Register here

Author Topic: Northrop Grumman B-21 Long Range Strike Bomber  (Read 170265 times)

Offline robunos

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1611
  • You're Mad, You Are.....
Re: Northrop Grumman B-21 Long Range Strike Bomber
« Reply #1230 on: May 19, 2017, 02:14:01 pm »
I don't think it's the aircraft directly that the Congresscritters are concerned with, but rather the financial details of the Development Contract . . .

cheers,
            Robin.

That is exactly what I mean Robin, they should keep the B-21 cost Blacker than Black and not reveal how much the B-21 overall cost for the entire program is, until after the B-21 reveal. Remember what happened to the B-2 program?

I do indeed, but then here's the Catch-22 esque scenario . . .
Pols say "We demand to how much money the B-21 is costing, and where the money's being spent", translation, if the money's not going to benefit our voters, we're going to cancel it, or at the very least, cut the programme back hard.
USAF says "We have to keep everything super secret, this programme is critically important to our future defence plans. So sorry, no can do.", translation, We're not going to give you any information about this programme, that you can use to make a case for cancellation, or cutbacks.
Pols say "In that case then, we're going to cancel it anyway.", translation, In that case then, we're going to cancel it anyway.


cheers,
            Robin.
Where ARE the Daleks when you need them......

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8903
Re: Northrop Grumman B-21 Long Range Strike Bomber
« Reply #1231 on: May 19, 2017, 02:24:59 pm »
I don't think it's the aircraft directly that the Congresscritters are concerned with, but rather the financial details of the Development Contract . . .

cheers,
            Robin.

That is exactly what I mean Robin, they should keep the B-21 cost Blacker than Black and not reveal how much the B-21 overall cost for the entire program is, until after the B-21 reveal. Remember what happened to the B-2 program?

I do indeed, but then here's the Catch-22 esque scenario . . .
Pols say "We demand to how much money the B-21 is costing, and where the money's being spent", translation, if the money's not going to benefit our voters, we're going to cancel it, or at the very least, cut the programme back hard.
USAF says "We have to keep everything super secret, this programme is critically important to our future defence plans. So sorry, no can do.", translation, We're not going to give you any information about this programme, that you can use to make a case for cancellation, or cutbacks.
Pols say "In that case then, we're going to cancel it anyway.", translation, In that case then, we're going to cancel it anyway.


cheers,
            Robin.

If that worked nothing would be able to be kept secret.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 6866
"The real man smiles in trouble, gathers strength from distress, and grows brave by reflection." - Thomas Paine

"On what principle is it that with nothing but improvement behind us, we are to expect nothing but deterioration before us?" - Lord Macaulay

Offline Airplane

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 178
Re: Northrop Grumman B-21 Long Range Strike Bomber
« Reply #1233 on: May 26, 2017, 06:21:43 pm »
http://breakingdefense.com/2017/05/b-21-bomber-boost-general-touts-165-kc-46-still-late/

165 is a good start............  ;D

165 of what? A four engined twin weapon bay aircraft similar to a B2? Or a twin engined single weapon bay 1/2 the payload of a B2 type of bomber?  Either way 100 is far too few.
"The test of success is not what you do when your on top. Success is how high you bounce when you hit bottom.
General George S. Patton