It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

We May See America's Next Stealth Bomber by This Time Next Year.

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
Ok for that ,but with your idea what range of speed for a bomber more faster than the others old long range striker ? If you can go in hours around the globe surely this is something like a supercruise capacity, if its not you have the same speed of a B-2 or B-52. When I travel by the plane the speed is a lot of time in the 970/1000 km/h speed , to have a real advantage with the speed you must go 1600/1700 km/h.




posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 02:04 PM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

Unless you add hypersonic weapons to the mix. Then it's just a matter of a short flight to shorten the range, and launch the weapons and allow them to use their speed to reach the target.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 02:58 PM
link   
As Zaph mentioned it said it can strike any place on Earth in hours When combined with emerging tech weapons systems (High super sonic or hypersonic cruise missiles). They never mentioned how many hours it was though, it could be 2 or 20, we don't know yet and I think it is too early to read into the top speed till we see the thing.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

One clue into it's potential speed. If the aircraft that was spotted and photographed over Amarillo was indeed one of the LRS-B competitors, it would seem to suggest that it was streamlined more than the B-2 and closer to a B-1 with wings back.

(THE ONE ON THE RIGHT)


It is also interesting that you mentioned that someone in the know says it is "much faster than anything that flies such missions". How would they know this if it hadn't been flying around for a while, seen by enough people to know what it's capabilities are?

edit on 18-9-2014 by Sammamishman because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 03:30 PM
link   
For sure this two pictures are very strange, I m very impatient to see the beast making his first public roll out, the birth of a bomber is one or at least 2 in a life time. I find this article interesting breakingdefense.com... . The photography are not clear enough to realy say us what it could be. For my opinion the more interesting in the sahpe for me is the Amarillo one, for the Kansas hmmm are we realy sure its not a fake ?



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

Kansas was not a fake. It was a different mission.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
So we can thinking this two pictures are real aircraft ? And the Texas one for you what type of mission do you think?, some people on the web think of a new stealth transport ?



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 04:09 PM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

No, there isn't currently a stealth transport flying.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
By the altitude of this 2 aircraft they look big airframe if we make the difference with a commercial plane at the same altitude. For my opinino the same size of a Boeing 737


edit on 18-9-2014 by darksidius because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

No bigger than a B-2, in fact slightly smaller than one.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 04:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
A thing we can say for sure, its the futur is in the triangle shape




posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom




If we stop producing new weapons, what will happen when China and other countries over take us in terms of military technological superiority?


then...they would probably take away your freedoms.

heaven forbid you stop producing new and improved weapons...all hope for world peace would then be lost.

Anyway...kudos on the new bomber. Very stylish and cool looking. Pure chick magnet.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: MarioOnTheFly

Right, because ONLY the US is creating new weapons, and causing every single problem in the entire world.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Can't wait to see these things and get a little handle on what all they can do. I feel like there is alot more to some of this new stuff than meets the eye. A slightly middle aged guy like me who started out working with former SAC guys you get trained into a very black and white (traditional) type thinking with this stuff. From what I can tell we were so far ahead as it was to go farther must bring some surprises.



posted on Sep, 18 2014 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Reading a recent FlightGlobal article it seems the USAF already has it's sight's set on fitting an AETP/AETD/ADVENT engine to the LRS-B. If so this differs from past public submissions a couple of years ago that the aircraft would be subsonic. A three stream ADVENT engine would allow super-cruise with a very high efficiency, so the claims of rapid intervention "within a few hours" might well be possible after all. I don't imagine though that we would be seeing hypersonic speeds but more like in the mach 1.4-2.0 plus-ish range. Even so a speed of around 1.6-1.7 mach would basically double the speed of current bombers, and technically well within reach. Interestingly the ADVENT/AETP/AETD technology promises huge efficiency gains over the latest current engines in both fuel consumption (at least 25-30% at first with maybe a 50% gain further down the track ) as well as range/loiter time, as well as being lighter than current engines. Whats more, GE is already testing a variant specifically aimed at a bomber application.

LEE.
edit on 18-9-2014 by thebozeian because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2014 @ 08:43 AM
link   
a reply to: thebozeian
It will say that there is a chance , the new engine for the LRS-B will be an Advent one ?


edit on 19-9-2014 by darksidius because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 19 2014 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

We already know it is.



posted on Sep, 19 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   
foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com... This thing could be a game changer on a fighter and a Bomber too, a plane with this kind of weapon could be very difficult to shoot, a 360 ° protection.



posted on Sep, 19 2014 @ 04:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Assassin82
We don't need new bombers. There are much bigger problems looming in our aerial arsenal then bombers. The B-1 and the B-2 are doing just fine as well as the B-52.

Bigger issues at hand: The F-35 and the F-22 need permanent solutions. They are very unreliable. The F-15 and F-16 are still are go to fighters, but they've been around for quite sometime.


Well i was going to say welcome to the site and great post but it looks like youve been here a couple years! I'm a former boom on KC-135s, and to my great and lucky career in the air force, I never got to do an Aeromedical Evac. lol.

I don't want you to think im picking on you because im not, gonna answer some of the responses i've seen so far so bare with me. I think your statement about the vipers and eagles pretty much sums it up why we need to have the f-35 succeed. I know its not the most popular right now because of the cost and other crap, but once it really gets going and the software and testing get further along, its going to be a great aircraft. Alot of people just go by what they have heard in the declassified world about the jet, and not what its really capable of. Here's a huge selling factor right here for it: JSF

As for the f-22, I'll still maintain my stance that it is the most advanced fighter the world has ever seen and will be for the next couple decades with upgrades. The only problem with them is we didn't build enough of them in the first place so the cost was high.



Then there are the tankers. I still fly regular missions on the KC-135, which has far exceeded its life expectancy. There aren't many KC-10's out in the system. The KC-46 is nearly ready to be inserted into our inventory, but that's going to take a long time before it completely replaces the KC-135's.

I'm low on the totem pole so my opinions mean squat. But if it were me, I'd invest all that money into fixing our stealth fighters first, pushing out as many new tankers as we can as quickly as we can. Getting some additional C-130J's in the air to take the pressure and hours off the C-17's (where applicable). Purchasing a few new C-17's. And finally, finding a new age A-10.


These two statements right here are probably the best statements I've seen on ATS in a long ass time! I agree completely, as long as the 46 fixes its wiring problems before concurrency takes ahold of that program as well. The bombers can wait, although i can't wait for them to come out. lol



My opinions come from 12 years in the AF, 8 of which have been flying on KC-135's, C-17's, and C-130's performing aeromedical evacuation mission all over the world accumulating over 1,300 hours (700 combat hours). Not an expert opinion, just an experienced opinion.


What was your AFSC and where were you stationed? I'm sure we probably ran into eachother somewhere. lol. I had 2500 hours, 1000 plus in combat in just six years so i pretty much stayed deployed in between trips to edwards. lol



posted on Sep, 19 2014 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: darksidius

No bigger than a B-2, in fact slightly smaller than one.


And thats the problem with this whole speed issue with the new bomber. Most logic would tell us that NG modeled their bomber after the B-2, which inheritely is sub-sonic by nature. However, IF lockheed/boeing really did build this:

then i can see it going supersonic. But supercruise? I dont know about that. Even with the new engines, moving a half million or even quarter million pound bomber through the air at mach 1 plus without burner would be quite a feat. And the new bomber is supposed to be based off of existing technology. Although we will see if they stick to that or not...



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join