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.

 

Air Force gives hints about new bomber

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 06:48 AM
link   
reply to post by tencap77
 


It won't be hard to make it unmanned later in its life. They do it with fighters to turn them into target drones now.




posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 01:43 AM
link   
Nimrod MRA4 was started as a fixed price contract - BAE had to renegotate half way through as it was going to send them broke.

I dont think fixed price is the answer to reign in the costs on bleeding edge technology.

Compromise maybe, more scrutiny on design decisions.

I doubt Boeing would have made their F34 any cheaper than LM.



posted on Feb, 23 2014 @ 03:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Yeah, I get that. I understand they can make really smart drones. and it makes sense. but bombing targets from space makes so much more sense. we don't have to send the bombers, they're "already" up there. GPS guided munitions dropped from 400 miles in space, by an autonomous killer robot?

another advantage to having a space based weapons platform? we can kill they're space based systems more efficiently and get a cleaner kill.

Better to take the high ground now. it's only a matter of time. eventually we're actually going to have to go to war with someone. I don[t want to fight them. I want to exterminate them. That's the only reason to use combat force. EVER. if we let some other "power" get there ahead of us, I can assure you, they won't be making the same STUPID mistakes on the battlefield of the future that we've been making all over the world for the last couple of decades.



posted on Feb, 25 2014 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Do you think we will see an unveil soon? (Christmas can't come soon enough...
), and will we be able to see a "fly-off" of the the two designs or have they already pretty much awarded contracts to the winning design?



posted on Feb, 25 2014 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Can anyone explain why the money is not spent in infrastructure? I mean You country already can kick ass... how about providing a few jobs...

Independent view from the outside.



posted on Feb, 25 2014 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by tencap77
 


I agree with that mentality when it comes to warfare. If you are going to fight then you damn well fight.

The problem with satellite weaponry is the problem all satellites have. You know where and when it is going to be somewhere. That makes it an easy target for ASAT weapons.



posted on Feb, 25 2014 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Sammamishman
 


From what I understand it will be a flyoff. It's down to a couple with some major advances that we'll never see, but it is an actual competition.



posted on Feb, 25 2014 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Dizak
 


Numerically we can kick ass. When you get into the fine details the US military starts to fall apart. Fleets as old or older than the crews, cracks appearing in structures, speed and G limits, etc.

I'd love to see a better balance of non-military to military spending, but the leadership has let the force get in bad shape.



posted on Feb, 25 2014 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Could this be the reasoning for the rumored added South base security?



posted on Feb, 25 2014 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


That is why if I was in charge, the satellites that have weapons on board would look identical to non-weaponized satellites. I'd also use a semi-civilian cover (hmmm NASA?) to place them. I'd be launching so many into space under the guise of GPS/scientific research that the enemy would be taking a "guess" any time it tried to destroy one.

Each satellite would be a "one time" weapon as well. If it wasn't, it could be targeted after giving away it's position.



posted on Feb, 25 2014 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Sammamishman
 


Almost certainly.



posted on Feb, 25 2014 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


Which is why the Air Force is launching electroptically equipped satellites into orbit.



posted on Feb, 25 2014 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


To add to Zaph's reply:

Aviation Week



posted on Feb, 25 2014 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Sammamishman
 


What South base Edwards ? What we see in the last itérations all the options are open for the new bomber energy weapon , hypersonic , I m very impatient to see a concept become public. Too long awaiting for Christmas

edit on 25-2-2014 by darksidius because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-2-2014 by darksidius because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 25 2014 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by darksidius
 


Ah but you should see the secret santa stuff.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Yes
Realy Zaph with your opinion when we see the first concept in public? If USAF want it for 2020 we will see the first prototype in white world in few years ?



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by darksidius
 


We'll see the competition start within a year if they want it even close to 2020.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


For the moment we can just speculate about the futur technology who embark on the new bomber, what shape? what kind of engine? what kind of weapon , what speed subsonic or supersonic ? all of that is realy interesting and the born of a new bomber is a great moment for Aerospace hobbyist.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Are Lockheed and Boeing still together on this? The two of them pooling their resources could make for some wicked flying machines.



posted on Feb, 26 2014 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Sammamishman
 


I've heard interesting things. Officially it is Boeing/LM and NG. Unofficially I've heard both Boeing and LM have something out there.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join