world

U.S. plans to deploy nuclear-capable B-52 bombers to Australia's north: report

56 Comments
By Renju Jose and Lewis Jackson

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2022.

©2023 GPlusMedia Inc.

56 Comments
Login to comment

That’s great. Tell the chinese all about some tactical information regarding air power but of course the source “Isn’t Authorized to speak about it”…so it sounds like you need to be Court Martialed for speaking about it.

-20 ( +3 / -23 )

Happy to see this deployment in the Northern territory. Would like to see a squadron of F-22's stationed with the B-52's.

1 ( +14 / -13 )

Happy to see this deployment in the Northern territory. Would like to see a squadron of F-22's stationed with the B-52's.

Are you happy that we are closer and closer to a third world war???..

(facepalm)

-9 ( +12 / -21 )

so "chinese threat" to Australia...is everything okay at your side of cable???

-4 ( +6 / -10 )

I wonder what Indonesia and other regional countries think. Of course they were not consulted. This military "solution" strategy of Biden's is quite shocking to be honest.

-9 ( +6 / -15 )

They really want this war in DC, and they'll fight to the last Ukrainian, European, Taiwanese, Korean, Japanese, and Australian citizen to win it.

Congratulations Australia, you are now firmly in the cross-hairs for nuclear annihilation too.

-11 ( +10 / -21 )

I was planning go there early next year, but as only 6 nukes will wipe out the whole country in 25 minutes, I’m thinking of NZ instead. One Chinese supersonic ICBM can have between six and ten guildable warheads.

-8 ( +6 / -14 )

Congratulations Australia, you are now firmly in the cross-hairs for nuclear annihilation too.

Always have been. Allied to the US and UK and with Pine gap radar station in Australia which has always been a priority target. And other installations.

Are you happy that we are closer and closer to a third world war???..

Obviously not. But with China agitation to be in charge of the planet it may be inevitable. It is all on China and the ambitions of Jinping Xi.

7 ( +16 / -9 )

Last time I checked Russia and the US had 5,000+ nuclear warheads. Chinese nuclear warheads can be counted in the hundreds. Facts matter.

6 ( +11 / -5 )

The US appears hell-bent on making sure that the Chinese are incentivized to not only take Taiwan, but attack Australia as well.

To say that the US military is behaving in an overtly provocative manner would be an understatement. It’s not at all unreasonable to wonder if the predominantly foreign cosmopolitan elite dictating the US military’s actions in Europe and Asia are pursuing this course of action, not because they are crazy or stupid, but in order to ensure the destruction of the US military.

-6 ( +8 / -14 )

Good on the USA. Nuclear weapons should be used as a deterrent ….. and this is what this is

-1 ( +7 / -8 )

As an Air Force pilot, being assigned to fly big, slow, sixty-plus year old B-52s in this age of very effective anti-air warfare developments must give the pilot a feeling similar to what an Imperial Japanese pilot might have felt being assigned to a Kamikaze squadron. The 'bomber' is as archaic as the aircraft carrier and, like the aircraft carrier, only good for murdering the defenseless and, given the Pentagon's backward looking posture, our poor kids may be looking at some REAL surprises when the U.S.'s outrageous aggressiveness and provocation finally kicks off a serious exchange of fireworks.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

And if that means world war three, bring it on. I would rather die than be subjected to bullying for the next few decades, and the good news is the odds are nearly stacked on the allies side winning any war anyway,"

This ignorant comment really takes the cake.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

The 'bomber' is as archaic as the aircraft carrier

Yeah, that is why China is rushing to catch up in both, right?

And you obviously do not know the capabilites of the B-52. It is capable of deploying stand-off weapons from several hundred kilometers outside an air defense envelope. Furthermore, 600 MPH might not be super-sonic but in terms of engaging a threat at that range it is pretty damn fast.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Are B-52s not rusty after 77 years? Nuclear capable? To Australia? As warning to China? Beijing to become Hiroshima? Beware. China is also clearly nuclear capable & Washington is within range of Beijing.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

But with China agitation to be in charge of the planet it may be inevitable. It is all on China and the ambitions of Jinping Xi.

The only one that has been trying to be in charge of the whole planet is the US. The US has been itching for a war with Russia (and China) because they are interfering with the US's plan to control the entire planet. We're on the verge of WWIII, and all the US can do is through more gasoline on the fire....

-3 ( +6 / -9 )

Military logic is trans-national, predictable, and wasteful, I would agree.

Yeah, that is why China is rushing to catch up in both, right?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

some of us has been enlightened. some of us are blinded. as days goes by, some of you will get the bigger picture. just keep asking and you will see the answers on the most important question "why"

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

see why US don't want NK to pursue nuclear weapons while they are also making it day by day?

see why they are doing their best to tell some lies ( idk any more what are lies and truth on their conflicts) on Russia just to break that country apart from the world?

see why they keep China on track and doing every thing to counter every China's progress (be it domination or economic progress) while they're also extending their influence throughout Europe and Asia.

idk if you're blinded or not. but that is just hypocrisy.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

The US appears hell-bent on making sure that the Chinese are incentivized to not only take Taiwan, but attack Australia as well.

Ah I see. All that military equipment and promise of support against an aggressive China is an incentive for China to attack Australia.

When is it going to happen? What’s your timeline? How wide are your goalposts?

1 ( +5 / -4 )

As expected people are happy if it's the US and allies doing the provocation and escalation

0 ( +7 / -7 )

It’s sad Hong Kong has been forgotten so quickly.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

He cannot do it without Congress approval

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

He cannot do it without Congress approval

That will not be a problem. They will be deployed to Australia without issue.

No nuclear weapons will be allowed to be stored in Australia, so that is not an issue. They will be using only conventional weapons unless sent to Guam to support the four B-52's already stationed there and rearm in Guam. I do not think Guam currently has stores of nuclear weapons, but I could be wrong.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

2026 , Biden will not be President,when this deployment will happen,mean while Australia will have a target on it back

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

As expected people are happy if it's the US and allies doing the provocation and escalation

How is this provocation? How is this escalation? Australia is far from Asia and Europe but the US and Australia have been on the same side for over 100 years. If the US is invited to have a handful of planes or ships or tanks in Australia then that is a matter for the two nations who are allied.

It is more a provocation for Indonesia than China or Russia or North Korea. But even Indonesia will see value in this situation.

Keeping the peace and keeping Australia safe is provoking nobody. If China wants to put a few bombers in Russia or NK, I would not call that provocation or escalation. Unless China plans on attacking Australia, it has nothing to be concerned about with these planes stationed there.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

As an American,the worst thing is too see a foreign lackey that lick the boots of America

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

How is this provocation? How is this escalation?

What, you really don't know?

When you have the most heavily armed (by far) country surrounding your country with weapons and military bases. And that country has a long history of making up excuses to attack and destroy other countries, how do you expect China to react?

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

YrralToday 08:15 pm JST

As an American,the worst thing is too see a foreign lackey that lick the boots of America

You clearly have no idea about relationships or this issue. Situation normal. Mutual respect and working together just does not register for some.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

When you have the most heavily armed (by far) country surrounding your country with weapons and military bases. And that country has a long history of making up excuses to attack and destroy other countries, how do you expect China to react?

Australia is thousands of Kilometers from China, and having US forces in Australia is in no way "surrounding" China. Australia is not a neighbor of China.

And your description of the US is a biased incorrect anti US comment not based on truth.

China continues to occupy Tibet. The US is not currently occupying any nation.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

I am an American,my opinion of America based on being an American

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

When you have the most heavily armed (by far) country surrounding your country with weapons and military bases. And that country has a long history of making up excuses to attack and destroy other countries, how do you expect China to react?

And your description of the US is a biased incorrect anti US comment not based on truth.

Someone doesn’t take war seriously. Is defending the MIC your job?

invalid CSRF

1 ( +3 / -2 )

How is this provocation? How is this escalation? Australia is far from Asia and Europe but the US and Australia have been on the same side for over 100 years. If the US is invited to have a handful of planes or ships or tanks in Australia then that is a matter for the two nations who are allied.

Ok I'm convinced you're not playing dumb.

Anyway from the article

Putting B-52s, which have a combat range of about 14,000 km, in Australia will be a warning to Beijing, as fears grow about an assault on Taiwan, Becca Wasser, senior fellow at the Washington, D.C.-based Centre for a New American Security, told the ABC.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

In addition to:

Last year, the United States, Britain and Australia created a security deal that will provide Australia with the technology to deploy nuclear-powered submarines, riling China.

This year, the U.S. deployed four B-52s to its Andersen Air Force base in Guam.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I am an American,my opinion of America based on being an American

And it seems to me you are a critical thinking American, you don't just swallow and support every move of your country, you call it bad if you assess it as bad or unfavorable

1 ( +3 / -2 )

That’s great. Tell the chinese all about some tactical information regarding air power but of course the source “Isn’t Authorized to speak about it”…so it sounds like you need to be Court Martialed for speaking about it.

It's kind of hard to hide a B-52 from satellite surveillance. The Chinese would know they are in Australia. Based on years of commments/complaints from those who post here I reckon the people of Australia would want to know these bombers are going to be deployed to their country. Citizens of a democracy tend to have this thing for transparency you know ......

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Australia is thousands of Kilometers from China, and having US forces in Australia is in no way "surrounding" China. Australia is not a neighbor of China.

When I was on active duty B-52s routinely conducted 24-36 hour ocean surveillance missions in the Pacific and Indian Ocean armed with Harpoon missiles. Crew members would take turns sleeping and they would refuel multiple times during these missions. A BUFF can patrol a lot of the Indian Ocean and South China Sea from bases in Australia.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Six nuclear-capable B-52 bombers to be deployed to Tindal Air Base in northern Australia; four have already been deployed to Andersen Air Force Base on Guam; altogether, ten nuclear-capable B-52s. 

Not only that. The U.S. also retains right to bring in nuclear arsenal to Japan, including Kadena Air Base on Okinawa, Yokota Air Base in metropolitan Tokyo and Misawa Air Base in Aomori Prefecture. A fat cat, I reckon.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As an Air Force pilot, being assigned to fly big, slow, sixty-plus year old B-52s in this age of very effective anti-air warfare developments must give the pilot a feeling similar to what an Imperial Japanese pilot might have felt being assigned to a Kamikaze squadron.

A great radar, long range stand off weapons and aerial mining keep the B-52 tactically relevant. There is no need to expose the airplane to enemy defensive fire if you are shooting missiles with ranges between 800-1600 km. The B-2 and the upcoming B-21 are saved for flying into enemy airspace. They are all aspect low observable and are not going to be detected and shot down. The old BUFF can launch a lot of long range ordnance at an enemy without exposing itself to enemy fire. In addition few aircraft can lay as many mines in the water in a single sortie as the B-52. Now the mines have wing kits and JDAM guidance kits allowing a BUFF to mine, oh let's say the Taiwan Straight from 50-100 km east of the strait,

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Now we see the true state of affairs, it's clear as day who is escalating and provoking.

So backwards and predictable...it's clear as day as to who has been doing the most invading and raining destruction on other countries after WWII, from Korea to Vietnam, Cambodia to Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. and we haven't even mentioned the proxy wars and the training of death squads in Central/South America, the coup d'etat in Iran, and on and on.

At some point other countries are going to get fed up and start building themselves up, and that's what we've seen happening with China and North Korea, who by the way had 20% of their population liquidated by US bombs.

No question as to who the real bully has been,.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Reminds me of Dr. Strangelove....

1 ( +1 / -0 )

At least, Australia has lots of open space to dig deep bomb shelters into.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Nuclear capable, doesn't mean they will be deployed with any nukes. The B-52s can carry all sorts of weapons, not just nukes.

People are reading far too much into this. For most of my childhood, I lived less than 2 miles from B-58s on alert, sometimes less than 1 mile. Nearly any aircraft is "nuclear capable", it doesn't need to be military.

As for letting anything secret be released. B-52s aren't hidden. They are in the open and counted daily via satellites. I don't know if the treaty is still active, but the US has a graveyard of B-52s that the Russians could count from space (or any US citizen can visit) showing all the aircraft - some mothballed and others in line for destruction. For example, Look at 35.9441115052222, -89.93712162736989 on any satellite map. That's a former SAC base, turned into a regional airport and retirement community after the base was closed. Note how the planes would be parked for easy take-off relative to a really long runway? Imagine seeing 8 loaded B-52s taking off in less than 2 minutes and headed north. There is a distinctive "tree" for alert aircraft.

This doesn't really change the ability of the US to apply kinetic diplomacy in the region. It just means that really long flights with many refueling stages won't be necessary if there's need to use a bomber. There are already BUFFs in the UK and Guam. Australia and the US have a long history of military and scientific cooperation. There are US radar complexes in Australia and NASA has a part of their deep space communications network there too.

Today, all B-52 pilots are younger than the aircraft they fly.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Nearly any aircraft is "nuclear capable", it doesn't need to be military.

Nope. To use nuclear weapons aircraft have to carry special communications equipment on board to accept the release codes for the weapon. No release code, no boom.

Even in the USAF, not every F-16 or F-15 has the equipment necessary to deploy nuclear weapons. Only certain squadrons have it and do the extensive training necessary for that mission. Another example, while many USAF and US Navy F-35s will be nuclear capable, as will some sold to UK, Germany, Italy and Netherlands, F-35s sold elsewhere will not be able to deploy nuclear weapons.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

DT,they are take away your security clearance for spilling the beans,

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Biden was not elected too be an international cop ,to police the world,but clean up the mess that Trump created,but too provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare,and secure the blessings of liberty

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Nope. To use nuclear weapons aircraft have to carry special communications equipment on board to accept the release codes for the weapon. No release code, no boom.

And suitcase nukes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suitcase_nuclear_device on a private plane? Seems nuclear capable to me.

The US played shell games with nuclear bombs on B-52s for many decades, because they had many more bombers than bombs. This is all unclassified information.

I doubt any nuclear weapons would be based in Australia before someone else starts killing people in the 5-eyes club. They'd never admit that, of course.

Vaguely remember reading that B-52s were losing the ability to carry nuclear gravity bombs so they could carry air-launched cruise-missile nukes instead. Think the payload is 20 AGM-86Bs.

The opposition should want B-52s with nukes rather than the other 2 options. That's because the other two options get fired and 5-30 minutes later, they hit the target. Talking about sub-launched missiles and ICMBs launched from the central USA. With a B-52, they can be sent towards the target and communications can still happen so they can be recalled at any point before release. It may seem like an extra 3 hrs isn't much, but it can change everything. Having the men in the planes is a good thing.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Nearly any aircraft is "nuclear capable"

And suitcase nukes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suitcase_nuclear_device on a private plane? Seems nuclear capable to me.

Lol hahahaha

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

You cannot do anything without a GPS map,before any bomb is drop , military map makers map the destination of all bomb, through satellite and physical mapping , Pyongyang and Beijing are 250 miles apart at 39.561,121.111,and each is about 750 miles from Sasebo ,can make a GPS map of Tokyo in five minutes

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

With a maximum speed between 600 and 960 km/h (depending on height), it takes quite some time flying to and over Chinese territory and of course being that slow they are easily to take out of the scene at any time , if not finally by radar detection then maybe by satellite surveillance. It’s more kind of a tranquilizer pill to deploy it in Australia, isn’t it?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

but clean up the mess that Trump created

No mess to clean up internationally. Domestically though lots of citizens still caught in the MSM matrix

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

I doubt any nuclear weapons would be based in Australia before someone else starts killing people in the 5-eyes club. They'd never admit that, of course.

Facilities handling nuclear weapons are painfully obvious to satellite observation. Rings of fencing, guard towers and other well known security features make them impossible to hide. If you look at Incirlik Air Base on Google Earth for example it is not very hard to figure out where the nuclear weapons and their aircraft are kept.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

With a maximum speed between 600 and 960 km/h (depending on height), it takes quite some time flying to and over Chinese territory and of course being that slow they are easily to take out of the scene at any time , if not finally by radar detection then maybe by satellite surveillance. It’s more kind of a tranquilizer pill to deploy it in Australia, isn’t it?

A BUFF is never going to get close to China. It will stay hundreds of kilometers offshore and shoot long range stealthy cruise missiles like JASSM-ER and JASSM-XR at targets in China. Done right the Chinese or Russians, or whomever, should never even know the BUFF was out there or see the missiles until they are so close it is too late to deal with them.

BUFFS will also patrol the Pacific and Indian Oceans carrying maritime attack cruise missiles like Harpoon and LRASM to attack naval targets from stand off range. Two BUFFS can carry more such missiles than a squadron of Navy F/A-18Es from an aircraft carrier. They can also lay minefields faster than just about any other aircraft available.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

You cannot do anything without a GPS map,before any bomb is drop , military map makers map the destination of all bomb, through satellite and physical mapping , Pyongyang and Beijing are 250 miles apart at 39.561,12

All those Tomahawks launched at Iraq during Desert Storm had no GPS. They used inertial guidance and TERCOM, TERrain COMparison, to find their targets. The precision guided bombs you saw used in Desert Storm were laser guided. No GPS. That came later. Many weapons do not require GPS to find their targets. It is one of those things that is helpful if available but not 100% necessary. The US Navy is returning to using celestial navigation knowing that against certain peer enemies in certain places one may not have GPS. The US is implementing a new form of LORAN C called eLORAN as a hedge against loss of GPS. eLORAN is ground based.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Vaguely remember reading that B-52s were losing the ability to carry nuclear gravity bombs so they could carry air-launched cruise-missile nukes instead. Think the payload is 20 AGM-86Bs.

Not so much losing a capability as a recognition that a B-52 is never going to get close enough to a target in any kind of contested airspace to successfully drop a gravity bomb. It is however a very capable cruise missile launch platform with an hourly cost less than the B-1 or B-2, and actually only very slightly more expensive to fly per hour than an F-22 (which is why the F-22 program was cancelled at 180 aircraft). Those AGM-86s have a range supposedly in excess of 2400 kilometers if open sources are to be believed. A BUFF can remain well outside Chinese or Russian air defenses and launch waves of these or other stealthy cruise missiles like JASSM-ER and JASSM-XR at targets inside Russia or China.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Not so much losing a capability as a recognition that a B-52 is never going to get close enough to a target in any kind of contested airspace to successfully drop a gravity bomb. It is however a very capable cruise missile launch platform with an hourly cost less than the B-1 or B-2, and actually only very slightly more expensive to fly per hour than an F-22 (which is why the F-22 program was cancelled at 180 aircraft). Those AGM-86s have a range supposedly in excess of 2400 kilometers if open sources are to be believed. A BUFF can remain well outside Chinese or Russian air defenses and launch waves of these or other stealthy cruise missiles like JASSM-ER and JASSM-XR at targets inside Russia or China.

Where does your knowledge of B-52's and F-22's come from?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites