ACCESS: Above Top Secret
- Apr 2, 2006
- Reaction score
To my knowledge, Jim is one of forum members.
Orionblamblam said:donnage99 said:
I'm told that "$5 Billion" describes it as such. I don't have a copy of the book, I'm afraid, given that it costs about as much as I'll make *this* *week.*
Abraham Gubler said:Great pictures. I think the straight wing fold line in the Tailspin drawing is probably a bit more likely than the angled line on the Orion drawing.
Abraham Gubler said:On spotting the Northrop ATA did have a higher spot factor than the General Dynamics ATA. From the same source as the other data it was 1.44 (Northrop) to 1.32 (General Dynamics).
donnage99 said:The side-by-side seaters are just way too narrow if compared them to the A-12 cockpit.
Orionblamblam said:A pity you've got to be registered to see whatever's there.
Orionblamblam said:If the Northrop design does a better job than the GD design of foldign the wings ou of the way, it might work out just right.
CFE said:Did the Northrop-Grumman ATA teaming help in any way to grease the skids for the Northrop-Grumman merger?
donnage99 said:Does the McDonnell Douglas proposal of the ATA speaks of their less experience in stealth operational effectiveness in comparison to the Northrop bid? The MDD bid is intended to go in at low altitude, so its stealth is masked from AWACS and such, with its under surface setback inlets and exhausts like conventional aircraft method of penetration, while the northrop bid is the opposite. I mean, why do you have to go low and risk visual identification if you going for ultra stealth flying wing?
I thought that McDonnell/GD also signed a contract with Lockheed to help them with stealth, like work on the leading edge and stuff. I read it from that website that is no longer active. Forgot its name, anyone remember?Abraham Gubler said:Grumman got in with Northrop over Lockheed and GDFW and McDonnell teamed without Lockheed. There were assumptions that because McDonnell was teamed with Northrop on the ATF they would know stealth... Of course the Navy and the succsessful bidders had underestimated what it took (ie cost, weight and schedule) to build a LO aircraft and the A-12A ended in disaster.
flateric said:I want to buy these A-12 drawings that Scott have made from giant original blueprints...
donnage99 said:The Northrop A-X is certainly very small to carry a weapon load similar to the A-6....or does it?
General Dynamics to Appeal A-12 Decision
(Source: General Dynamics; issued November 24, 2009)
FALLS CHURCH, Va. --- The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit today denied a request for a rehearing of the Federal Circuit's prior decision sustaining the government's default termination of the A-12 aircraft contract to which General Dynamics and The Boeing Company were parties with the Navy.
General Dynamics disagrees with this most recent decision and continues to believe that the government's default termination was not justified. The company also believes that the ruling provides significant grounds for appeal, and intends to petition the U.S. Supreme Court for review.
General Dynamics, headquartered in Falls Church, Virginia, employs approximately 92,300 people worldwide. The company is a market leader in business aviation; land and expeditionary combat systems, armaments and munitions; shipbuilding and marine systems; and information systems and technologies. (ends)
Boeing Statement on Appeals Court Refusal to Rehear A-12 Case
(Source: Boeing Co.; issued Nov. 24, 2009)
CHICAGO --- J. Michael Luttig, Boeing executive vice president and general counsel, today said that the company intends to appeal to the Supreme Court after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit refused to rehear the company’s appeal in the long-running A-12 case.
"We are disappointed in today's decision. The Court of Appeals' decision is clearly wrong as a matter of law and it has broad implications for all forms of government contracting nationwide. As a consequence, I have directed that an immediate appeal be taken to the Supreme Court of the United States," Luttig said.
At issue in this litigation, which has been pending over a decade, is the manner in which the Defense Department terminated the A-12 military aircraft program and whether the government owed Boeing (then McDonnell Douglas) and General Dynamics Corporation money for work in progress when the contract was terminated, as well as certain other expenses.
The trial court originally ruled in favor of the contractors, but various appeals over the years have delayed a final decision.
The A-12 was to have been the Navy's next-generation, carrier-based advanced tactical aircraft utilizing low observable "stealth" technology.