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.

 

U.S. Air Force Said Poised to Award Bomber Contract Tuesday

page: 11
7
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 31 2015 @ 10:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

en.wikipedia.org...

Doesn't necessarily change what you're saying but the PW1000G is outselling the CFM LEAP on the A320NEO.


edit on 31/10/15 by C0bzz because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 1 2015 @ 01:37 AM
link   
I just noticed tonight that Northrop Grumman has started running this commercial again - saw it several times over the course of a few hours on the Science Channel. Gotta love that cranked kite pattern in the clouds at the end...




posted on Nov, 1 2015 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: AtomicMod
It look more on a triangle shape with a more high angle swept than a x-47b cranked kite in the shadow end. Something strange too in this video is the engine sound of the black triangle shadow.


edit on 1-11-2015 by darksidius because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2015 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

A little like this?


As to the sound, turbojets and turbofans both sound pretty distinct from each other, and I'll bet that the variable-cycle engines will have a 3rd, distinctive sound that's all their own.
edit on 1-11-2015 by Barnalby because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2015 @ 11:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby

I'd have to second this..



posted on Nov, 1 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Barnalby
It look a little like this it's right , for the sound we hear a loud rumble sound that don't have the sonority of a classic turbojet.



posted on Nov, 1 2015 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Guys, it's a TV commercial, not a realistic simulation.



posted on Nov, 1 2015 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: C0bzz

Hear, hear.

People are WAY over analyzing that promo spot.



posted on Nov, 1 2015 @ 08:36 PM
link   
You mean defense contractors don't put valuable insights about classified national security projects into Super Bowl commercials? The heck you say, sir!



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 05:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman
I agree for now its a game because since the award we have nothing new to speculate, nothing we don't know since a lot.




posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 08:55 AM
link   
I don't know if the following info has already been covered by other posts but I'll go ahead and speak on it. Over the weekend I had an interesting convo with some folks who would most likely know and are not known to BS.
The subject was the B-3.
Info gleaned from the chat is as follows:

Both the Lockheed and Northrop Grumman prototypes are in Nevada (Groom Lake) and were most likely built there.
The sensory array is several generations ahead of anything currently fielded and the aircraft is considered by insiders as a stealthy spy plane that, "Oh by the way, it can drop bombs too…" Making it a battle management and command and control fixture loitering deep inside enemy territory.

Additionally it will be able to defend itself via beyond visual range using air-to-air missiles.
Regarding the appearance: One of the prototypes was a radical departure from the typical, the other was exactly what you would expect.

As stated before, I don't know how much of this is new info for you guys, but there it is.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: intelgurl

That's excellent confirmation for some things I heard, and some new information. I hadn't heard about the BVR capability. Very interesting. Thanks!



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: intelgurl

"A radical departure from the typical" - I'm guessing the Lockheed bird

"The other was exactly what you'd expect" - sounds like Northrop's cranked kite on steroids.

Given all the emphasis on stealthy loitering and battlefield management, this sounds a lot like it's the de facto J-STARS/E-3 replacement.

If that's the case, then perhaps Lockheed's design was less of a screamer and more of an extreme loiterer, combining know-how from Quartz, the X-56, etc into some sort of exotic high-altitude loiterer with an equally exotic planform.

Boeing's joined-wing sensorcraft comes to mind immediately as a great, ~B-2 sized platform that would fit the " spyplane that can carry bombs", "radical departure", and " the design just screamed cost overruns" descriptions to a T.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 12:29 PM
link   
This pic was purported to be Northrop Grumman's design for the Next Gen Bomber - looks to me like they cold drop this design down to 2 engines and we'd have a good LRS-B candidate....




posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: intelgurl

Lets assume for a second its loitering inside a fairly large country like India or heck we'll use Russia and then its spotted, not necessarily via radar but lets say the Russians out smart you and decide to start running surveillance flights disguised as commercial airliners, you send in the B-3 to loiter thinking you are sneaking around and those "routine" commercial airliners which you've tracked for years are actually giant spy planes waiting to visually find you and they are using all passive detection, IR, whatever. Then they radio down to the Migs who are on standby, and transmit live video of your B-3 and estimated position to the migs, then...how exactly do you get out of there going 650 MPH?



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: BigTrain

You don't loiter near other aircraft.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: BigTrain

China is also a big country. The Pacific is an enormous, erm, geographic region.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 12:51 PM
link   
And now the debate over funding the LRS-B seems to have started rapidly boiling:




WASHINGTON — The Pentagon’s decade-long search for a next-generation bomber ended last week, but now a fight is brewing over how the new bomber fits into the Pentagon’s long-term spending blueprint.


Defense News Article



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: AtomicMod

It started months ago. I'm surprised it took this long after the announcement.



posted on Nov, 2 2015 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

It's pretty clear from Northrop Grumman's new website that this was expected. I wonder if those corporate sponsored websites that email lawmakers actually do any good?



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join