US Next Generation Bomber Studies

Ian33 said:
So it us a temporary shelter to keep an aircraft in. Must be very slow and cumbersome on the ground then if it cannot get outand away without a half way house.
Click to expand...


There is a lot of activity in and around the facility. The test assets are sight sensitive, and the facility observes a number of security conditions. Aircraft have to transit a long taxiway from the main base to the south end of the runway. The aircraft can't be visible while some of these security conditions exist - these range from overhead satellites to observers on Tikaboo to personnel at the facility uncleared for the aircraft's shape. Just scheduling around the number of Janet flights is a challenge (they are, currently, about hourly).


Placing a shelter close to the south end of the runway gives the test director a much greater degree of flexibility. If a test asset is delayed and will conflict with an incoming Janet it will not have to transit all the way back to a secure area of the main base before the Janet can land - which would hold up the entire facility.
 
quellish said:
There is a lot of activity in and around the facility. The test assets are sight sensitive, and the facility observes a number of security conditions. Aircraft have to transit a long taxiway from the main base to the south end of the runway. The aircraft can't be visible while some of these security conditions exist - these range from overhead satellites to observers on Tikaboo to personnel at the facility uncleared for the aircraft's shape. Just scheduling around the number of Janet flights is a challenge (they are, currently, about hourly).


Placing a shelter close to the south end of the runway gives the test director a much greater degree of flexibility. If a test asset is delayed and will conflict with an incoming Janet it will not have to transit all the way back to a secure area of the main base before the Janet can land - which would hold up the entire facility.
Click to expand...

Hahahahaha. Well, thats cleared up about a dozen questions I had. Appreciated. Every day is school day.
 
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2014/September/Pages/TopSecretAirForceBomberProgramMovesForward.aspx
 
:eek: :eek: :eek: Said to be from Lockheed Martin called VS-07 NGB LRS-B 2006 Concept Model ... or simply fan-art !?
 

Attachments

  • B-x Lockheed Marting VS-07 NGB LRS-B 2006 Concept Model.jpg
    B-x Lockheed Marting VS-07 NGB LRS-B 2006 Concept Model.jpg
    28.3 KB · Views: 479
Posted on the last page; it's legit, but wouldn't be representative of what's currently flying.
 
Deino said:
:eek: :eek: :eek: Said to be from Lockheed Martin called VS-07 NGB LRS-B 2006 Concept Model ... or simply fan-art !?
Click to expand...


Relevant:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,191.msg89510.html#msg89510
 
http://m.aviationweek.com/military-government/northrop-bomber-team-relieved-over-california-legislation

http://m.aviationweek.com/defense/california-bill-nearly-torpedoed-bomber-bid
 
That link cuts off at an unfortunate place. :) I momentarily thought that it was about a suprise Air Force move to go ahead with something like the FB-22 fighter bomber.
 
And may include one of these.

http://alert5.com/2014/09/16/lockheed-martin-flight-tests-airborne-laser-turret/
 
I feel this futur bomber will be a beast, very impatient to see the first public roll out ;D With laser weapon revolution of futur warfighter is on the way
 
Fielding opinions: do you think PBS is making a JSF style documentary with the LRS-B teams?
 
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/blog/Lists/Posts/Post.aspx?List=7c996cd7-cbb4-4018-baf8-8825eada7aa2&ID=1604&RootFolder=%2Fblog%2FLists%2FPosts

The head of the Air Force Research Laboratory on Sept. 16 said the first test of a hypersonic aircraft could come within five years, and the technology could be applied to cruise missiles by the 2020s. Maj. Gen. Tom Masiello, commander of the Air Force Research Laboratory, said hypersonics is one of the most promising technologies the lab is working on. It is currently testing the Boeing X-51 WaveRider unmanned hypersonic vehicle. Hypersonic planes, lasers and unmanned aircraft are all considered major aviation game changers, he said.

“Hypersonic is the technology of the future,” Masiello said during the Air Force Association’s Air and Space Conference at National Harbor, Maryland. “I can’t overemphasize the significance of the X-51.” Following a successful and historic test of the X-51 last year, momentum has been growing, Masiello said. During the test, the vehicle reached speeds of Mach 5.1 and traveled 230 nautical miles in about six minutes. When operational, a hypersonic aircraft will give the military the ability to strike time-sensitive targets and could be used in an anti-access/area-denial environment, Masiello said. Survivability in A2/AD situations is critical as the nation focuses on the Asia-Pacific region, which has a higher threat of such attacks, he said.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting that he clearly makes the distinction between 'aircraft' and 'cruise missiles'. So five years would mean something is being built or has been built?? :eek:

 
Hate to be a downer but we've been hearing this kind of thing since the 80's if not earlier. :( And a hypersonic cruise missile by the 2020's? But, but, we could have had the hypersonic ASALM (Mach 5.4) in the 80s. :'(
 
sferrin said:
Hate to be a downer but we've been hearing this kind of thing since the 80's if not earlier. :( And a hypersonic cruise missile by the 2020's? But, but, we could have had the hypersonic ASALM (Mach 5.4) in the 80s. :'(
Click to expand...
Of course a large stealthy BWB type aircraft carrying about 50 ASALMs would pose quit the 'air defense' challenge in, let's say, the Far East for example? ;)
 
bobbymike said:
sferrin said:
Hate to be a downer but we've been hearing this kind of thing since the 80's if not earlier. :( And a hypersonic cruise missile by the 2020's? But, but, we could have had the hypersonic ASALM (Mach 5.4) in the 80s. :'(
Click to expand...
Of course a large stealthy BWB type aircraft carrying about 50 ASALMs would pose quit the 'air defense' challenge in, let's say, the Far East for example? ;)
Click to expand...

Yes indeed. :)
 
bobbymike said:
sferrin said:
Hate to be a downer but we've been hearing this kind of thing since the 80's if not earlier. :( And a hypersonic cruise missile by the 2020's? But, but, we could have had the hypersonic ASALM (Mach 5.4) in the 80s. :'(
Click to expand...
Of course a large stealthy BWB type aircraft carrying about 50 ASALMs would pose quit the 'air defense' challenge in, let's say, the Far East for example? ;)
Click to expand...

Wouldn't the general availability of the latter strongly influence how you designed the former? A stealthy, BWB might no longer be the optimal or desirable planform for a hypersonic CM carrier.
 
Surely the technology start to be mature enough to see an hypersonic cruise missile in 2020, and we don't know what kind of technology live in the black world.
 
http://secure.afa.org/events/Conference/2014/transcripts/Tuesday-9am-NuclearPanel.asp
http://secure.afa.org/events/Conference/2014/transcripts/Wednesday-8am-Chadwick.asp
 
Going a bit OT for the moment:

un15e00f4kwvmnb6ko5k.jpg

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-u-s-air-forces-new-ac-130-gunships-are-really-bomb-1584518199​
 
http://www.floridatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/09/11/florida-today-sponsoring-forum-aviation-expansion/15476331/?utm_content=%5B%278194874%27%5D


FLORIDA TODAY sponsoring forum on aviation expansion
Wayne T. Price; FLORIDA TODAY 12:31 p.m. EDT September 25, 2014


The ripple effect of the company's "Project Magellan" at Melbourne International Airport, along with other area aeronautic projects and expansions, will be felt in the local employment rolls, in real estate, in education and in the small business community. It also will further cement Brevard's reputation as an aeronautics and aviation epicenter for research and development.


To help sort out some of this, and to help provide a strategy on how best to capitalize on recent momentum, FLORIDA TODAY is sponsoring a public panel discussion from 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Sept. 29 at the Florida Institute of Technology's Gleason Auditorium. Other hosts of the event, called "Building on Magellan — Exploring Possibilities," are the Economic Development Commission of Florida's Space Coast and Florida Tech.


Panel members for the event include:


• Alan Metzger, vice president and integrated program team leader of LEMV and airship programs for Northrop Grumman;


• Michael Chriszt, economist with the Federal Reserve in Atlanta;


• Steve Moldrem, director of human resources, Embraer;


• Lynda Weatherman, president and chief executive officer of the Economic Development Commission of Florida's Space Coast.


Moderating the event will be Matt Reed, FLORIDA TODAY's public interest editor.
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • ByY0hN9IMAAWbz-.png
    ByY0hN9IMAAWbz-.png
    140.9 KB · Views: 513
Please! 767, 777, or 787 are required for this. No respectable USAFA grad is looking to fly light turbine. It would be nice to think that USAF Inc. would consider a cost effective means to support the PBI (poor bloddy infantry), since "up close and personal" is out of vogue (again).

Seriously if all of the discussion about precision is correct, having a platform full of a myriad of ordance to support the mission in an age of information diversity makes sense to me. There is a lot of discussion regarding increased military operations in major urban centers (Gaza, Mosul and (any city in) Syria), with the desire to minimize collateral damage. An aircraft chalk full of SMB Mk.II and Griffin AGM lerking for hours on end seems something any commander tasked with operating in that environment would desire. Precision artillery and mortars would be able to do the same, however if one is trying to minimize their visibility/footprint, for whatever reason, then an airliner with a misplaced cargo door might be adventageous. For a multitude of reasons.
 
The latest Aviation Week has an article by Bill Sweetman which includes the following quote:

Goodbye Global Zero

"A senior air force official last week said the LRS-B would be designed with hardpoints - suggesting it could be a cruise-missile carrier."

I find that a bit hard to square with the idea that the LRS would be highly stealthy and the repeated insistence that the LRS-B would be fast.
 
DrRansom said:
The latest Aviation Week has an article by Bill Sweetman which includes the following quote:

Goodbye Global Zero

"A senior air force official last week said the LRS-B would be designed with hardpoints - suggesting it could be a cruise-missile carrier."

I find that a bit hard to square with the idea that the LRS would be highly stealthy and the repeated insistence that the LRS-B would be fast.
Click to expand...

The B-1B has/had hardpoints for cruise missiles.
 
This is just my 2 cents. But I wouldn't mind seeing something like McD MD-12. Or perhaps a redesigned Being Sonic Cruiser. I always thought both deserved a bomber variant.
 

Attachments

  • MD-12.jpg
    MD-12.jpg
    24.5 KB · Views: 295
sferrin said:
DrRansom said:
The latest Aviation Week has an article by Bill Sweetman which includes the following quote:

Goodbye Global Zero

"A senior air force official last week said the LRS-B would be designed with hardpoints - suggesting it could be a cruise-missile carrier."

I find that a bit hard to square with the idea that the LRS would be highly stealthy and the repeated insistence that the LRS-B would be fast.
Click to expand...

The B-1B has/had hardpoints for cruise missiles.
Click to expand...

The F-35 can add exterior hard points as well.

The USAF definitely has a 'first day of war' and degraded air defense strategy when it come to stealth.
 
XP67_Moonbat said:
This is just my 2 cents. But I wouldn't mind seeing something like McD MD-12. Or perhaps a redesigned Being Sonic Cruiser. I always thought both deserved a bomber variant.
Click to expand...

Are we not endangering enough civilian traffic by building military variants of the 737, 767, 330 etc?
 
XP67_Moonbat said:
Neh. Unless we start painting military aircraft in civilian livery.
Click to expand...

Not to take this too OT, but do civilian liveries really give distinct returns? I could see that broadside perhaps (windows and all) but front and rear aspect?
 
marauder2048 said:
XP67_Moonbat said:
This is just my 2 cents. But I wouldn't mind seeing something like McD MD-12. Or perhaps a redesigned Being Sonic Cruiser. I always thought both deserved a bomber variant.
Click to expand...

Are we not endangering enough civilian traffic by building military variants of the 737, 767, 330 etc?
Click to expand...

::)
 
...
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20140929_180611.jpg
    IMG_20140929_180611.jpg
    50.2 KB · Views: 452
That's a screencap from this video last year; I think it was linked earlier in this thread:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCM4y6gOQdM
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom