• Dolores [love/loves]
    ·
    2 years ago

    wish a b-52 would strafe the locations this is going on :sicko-wistful:

    • Findom_DeLuise [she/her, they/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      A B-1 would do it faster and carry more ordnance, tbh

      It would just break down immediately afterwards and need a ton of maintenance done on it because they took it outside the environment

      • Dolores [love/loves]
        ·
        2 years ago

        :cat-confused: i was under the impression they still used b52s, why would it break?

        • Findom_DeLuise [she/her, they/them]
          ·
          2 years ago

          They still do, and are slated to for a really long freaking time yet. The B-52 is more of a cruise missile/standoff weapon launching platform than anything since it's a slow, high-altitude bomber. It's also able to carry nukes.

          The B-1 is more of a "general purpose" conventional bomber that was designed to evade surface radar stations by hugging the terrain. It's kinda sorta nuclear-capable, but had enough issues that the EMP from its own gravity nukes would turn it into a $250 million lawn dart (due to insufficient shielding, largely by design since it was supposed to be lightweight and fast). The START treaty with the USSR (and later Russian Federation) mandated that the external hard points be removed from the B-1, as well as disallowing the use of nukes. Kind of a moot point, since a B-1 carrying nukes is a one-way flight anyway, and the hard points contributed to structural problems (because a jet that big goes through a lot of stress when it hits supersonic speeds).

          The B-1 is unreliable as shit because Rockwell Collins designed the airframe mostly on Friday afternoons when the break room was out of coffee, and at great expense. It's the predecessor to the F-35 grift, except the B-1 actually flies once or twice before it suddenly needs half of its avionics replaced or its backbone welded back together.

          • Dolores [love/loves]
            ·
            2 years ago

            well that's just silly. put a timer on the b-1's nuke detonator so it has time to get away! 'muh air-burst' bruh its a nuclear fucking bomb im sure it'll do enough damage to kill us all anyway :think-mark:

            oh and i get the op now the b-1 is the one that breaks, you weren't touting it as the studier model

    • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Six simultaneous Warthog runs from six directions, kicking up a huge asterisk of autocannon dust with nothing remaining at the center

  • axont [she/her, comrade/them]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    The B-52s are cool and always have been. They've been vocally pro-lgbtq since the 70s. They have never fumbled except maybe that one time they let their song get used in Family Guy.

    • HiImThomasPynchon [des/pair, it/its]
      ·
      2 years ago

      All those cats out of the alternative scene in Athens were. Punk moved lots of people to come out and live their lives truthfully because what was more counterculture and in-your-face than being L or G or B or T or all or none?

  • GVAGUY3 [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    It is important to note that their original guitarist died of AIDS back in the 80's. They know what anti-LGBTQ policy can do.

  • supdog [e/em/eir,ey/em]
    ·
    2 years ago

    I heard a b52 interview on NPR and man those are some fun having motherfuckers. I'd rather be in their band than any band.

  • GVAGUY3 [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    I was going to play a B-52's cover set around the time Omicron happened, then our guitarist got it and we couldn't do that. Since then, I have loved B-52's