomber.

They're for dropping nukes and carrying assloads of bombs once we have air superiority.

>I know more than the USAF!!!
shut the fuck up.

We haven't replaced them yet because they're good enough at dropping bombs, not everything has to be based on peer-state conflicts. They'd be very useful in fighting North Korea. We have B-1's, F-22's, B-2's, and soon will have F-35's for if we need to curbstomp more competent militarizes.

Aardvarks cost more to maintain than the F-16s and F-15s that can deliver B61 and B83s with more maneuverability than the F-111 and climb out of the LABS faster when they lob the nukes.

B-52s are workhorses and their reliability along with an engine that is easy to repair keeps them in service until B-21 comes online.

i actually have goosebumps.
>tfw germany shitposts harder than the FUCKING LEAFS!!1!

You are trying waaaayy too hard man

>B52 and C130s are very simple aircraft that is very easy to fix and maintain. They are cheap and do their job.

Alright, that makes a lot of sense. I'm assuming just because a plane is "retired," we would still be willing to use it in the event that we need to. It just seems silly when we have thousands upon thousands of decent aircraft just sitting in the boneyard when we could at least sell them for a lot of shekels.

>B-2 program a complete and utter failure

The program was expensive but far from being a failure. The B-2 bomber worked brilliantly. Better than it needed to, in fact. That's the only valid criticism of the program. The bomber was way more expensive than it needed to be because the AF insisted on giving it high-speed low-altitude penetration capabilities, which was fucking pointless since a stealthy plane doesn't need to fly below radar and we already had the B-1 for that job. Shows you how difficult it is for high-ranking officers to trust new technologies and tactics.