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.

 

Lockheed Martin Mystery.....

page: 9
13
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
Three hypersonic bomber yes but three very high end toys nobody has on earth (joke )





posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

That will probably come apart 8 minutes into flight. Just like the hypersonic platforms usually do.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 05:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: cmdrkeenkid
a reply to: nelloh62

Given that LM and Boeing are allegedly the winners, I'm hoping for an up-scaled cross of the original Hopeless Diamond design and the Bird of Prey. The radar signature of the former with the (allegedly tested) active camouflage and flight stability of the latter would be pretty dandy. It would probably look pretty awesome too.

LM does have a history of building demonstrators from currently existing parts, such as what they did with Have Blue. And Boeing did similar with their Bird of Prey, developing it from off the shelf parts. Boeing also spent somewhere around US$70M of its own funds for developing the Bird of Prey. I don't think a company would use its own funds, especially such a large amount, to develop something that has essentially stalled in the X-45 (shelved by USAF) and Phantom Ray (also being developed internally by Boeing, but has been very quiet since it's first flight in 2011) programs.

So when it comes to keeping cost down, both companies do have some positive history.



something like this?.




posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: EBJet

we may have already seen a grainy photo and i think what will be displayed will have a similar look to SENIOR PEG with out the tail. that Wichita picture looks allot like S.P.

i would assume that the RAM would be upgradable, so even if th3ey have come up with better ones they still have to change it to keep pace with the RADAR of the new and the upcoming SAMS's and other RADAR systems. so unless they came up with a super cheap RAM coating that is modular i dont see how it would be any different then the B-2 as far as cost goes.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: penroc3

The F-35 coating doesn't have to be removed before you can remove panels like the older RAM did. It's embeded now, instead of a separate coating. That dropped the price a huge amount right there.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 07:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: BigTrain

Yes, because an F-18 is just an upgraded F-15 with minor changes. They both have two engines, two tails, etc. That's exactly what calling this an upgraded B-2 is like.

But then you'd rather spend a billion dollars an airframe to get a hypersonic platform, so you can have three bombers in the inventory.


The political environment is changing...you aren't getting 100 bombers for a B2 plus 1.

This is a joke if true. 40 yrs later and all we can do is upgrade the stealth and add some EW stuff? Come on man.

Youve bought way too far into this radar evading stealth argument. So what if it goes from bird sized to knat sized. Put 30 migs in the air on 24/7 patrol and once the human eye sees it....its taken down with nothing but a 20mm canon.

Do we need to see this actually happen before you realise slow moving "invisible " planes aren't really that hard to shoot down??



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 07:54 PM
link   
a reply to: BigTrain

Yes, because 30 MiGs are going to be able to cover the millions of square miles that it can come from. You have no idea what you're talking about by saying it's only an upgraded B-2 with new EW systems. There's a lot more to it than that, but of course, it's a total POS because it doesn't go mach 20 at 100,000 feet, and drop 5000 bombs from up there.

I'm so glad you aren't in charge of procurement. We wouldn't have an Air Force left, because they'd be broke from trying to get nothing but hypersonic aircraft and failing miserably at it.

Four 25 foot long, Mach 6 aircraft cost $144M, and you want a fleet of bombers, the size of a B-1 or B-2, capable of going that speed. Sure, take the entire DoD budget, and screw the other services, because that's what it would take.
edit on 6/15/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 08:21 PM
link   
a reply to: BigTrain

So shocking next Ievel stealth, unprecedented range, the endurance of an olympian, sci-fi level comms, robust and a comprehensive fusion of cutting edge sensor and targeting capabilities, stunning ECM/EW suites, incomparable versatility beyond any bomber in history, the ability to fill multiple aircrafts (b1,b2) rolls, superb survivability, state of the art avionics and flight controls, a bunch of other sneaky abilities up her sleeve that nobody will talk about, and sexy lines that would make pininfarina proud aren't enough for you?



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: BigTrain

Yes, because 30 MiGs are going to be able to cover the millions of square miles that it can come from. You have no idea what you're talking about by saying it's only an upgraded B-2 with new EW systems. There's a lot more to it than that, but of course, it's a total POS because it doesn't go mach 20 at 100,000 feet, and drop 5000 bombs from up there.

I'm so glad you aren't in charge of procurement. We wouldn't have an Air Force left, because they'd be broke from trying to get nothing but hypersonic aircraft and failing miserably at it.

Four 25 foot long, Mach 6 aircraft cost $144M, and you want a fleet of bombers, the size of a B-1 or B-2, capable of going that speed. Sure, take the entire DoD budget, and screw the other services, because that's what it would take.


Sr 71 designed in late 50s. 60 yrs later we get 1/4 the speed and fancy computers? Some advancement there. You sound like a paid military complex spokesman. Hey look new computers for a 40 yr old B2 all yours for the low low price of 100B.

Id take 10 of my super advanced hypersonic bombers over 100 of your sitting ducks. Ya Iraq and syria....ooooooh such big adversaries....go fly a b2 into russia....tell me how that goes. They know exactly where it is. Cough f117 cough



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 08:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: BigTrain

So shocking next Ievel stealth, unprecedented range, the endurance of an olympian, sci-fi level comms, robust and a comprehensive fusion of cutting edge sensor and targeting capabilities, stunning ECM/EW suites, incomparable versatility beyond any bomber in history, the ability to fill multiple aircrafts (b1,b2) rolls, superb survivability, state of the art avionics and flight controls, a bunch of other sneaky abilities up her sleeve that nobody will talk about, and sexy lines that would make pininfarina proud aren't enough for you?


Again....slow flying and can be seen by naked eye = dead against any real enemy. If its not fast its just smoke and mirrors.

Whatever....i cant wait to see the grand unveiling of B2 revision B. at least roll out green flame next to it so we dont look totally incompentent.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 08:38 PM
link   
a reply to: BigTrain

Yeah uh huh....

Anyways, not to be nitpicky but we call her the Green Lady.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 08:42 PM
link   
a reply to: BigTrain

Hey I like your hypersonic bomber idea. Tell me more about them. How fast would be adequate for you? What would it look like if you designed one. The topic interests me. Like to hear your proposal.



posted on Jun, 15 2015 @ 08:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: BigTrain

Hey I like your hypersonic bomber idea. Tell me more about them. How fast would be adequate for you? What would it look like if you designed one. The topic interests me. Like to hear your proposal.

ok

How about 10 green ladys? Cant drop a bomb outta her??



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 01:20 AM
link   
a reply to: BigTrain

Do you have any flight experience? Because spotting something moving a few hundred miles per hour, while you yourself are flying a few hundred miles per hour is pretty damn difficult. Even more so if it's something that has a low visibility, is flying with nav lights off, is in the glare of the sun, potentially has active camouflage abilities, etc...

If it were as easy as making visual contact and being able to engage there would be no need for radar.
edit on 6/16/2015 by cmdrkeenkid because: Fixing typo.



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 01:29 AM
link   
Big train like you I would love to see a hypersonic bomber, a star destroyer will be my better choice , but we are in a real world with real law of physic and surely LRS-B will be something new and awesome. But there is work in hypersonic for weapon and glider wait at the end to see a combination of LRS-B and may be hypersonic cruise missile. In my opinion I prefer to see money going on a follow on of the X-37B with orbital war mission instead of putting all the money on a hypersonic and impossible to build hyp bomber (my opinion).



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 02:33 AM
link   
a reply to: BigTrain

So one F-117 being shot down out of over ten thousand missions proves stealth doesn't work. Yeah. OK. Keep telling yourself that.
edit on 6/16/2015 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 05:31 AM
link   
ADVENT is only fairly recent and I would bet the Lady is running on upgraded J58,s with a sleaker body with active camo (camera mounted) with up to date EW avionics packages and other tricky anti radar and IR capabilities.Have a nice compact internal bombay with either recon pack with hi def cameras and sensors or advanced missile/bomb loads..



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 08:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackfinger

That would jibe exactly with what Zaph was hinting about the green lady being possibly related to that OTHER J58-powered concept from the 1950s.

You know, the Convair-designed that supposedly wrecked the A-12 during the RCS tests, that had a planform with all the hallmarks of an 80s-era stealth design (facet-like fuselage, hidden intakes, hidden exhaust, YF-23-style fuselage chines, etc), but was passed over for being too technologically ambitious (people always forget that the A-12 was the CONSERVATIVE entry in a pole-off and possible flyoff to replace the U-2).

Build an improved kingfish with 1990s-era materials and stealth technologies(think the F-15SE), and load the whole thing up with boron zip fuel for Mach ~4 dashes, and you've got 98% of what a scramjet or boost-glide ISR/strike platform could do for a relative fraction of the price.


And guess who bought Convair's Fort Worth plant and all of all of the aerospace IP that came with it? That 1993 purchase by Lockheed would make perfect sense for the Lady, a product of that acquisition, to take to the skies 5-10 years later.

Too bad we'll never see it.



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 08:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

Soooooo..........To get back on track with the original OP. Is everyone in agreement that August 2nd is the most likely date for a press release ? Do any of you guys have any buddy's you can ask if that is the most likely date. I'm not wanting to out anybody or get and top secrets, just looking to put something my diary to look forward to ! That is unless LM/Boeing wish to invite me to the press release with front row seats, you never know !! (There is more chance of me piloting a U2 to the ISS than that)



posted on Jun, 16 2015 @ 08:55 AM
link   
Yeah getting back on topic. So this potential August date. Will this be just th e announcement, or will it also be the official roll out to the public like when the B2 was first shown to the public. Like will there be a physical bomber to look at or will they just announce Lockheed won? And if it's just the announcement then do you think they'll at kkeadt have an official picture they can show?



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join