Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
And LMCO and Boeing are protesting...I had read somewhere that one of the factors involved in this decision was to try to prevent a duopoly between the other two big aircraft manufacturers.
And LMCO and Boeing are protesting...
Don't they protest anything they lose?
Fact is, Northrop have the experience and capability to produce a long-range bomber.
I dont want to think about the individual cost of each bomber, must be bone chilling, aniway is pretty interesting foe the aviation aficionado that the big players are still interested in manned combat planes, I particulary like the concept of the Su-34 bomber.
How long before the first report saying it wont work?
but ... but ... It won't carry the payload of a B-52 .... but .... it won't have the speed of the B-1 ... but ... it won't have the RCS of the Spirit ...
but ... money spent on RCS reduction and control is wasted because old Russian radar completely negates Stealth ...
but ... there is no way that it will be worth the cost because the B-52 only cost a couple million per copy and we have gotten over 50 years of service. Why not just build a new B-52 at the original cost?
T!
And just in case anyone missed it...JOKING
You missed out but but this is old technology the future is satellites and UAVsbut ... but ... It won't carry the payload of a B-52 .... but .... it won't have the speed of the B-1 ... but ... it won't have the RCS of the Spirit ...
but ... money spent on RCS reduction and control is wasted because old Russian radar completely negates Stealth ...
but ... there is no way that it will be worth the cost because the B-52 only cost a couple million per copy and we have gotten over 50 years of service. Why not just build a new B-52 at the original cost?
T!
And just in case anyone missed it...JOKING
You missed out but but this is old technology the future is satellites and UAVs
And...so it begins...
The wrist-wringing, bed-wetting and heavy breathing starts now with this article's headline:
"Air Force Award Of The LRS Bomber To Northrop Grumman Commits Taxpayers To A Trillion-Dollar Burden"
Forbes - Taxpayer Burden
Absolutely...What's funny is the article doesn't bother trying to justify why the author calls it a trillion-dollar burden, when he says it's an $80 billion program. He refers to "the whole package" as a trillion dollars, but that's right after bringing up the Navy's nuclear carriers and submarines. Maybe he's talking about the entire nuclear triad? It's unclear.
Looks like he's just trying to pin the "trillion" label on the LRS-B.