Operation Linebackers II with B-2 Stealth bombers

In the scenario,
In 1971, R. Nixon announced that, B-2 stealth bombers were introduced in US air force. Some of the newly produced B-2 were positioned in Guam.

On 30 March 1972, North Vietnamese started a full-scale invasion across 17th parallel (DMZ). As in the original history, B-52 bombers and other fighters were deployed to halt North Vietnamese army north of Hue, west of Kontum and also prevented them from taking An Loc. However, Le Duan refused to stop the war, despite being pushed back to Quang Tri in September 1972. Additionally, it was found that B-52 bombers were easy to be shot down by North Vietnamese SAMs, causing dozens of US causalities and POWs.

In order to maximize the efficiency of bomber to force DRV to agree on peace agreement, also replying to anti-war criticisms because of the causalities caused by B-52 shot down, Nixon finally deploys B-2 bombers to bomb Hanoi, Haiphong and elsewhere in North Vietnam as operation Linebackers II. Because B-2 could not be spot by SAMs, once B-2 were used, the number of bombers shot down by North Vietnamese dwindles. Instead, North Vietnam's civil and military infrastructure were totally destroyed, "back to stone age", and North Communist's "Imperial Palace" was so destroyed, killing some major party cadres.

Nixon has shown that cost of bombing with B-2 is indeed successful. North Vietnamese stationed in the South were out-of ammunition because HCM trails were bombed by B-2 too, while SAMs lost their functions. Nixon once thought that North Vietnam would be nuked to "stone age" to surrender. However, it seemed that B-2 could replace nukes to force Northerners to do so.

What would go on next? Would Le Duan be replaced by other moderates because North was indeed destroyed? Would PAVN leave South Vietnam, begging for US to make peace? Would ARVN retake Dong Ha, up to DMZ if Nixon also use B-2 to bomb Dong Ha area to rumps?
 
Leaving aside the rest of your post, which I am not qualified to comment on, the B-2 didn't even fly until 1989. Even the B-1 wasn't available until 1973.
 
Even if they are available would they be used ?

Is it worth risking them during the cold war rather than keeping them safe and secret to hit Russia ? Is the reduced loses worth risking such a strategic asset and potentially letting one fall to a NVA fighter ?
 

B-29_Bomber

Banned
Leaving aside the rest of your post, which I am not qualified to comment on, the B-2 didn't even fly until 1989. Even the B-1 wasn't available until 1973.

I knew there was something weird about the OP...


Thanks! Glory to Math!:rolleyes:
 

Delta Force

Banned
Leaving aside the rest of your post, which I am not qualified to comment on, the B-2 didn't even fly until 1989. Even the B-1 wasn't available until 1973.

I was going to say that, but it seemed more like this was posted in the wrong forum. :p
 
Just to kick the can again... if the B70 had been put into production how would it have done over Hanoi, or were the B58 extended in service a few years. Any other alternates to examine?
 

Ian_W

Banned
Just to kick the can again... if the B70 had been put into production how would it have done over Hanoi, or were the B58 extended in service a few years. Any other alternates to examine?

"What if the US Air Force and Navy had realised the capability of the North Vietnamese to project power into South Vietnam relied on their ability to import weapons, food and the other necessary things of war from Russia and China, which could have been effectively been done by truck over the Chinese border even if Haiphong had been blocked, and had realised that this strategic bombing campaign was as wasteful and ineffective as all the others ?"
 

Delta Force

Banned
Just to kick the can again... if the B70 had been put into production how would it have done over Hanoi, or were the B58 extended in service a few years. Any other alternates to examine?

What about precision strikes with Thunderstick equipped F-105 strike fighters or the F-111 with simplified avionics?

An F-106 strike fighter could be a more alternate history option, with the interceptor equipment being replaced by strike equipment.

Even more alternate history options would include precision strike variants of the A-5, F-108, or SR-71/A-12/F-12.
 

Pangur

Donor
Just to kick the can again... if the B70 had been put into production how would it have done over Hanoi, or were the B58 extended in service a few years. Any other alternates to examine?

Both would have made excellent targets for SA2`s There survival chances were as good (at best) as the B-52`s. Why waste what would be your prime strategic bomber like that?
 

Delta Force

Banned
Essentially there are four options.

1. Go in low and slow with strike fighters (F-105, F-106 strike fighter variant, etc.) and try to hit specific targets.

2. Go in at SAM height with mass strategic bomber raids (B-52) and hope to overwhelm with numbers and ECM.

3. Go in fast and high with reconnaissance strike aircraft and try to hit with with advanced munitions (F-108 or SR-71/A-12/F-12).

4. Go in fast and high with supersonic strategic bombers and hope to be in and out before anyone notices (B-70).

The question is if 3 or 4 could actually hit anything flying so fast and high.
 

Ian_W

Banned
Essentially there are four options.

1. Go in low and slow with strike fighters (F-105, F-106 strike fighter variant, etc.) and try to hit specific targets.

2. Go in at SAM height with mass strategic bomber raids (B-52) and hope to overwhelm with numbers and ECM.

3. Go in fast and high with reconnaissance strike aircraft and try to hit with with advanced munitions (F-108 or SR-71/A-12/F-12).

4. Go in fast and high with supersonic strategic bombers and hope to be in and out before anyone notices (B-70).

The question is if 3 or 4 could actually hit anything flying so fast and high.

5. Dont do strategic bombing at all.
 

Delta Force

Banned
The F-105 Thunderstick II modification achieved a CEP of 15 meters, comparable to JDAM. Unlike laser guided bombs, it is a blind attack capability.

Experience in Vietnam demonstrated the need for a better visual and blind bombing capability. In March 1968, the Air Force ordered development of an upgraded bombing/navigation system, incorporating a Singer-General Precision inertial navigation system, improvements to the AN/APN-131 navigation radar, and solid-state circuitry for the R-14A radar, which was redesignated R-14K. Furthermore, the digital AN/ARN-92 long-range navigation receiver replaced the problematic AN/ARN-85 receiver. The additional avionics were housed in a long, raised dorsal spine. The modified bombing/navigation system was known as Thunderstick II. F-105s with this system could achieve a bombing circular error of probability (CEP) of 50 feet (15 m) from an altitude of 15,000 ft (4,600 m). Although the first Thunderstick II aircraft flew in 1969, they were not used in Vietnam. A total of 30 F-105Ds received this modification.[47]
 

Ian_W

Banned
There isn't the need to go Curtis LeMay on the DRV to hit the targets. Tactical Air Command had precision strike capabilities at least as early as 1968.

Strategic bombing is about what the targets are, not how you hit them.

An Arc Light in defense of some attacked unit isnt strategic, even if it does use B-52s.
 
Top