Digital BW, The Print

You could have a look at the measurements presented at clarkvision.com
on this subject, for example, (although mainly about colour there is
some info on B&W). Then you could think how to exploit the benefits
and avoid the problems with your style of photography.  It is very
likely possible if you want to, of course not for every possible style.

It is not hard to put noise in your skies if you desire.  Nor are
blown highlights mandatory.  Digital capture is just another tool and
not a bad one (of course film is fine too).  

For some subjects I can get great resolution from my digital cameras 
(>10k pixel square images or more from a cheap DSLR using panorama
tools) -better than I ever got from my SL66. Doesn't suit your style?
No problem!  

What about "combinez" for as much depth of field as with large format
tilting? Too much work?  I'd argue not much more work than it took to
dev a 4x5 sheet in two-bath.   

Half way through a day the light changes from "Tech Pan"  to "Delta
400" - no problem, I can make characteristic curves as I like in the
raw converter much better than I ever could with mono developers etc. 
Also a mistake does not ruin the "whole film".  

Want more dynamic range? Well neg film has great dynamic range but
appalling resolution in the shadows. Easy (in principle) to mimik that
by using noise reduction in the shadows (actually very tricky to get
it right, I find, but I think that is my lack of competance). Or by
stacking images (hard though, even for static subjects).

For me the two real advantages of digital capture are the 30 times or
so better sensitivity to light (OK, not with quite the same
resolution, yet, a factor of ~2 to go there), and the option to choose
the characterisitic curve.    The former is invaluable on a mountain
top, the latter helps a lot in many lighting conditions.
A big disadvantage is initial purchase cost, but it is getting there,
slowly.  

Great fun and very rewarding.  Not a replacement in all respects.  

Ken