Bombers - Explore the Science & Experts | ideXlab

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies


The Experts below are selected from a list of 309 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Burcu Pinar Alakoc – 1st expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • femme fatale the lethality of female suicide Bombers
    Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 2020
    Co-Authors: Burcu Pinar Alakoc


    Are female suicide Bombers deadlier than male suicide Bombers? Utilizing newly coded data on the tactical attributes of suicide terrorism worldwide from 1998 to 2015, this study shows that the use …

  • Femme Fatale: The Lethality of Female Suicide Bombers
    Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 2018
    Co-Authors: Burcu Pinar Alakoc


    AbstractAre female suicide Bombers deadlier than male suicide Bombers? Utilizing newly coded data on the tactical attributes of suicide terrorism worldwide from 1998 to 2015, this study shows that the use of female suicide Bombers is not only positively correlated with the lethality of the suicide attacks, but also accentuates the existing tactical advantages of suicide terrorism. Especially in the cases of soft targets like civilians, and easily accessible locations, the deadliest outcomes result from those attacks carried out by female suicide Bombers.

Wade S Karren – 2nd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • Lightning Strikes and Thunder Claps: The Strategic Bomber and Air Superiority
    , 2012
    Co-Authors: Wade S Karren


    Abstract : The bomber has occupied the center of Air Force doctrine since the advent of airpower redefined power projection. In 1926 the US Army s Training Regulation no. 440-15, Fundamental Principles for the Employment of the Air Service, stated that airpower should be used offensively, primarily to secure the control of the air, and, secondarily, to disrupt and delay enemy communications and ground establishments. 1 The primary function became known as air superiority. Even during the early days of aviation, the importance of aerial bombardment in establishing air superiority became readily apparent. As the bomber s attributes of range, payload, and precision matured over a number of major conflicts, the establishment of air superiority over enemy territory together with the efficiencies associated with this process developed as well. Today, high-technology capabilities make an adversary s air defenses difficult to defeat. Although the bomber s attributes have decreased the amount of time needed to attain air superiority, they are no longer sufficient to overcome modern defenses. The heavy bomber s ability to strike critical command and control (C2) nodes, severely damage enemy airfields, and degrade air defenses with great precision early in a conflict can still give the United States a distinct and overwhelming advantage. However, if we wish to maintain a capable bomber force as well as remain competitive in a contested environment, both modernization and acceleration of the speed of offensive operations must become a strategic and operational imperative. Unfortunately, air superiority historically has been more closely associated with the fighter force while Bombers have played their crucial role in relative obscurity since the end of World War II. In a high-technology conflict, the rapid attainment of air superiority will prove essential.

Rebecca Grant – 3rd expert on this subject based on the ideXlab platform

  • Return of the Bomber: The Future of Long-Range Strike
    , 2007
    Co-Authors: Rebecca Grant


    Abstract : This monograph on the future of the bomber begins with an introduction that chronicles the success of the VIII Bomber Command during World War II. The commander of the VIII Bomber Command, Brig. Gen. Ira C. Eaker, U.S. Army Air Forces, led his fliers on long-range missions into the heart of Nazi-occupied Europe. Things have changed since then. The Air Force stopped acquiring new Bombers in 1997, and the result is a “bomber gap.” The USAF has maintained its bomber fleet, but the fleet is old and in constant need of modernization. The lack of modern Bombers severely hampers the United States’ long-range strike capabilities. Part I, The Bomber Gap, reviews 80 years of American bomber force development, the demise of the B-2 bomber program, the success of the B-52 in Operation Desert Storm despite the glory going to precision attack by fighters rather than strategic bombing, and the risks of having an insufficient fleet of long-range stealthy Bombers. Part II focuses on modernizing the existing bomber fleet; the use of the B-52 and the B-1B in Iraq in 1996 and 1998; the debut of the B-2 in Serbia in March 1999; and the role of the B-52, B-1B, and B-2 in Operation Enduring Freedom in 2001 and in Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. Part III, Closing the Gap, examines the warning signs that the current long-range strike force will not be adequate for the future, including barriers to forward base access; a change in course about the bomber fleet that started with a December 2003 long-range strike summit and the February 2004 Corona South meetings; and the 2005 Quadrennial Defense Review’s key goal: “Develop a new land-based, penetrating long-range strike capability to be fielded by 2018 while modernizing the current bomber force.” Part IV looks at the desired capabilities of a new 2018 bomber in terms of range, payload, survivability, speed, and persistence; optionally manned Bombers; and autonomous refueling. Part V presents the views of skeptics and other challenges.