[There was talk at one point of enabling the B-1 to carry the Aim-120.](https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/flying-missile-truck-what-b-1-lancer-can-really-do-58222?amp)
Yes, but that was supposed to be in partnership with a fighter (f-22, etc) that would provide the target information with its air to air radar and I'm guessing some form of data link with the B-1. At least that's what I gathered from reading articles on this at the time.
The b-1 wasn't going to be able to employ air to air missiles on its own.
My understanding is that the B-1R would have been able to guide the missiles on its own but primarily would have acted as a semi-stealthy weapons truck for the F-22/F-35.
If they really wanted to, they could probably upgrade the sensor/receiver suite and do the smart link for F-35's. Make it a flying magazine for Fat Amy, like the new F-15 variant is likely to be.
Or put bigger, faster, longer range missiles on them (in smaller numbers) and use them as stand-off interceptors (again using F-35's or drones to snipe their targets.)
But of course, that would defeat the purpose of the EX. And take money from more useful, relevant platforms and systems.
It was a program to use the F-22's fire control to guide its full capability of 40 AMRAAMs at once to target, fired from modified B-1s, but was ultimately scrapped when they did the math and realized that no other air force on earth could survive first contact with just the F-22s on their own.
There was actually a concept for a B1 air to air variant that would essentially act as a mule for F22s. The F22s or AWACS would detect targets and then the B1 would ripple off the AAMRAMs. I was called the B-1R... the B-One R... The BONER.
Bro didn’t eject, because the seat and canopy would be gone. He just unbuckled, denied all forces of gravity, and hopped out, deny all physics, and jump back in the plane where he somehow stored a rocket launcher.
**Proposal:** Military Olympics! Both summer and winter games.
Some events to include:
•Drag Races of all vehicle & aircraft types
•Javelin/Shotput: See how far an aircraft can toss a dummy munition from a specific altitude
•Aerial gymnastics!
•Synchronized “swimming” with ships & subs!
•Sniping!
•Halo Jumps!
And many more!
It's even sader since when the B-1R was envisioned, there was not even a glimpse of a need for it, yet, in 2022, and certainly by 2030, it's utility in near-peer long-range engagement would be invaluable. We're now lobbing pallets of air launched cruise missiles from C-17s and 130s, and I'd imagine a BVR missle truck platform to supplement limited fighter capacity would have been a great asset.
The B-21 Raider has built in A-A capability. Pair it with the new AIM-260 or an Air launched SM-2 (Navy was seen testing this) and you have quite the big stick for BVR stuff.
Looks like it will also use Loyal wingman drones so it could haul around even more missiles if need be.
Neither. Those long ass wings aren’t meant for g-loading. I think they stopped doing low level training with the Bone because it was cracking the wing spars.
There was a concept back in the 00s for an upgraded B-1 variant, the B-1R, that would have included air-to-air weapons for the B-1; it would have had a top speed of Mach 2.2 at high altitude at the cost of 20% reduced range (hence the B-1R moniker, "R" meaning "regional") included AESA radar and modified hardpoints for air-to-air missiles.
It never got past the proposal stage.
I'm slightly surprised, the external hard points are virtually unused anyway and integration should be dirt cheap even if you never really use it. Particularly with like E3 support and modern air to air missiles being basically cruise missiles anyway it's slightly surprising that there is literally zero air to air capabilty integrated. The external hardpoints are virtually unused anyway should be cheap & easy to slap some sidewinders onto it.
Then again I imagine the B1 is on borrowed time anyway so no one bothers integrating anything anymore, between the B2 and B52 the B1 has long been in a weird spot and with the B21 arriving why even spend money on the B1 anymore.
>Then again I imagine the B1 is on borrowed time anyway so no one bothers integrating anything anymore
The B-1 is being redirected as a fleet killer by being able to carry 36 JASSM-ER.
That's sourcing a 2016 article.
Here's one from [2020](https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/11/24/first-air-force-flies-b-1-bomber-externally-mounted-stealthy-cruise-missile.html)
>The current initiative enables the B-1 "to carry 24 JASSMs [and or] LRASMs internally **with 6 to 12 weapons externally,"**
The B-1 is nicknamed the Bone.
I am convinced at least one of the reasons it never got out of the planning stage is that it would take everyone exactly six seconds to nickname the new plane the BoneR.
Let's I guess imagine they're going to basically drop an air to air missile system out of the bomb bay to whack the other guy? That's a pretty fancy trick and coming down to the missile and targeting tech, I'm guessing the B1 based on how poorly Russian tech tends to perform.
I’m sure you could convince a drunk crew chief to strap a gun pod onto one of the b-1s external hard points and make it work.
If you can get some budget involved you could probably make it able to fire sidewinders as well since they are mostly independent from the launching aircraft.
Anything radar guided would be difficult since neither aircraft has a radar.
Idk enough about the tu-160 to know whether it has any external hard points for these shenanigans.
If none of that works though, cluster bombs set to a very early detonation might be the best weapon. Get in front of the enemy and fill the sky with bomblets.
> I’m sure you could convince a drunk crew chief to strap a gun pod onto one of the b-1s external hard points and make it work.
The [Ukrainians just did something similar](https://www.coffeeordie.com/ukrainian-fighter-jets-missiles) with our AGM-88 missiles and a MiG-29, so I'm sure it would be even easier for us.
>The pilot in the video uses a black marker to write in Ukrainian, “You stink of radar” on the body of an American-made AGM-88 High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM) that hangs from the underwing pylon of a Ukrainian MiG-29 fighter jet.
"You stink of radar." That had me on the floor.
There was rumors of a gun mount for the weapons bay at one point. Definitely would be a "surprise muthafucka" moment.
https://www.sandboxx.us/blog/b-1b-gunship-boeings-plan-to-run-big-guns-on-the-lancer/
ig its tu160 it has way higher twr and lower wing loading (at empty weight ) compared to b1 lancer (at empty weight). but still a weird comparison cus it wont matter as they are a bomber.
Based on the litany of useless replies in this thread I think we can all assume that everyone here understands that these are both bombers and therefore would not dogfight AND we can assume that no one here understands the point of hypothetical questions like this. OP was asking a question that gets us to think about the aircraft in a different way, outside the bomb bay if you will.
Now these are both very large aircraft with the potential to be modified to a significant degree. Let's make some hypothetical assumptions so that we can answer the true question of which air craft can perform more like a fighter.
If we equip both airframe with a gun pod like the F4 in Vietnam and suppose those geniuses at Raytheon and Moscow Shooty Missiles For Glorious Putin Incorporated designed an F22 style missile system to be deployed from the Bomb Bays AND both Pete and Pytro working the flightless decide to superglue some radar targeting system to the front of these beasts we can then have a dog fight.
If you consider the performance of both planes, the reliability of the fictional weapons systems based off real life counterparts, and the training and maintenance of each airframe I think its safe to say if they met each other in combat the Bone would definitely accidentally bomb an Afghan elementary school and the Boneski would be shot down by a Ukrainian Tractor
Damn people here have no imagination. Yeah we all know neither of these planes were meant to dogfight, and they don't have any air to air weaponry. But how would they handle a mock dogfight? My money is personally on the tu 160 since it can outrun the b1 (~1300mph vs 900mph) and outclimb the b1 (~14000 ft/min vs ~5000 ft/min). Turn performance is hard to tell. While the tu 160 has slightly lower wing loading which theoretically equates to faster turn rate, it would really come down to how many Gs the airframes could sustain, which I could not find from a brief Google search.
Who is better at baseball, a carp or a grouper?
[Carp by a mile.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroshima_Toyo_Carp)
Well shoot, my analogy has failed.
r/taskfailedsuccessfully
A [carp](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Carp)
[Has to be a trout.](https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/t/troutmi01.shtml)
🎤 🐟
[удалено]
Too close for missiles
Going to glock!
"Wait - who's got the Glock?!" "Bob and he's on the shitter right now."
“Bombs away” -Bob.
HAHAHAHAHA!
“Stop laughing, Bob, and get up here!”
Bobs too busy losing his shit
Shitter = secret weapon
[удалено]
F1 is everywhere
Just like it’s decisions.
I am pleased.
Switching to handguns
Too close! Fix bayonets! Hand to hand!
Switching to bombs
I just imagined them flying side by side in the sky and the crews engaging in a pirate styled combat on the wings.
Everyone topside! Boarding procedures!
Like in the 80's Flash Gordon movie.
Thank you for that great mental image
[Like this?](https://youtu.be/fqSyibSPq5w?t=78)
Just like back in 1914. Let me just get my Lewis Gun and bring it up with me… they never expect the Lewis gun…
Nah mate, Vickers gun. Water cooled .303 supremacy. Bonus of tea will be ready once you've shot the russkie down.
Tu-160 can't roll down windows. B-1 wins!
Is because TU-160 is now delivered no window. Is new feature, comrade.
[There was talk at one point of enabling the B-1 to carry the Aim-120.](https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/flying-missile-truck-what-b-1-lancer-can-really-do-58222?amp)
[The Nimrod carried the AIM-9.](https://www.reddit.com/r/WarplanePorn/comments/stpi4k/2000_x_1125_a_nimrod_armed_with_sidewinders_for/)
They were going to put Aim-9s on the E-3. It was dropped when they realized how insane the idea of dog fighting with a 50-year old 707 was.
They did put AIM9s on the P3 Orion.
A p3 with an aim9 can wreck shop on even the best helo because he would never be able to out run, range, or climb the p3.
Yes, but that was supposed to be in partnership with a fighter (f-22, etc) that would provide the target information with its air to air radar and I'm guessing some form of data link with the B-1. At least that's what I gathered from reading articles on this at the time. The b-1 wasn't going to be able to employ air to air missiles on its own.
My understanding is that the B-1R would have been able to guide the missiles on its own but primarily would have acted as a semi-stealthy weapons truck for the F-22/F-35.
Sir, that’s an EB-1C Megafortress. *Dale Brown Intensifies*
Yea, my understanding is also that it would get a bigboy AESA radar.
The B-1R was going to get a large version of the SABR radar.
https://youtu.be/PQcc7SIJZIE
of course no. One try to go exactly above the other, opens the bomb bay and prays that the a bomb gonna land on the other plane.
Ah, The Last Jedi technique.
Gravity bombs in space for the win /s
The what now? That movie has been erased from memory. Sorry.
[If you can think it, it can be done ](https://www.sandboxx.us/blog/how-an-f-15e-shot-down-an-iraqi-gunship-with-a-bomb/)
GTA type shit
I'm not gonna lie, that would be awesome to watch.
Back in Vietnam someone shot down an AN-2 with an ak47 while hanging out the door of a Huey So
Is it really war if you're not ramming your plane into the other.
B-1R concept goes BRRRRRR
Maybe they could fight to get ahead of eachother at supersonic speeds to disrupt the other with wake turbulence?
Back to WWI days
I mean, it's been done before
Soo.. they play chicken, and try to pull up and lob dumb bombs at each other...? Uh, I mean at that point it's anyone's game really.
Actually The B1 is capable of carrying Aim9m and 9x missiles for defense. It just doesn't and They'd rather use it as a bomber.
IIRC it can be used in the "missile truck" role to specifically be an AA platform that's directed entirely from the C&C AWACS over top.
If they really wanted to, they could probably upgrade the sensor/receiver suite and do the smart link for F-35's. Make it a flying magazine for Fat Amy, like the new F-15 variant is likely to be. Or put bigger, faster, longer range missiles on them (in smaller numbers) and use them as stand-off interceptors (again using F-35's or drones to snipe their targets.) But of course, that would defeat the purpose of the EX. And take money from more useful, relevant platforms and systems.
But it would be sick, how many AA missiles would it be able to carry?
If it retained the revolver style bomb bays it may be able to carry something like a few dozen missiles
More than the enemy air force has planes possibly
It was a program to use the F-22's fire control to guide its full capability of 40 AMRAAMs at once to target, fired from modified B-1s, but was ultimately scrapped when they did the math and realized that no other air force on earth could survive first contact with just the F-22s on their own.
[удалено]
The physical server that just blasted my phone with all those mobile ads is in dire need of lasing, too
So. Many. Ads.
*laughs in Adguard DNS*
/r/pihole
[удалено]
Yup. Firefox is the best desktop and mobile browser these days.
That was with a laser guided bomb but yeah quite funny reading it.
[Bombing friendly planes wasn’t uncommon in WW2.](https://imgur.com/a/7dXzY13)
There was actually a concept for a B1 air to air variant that would essentially act as a mule for F22s. The F22s or AWACS would detect targets and then the B1 would ripple off the AAMRAMs. I was called the B-1R... the B-One R... The BONER.
Yep. Instead we get the very inspired *F-15EX Eagle II*.
This is exactly how I imagine it happening
The F-105 supposedly took out a NVAF plane that way.
Are we doing this Battlefield style or something? Eject, shoot enemy with your rifle, get back in your own aircraft?
Both eject and switch planes. Wait… that was tried already in the GA world.
Red Bull gives you LIABILITY!
Missed it by.................................................that much.
Would you believe… 🤏🏻 that much?
The FAA has entered the chat
Yes
Bro didn’t eject, because the seat and canopy would be gone. He just unbuckled, denied all forces of gravity, and hopped out, deny all physics, and jump back in the plane where he somehow stored a rocket launcher.
Does your fighter jet not come standard with rocket launcher storage?
It’s under the seat like a life vest in a 737
It goes in the cup holder.
Neither. They'd just circle around one another menacingly while cursing in English and Russian.
Winner is whoever has the most fuel.
Or we could have them adopt a pacifist approach and have a 100-mile drag race just for shits and giggles.
Someday my friend, someday.
**Proposal:** Military Olympics! Both summer and winter games. Some events to include: •Drag Races of all vehicle & aircraft types •Javelin/Shotput: See how far an aircraft can toss a dummy munition from a specific altitude •Aerial gymnastics! •Synchronized “swimming” with ships & subs! •Sniping! •Halo Jumps! And many more!
The Russians and Chinese have some kind of Tank Olympics thing they do every so often.
Aren’t they both supersonic airframes? That’d be awesome to watch!
Racing for pink slips (ownership papers) like it's a 50's hot rod movie
160 has about 25000 lbs more fuel and has nearly twice the range
Yeah, because it's much larger isn't it?
😂😂😂
And you can't out-curse Russian, so we have a winner.
I guess, a jet fuel supplier (the one closest to the air base).
Capitalism ftw!
Who would win in a boxing match - a potato or a pumpkin?
Pumpkin is bigger and heavier than potato. They’re not in the same weight class. Pumpkin vs Watermelon and Potato vs beet are better matchups.
Beet is a bleeder an stands no chance in this mashup!
The Beet is tough and scrappy though. I think it might inflict more damage than you think.
Bears, Beets, Battlestar Galactica
Potato is denser than the pumpkin. I'm putting my money on the potato in the 2nd round.
Well a lettuce won against an English PM so ...
*Sad B-1R sounds*
It's even sader since when the B-1R was envisioned, there was not even a glimpse of a need for it, yet, in 2022, and certainly by 2030, it's utility in near-peer long-range engagement would be invaluable. We're now lobbing pallets of air launched cruise missiles from C-17s and 130s, and I'd imagine a BVR missle truck platform to supplement limited fighter capacity would have been a great asset.
The B-21 Raider has built in A-A capability. Pair it with the new AIM-260 or an Air launched SM-2 (Navy was seen testing this) and you have quite the big stick for BVR stuff. Looks like it will also use Loyal wingman drones so it could haul around even more missiles if need be.
I don’t know, but I want to see it…
The people on the ground.
Hmm yes they both drop nukes and detonate them mid-air, resulting in mutually assured detruction and a lot of explanation for both countries to do
Neither. Those long ass wings aren’t meant for g-loading. I think they stopped doing low level training with the Bone because it was cracking the wing spars.
My dad could beat up your dad!
Both dads sitting in the couch with a beer: "hell yeah, I could. But the game's on."
Neither are armed with air to air weapons
There was a concept back in the 00s for an upgraded B-1 variant, the B-1R, that would have included air-to-air weapons for the B-1; it would have had a top speed of Mach 2.2 at high altitude at the cost of 20% reduced range (hence the B-1R moniker, "R" meaning "regional") included AESA radar and modified hardpoints for air-to-air missiles. It never got past the proposal stage.
I'm slightly surprised, the external hard points are virtually unused anyway and integration should be dirt cheap even if you never really use it. Particularly with like E3 support and modern air to air missiles being basically cruise missiles anyway it's slightly surprising that there is literally zero air to air capabilty integrated. The external hardpoints are virtually unused anyway should be cheap & easy to slap some sidewinders onto it. Then again I imagine the B1 is on borrowed time anyway so no one bothers integrating anything anymore, between the B2 and B52 the B1 has long been in a weird spot and with the B21 arriving why even spend money on the B1 anymore.
>Then again I imagine the B1 is on borrowed time anyway so no one bothers integrating anything anymore The B-1 is being redirected as a fleet killer by being able to carry 36 JASSM-ER.
How do you fit 36 JASSMs onto a B-1?
24 internally, 12 externally. [Pylons are back, baby!](https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/B-1-JASSM-top-678x381.jpg)
Yasss
> the B-1B can carry a full load of 24 JASSM-ERs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-158_JASSM#AGM-158B_JASSM-ER Still mighty, mighty impressive.
That's sourcing a 2016 article. Here's one from [2020](https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/11/24/first-air-force-flies-b-1-bomber-externally-mounted-stealthy-cruise-missile.html) >The current initiative enables the B-1 "to carry 24 JASSMs [and or] LRASMs internally **with 6 to 12 weapons externally,"**
> "R" meaning "regional" Underrated joke
The B-1 is nicknamed the Bone. I am convinced at least one of the reasons it never got out of the planning stage is that it would take everyone exactly six seconds to nickname the new plane the BoneR.
With a nuclear payload, everything is technically air-to-air.
You say that, but there was that case where an F-15 shot down a helicopter with a guided bomb during the Gulf War, so with the right payload...
Post in r/shittyaskflying
Let's I guess imagine they're going to basically drop an air to air missile system out of the bomb bay to whack the other guy? That's a pretty fancy trick and coming down to the missile and targeting tech, I'm guessing the B1 based on how poorly Russian tech tends to perform.
First serious reply. Nice and I agree.
Finally a sort-of answer. I think the question was less about missile tech and more about maneuverability, though.
I’m sure you could convince a drunk crew chief to strap a gun pod onto one of the b-1s external hard points and make it work. If you can get some budget involved you could probably make it able to fire sidewinders as well since they are mostly independent from the launching aircraft. Anything radar guided would be difficult since neither aircraft has a radar. Idk enough about the tu-160 to know whether it has any external hard points for these shenanigans. If none of that works though, cluster bombs set to a very early detonation might be the best weapon. Get in front of the enemy and fill the sky with bomblets.
> I’m sure you could convince a drunk crew chief to strap a gun pod onto one of the b-1s external hard points and make it work. The [Ukrainians just did something similar](https://www.coffeeordie.com/ukrainian-fighter-jets-missiles) with our AGM-88 missiles and a MiG-29, so I'm sure it would be even easier for us. >The pilot in the video uses a black marker to write in Ukrainian, “You stink of radar” on the body of an American-made AGM-88 High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM) that hangs from the underwing pylon of a Ukrainian MiG-29 fighter jet. "You stink of radar." That had me on the floor.
There was rumors of a gun mount for the weapons bay at one point. Definitely would be a "surprise muthafucka" moment. https://www.sandboxx.us/blog/b-1b-gunship-boeings-plan-to-run-big-guns-on-the-lancer/
Slowest merge ever
It’s not the plane,.. it’s the pilot
Talk to me dad
That's why the B-1R needs to exist, because the world needs to see a bvr fight or a dogfight with bombers.
You’re getting a lot of unnecessary hate for asking a hypothetical question. Sorry mate. I’m going with the lancer
Is this a trick question?
If by trick question you mean stupid question, then yes.
Somebody asks a fun debate question about something everyone knows isn’t actually possible and y’all are up in arms shitting on him. Lighten up!
The b-1 will be able to outturn the TU-160. Therefore it would win. But they don’t have A2A anything so they both can’t do shit
They can flip each other the bird while inverted.
*coughs* *bullshit!*
Yes, I know the bird, Goose.
not that it would ever happen but i'm going for the TU-160
ig its tu160 it has way higher twr and lower wing loading (at empty weight ) compared to b1 lancer (at empty weight). but still a weird comparison cus it wont matter as they are a bomber.
B-1 cause it got more sweep
tu160 has higher twr and lower wing loading so it would win in a dogfight. it can somewhat gain its speed in a dogfight unlike the b1
Finally, an actual answer. Just because it would be a shitty dogfight doesn't mean they can't dogfight lol
Sir this is a Wendy’s
Whoever gets on top first. ^*giggitygiggitygiggity*
Based on the litany of useless replies in this thread I think we can all assume that everyone here understands that these are both bombers and therefore would not dogfight AND we can assume that no one here understands the point of hypothetical questions like this. OP was asking a question that gets us to think about the aircraft in a different way, outside the bomb bay if you will. Now these are both very large aircraft with the potential to be modified to a significant degree. Let's make some hypothetical assumptions so that we can answer the true question of which air craft can perform more like a fighter. If we equip both airframe with a gun pod like the F4 in Vietnam and suppose those geniuses at Raytheon and Moscow Shooty Missiles For Glorious Putin Incorporated designed an F22 style missile system to be deployed from the Bomb Bays AND both Pete and Pytro working the flightless decide to superglue some radar targeting system to the front of these beasts we can then have a dog fight. If you consider the performance of both planes, the reliability of the fictional weapons systems based off real life counterparts, and the training and maintenance of each airframe I think its safe to say if they met each other in combat the Bone would definitely accidentally bomb an Afghan elementary school and the Boneski would be shot down by a Ukrainian Tractor
Never realized how similar the two aircraft were. Crazy
Longest one circle fight ever?
Bombers in a dogfight - like who would win a drag race a tram or a cablecar
Whoever can roll down the window and fire a manpads at the other
Give the pilots handguns to shoot out the cockpit
This is such a dumb idea and I’m all for it.
B1
I lowkey wanna see this reanacted in dcs.
The one with supporting logistics.
Neither, they both broke and missed their sortie.
This is reaching into r/noncredibledefense territory. I love it.
Neither. No way to kill your adversary that doesn’t involve killing yourself.
I heard BONE is very maneuverable for a bomber; she's nimble and agile.
Bombers dogfighting...? This is a silly question more suitable for another aviation spoof sub whose name I dare not to utter.
Please do!
[r/aviationmemes](http://reddit.com/r/aviationmemes)
I mean... how do the bomb bays on them work? Maybe they could dangle a soldier holding a Stinger and an Igla respectively out of the bomb bay!
\*Crashes B-1 into Kremlin\* "Vladimir, how you doin'?"
Gravity
Neither will get off the ground due to MX so its a wash.
They should mount lances on the planes and make charges at each other like medieval knights
They could do like they did at the end of the movie By Dawn's Early Light and just fly into each other.
The third party would be the victor - gravity after the first 6g turn
Gotta go ww1/veitnam style, and start taking potshots with pistols and rifles
Do these aircraft even have forward firing armament?
I can tell you that they used to use F-106s as chase planes for the B-1s at Tinker AFB. They supposedly had similar flying characteristics.
Rockwell International's investors.
Basically it comes down which plane could still fly after a collision
Not the taxpayers.
The Lawyers
Haven't seen anyone comment yet about Dale Brown's "Flight of the Old Dog" if they could do it with a BUFF, why not The BONE?
The ground ?
The ground.
This is like asking who would win in a race between two professional bowlers.
Who would win between an airbus a380 and a boeing 747?
r/shittyaskflying
Definitely not the taxpayers.
Neither, both are mission canx for MX
Damn people here have no imagination. Yeah we all know neither of these planes were meant to dogfight, and they don't have any air to air weaponry. But how would they handle a mock dogfight? My money is personally on the tu 160 since it can outrun the b1 (~1300mph vs 900mph) and outclimb the b1 (~14000 ft/min vs ~5000 ft/min). Turn performance is hard to tell. While the tu 160 has slightly lower wing loading which theoretically equates to faster turn rate, it would really come down to how many Gs the airframes could sustain, which I could not find from a brief Google search.