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.
Originally posted by Zaphod58
The B-1B is limited in top speed because of all the modifications they had to make over the years made it overly heavy, and reduced the speed. Then they had to modify the modifications to get some speed back. That's why it's so underpowered. It only has three generators, where most large bombers carry 4, because that was one of the weight saving measures used to get it back up to over Mach 1.
Originally posted by galm 1
The B-1R will change that.
Originally posted by Ghost01
I have done my own study of the future LRS platform. I believe the USAF is trying for new capibilities in this bomber, but at an acceptable price. The big goal here is to finally develop a true sucessor to the B-52 Stratofortress, which has served since 1955, making it well over 50 years old.Tim
Originally posted by galm 1
I thought that the B-2 was the replacement for the B-52?
Originally posted by BlackWidow23
Ghost01 the easiest way to accomplish a higher payload is with more lift. The easiest way to accomplish more lift without vastly increasing size is increase speed.
A b-1 sized hypersonic bomber would generate so much lift at high speed that it could carry an enormous payload.
In my opinion we should go with a hypersonic bomber. It cant outrun missiles but it can get away fast enough to evade them.
Originally posted by Ghost01
Originally posted by galm 1
I thought that the B-2 was the replacement for the B-52?
It was, the problem is the congress have never allocated enough money to buy the number of planes required to replace all of the B-52's. The easy solution would be to buy MORE B-2's!
Tim
Originally posted by galm 1
I know that the B-2 costs around 2.2 billion dollars, but do you think that congress should raise the funding for the B-2 project. Or do you think that they should increase funding for a more cost effective bomber to replace the B-2. I think that the B-2 is fine the way it is.