It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Meet the B-21

page: 16
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 28 2016 @ 11:21 PM
Apparently McCain and Reed are angry about the deal.

posted on Feb, 28 2016 @ 11:31 PM
a reply to: cavtrooper7

McCain is angry that he's irrelevant now. He'll be angry that the sun comes up tomorrow. That's also old news, from last August.

posted on Feb, 28 2016 @ 11:46 PM
I dont think its just the Lasers that are going to be the selling point.If its got the maturity of the F35 Avionics and RADAR in her plus the aerodynamic packages of the B2,F22 and F35 plus hints of X56 maybe.Also there are things out there nastier than Nukes and Lasers that have been played with allegedly in the desert.

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 12:01 AM

originally posted by: nelloh62

originally posted by: Discotech
a reply to: Zaphod58

Do you think it's because we've reached an apex in terms of aerodynamics and we can't deviate too much from standard designs until we figure out anti-grav/magnetic levitation ?

How do these beasts achieve yaw without a seemingly visible rudder/tail ?

I think it might be controlled by the engines. But exactly how they do that is still a military secret

Internal (hidden) thrust vectors? Venturi ducting?

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 12:07 AM

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
Can they at least add racing stripe on it to make it a little more exciting? Lockbo should release a rendering of theirs to show the public what they coulda had.

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 12:09 AM
Something that goes waaaay back to the beginning of powered flight.
Flight control

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 12:26 AM

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Barnalby

They may end up going another route, but they're pretty limited with the amount of fuel you're talking about transferring. One reason the Navy gets away with a hose and drogue is they're moving small amounts of fuel. With even a C-130 you'd have to move do much a hose or similar system wouldn't be feasible.


Just some info for those of you into in-flight refueling.
The USAF was thinking of going fully autonomous with
flying gas can aircraft that had MULTIPLE fueling booms
that are attached to a wing-shaped device that would
be dragged out behind the tanker which was used to
separate each fueling boom via a wide separation
BOTH vertically AND horizontally.

The wing-like system kinda looks similar to what crop-duster
planes look like with their multiple sprayer nozzles hanging
underneath a really wide boom but in this case a large
DRONE KC-10-like craft (but MUCH Bigger to carry the extra fuel)
would drag out a multi-level flying wing structure out back that
had up to 10 booms fueling up to 10 planes (mostly drones!) at once.

The reason I know this is because of a Canadian
company that was working on the Vision Recognition
system (Thermal, Optic and Acoustic) that would
AUTOMATICALLY figure out how and when to lower
the fuel boom from the dragging-wing structure
and steer it to the incoming aircraft on a fully
autonomous basis and then auto-disengage
when done (NO boom operator needed!).
This project was started in about 2004
and is STILL ongoing although I have heard
via the grapevine of just such an auto-fuel system
with the dragging wing in actual operation!

I won't say HOW i came to know of this
information...but I know it well...saw a
video demo of the computer simulation too!

(NOTE: it was NOT a classified programme, just a "proprietary" one!)

edit on 2016/2/29 by StargateSG7 because: sp

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 01:38 AM
Something interesting on this beast is if it will have a air/air capacity it will be a game changer. If a laser weapon come on board it can become un-shootable if it can fry every missile or fighter near of it.

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 02:25 AM
a reply to: pauljs75

Sounds a bit like the Switchblade project of yesteryear... all this discussion of refueling and range, what are the electric/battery options available today for aircraft?
edit on 29-2-2016 by Jason88 because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 03:13 AM
a reply to: PhantomTwo

Unfortunately, not my story to tell.
edit on 29-2-2016 by TAGBOARD because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 09:05 AM
a reply to: Tempter

When in hostile airspace, it uses differential engine thrust for yaw control

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 10:13 AM
a reply to: BASSPLYR

You think it's something like a philadelphia experiment?

Be cool if it did indeed have a cloaking device.

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 11:23 AM
a reply to: Virgil Cain

Would you post those in another thread or PM me? I'd like to take a look.

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 12:42 PM
High flyer this one looks to be with no double W.

Cartoons are for kids, real men look at pictures and movies

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 01:44 PM
a reply to: penroc3

Got any handy?

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 02:30 PM
a reply to: anzha

Done. Let me know if received - I've never pm'd let alone pm'd images before...
edit on 29-2-2016 by Virgil Cain because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 06:58 PM
a reply to: Zaphod58

Wont be built.

550M for nothing in 40 years.

How about YOU try again.

This is DOD welfare, if we've got green lady and CA dreaming and all the other crazy stuff, then what is this, 4th best?

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:11 PM
a reply to: BigTrain

green lady designed to do something different. you could say LO isn't her forte.

CA dreaming? what dat be?

b21 to me is like the millennium falcon. looks are decieving.

Big Train have you read the entire thread and really analyzed whats been said? just curious cause a lot seems to be going right past ya. its cool I do that often when I stick my head in the fridge. the one thing I'm looking for and can't find is usually right there in front of me and I just couldnt see it.

here is a link that will help you.
edit on 29-2-2016 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:27 PM
a reply to: BigTrain

You repeat it over and over again, but you haven't shown a lick of proof. You claim to have seen proof, so once again, prove it.

You don't even begin to understand the concept of "mission" do you. Just because something is fast, doesn't mean it can do everything you think it can. Fast doesn't mean that it can do every mission out there, contrary to what you may think. It would have to slow down to release weapons, and everything anywhere near the area would be all over it as soon as it did. You can't hide the signature of a high speed aircraft. Advanced new missiles could stop it, even during the high speed portion, if the interception is handled right.

posted on Feb, 29 2016 @ 07:29 PM
a reply to: Zaphod58

I think he should take my advice and follow the link provided.

new topics

top topics

<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in