There are currently a number of American B-52 Bombers airborne and crossing the Atlantic heading for the United Kingdom.

It is understood that this is part of a ‘Bomber Task Force’ mission to Europe.

It should be noted that ‘Bomber Task Force’ missions regularly visit the UK, with the most recent being a B-2 stealth bomber. You can read more about the previous deployment by clicking here.

The US Air Force explains the purpose of Bomber Task Force missions as follows “by training in Europe, aircrew and Airmen are familiarizing themselves with the European theater and airspace, to enhance enduring skills and relationships with allies and partners”.

On their website, the U.S. Air Force describe the bomber as follows:

“The B-52H Stratofortress is a long-range, heavy bomber that can perform a variety of missions. The bomber is capable of flying at high subsonic speeds at altitudes of up to 50,000 feet (15,166.6 meters). It can carry nuclear or precision guided conventional ordnance with worldwide precision navigation capability. In a conventional conflict, the B-52 can perform strategic attack, close-air support, air interdiction, offensive counter-air and maritime operations.

B-52s are equipped with advanced targeting pods. Targeting pods provide improved long-range target detection, identification and continuous stabilized surveillance for all missions, including close air support of ground forces. The advanced targeting and image processing technology significantly increases the combat effectiveness of the B-52 during day, night and less than ideal weather conditions when attacking ground targets with a variety of standoff weapons (e.g., laser-guided bombs, conventional bombs and GPS-guided weapons). The use of aerial refuelling gives the B-52 a range limited only by aircrew endurance. It has an unrefueled combat range in excess of 8,800 miles (14,080 kilometres).”

For more than 60 years, B-52s have been the backbone of the strategic bomber force for the United States.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

65 COMMENTS

  1. The longer the Ukraine crisis continues, the greater the chance of a miscalculation. With the Russians begining a highly escalatory “exercise” in southern Belarus and now the USAF deploying nuclear capable B-52 bombers, this could turn nasty very quickly.

    • I don’t honestly believe Putin has any intention of invading Ukraine, he’s trying to make a point – badly! The dictator in Belarus is only backing him to save his skin. A new cold War could begin,but that doesn’t benefit Russia either. The US deploys bombers to Fairford ( which is the USAF’s European Heavy Bomber Base) on a fairly regular basis, so no real change with this deployment.

      • I think he will, i think he has backed himself into a corner and the loss of face for him not to do something would be too much. I think it will be a smaller scale assault in the East though, and not a full on invasion of the whole of the country. Just my thoughts.

        • If he seriously intended to invade he would have launched an attack with as much surprise as possible. Not sit back and wait for NATO to arm Ukraine with weapons that will kill a great deal of Russian serviceman.

          • He doesn’t want to rain on Xu’s Olympic parade, so it’s more likely once that’s over.

        • I am hoping it’s all a ploy too. Pull back the troops and claim it was all NATO “warmongering” He would save face, even gain support at home for demonstrating how weak and disunited NATO is.

          • Not sure how he would play a withdrawal to that effect when overall the message is pretty much displaying the opposite UNLESS he gets some very played concessions from NATO. I suspect that is actually the opportunity he wants to exploit, but things don’t always go to plan.

          • He would claim that there were no invasion plans and he was simply holding exercises as he has said all along (despite not complying with the rules about such manoeuvres).

            He can sell NATO’s response as evidence of their ill intent and justification for more arms increases.

          • This is huge, I can’t believe this comment, it’s not about NATO, It’s about domination, how would you feel if another country or dictator decided to take over our country and impose their laws and ways. I think your blind sided and if you want to live in Russia, then your more than welcome. I’m open to comments from anyone,
            Ukraine is its own sovereign state and should still be, and not bullied by the bear,
            Nobody wants war but… Inevitably Russia and China could stir the hornets nest.
            If missiles start flying, it won’t be like Iraq,
            It will be deadly. Open your eyes and remember why NATO was set up as a global peacekeeping force in very hard times.

        • Yes fully agree, a small military campaign for a limited period, then retreat gracefully. Just hope NATO gets a tad over ambitious and aggregate the issue.
          Cheers
          George

          • Hi George.

            Yes, possibly so, so as not to lose face. Both sides will want to be seen to come out of this with something. Cornering a dangerous rat is not a good idea as it will go for you. I hope there are back channels at work beyond the usual bull**** politicians.

            NATO has to respond, but going all ye ha making military threats like the ye ha war boys would love won’t help, only aggravate things further. Defend NATO countries, support Ukraine with weapons and training. Stop there. Reinforcing NATO’s eastern nations even with these minimal forces is the right thing to do in my view. If Putin starts massing against a NATO nation, then sure, gloves are off. Face down.

            That is a big if.

          • Hopefully this is also an opportunity to further increase the min limit of defense spending for NATO countries from 2%.

          • Evening mate. Yes, hopefully.
            Our own 2% has been dubious before with the fiddling.
            Needs increasing. Cannot see it though!

          • Evening (morning for me) :). My huge amount of research (limited to 2 mins on wiki) shows the UK at 2.7% GDP. Padded out I’m sure

      • Its hard to know, either one of three things is happening:

        he intends to invade and just waiting for a good excuse
        his using it to get stuff out of NATO/EU and the ongoing negotiation would appear to indicate that he might succeeding.
        he has problems at home and is using this as a power play to keep control
        If its 2, realistically we will never know what NATO / EU agreed to.

    • The recent Warship documentaries on TV brought home just how engaged contact with Russian warships and subs can be. I fear close contact will be stepped up in the future at sea, in the air, and on land, and each time snap judgments by key personnel could lead to miscalculations? The likelihood of inadvertent military exchange is ‘when and not if.’ Putin is determined to increase deliberate incursion as part of his long-term plan to remain at the forefront of Russian politics.

      • Let’s not forget B52 was first aircraft cleared to fire LRASM. The two Typhoons that buzzed the Udaloy destroyer had nothing to throw at it. Nor do our P8s. HMS Northumberland lacked its Harpoon load out. Maybe we could have rustled up an Astute if need be, but with only 6 SSNs, availability is unlikely to be more than 3 at any time. I say I welcome these deployments. I say we need a credible ASuW capability

        • The current UK defense shortfalls might become glaringly obvious to the general populous if Russia kicks off in Ukraine. If so, then the usual social behavior as seen with COVID will begin again, long queues at supermarkets and fuel stations. The only difference will be a ‘background concern’ that a terrible conflict could spread and a realisation the UK is vulnerable once again?

      • Agreed he knows Russia has been getting sidelined in big power politics and wants to wave his balls about to show they are relevant while trying to humiliate and weaken the West esp in terms of unity. He also wants to hold back democratisation that his own people might see as positive. He will increase pressure and hope an excuse happens for taking some action he can play up as defending the motherland as he increasingly takes control of the message internally. Dangerous game mind and could go either way and even weaken his position if NATO and the west stay firm and realise ignoring this long game threat is no longer an option.
        On a side note regarding the Warship programme it is somewhat depressing to see a British frigate 18 odd miles off of the Scottish coast so close to Faslane being warned off by a heavily armed Russian destroyer when fitted for, but in above shots clearly not armed with anti ship missiles. I wonder what even the two Typhoons could have done had it ever come to a shooting match. Hopefully that is a warning and and urgent one to the powers that be too. And this was a year ago. Ridiculous that only submarines that it was clearly there to trace the very movements of are really capable of dealing with a threat off of our coast and so our surface ships daren’t provoke.

        • Putin’s posturing is based on the long-term erosion of Russia’s power base as the World’s eyes are redirected East. Closer cooperation with China is his only option? We saw recently his eagerness to be seen meeting with China’s leader as if to get some much-needed public exposure. Putin is very much seen at home as a strong leader but sadly, for him, the country is inextricably moving ahead of his horizon, and in time, he’ll have recognise that fact or go.

    • Why should a Typhoon from the OCU be armed at all? That photo looks like a 2 seater? Thought they’d been dropped ages ago?

        • Who knows mate. I got the impression that Chris thought an OCU aircraft should be armed at all times by highlighting the single ASRAAM.

          I also thought if they are doing air to air shoots that takes place to the west over the Irish Sea under the auspices of Aberporth rather than first doing overshoots elsewhere.

          Whatever, I didn’t see it as notable that it had only 1 missile.

        • excellent so there are still 2 seaters for training? good info as thought all scrapped. would it have been usefull to have more for strikes against stand off and terror targets? or does modern tech negate the old idea of having a back seater??

    • They always carry an ASRAAM acquisition round. It’s a real seeker head to track targets and give the same functionality as a real missile for training purposes. It isn’t fitted with a warhead or rocket motor.

    • That’s why the US is introducing its extended range Anti Radiation missiles which even the Russian media call the S400 killer.

      • Cool, I wasn’t aware. There is something very laudable about the way the US military retains its assets and continually improves them. Far better then what we do: create something world class (Samson radar, Merlin helicopters) and then not invest at all leading to a likely replacement with US kit or get rid of expensive assets we have already paid for with plenty of life left in then to save a tiny amount of operational costs (tranche 1 typhoons, T22 frigates)

  7. Hi folks hope all is well.
    Slightly off this topic.
    Did I hear correctly last night that the UK is to have 1000 troops on standby to deploy? I was wondering, if this is so, then how long would that take and the type of logistics involved. Not huge, however may be quite impressive.
    Cheers
    George

    • HI George Defence minister Mr Wallis made a comment on Breakfast TV that those deployed were Humanitarian trained, ?whatever that’s means if that’s the case would they be mostly made up of Medics and supporting staff ( security) of so the logistics would be for the movement of a field hospital ?

    • I heard that too George. Don’t know if these are same as what was previously announced and HMG are repeating old news ( they’re good at that spin ) or if this is additional.

      1,000 isn’t much really.

  9. It’s a regular deployment and the Russians would have been notified. It will be interesting what form the excersises over Europe take. Watch this space!!!!

  10. Would be nice if Europe could handle this crisis on their own. Britain seems to be the only country there doing anything besides sitting on their butts. If they think Sleepy Joe will do anything to stop Putin they are in for a big shock. He advised then POTUS Obama to not lift a finger the last time Putin invaded Ukraine.

  11. Having a fight against Afghanistan is one thing,but Russia is complete different game we better be smart and understand their game to win I don’t think this administration has it.

  12. I think he’s keeping the West’s attention diverted as China deals with Taiwan. So, it may become a choice of losing Ukraine or Taiwan for the West, for he visited China just before the military buildup re Ukraine

  13. If Russia decides to invade the Ukraine it will be with air strikes first. Knocking out all airports railway and major road arteries crippling the infrastructure of the country. Plus attacking military targets with radar and ground to air missile insulation’s. That’s my thinking anyway.

  14. Enough of the rhetoric. Since December 2021 we have been fed with doomsday talks about imminent Russian invasion. We are almost in middle of February 2022. Let this roulette play begin.

  15. what a karma
    to any country usa have helped it turned to be enemies now

    russia would make big mistake if desired to invade 🇺🇦. afyer ww2 only lithuania and ukraine were fighting against soviets till middle 60s

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here