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.

 

Meet the B-21

page: 34
32
<< 31  32  33    35  36  37 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2016 @ 06:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Back in 1980, Regan's administration constantly criticized the Carter administration for a lack of defense projects, and cited the cancellation of the B-1 program. So to counter, the Carter administration publicly unveiled the ATB program.
Do you think something similar could happen around late October, or early November of this year? Especially with the lack of backup behind the F-35 program?




posted on Sep, 19 2016 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: HomeyKXTA

It wouldn't surprise me. Let's just say that certain parties fell in love with the way they ran the B-21 program up until selection. Certain ideas that have been tossed around in recent years MAY be undergoing something similar.



posted on Sep, 19 2016 @ 11:56 PM
link   

The Air Force’s new bomber, the B-21 Raider, should come in almost $40 million below the official $550 million a copy official estimate, says Randall Walden, director of the Air Force’s Rapid Capabilities Office. So, $511 million is the new $550 million.

After his panel here at the Air Force Associations 2016 annual conference, Walden said the Pentagon’s office of Cost Estimate and Program Analysis (CAPE) has produced a new estimate of $511 million a plane, which matches earlier estimates by the plane’s builder Northrop Grumman.

CAPE has been regularly performing cost estimates of the plane since 2012.


breakingdefense.com...



posted on Sep, 20 2016 @ 01:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: anzha

The Air Force’s new bomber, the B-21 Raider, should come in almost $40 million below the official $550 million a copy official estimate, says Randall Walden, director of the Air Force’s Rapid Capabilities Office. So, $511 million is the new $550 million.

After his panel here at the Air Force Associations 2016 annual conference, Walden said the Pentagon’s office of Cost Estimate and Program Analysis (CAPE) has produced a new estimate of $511 million a plane, which matches earlier estimates by the plane’s builder Northrop Grumman.

CAPE has been regularly performing cost estimates of the plane since 2012.


breakingdefense.com...


B21 ROI-nnihalator.
A fearsome ability to appear less expensive on paper than its competitors.

So if we are saying the Raider precursor was Tx......how does this fit with the rumor that Kansas was not an LRSB entry?

Surely the most likely scenario was Lockheed/Boeing flashing their knickers as well???
edit on 20-9-2016 by Jukiodone because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2016 @ 01:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Jukiodone

Theirs looked nothing like Wichita. It was an interesting design, but kinda something you'd want to keep under wraps because it could never be passed off as a B-2 on a routine flight.



posted on Sep, 20 2016 @ 02:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Barnalby
a reply to: Zaphod58

Too bad Northrop Grumman don't have any WWII bomber designs in their collectively-owned heritage. "Superfortress/Stratofortress/Liberator II" would have been nice to see.
B-52 Stratofortress.. Already taken.



posted on Sep, 20 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   
For sure TEXAS has nothing to see with a B-2 flight , and the Amarillo shape don't look like the B-21 picture USAF release, the Amarillo craft is more Arrow shape. Why on the Northrop B-21 pictures the inlet are so enormous ? not realy stealth no ?
edit on 20-9-2016 by darksidius because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2016 @ 07:19 AM
link   
www.popularmechanics.com... Very interesting a long range fighter like the P-51D escort of WW2 BOMBER

edit on 21-9-2016 by darksidius because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2016 @ 07:25 AM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

I believe that was brought up already.

Cool that there's an article about it.



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 06:42 AM
link   
I have the feeling that the PCA plane will be something very different than the fighter we know today. Something able to escort the B-21 Raider on the long distance will be with new engine and radical new design for sure.



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Discotech

It's down to selective power-up of banks of capacitors having high K-value dielectric insulators, which leads to a gravitational field gradient perpendicular to the horizontal profile of the wing, producing a repulsive (propulsive?) force upon the selected parts of the airframe, conducive to the appropriate directional change/roll etc..



I read a book today, which I must admit was a million miles over my head in terms of the mathematics, but the above roughly approximates to a description of the B2 steering capability. I think. I'm probably wrong due to my mathematical incompetence, though I believe that in itself, the theory presented was quite sound.

Awaiting scornful rebuke in 5, 4, 3...






edit on SeptemberThursday1619CDT04America/Chicago-050009 by FlyInTheOintment because: clarification, phraseology



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

According to that article the B-21 can't survive over China. Why are we building an aircraft that can't make it to it's targets?



posted on Sep, 22 2016 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: PhantomTwo

Nothing will be able to get deep into China on one mission. Their defenses are to numerous and the way they have them layered is too good.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 02:40 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
I couldn't help noticing that you said "willl be able......" ? (as opposed to "would be able....")
Is there something you know about future military plans and China?

Half-kidding.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 02:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Moley

No plans currently, just some interesting new developments in the Chinese defense industry.
edit on 9/23/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 10:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment
a reply to: Discotech

Awaiting scornful rebuke in 5, 4, 3...

Yeah, I'm not going to rebuke you - But - trying to read gravitational manipulation into the math/physics/myths about the B-2 is erroneous at best. Any strange electronics the B-2 may possess should be interpreted as a puzzle piece discovered that may accentuate the stealthiness of the system as opposed to helping the aircraft defy gravity.



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 10:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: darksidius
I have the feeling that the PCA plane will be something very different than the fighter we know today. Something able to escort the B-21 Raider on the long distance will be with new engine and radical new design for sure.

I am so glad someone is talking about the PCAP! For those who like to guess what the future will bring - you have to really look into the PCAP. Forget Gen 6 and other future fighter projects, its this concept you need to follow as it matures and changes names (as they all do at this stage). I will also bet that this is a concept that could see the rebirth (albeit new and improved) of the F-23, version 2.
(yes, I'm in Nevada again :-P)
edit on 9-23-2016 by intelgurl because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2016 @ 11:34 PM
link   
a reply to: intelgurl

I have to say the Air Force is doing a good job with acronyms and making searches hard. I first thought it was permanent change of assignment and google mostly agreed with me when looking up articles, lol.

My question is will the PCA be rolled into later fighter programs like the F-X or will it be stand-alone?


edit on 24-9-2016 by Pyle because: grammer



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 12:03 AM
link   
a reply to: intelgurl

I'd really love to see the FB-23 or a version of, roll out of a hanger somewhere.



posted on Sep, 24 2016 @ 12:24 AM
link   
I would intuitively suggest that the similar looks of this aircraft to the B2 is just on the surface, but the technology underneath the design in shape is far superior to the B2, probably in many ways that will remain top secret. Just from my experience observing and being in the aerospace industry since the 80's..



new topics




 
32
<< 31  32  33    35  36  37 >>

log in

join