Slashdot Mirror
Pentagon Picks Northrop Grumman For Next Gen Bomber (theatlantic.com)
retroworks writes: The B-52s currently in use have been flown by three generations of American Air Force pilots. B1s and B-2 Bombers are also long in the tooth. The Pentagon has been looking for a new model to replace them, and Northrop Grumman has won for the next half-century with a major new order for state-of-the-art bomber aircraft. The bomber will be capable of carrying nuclear weapons, and the contract is worth almost $60 billion. The Atlantic reports, "While the current fleet remains useful, the Air Force wants a bomber that can evade the advancing air defenses of Russia and China—if ever the need arises. The long-range bomber would act as a deterrent against actions designed to keep U.S. forces out of a designated area—what the military calls 'anti-access aerial denial.'"
I'd say it was easily doable if it was a B-52 style 'bomb truck', perhaps even being supersonic like the B-1.
But if it has to survive against modern air defenses that means stealth AND speed. I'm thinking of something like a supersized F-22 or 35.
As such, I'm with Richard - 100 craft delivered for less than the cost of F-35 development? Even if it's just scaling up a F-35, I don't see it happening.
I don't read AC A human right
... if Russia and China announced new attack planes that were designed with the specific purpose that they couldn't be kept out of American airspace...
Instead of building fighter planes, we spend that money on feeding the poor, educating people with no options for education, and providing infrastructure to help those who lack even running water, let alone electricity, internet, or other amenities of modern life?
Yes, we do. Bombers get old. And we no longer have the capability of building B-52's. The assembly line is long since gone to wherever old assembly lines go when they stop making something.
Since the B-52 is pre-interwebs and mostly pre-computer, recreating the ability to manufacture B-52's is likely to be even more expensive than designing a new bomber from scratch, even ignoring that we want stealth and other fun things in a new bomber.
Note that the B-1 and B-2 suffer some of the same problems - not making them anymore means recreating the ability to make them with modern machine tools may be as hard as or harder than starting a new bomber from scratch.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Not a technology demonstrator, it is a classic boondoggle. Gen. Smedly Butler was right when he wrote that war is a racket. This is about money, and nothing else. The US taxpayer is getting fleeced over and over by these overpriced, unnecessary, unneeded weapons systems. But it is damn good for business, if you prefer your business to be focused on weaponry.
A brain is a terrible thing to waste... Mind? That's debatable.
The number of people without running water or electricity in the USA is incredibly small. Internet, we're working on.
Oh, you meant in other countries? Why not lobby those governments to provide these vital services for their citizens?
I'm sorry... I thought you were asking us to stop acting like the policemen-- or bullies-- of the world, by shrinking our army and ending our interventionist policies. So it turns out that you still want our money. Well, my tax money goes to provide for the general welfare of the USA. To do otherwise is interventionist, and also against our fundamental principle of no taxation without representation. If we don't get to demand that the corrupt dictators of failed states change their policies and act according to the needs and will of their people, then no government assistance will be given them.
The people of the United States are not a wallet. If you want to perform charity work, donate time and money to a charity organization.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
We already have well-funded social programs for those issues. They date back to the 1930s. More money isn't the answer.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
The median hourly compensation has fallen in the last 40 years while productivity has more than doubled.
The rich have doubled their ownership, CEO pay has tripled or more.
A basic education is now out of reach for many, and globalization and rampant immigration have mostly annihilated upwards mobility.
You're right, the safety nets established 80 years ago are now ineffective. Time for something much more disruptive.