America's most feared: The B-2 ‘stealth' bomber that struck Iran's ‘nuclear mountain'
It is currently the only bomber in the US fleet capable of dropping the huge GBU-57 bunker-busting bomb that analysts say is the only conventional weapon that could destroy Iran's underground Fordow nuclear facility from the air.
President Donald Trump on Sunday confirmed that the US had struck Fordow with 'a full payload of BOMBS', along with two other sites at Natanz and Isfahan. 'All planes are safely on their way home,' he added.
Since entering service in the late 1990s, the B-2 has become the backbone of the US strategic bomber fleet. Most recently, in October 2024, several B-2s used an RAAF base in northern Australia as a staging ground to carry out strikes on Houthi militants in Yemen, including hardened weapons storage facilities.
The B-2 holds the record for the longest air combat mission in history, which took place in 2001 when an aircraft named Spirit of America took off from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri and flew to Afghanistan along with five other B-2s in a 44-hour mission. It then flew back to Missouri in another 30-hour flight to hit a total of more than 70 consecutive hours, including a quick pit stop for a 45-minute crew and service change with engines still running.
Manufacturer Northrop Grumman describes the B-2 as 'one of the most survivable aircraft in the world' and the only one to combine long-range, stealth and a heavy payload. More practically for air crew flying the mammoth missions, the cabin features a bed, a microwave and a toilet.
The B-2 began life as a secretive 'black' project during the 1970s, with the aim of producing a bomber that could fly deep into the Soviet Union undetected by air defences using a pioneering, radar-deflecting design.
The original plan was to build 165 B-2s, but as the Cold War drew to a close in the late 1980s, this was drastically scaled back to just 21 aircraft, of which 19 remain in service.
Despite that reduction, the entire program cost about $US2 billion ($3.09 billion) per aircraft. In 1996, the B-2 was predicted by US government auditors to be 'by far, the costliest bombers to operate on a per-aircraft basis', amounting to three times as much as the B-1 bomber and over four times as much as the veteran B-52.
Part of those costs go to upkeep. The B-2 is a delicate creature that requires specialised care, including air-conditioned hangars that can accommodate its 52-metre wingspan and are needed to keep its radar-absorbing 'low-observable' skin in good condition.
Each plane reportedly costs more than $US3 million a month to maintain.
The B-2 made its public debut in 1988, and the first production aircraft – named Spirit of Missouri – was delivered to the US Air Force in 1993.
Its first combat mission came during the NATO-led mission, known as Operation Allied Force, to Kosovo in 1999. Two B-2s flew more than 31 hours from Missouri to Kosovo, where they attacked multiple targets, then flew directly back.
The B-2's performance in Europe soon earned it a reputation as a highly effective weapon of war. The stealthy bomber flew less than 1 per cent of the total missions, but accounted for 33 per cent of targets destroyed during the first eight weeks of the Kosovo conflict, Northrop Grumman said.
After Kosovo and Afghanistan, the B-2s next saw action in Operation Iraqi Freedom and twice in Libya in support of Operation Odyssey Dawn and Operation Odyssey Lightning.
Early B-2s were given names by air crews such as 'Shady Lady', 'Black Widow' and 'Fatal Beauty', although these have now been replaced by the more prosaic 'Spirit of ... ' titles taken from American states.
But when Hollywood needs a 'super bomber' to fight off a giant monster or an alien invasion, the B-2's star power as one of the world's most recognisable aircraft always secures it top billing. Its movie credits include Independence Day, Armageddon, Iron Man 2, Cloverfield and, most recently, Captain Marvel.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
27 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Europe on edge as Trump risks his biggest TACO moment
There is no public shift in the core demands from Putin. First, Ukraine must withdraw from the eastern regions now under Russian control. Second, it must accept strict limits on the size and power of its military. Third, it must give up its dream of joining the NATO defence pact with the United States and much of Europe. There may, of course, be a signal from Putin in private that he may be willing to be flexible on some of these demands, and this might in theory allow Zelensky some scope to make concessions. There is no sign of this, at least so far. The emptiness in Anchorage was apparent in what was not said at the end. Trump did not mention 'severe consequences' for Russia, something he threatened just before the summit. Trump did not mention secondary tariffs on China, either. This move would place pressure on Russia and its key economic partner. Only later, when asked on Fox News, did Trump acknowledge the China question. And then he suggested this was a matter for a later date. Putin, in other words, gained more time. At no cost. He played the White House team and made them look like amateurs. Trump will be judged by his actions, not his words. He has reduced American support for Ukraine. US military supplies have slowed and US aid funding has also been scaled back. The claims about putting pressure on Russia are all in the headlines, not in the hard power on the ground. Europe was cut out of this negotiation. Leaders such as Sir Keir Starmer of Britain, Emmanuel Macron of France and Friedrich Merz of Germany tried to back Zelensky but were left watching from a distance as an American and a Russian held a summit to decide the biggest war in Europe in eight decades. This is humbling for European leaders and reminds them that they cannot rely on America – or, at least, America under Trump – to enforce any peace agreement with Putin. They will have to do that themselves. Western Europe is scrambling to rearm so it can face Putin in a world without American safeguards. It is late, of course. Starmer and Macron will hold a meeting on Sunday, their time, to discuss their willingness to enforce a peace deal in Ukraine. While Starmer is willing to put 'boots on the ground' to do this, few others send this message. The benign view of Anchorage is that Trump was 'feeling out' his Russian counterpart before getting a peace deal, and that he will hear from Zelensky on Monday before deciding the next steps. Nobody can be sure about the full story of the Anchorage summit until this happens. Loading Even so, there are good grounds to think that Trump's decision to shift focus from a ceasefire to a long-term peace agreement means he is open to Putin's demands. After all, the dynamic was clear in Trump's attempt to humiliate Zelensky in the White House in February, and then in his generous treatment of Putin in August. The US president would prefer Ukraine to give ground, not Russia. And he seems intent on pursuing this approach in his quest to secure the Nobel Peace Prize. Loading Trump hates the four-letter barb that is often used to mock his tough talk: TACO, for Trump Always Chickens Out. He countered the critics by bombing Iran in June, but there is no sign he wants to take genuinely firm measures with Russia. Trump said he could end the war. Now he discovers it is harder than he thought, and he tries to put the onus on others to make it easier for him. 'Now, it's really up to President Zelensky to get it done,' Trump told Fox News. 'And I would also say the European nations, they have to get involved a little bit.' The easy option for Trump is for Zelensky and the European leaders to nod in support as he trades away large parts of southern and eastern Ukraine. All the risks are on them if this simply emboldens Putin to start another war in a year or two. The Alaska summit may be remembered as Trump's biggest TACO moment. And he will not win the Nobel for that. Everything depends on whether he has the stomach to stand up to Putin and force a lasting peace in Europe.
The Age
27 minutes ago
- The Age
Europe on edge as Trump risks his biggest TACO moment
There is no public shift in the core demands from Putin. First, Ukraine must withdraw from the eastern regions now under Russian control. Second, it must accept strict limits on the size and power of its military. Third, it must give up its dream of joining the NATO defence pact with the United States and much of Europe. There may, of course, be a signal from Putin in private that he may be willing to be flexible on some of these demands, and this might in theory allow Zelensky some scope to make concessions. There is no sign of this, at least so far. The emptiness in Anchorage was apparent in what was not said at the end. Trump did not mention 'severe consequences' for Russia, something he threatened just before the summit. Trump did not mention secondary tariffs on China, either. This move would place pressure on Russia and its key economic partner. Only later, when asked on Fox News, did Trump acknowledge the China question. And then he suggested this was a matter for a later date. Putin, in other words, gained more time. At no cost. He played the White House team and made them look like amateurs. Trump will be judged by his actions, not his words. He has reduced American support for Ukraine. US military supplies have slowed and US aid funding has also been scaled back. The claims about putting pressure on Russia are all in the headlines, not in the hard power on the ground. Europe was cut out of this negotiation. Leaders such as Sir Keir Starmer of Britain, Emmanuel Macron of France and Friedrich Merz of Germany tried to back Zelensky but were left watching from a distance as an American and a Russian held a summit to decide the biggest war in Europe in eight decades. This is humbling for European leaders and reminds them that they cannot rely on America – or, at least, America under Trump – to enforce any peace agreement with Putin. They will have to do that themselves. Western Europe is scrambling to rearm so it can face Putin in a world without American safeguards. It is late, of course. Starmer and Macron will hold a meeting on Sunday, their time, to discuss their willingness to enforce a peace deal in Ukraine. While Starmer is willing to put 'boots on the ground' to do this, few others send this message. The benign view of Anchorage is that Trump was 'feeling out' his Russian counterpart before getting a peace deal, and that he will hear from Zelensky on Monday before deciding the next steps. Nobody can be sure about the full story of the Anchorage summit until this happens. Loading Even so, there are good grounds to think that Trump's decision to shift focus from a ceasefire to a long-term peace agreement means he is open to Putin's demands. After all, the dynamic was clear in Trump's attempt to humiliate Zelensky in the White House in February, and then in his generous treatment of Putin in August. The US president would prefer Ukraine to give ground, not Russia. And he seems intent on pursuing this approach in his quest to secure the Nobel Peace Prize. Loading Trump hates the four-letter barb that is often used to mock his tough talk: TACO, for Trump Always Chickens Out. He countered the critics by bombing Iran in June, but there is no sign he wants to take genuinely firm measures with Russia. Trump said he could end the war. Now he discovers it is harder than he thought, and he tries to put the onus on others to make it easier for him. 'Now, it's really up to President Zelensky to get it done,' Trump told Fox News. 'And I would also say the European nations, they have to get involved a little bit.' The easy option for Trump is for Zelensky and the European leaders to nod in support as he trades away large parts of southern and eastern Ukraine. All the risks are on them if this simply emboldens Putin to start another war in a year or two. The Alaska summit may be remembered as Trump's biggest TACO moment. And he will not win the Nobel for that. Everything depends on whether he has the stomach to stand up to Putin and force a lasting peace in Europe.
ABC News
27 minutes ago
- ABC News
Rice nearly sank US tariff talks until Japan finally agreed to take more American grain
For decades, Japan's tight protection of its rice market — a symbol of cultural pride, postwar resilience and self-sufficiency — blocked broader trade deals. Last month, rice was once again a sticking point during negotiations over the US "reciprocal tariffs" with President Donald Trump calling Japan a "spoiled" country that "won't take our rice". However, this time Mr Trump forged what he framed as a tariffs breakthrough: Japan importing more US rice. Rice prices have nearly doubled since last year across Japan. A perfect storm of supply miscalculations and a bad harvest left supermarket shelves bare and sparked rare street protests, triggering the government to release emergency stockpiles. But still the question remains: Are the Japanese public able to stomach foreign rice? Rice is integral to history and political power in Japan. Rice planting festivals remain an important ritual in rural areas, alongside offerings to ancestors during ceremonies to gods or weddings. "It's a delicate tightrope between price and protecting our identity," said Yusuke Yokoyama, a Tokyo resident, who noticed many local restaurants had stopped offering free "refill" rice. "People in Japan are generally happy to have lower prices for rice, but they also don't want to import it," he said. In the late 19th century, as Japan faced geopolitical tensions while opening up to the West, rice was even woven into the military transformation. Mr Yokoyama explained that many Japanese were aware of the historical connection of rice as a symbol of Japanese identity and sovereignty. For example, a "rice wage" was an incentive to recruit soldiers, expanding from the previous exclusive samurai class. In a nation where rice farming has been politically protected since the 1970s, the crisis is exposing the structural fragility of its agricultural sector. Rice emerged as a top-three issue for voters in polling ahead of recent municipal elections, as customers and restaurants struggled with inflation and the far-right Sanseito party capitalised on the outrage. CoCo ICHIBANYA, Japan's largest curry rice restaurant chain, raised its menu prices and saw a 5.2 per cent drop in customers between September last year and this year. Retailers are resorting to marketing gimmicks. Convenience store chain Lawson began selling rice balls made from the older grain, labelling them as "2023 Vintage" onigiri. The attempt at humour — or damage control — was mocked online. For decades, Tokyo maintained one of the most rigid agricultural systems in the developed world. Under the now-defunct "gentan" policy, farmers were paid not to grow rice, and strict production targets were set to manage supply. "Japan previously paid farmers to leave their fields fallow," said Jeffrey Kingston, professor of History and Asian Studies at Temple University Japan. "The idea was to keep prices stable. But now we see how this entire system — combined with high tariffs and climate shocks — has become untenable." Instead, it has contributed to what he describes as a "Byzantine" distribution network and mindset. "The youngest farmer I know is 65," Mr Kingston said. "The aging population will have adverse effects on the sector whether Tokyo likes it or not." Nicole Freiner, author of Rice and Agricultural Policies in Japan, said the government's program to subsidise farmers to limit rice production because of declining demand was short-sighted. "Even if Japan utilised most of its usable land, it still would not be self-sufficient," she said. Instead, she encouraged the government to react more to consumers switching to wheat-based food. "This policy created a lack of incentive for rice-growing that left rice paddies abandoned, with no opportunities for young farmers," Ms Freiner said. Japan's protectionist stance has long frustrated international trade partners. The United States, in particular, has pushed for greater access to Japan's rice market and the Trump administration made it their mission during the recent tariff negotiations. Some netizens pushed back, sharing clips of an anime film where a Japanese character tells a pushy US politician that Japanese consumers prefer home-grown rice over California rice. Japan imports 770,000 tonnes of foreign rice annually — but much of it has traditionally been used for processing or animal feed, not table rice. Tokyo reached a deal with Washington in the latest tariff deal, increasing the proportion of US rice allocated for household consumption. Mr Trump claimed that Japan had "caved" to US demands. Japan's Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba pushed back. "We made absolutely no sacrifice in the agricultural sector," he told local media. Marcel Thieliant, Asia Pacific analyst at Capital Economics, said Japan had negotiated cautiously, keeping the overall import quota unchanged, but a larger share of that quota would now come from the US, rather than other countries. He rejected the narrative from Washington of a sweeping victory. "I'm not aware of any plans to actually liberalise the market by lifting the import quota," he told the ABC. Other analysts said the proportion change of staple rice imports — even within existing frameworks — may have signalled a gradual shift away from hardline protectionism. "The [US] side deal is significant in symbolic terms; it may be an indication that Tokyo is becoming more willing to open its rice market — at least, when it needs help," Ms Freigner said. "Whether or not these changes take hold and become more entrenched is not clear yet," she added. For ordinary citizens, many remain uneasy and some local broadcasters have directed the blame at the rise in foreign tourists — including Australians — as Japan records an all-time high for international tourism figures. "As the yen falls, locals have started to become angry," said Mr Kingston. "They watch foreigners swaggering about, buying up real estate and eating cheap, while local households feel the pinch of inflation — even in their daily meal of rice." The situation, he added, had created "a sense of malaise gripping people here". Japan is struggling with low wages and inflation. Since the July agreement, Japanese supermarket prices have fallen following the government's release of stockpiled rice. But prices are still nearly double the same time last year. Industry analysts note that the increase in imports of rice for human consumption has been modest so far relative to the scale of the domestic supply shortfall, and distribution has yet to catch up with rising consumer demand. Last year's harvest was devastated by record-breaking heat. And with meteorological extremes becoming more common, experts say Japan's model of matching production to slowly declining demand is no longer sufficient. "Climate is affecting harvesting rice and other products," said Mr Yokoyama. "The policy may have to change. Our food security is not high, and people are starting to understand that now." A sense of frustration has grown among farmers, angry at the regulations limiting how much rice they can grow, which spilled over into protests earlier this year. Japan's food self-sufficiency rate has languished around 30–40 per cent for decades. Despite pledges to raise it, little has changed. One approach could be to subsidise farmers' production of rice instead of paying them not to, and export the surplus. "What the government should do now is stop subsidising crop conversion," said Yusaku Yoshikawa, an agricultural aid consultant with Japanese Official Development Assistance Projects. Already, the government has dipped into emergency stockpiles to manage supply, but analysts warn that short-term fixes can't resolve long-term instability. They must also be careful not to overcorrect, as producing too much rice now could lead to a glut and cause prices to crash. "We're in a delicate moment," Mr Yoshikawa said. "We've gone from rice scarcity last year to needing policy imagination. What's needed now is not just price control."
