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 States Stealthy TR-X U-2 & Global Hawk Replacement will cost $3.8 billion

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 11:15 AM
link   
Lockheed has come out to give a bit more info on their proposed TR-X proposal. They state they will need $3.8 billion for 30 aircraft. It is supposed to replace the U-2 which is supposedly retiring (*) in 2019.

The design is supposed to have a 40 hour linger at 70k ft. The wings are supposed to be pretty much the same as the U-2, but the shape is not being discussed. The payload is supposed to be 2,200 kg (**).

What I find rather curious about the whole thing is why is Lockheed pitching this publicly? it seems like it ought to be a classic for a black program. I can think of two reasons, but I have been and will be wrong. 1. There is one and Lockheed lost. Now they are trying to get back into the game through convincing people publicly. Skunk Works! We're awesome! Spend money on us! 2. They might have something they want to put into production and want to make people think they just getting started.

www.janes.com...

*. I've heard that how many times since I was a teen?

**. Oh lockheed. Didn't you learn your lesson 20 years ago about mixing unit systems?!




posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha

More wunderwaffe in the 'works'. 4 billion for thirty long lurking aircraft?

One battalion of Russian S400s would make quick work of those. Cost… 200 million. The S400s are currently deployed, a contingent is stationed in Syria, in case the Turks get any funny NATO ideas…

Wiki



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Those companies are money vaccuums, sucking up every buck we have.

Now why do we need to be building all of this expensive technology? Russia is having the same problem and so are other countries. They are keeping their people poor and giving their people's money to build war machines and since they spend so much on them they will need to justify the expenditure. It is heading towards another big war.

I wonder what Island, away from all possible conflict, the execs of Lockheed have their summer houses on? I bet their summer homes have fully stocked bunkers in them. We should make international laws that developers of weaponry cannot have bunkers or out of country homes.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Lockheed is saying it would take ten years.

www.flightglobal.com...



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

So we should just keep flying our 30+ year old fleet until they fall out of the sky and then replace them? And just ignore everyone else upgrading?



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 12:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: rickymouse

So we should just keep flying our 30+ year old fleet until they fall out of the sky and then replace them? And just ignore everyone else upgrading?

They upgrade to match our capability. The US leads the world in that development. In fact they copy our tech and become as good as we eventually, thereby increasing the danger to us in the long run.

US drone fleets over the world. Sounds hostile to me. I think the 'fleet' should land and be scrapped. Maybe others will stop needing to defend themselves against ours and follow suit.

The problem with drone development is one day, armies both on the ground and in the air will become more autonomous, pity the fools that don't see anything wrong with that scenario.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 12:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: rickymouse

So we should just keep flying our 30+ year old fleet until they fall out of the sky and then replace them? And just ignore everyone else upgrading?


They need to replace the old planes, that is not the issue. The fact that this constant competition for more and more power is causing problems. Proving the expenditures are necessary is also a concern. The world we live in is so messed up and we are stuck on a track that will lead us into colliding with another train.

This has been going on for thousands of years, it is nothing new.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 12:15 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

You don't replace them with new versions of the same thing. If you replace an F-15 with an F-15 you're in the same boat. New technology means more money.

It's not happening in a vacuum. That means new technology to counter their technology, which means more money.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 12:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: rickymouse

You don't replace them with new versions of the same thing. If you replace an F-15 with an F-15 you're in the same boat. New technology means more money.

It's not happening in a vacuum. That means new technology to counter their technology, which means more money.


Yeah. I know. But the Russians will have technology to counteract our technology on anything we create sooner or later. It's like a dog chasing it's tail and then running to the food dish and gobbling up all the food then resuming chasing it's tail.

I know in this world we live in it is happening and probably won't change. That is why these people making this stuff get richer and richer. But is it actually rational that humans are doing this, constantly living in fear that there will be a major war? I suppose our fear actually keeps our governments in charge on all sides. They all promote fear to control people.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

As long as people need resources nothing will change.

Yes they'll counter it and we'll upgrade until it can't be upgraded anymore and build new.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 12:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: rickymouse

As long as people need resources nothing will change.

Yes they'll counter it and we'll upgrade until it can't be upgraded anymore and build new.


We are stuck on that train track with another train coming towards us. All of the passengers lose when they collide. I understand there is nothing we can do about it, so many people are brainwashed that there is no way to stop it. Deception and greed run this world. I look at this and understand it is the way it is and know if we don't keep up that we will be in a train that will sustain the most damage. The route we have chosen is not the right route but we can't get off that route anymore.
edit on 16-3-2016 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 04:33 PM
link   
If its fixed price then not a bad price, the real kicker always comes with the maintenance contract as by the time you're nearly 4 billion in it you can't really say no to the well overpriced upgrades for the next 30+ years.



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Make an Rq-180 bigger and put a cockpit in it..



posted on Mar, 16 2016 @ 07:26 PM
link   
I'm an idiot. wrong thread.
edit on 16-3-2016 by anzha because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 02:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
This has been going on for thousands of years, it is nothing new.

And yest your post seems to suggest you want the US to stop doing it. Can you tell me any country that worked well for?



posted on Mar, 17 2016 @ 12:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: rickymouse
This has been going on for thousands of years, it is nothing new.

And yest your post seems to suggest you want the US to stop doing it. Can you tell me any country that worked well for?


I never really said the US should stop anywhere. I only stated that the whole arms race is foolish. Propaganda makes us fear other countries and other countries propaganda makes their citizens fear us. If they made the people running things go out in the field and fight, the wars would disappear. I am sure you won't get the president of Lockheed to go fight in a war.




top topics



 
4

log in

join