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.

 

As Expected, Boeing & Lockheed Protest LRS-B Contract Awaard

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 03:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Blackfinger

A lot of reasons. The design is unique, the technologies involved are still some of the most advanced in use, and more advanced than several other nations, areas it's flown, etc.


I think its ingrained in some of us to think for example, RQ170 would have everything and better learned on the -117 and its 'companion' and those technologies are now with Iran and perhaps China and Russia so whats the deal with keeping the companion quiet. Also, a whole lot of wanting to see black projects.

A unique design is a holy grail, how unique, like a flying diamond unique??




posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Forensick

Nothing else flying even comes close.



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

The flying polecap, or possibly the backwards teardrop-shaped craft that was supposedly sighted in the early 90s?



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   
I have to ask:

originally posted by: intelgurl
One of the prototypes was a radical departure from the typical, the other was exactly what you would expect.

Is the "radical departure from the typical" alluding to a companion replacement?



posted on Nov, 9 2015 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Michet

That's a separate program.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Is it not possible to build the fleet of LRS-B in the black to avoid the protest ? Like USAF do for the A-12 ? I hope the protest will not delay too much the new bomber.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

Black projects go through the same steps as white projects do. It's just not public.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 05:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
What delay can we expect with the protest for your opinion ? Do you think a come back in selection is possible ? , its a huge program.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

One hundred days maximum. It all depends on if Congress gets involved.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: [post=20016305]Zaphod58[/post
If USAF is forced to restart the selection it can mean years for the program. For my opinion this protest is not justify, when we look at the F-35 program , the mistake of Lockheed are very huge the delay and the cost of the plane make realy the other USAF program in jeopardy. The F-35 start to become the bigger danger for the other USAF program, for a plane who don't prove the superiority on the other. I realy hope Northrop will win the futur 6th gen too, the Boeing and Lockheed attitude is not good for the security, delay in the bomber is very bad in the world we live now.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 06:05 PM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

That's why this program is fixed price, to prevent major overruns. It doesn't matter who builds it. Just because it's Northrop doesn't magically get rid of delays and overruns. They happen.



posted on Nov, 10 2015 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
It seem that Northrop is still in a good position to build the new generation of strike and stealth aircraft for the futur , with LRS-B , the rumorous RQ-180 + X47-b for UClASS and now engineer looking in the F/X-FA/XX direction , Lokcheed has no insurance for the futur of combat aircraft ( in my opinion).



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha

The protest is based on the fact that the Pentagon scored the cost based on past performance data, ignoring the proposed cost controls, and doubled the cost of the proposal.

That makes it interesting because Boeing and Lockheed delivered far more aircraft, averaging 50% over projected cost, while Northrop produced single digit numbers, averaging higher overruns, especially when you looked at their other programs.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 01:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

For realz, I was 100% sure lockheed & boeing would get it for this reason. Yet they claim it had nothing to do with keeping Northrop in the game lol.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Bfirez

It's not a slam dunk that it will be overturned, but it's a very real possibility.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

That they doubled the price for everything makes me wonder a bit.

Stupid question: could the BoLock Bomber actually be cheaper but need more offboard systems than Northrop's that would spike the price?



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Possible, but not likely. I think they saw an easy way to keep Northrop in the manned game, tweaked some numbers and gave it to them.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Interesting. We need probably a 4th manned aircraft manufacturer, but what is done is done.

Just curious why did McDAC lose on the JSF competition? Was it the Pentagon was mad still over the A-12?

FYI: the advocates of the LRS-B are arguing for 200 bombers. Real? Disillusion fanboys (*)? Or the countermove for budget battles against the F-35 et al?

*. a bit unfair, but you know what I mean.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

I saw a really good argument for 127, but 200 is ridiculous.

The design was too risky, and probably too expensive.



posted on Nov, 19 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Its still funny that they publicly proclaimed that keeping northrop in the manned a/c biz had nothing to do with the decision. THESE ARE NOT THE DROIDS YOUR'E LOOKING FOR!



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join