I
Ian33
Guest
I am trying to locate the base that is under the B-1B, as I am making a slide show and would like to add a caption.
Any help appreciated.
SOC said:Some time later, an attempt was made to re-create this landing on the paved runway at Diego Garcia. Seeing an opportunity to better the Edwards landing, the crew elected to leave the main landing gear up as well.
Bill Walker said:Very interesting to see the amount of fuselage flex when the nose hits the dirt.
kitnut617 said:Bill Walker said:Very interesting to see the amount of fuselage flex when the nose hits the dirt.
One time when I was at the Cold Lake (Alberta) Airshow, a B-1B was being demonstrated and after whipping down the runway at very low level and wings back, it pulled up and did a barrel roll as it gained height. Sometime later at the Abbotsford (BC) Airshow I was talking to the captain of another B-1B and mentioned it to him. His response was (and pointing at his aircraft at the same time), 'that's what hot-dogging does'. He was pointing at all the wrinkles the forward end of the aircraft had ----
I still have a 5.25" with Platoon on it for a C64 in the loft. I have it on tape too. Are we saying that my loft has better data storage integrity than the DoD?Surprisingly enough there are companies out there that still make 3.5" floppy drives and disks. 5.25" is dead and buried though and presumably everything before that.
It worked as of 1 month ago. As did Pac-Man on the VIC-20. To get back on topic, a B-1 is no different to Pac-Man, except the ghosts are the Taliban.You're assuming they still work. I had more than a few burned CDs from the 90s that no longer work.
It worked as of 1 month ago. As did Pac-Man on the VIC-20. To get back on topic, a B-1 is no different to Pac-Man, except the ghosts are the Taliban.You're assuming they still work. I had more than a few burned CDs from the 90s that no longer work.
In that case I hope the USAF have lots of araldite.It worked as of 1 month ago. As did Pac-Man on the VIC-20. To get back on topic, a B-1 is no different to Pac-Man, except the ghosts are the Taliban.You're assuming they still work. I had more than a few burned CDs from the 90s that no longer work.
Best case, and all engineering drawings for the B-1B are in pristine condition, that doesn't mean all the subs did the same (they might not even be in business). Also, the production line is gone, the tooling is gone, etc. The odds of the B-1B being resurrected are zero.
If you expect it to fly "with 4th and 5th Generation fighter", you'll need to have a nearly equal availability rate... Fleet wide.
Otherwise the gamut of missile you promise to provide one day will pale in comparison to the lack of them on overall regarding the number of flight package canceled due to the airframe grounded.
Arsenal is a statistical weapon primarily before any tactical advantages it can bring.
The JimmyCarter B-1B was a compromise of the more maintainable B-1A so the B-1B was obsolete and hard to maintain from its inception.
The B-1B has many great advantages but certainly needs to be replaced and the, smaller than B-2, B-21 is not the answer for payloads
TomcatViP comments stand. The Bone is a hangar honey and needs to be replaced. This NDAA is no where near. A 900B is only a start.If you expect it to fly "with 4th and 5th Generation fighter", you'll need to have a nearly equal availability rate... Fleet wide.
Otherwise the gamut of missile you promise to provide one day will pale in comparison to the lack of them on overall regarding the number of flight package canceled due to the airframe grounded.
Arsenal is a statistical weapon primarily before any tactical advantages it can bring.
It was Ronald Reagan's B-1B. Carter cancelled the B-1 in favor of cruise missiles on B-52s and the B-2 (which he found out about when he took office).The JimmyCarter B-1B was a compromise of the more maintainable B-1A so the B-1B was obsolete and hard to maintain from its inception. The B-1B has many great advantages but certainly needs to be replaced and the, smaller than B-2, B-21 is not the answer for payloads required. Smaller and smaller munitions are great but do not obviate the needs that only a large payload craft similar to B-1 can meet.
LM's proposed H-Bomber would be good start, it should be manned vs what LM proposed as Unmanned as it still needs to carry and fulfill Bone missions which include CAS. Some of the resource spent on too many Hyper projects could be spent on a manned multi-mission bomber/launcher.
1). not sure how one knows that this is not a LM version but ok.LM's proposed H-Bomber would be good start, it should be manned vs what LM proposed as Unmanned as it still needs to carry and fulfill Bone missions which include CAS. Some of the resource spent on too many Hyper projects could be spent on a manned multi-mission bomber/launcher.
Ok, you really have to be deliberately trying to be this wrong.
1) That's not a Lockheed Martin proposal for anything. It's somebody's faked up concept art for the Russian PAK DA. I'm sure LM has some hypersonic bomber art but this isn't it.
2) Hypersonic strike and loitering CAS are two roles that cannot possibly be accommodated in one airframe. An airframe that can manage Mach 4+ cannot efficiently loiter for hours at subsonic speeds. It's not physically possible within shouting distance of the current state of the art.
3) USAF is developing a manned multi-mission bomber. It's called the B-21. That's all the money there is. Killing all of the hypersonic missile programs in total wouldn't fund another manned bomber program of any sort, much less your hypersonic loitering fiction.