# Dumb question, but could stealth bombers be used in a makeshift anti-aircraft role? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 18, 2023, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dumb-question-but-could-stealth-bombers-be-used-in-a-makeshift-anti-aircraft-role/988769 "2023-08-18T21:12:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2023, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dumb-question-but-could-stealth-bombers-be-used-in-a-makeshift-anti-aircraft-role/988769/1 "2023-08-18T21:12:26Z")
Say you take a B-2 or B-21, modify it to carry 40 AMRAAMs, give it the appropriate radar and avionics - seems like it would be well-suited for doing a “drive-by shooting” any time there is a cluster of enemy warplanes in one area. The stealth bomber couldn’t dogfight, of course, but it wouldn’t have to - just fire on the enemy from 30-70 miles away and slink away. If any enemy fighters managed to get within visual range (or close-enough radar range) then the bomber would be screwed but in most cases it would be able to make a getaway. The key is that the missiles would have to be the fire-and-forget variety, but most today are. On top of that, such a stealth bomber would have far greater range than any fighter like an F-22 or F-35, so it would have tremendous loitering endurance at a given location (if it were flying something like a patrol) and would have less need for tanker assistance. I know, at $1 billion per jet, the stealth bombers are too expensive to use this way, but was just wondering about the technical feasibility. ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2023, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dumb-question-but-could-stealth-bombers-be-used-in-a-makeshift-anti-aircraft-role/988769/2 "2023-08-18T21:43:27Z")
It would still require a non-stealthy aircraft (like an AWACS or a Boeing E-7 Wedgetail) to search for targets for those missiles. Such an aircraft can hypothetically hang back well behind the FEBA (Forward Edge of the Battle Area, i.e. friendly airspace) but it would still be a high priority target. Fighters, including stealthy ones, have their own target search radars. I don’t know how fast the “bay open, bay closed” sequence takes on a B-2, but any stealth aircraft with an open panel or bay door is no longer stealthy for as long as it’s unbuttoned. But that’s also a risk in the B-2’s primary business (deploying bombs or cruise missiles), so I imagine the stealth break is short enough to be an acceptable risk. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2023, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dumb-question-but-could-stealth-bombers-be-used-in-a-makeshift-anti-aircraft-role/988769/3 "2023-08-19T04:08:08Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > any time there is a cluster of enemy warplanes in one area. Does this still happen? I understood that the modern war doctrine for aircraft was to send them out as individual self-contained attackers. When using several warplanes, send them out at different times and using different routes, but timed to get them to arrive at the target at the same time from different directions and altitudes, hoping to distract and overwhelm the defenders. The WWII tactic was sending whole wings of bombers at once, covered by a fighter escort force, hoping some will make it through to bomb the target. I didn’t think that is a common tactic any more. So this proposal might work, if you were fighting the last war over again. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2023, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dumb-question-but-could-stealth-bombers-be-used-in-a-makeshift-anti-aircraft-role/988769/4 "2023-08-19T18:47:42Z")
> [@Velocity](#): > > give it the appropriate radar There’s the flaw in your plan. Even if the bomber itself is stealthy, having a radar operating makes it hugely visible. It’s like having a flat black ship that’s low to the water, at night, and then mounting a huge searchlight on it. You may not be able to see the ship (or aircraft) itself, but you can sure see the searchlight (or radar). I wonder if there would be much utility to the idea of putting a booster on AMRAAM missiles to extend the range to something like 100 miles and then loading up a B-52 or something with a bunch of them, and using the AWACS to transmit the initial guidance (which they can already do, FWIW), and then firing a salvo to take out a “cluster”. The terminal guidance would be handled by the existing active radar homing of the AMRAAM. That way, you wouldn’t even have to get close- you could just hit them well out of their effective range, and the B-52 has longer range, higher loiter capacity, and higher payload than the B-2, as well as not costing a billion dollars each. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2023, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dumb-question-but-could-stealth-bombers-be-used-in-a-makeshift-anti-aircraft-role/988769/5 "2023-08-19T19:09:59Z")
> [@bump](#): > > I wonder if there would be much utility to the idea of putting a booster on AMRAAM missiles to extend the range to something like 100 miles Raytheon beat you to it, sans the booster. > **[Raytheon Fires First AIM-120D3 Missile, Seeking Big Range Boost | Aviation...](https://aviationweek.com/shownews/farnborough-airshow/raytheon-fires-first-aim-120d3-missile-seeking-big-range-boost)** > > The firing sets up a campaign to extend the range of the air dominance missile “significantly.” [AIM-120 AMRAAM - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-120_AMRAAM#Variants_and_upgrades) > The **AIM-120D** is an upgraded version of the AMRAAM with improvements in almost all areas, including 50% greater range (than the already-extended range AIM-120C-7) and better guidance over its entire flight envelope yielding an improved kill probability ([Pk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_of_kill)). Initial production began in 2006 under the Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase of program testing and ceased in September of 2009.[[37]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-120_AMRAAM#cite_note-38) Raytheon began testing the D model on August 5, 2008, the company reported that an AIM-120D launched from an F/A-18F Super Hornet passed within lethal distance of a QF-4 target drone at the [White Sands Missile Range](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Sands_Missile_Range).[[38]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-120_AMRAAM#cite_note-39) The range of the AIM-120D is classified, but is thought to extend to about 100 miles (160 km). ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2023, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dumb-question-but-could-stealth-bombers-be-used-in-a-makeshift-anti-aircraft-role/988769/6 "2023-08-19T21:14:12Z")
IIRC, though, that is only true of old-fashioned radars, and the more-modern AESA radars are very difficult to detect. ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2023, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dumb-question-but-could-stealth-bombers-be-used-in-a-makeshift-anti-aircraft-role/988769/7 "2023-08-20T00:53:47Z")
The specific radar voodoo you’re looking for is “LPI” - low probability of intercept. > **[Low-probability-of-intercept radar](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-probability-of-intercept_radar)** > > A low-probability-of-intercept radar (LPIR) is a radar employing measures to avoid detection by passive radar detection equipment (such as a radar warning receiver (RWR), or electronic support receiver) while it is searching for a target or engaged in target tracking. This characteristic is desirable in a radar because it allows finding and tracking an opponent without alerting them to the radar's presence. This also protects the radar installation from anti-radiation missiles (ARMs). > LPI measur... This allows a stealthy aircraft to operante an active target search radar and still not completely defeat its stealth. At least until opposition defensive electronic warfare capabilities catch up again. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2023, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dumb-question-but-could-stealth-bombers-be-used-in-a-makeshift-anti-aircraft-role/988769/8 "2023-08-20T01:26:09Z")
Sure, but a B2 doesn’t have a LPI radar. It would probably have to be pretty extensively modified to work in the OP’s way, and to what end? You could do what I’m describing, and not have to do anything nearly so invasive or expensive. AWACS have a low flying aircraft detection and tracking range of _250 miles_, which is more than twice the range of the extended range AMRAAM that @Dissonance mentions or the old Phoenix missile. ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2023, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dumb-question-but-could-stealth-bombers-be-used-in-a-makeshift-anti-aircraft-role/988769/9 "2023-08-20T18:47:39Z")
> [@bump](#): > > B2 doesn’t have a LPI radar Actually, it does. The Raytheon AN/APQ-181. > **[AN/APQ-181](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/APQ-181)** > > The AN/APQ-181 is an all-weather, low probability of intercept (LPI) phased array radar system designed by Hughes Aircraft (now Raytheon) for the U.S. Air Force B-2A Spirit bomber aircraft. The system was developed in the mid-1980s and entered service in 1993. The APQ-181 provides a number of precision targeting modes, and also supports terrain-following radar and terrain avoidance. The radar operates in the Ku band (a subset of the J band). The original design uses a TWT-based transmitter with ... But it doesn’t have integration to target search and designation for air-to-air missiles. (The radar is used for navigation, terrain-following, and bombsighting.) With substantial software changes and an extensive checkout and operational test phase, it possibly could. But none of that would be “quick and cheap”. Just the hardware for carrying and deploying A2A missiles would be extensive and expensive. ---
**Author:** ![Asuka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@Asuka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Asuka)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2023, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dumb-question-but-could-stealth-bombers-be-used-in-a-makeshift-anti-aircraft-role/988769/10 "2023-08-20T18:54:58Z")
I remember reading SOMETHING a few years ago about a plan to make C-130s into low cost fighter jets by dropping stacks of long range radar guided missiles out of the back. I believe the idea was something like “Enemy aircraft won’t expect a transport aircraft to start launching missiles at them”. Of course it didn’t go anywhere, entirely theoretical design. ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2023, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dumb-question-but-could-stealth-bombers-be-used-in-a-makeshift-anti-aircraft-role/988769/11 "2023-08-21T17:30:44Z")
Similar in spirit, though not air-to-air: > **[Rapid Dragon (missile system)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_Dragon_(missile_system))** > > Rapid Dragon is a palletized and disposable weapons module which is airdropped in order to deploy flying munitions, typically cruise missiles, from unmodified cargo planes. Developed by the United States Air Force and Lockheed, the airdrop-rigged pallets, called "deployment boxes," provide a low cost method allowing unmodified cargo planes, such as C-130 or C-17 aircraft, to be temporarily repurposed as standoff bombers capable of mass launching any variant of long or short range AGM-158 JASSM cr... Cruise missiles need less hand-holding before being launch than air-to-air missiles, so that might be a difference.