/k/ - Weapons » Thread #27714244

[312 / 47 / ?]

22KiB, 800x362, sfqvahmlr0x18biuiu6z.jpg

A Winner Is Northrop Grumman

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:06:13 No.27714244 View Reply Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714447 >>27714851 >>27715126 >>27715347 >>27715468 >>27716103 >>27716623 >>27716810 >>27719394 >>27721509 >>27723279

Northrop Grumman has won the LRS-B competition, with a fixed price $21.4 billion dollar contract for 21 aircraft. The estimated cost of the winning airframe is $511 million per aircraft. No technical details yet.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/2015/10/27/northrop-grumman-wins-usaf-bomber-contract/74661394/

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:21:32 No.27714412 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27716623 >>27718425

BOEING BTFO
LOCKHEED SHILLS ON SUICIDE WATCH

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:22:40 No.27714425 Report Delete

Quoted By:

I like northrop grumman, good for them.

Phil Ossiferz Stone !!esSirF6LRYN

Phil Ossiferz Stone !!esSirF6LRYN Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:24:33 No.27714447 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714467 >>27714472 >>27714477 >>27714478 >>27714675 >>27714822 >>27715535

>>27714244
21 fucking airplanes? That's IT?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:25:59 No.27714467 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714527 >>27715086

Good for NG, I was actually hoping they would win. For some reason the aircraft they develop are always sexy as fuck.

>>27714447
Quality and performance generally costs a lot. There's only 21 spirits in service.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO z1445372595001.png, 39KiB, 157x168

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:26:18 No.27714472 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714447
Thank, Obama!

Madfag !msgq72yRSI

Madfag !msgq72yRSI Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:26:41 No.27714477 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714447
For now.

100 planned.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:26:44 No.27714478 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714522

>>27714447
>21 fucking airplanes? That's IT?

1 billion dollars a plane

I'm sure it would cost that much to build more b2s

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:28:19 No.27714509 Report Delete

Quoted By:

Is there any details on a render or mockup of their concept. Or did they just say here's money build plane.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:29:26 No.27714522 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714583

>>27714478
>1 billion dollars a plane

$511 million dollars in FY-2010 dollars per plane. The rest of the cost comes from creating the industrial base (building tooling, hiring workers, building and testing the flight prototypes) for the aircraft.

DrafterAnon !!369c0OUfy9A

DrafterAnon !!369c0OUfy9A Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:29:39 No.27714527 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714826 >>27715593

>>27714467

Hell, just the logistics of TRYING to prevent spying is going to cost a ton. Let alone engineering and manufacturing.

Does the 21.4 billion include trainers and stuff?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:32:29 No.27714562 Report Delete

Quoted By:

its only pork when its not your district

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:34:22 No.27714583 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714592 >>27714595

>>27714522
>$511 million dollars in FY-2010 dollars per plane.

If I sell you an ice cream cone for 1 dollar and add 5 dollars in service fees and ice cream research costs you might as well call it a 6 dollar ice cream cone.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:35:27 No.27714592 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714634

>>27714583
>If I sell you an ice cream cone for 1 dollar and add 5 dollars in service fees and ice cream research costs you might as well call it a 6 dollar ice cream cone.

Those $5 service fees are one time only deals, which do not become recurring costs if you buy more ice cream.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:35:36 No.27714595 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714583
>doesn't understand the difference between one time costs and per unit cost
>commenting on any kind of industrial project, much less military procurement

please go and stay go

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:37:00 No.27714617 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714640 >>27714641 >>27714664 >>27721539

what if they go 3times over budget and 5 years behind, but make badass aircraft that meets every need, you guys would call it a failure or win?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:38:12 No.27714634 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714679

>>27714592
>which do not become recurring costs if you buy more ice cream.

Oh ok not like there has been a history of ordering 132 bombers and then actually building 21 or anything.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1410479641966.jpg, 239KiB, 1854x1013

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:38:47 No.27714640 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27722121

>>27714617
Hi. Have we met?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:38:48 No.27714641 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714617
>what if they go 3times over budget and 5 years behind, but make badass aircraft that meets every need, you guys would call it a failure or win?

They would lose the contract long before that. It's fixed price. The cost for excess is failure. The Rapid Capabilities Office is specifically running this program to avoid this outcome, and it has apparently been a spectacular success so far.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:38:55 No.27714646 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27722930

northrop is best rop.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:40:40 No.27714664 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714686 >>27714823

>>27714617
>what if they go 3times over budget and 5 years behind, but make badass aircraft that meets every need, you guys would call it a failure or win?

Essentially the entire selling point of this aircraft is the affordability of it instead of building more/upgraded b2s. If it goes over budget it has literally failed its one task, unlike the f35/f22 who's purpose was to provide capability that was not even remotely possible with existing aircraft.

Now everyone will start with the "LRSB is 50000000x better than the b2" bullshit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:41:39 No.27714675 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714447
It's the initial contract. The Air Force said they still plan to buy 100.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:41:56 No.27714679 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714634
>Oh ok not like there has been a history of ordering 132 bombers and then actually building 21 or anything.

You can play the "what if" game as long as you want, but it's meaningless drivel without access to actual program data. The RCO says So Far So Good, and that's because they spent $1.9 billion dollars over the past four years on risk reduction efforts before moving to the contracting phase. They are not overloading the plane with gizmos. The Northrop entry's estimated cost (two independent organizations evaluated the designs; the more conservative estimate of $511 million was used) is $39 million under the requirement.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:42:18 No.27714686 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714717 >>27714725

>>27714664
What if the aircraft has a lower RCS than the F-22 / F-35 and is capable of striking targets from sea?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:44:27 No.27714717 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714748 >>27714753 >>27714823

>>27714686
>What if the aircraft has a lower RCS than the F-22 / F-35 and is capable of striking targets from sea?

It would need significantly different or better capabilities than the b2 for it to make sense.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:45:14 No.27714725 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714686
>What if the aircraft has a lower RCS than the F-22 / F-35
It will. The B-2 already does across all spectrums. It's far easier to build all spectrum VLO into a tail less airframe.

>is capable of striking targets from sea?
It's way too fucking big for carrier ops. It's a strategic bomber, not a tactical strike fighter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:46:44 No.27714747 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714775 >>27714822

B-3 POLTERGEIST WILL COMPRESS TIME AND SPACE.

Also, what systems and gizmos would be used for electronic attack?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:46:54 No.27714748 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714837

>>27714717
It's supposed to be a replacement for the B-52 and B-1. Your precious B-2 planefu is safe for now until 2037 is developed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:47:16 No.27714753 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714780 >>27714798

>>27714717

I'm expecting it to be a cheaper, stealthier version of the B-2 with updated electronics and a somewhat smaller max payload.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:48:36 No.27714775 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714798

>>27714747
It will probably have the Next Generation Jammer integrated into it. Not to mention a powerful AESA radar if it's expected to perform ISR missions as well.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:48:51 No.27714780 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714798

>>27714753
That also has laser defences and EW capability.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:49:53 No.27714792 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714880

>>27714428
>>27714632
>>27714697

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:50:09 No.27714798 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714810 >>27714813 >>27714823 >>27714840 >>27715043

>>27714753
>>27714775
>>27714780

And these are things that could not be just added to the b2 for less resources?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:51:21 No.27714810 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714837

>>27714798
That still doesn't address the issue of the B-52s and B-1Bs being absolutely fucking ancient.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:51:25 No.27714813 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714848

>>27714798
>And these are things that could not be just added to the b2 for less resources?

There are not enough B-2s. The industrial base for creating B-2s does not exist anymore. It was not difficult to build a new plane that better fulfills the Air Force's needs.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:52:10 No.27714822 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714832 >>27715514 >>27719534

>>27714447

Heavy Bombers in an age when you can strap a couple of dozen hellfires to a MC-130 for low intensity conflicts and use cruise missiles for long range heavy bombardment at a fraction of the cost of a bomber flight.

>>27714747

Cyberspace cowboys flying behind the bombers on stealthy microlites with their cutting edge decks and counter-ICE programs set to kill.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:52:10 No.27714823 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714798
>>27714717
>>27714664
Not this fucking luddite faggot again. Holy fuck.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:52:28 No.27714826 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714854

>>27714527
Im curious, why do they have important scehmatics accessible to the internet? Is it too nightmarish to put it all to an isolated network?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:53:14 No.27714832 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714822
>cruise missiles for long range heavy bombardment at a fraction of the cost of a bomber flight.
What. The. Literal. Fuck.

Go read a goddamn book, nigger.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:53:57 No.27714837 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714874 >>27714922 >>27721709

>>27714810
>That still doesn't address the issue of the B-52s and B-1Bs being absolutely fucking ancient.

I find it hard to believe that the b2s could not be upgraded and the production of them started up again.

Also, as I've said before. I think its fucking hilarious that they are planning 100 of these things. If only there was an existing bomber that they cut down the order by 100 planes that has similar capabilities.

>>27714748
>Your precious B-2 planefu is safe for now until 2037 is developed.

My planefu is the 2037 bomber. I think all effort should be put into that plane to make it be better and come out sooner.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:54:26 No.27714840 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714798
No, they could not.

B-2's used to cost twice as much as the LSR-B current estimates, and will be inferior in pretty much every way.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:55:17 No.27714848 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714922

>>27714813
>The industrial base for creating B-2s does not exist anymore.

And the industrial base for the LRSB does?

>>27714813
>It was not difficult to build a new plane that better fulfills the Air Force's needs.

Yeah it just costs a lot of money.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 39c4aa03b61d346372844a8ccb350c1d.jpg, 41KiB, 736x413

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:55:23 No.27714851 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714244
>Northrop Grumman
Fuck yeah, bad guys win again! We're sure to get another impossibly enormous evil-looking flying wing bomber.

Finally, payback against Lockheed for the Air Force picking the F-22 over the clearly sexier YF-23.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:55:35 No.27714854 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714826
>why do they have important scehmatics accessible to the internet?
They don't. Some less sensitive data is on networked boxes, but all the truly sensitive stuff is on black room boxes. Most of the highest-level industrial and national data espionage revolves around trying to move data from black room boxes to networked boxes through subverted employees and clever dongle exploits.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO rlabfdndjnelosjgyuw5.jpg, 113KiB, 653x295

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:55:58 No.27714857 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714872 >>27715127 >>27715378 >>27722485

Why do we need bombers anyway?
Why not just build cruise missile trucks?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO ndbhm.jpg, 55KiB, 504x500

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:57:04 No.27714868 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714882 >>27715048

>The Pentagon announces a contract for a new strategic bomber
>Anons start arguing about what they know the Pentagon /really/ needs and should have bought

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO jqpnexme8siuimsknw4a.jpg, 46KiB, 800x322

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:57:21 No.27714872 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714857

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:57:36 No.27714874 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714890

>>27714837
>I find it hard to believe that the b2s could not be upgraded and the production of them started up again.

You're a fucking idiot. The production facilities for the B-2 no longer exist, and the people responsible for the project have most likely died, retired, or are working on other projects. It's way cheaper and more practical to go with a clean sheet design.

>My planefu is the 2037 bomber. I think all effort should be put into that plane to make it be better and come out sooner.

The B-2 is not the only bomber the Air Force operates. They need something to replace their B-52s and B-1Bs in the coming decades.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1443788169595025069.jpg, 3MiB, 6228x2301

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:57:43 No.27714878 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715150

based USA tbh

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:57:50 No.27714880 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714792
Considering the remote hacking capabilities, and B-2 Spirit:

B-3 Poltergeist

_____________________________
Also, B-3A Poltergeist is the only true option.

_____________________________
We need to get this out on as many aviation forums as possible, STAT.

>tfw /k/ names the next manned stealth aircraft in service

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:58:03 No.27714882 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714904

>>27714868

These are the same people that think driving around in humvees looking for trouble in the middle east is a good strategy. Or that launching a couple hundred airstrikes is going to defeat ISIS.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 18:59:06 No.27714890 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714899 >>27714906 >>27714912 >>27714915 >>27714917 >>27714983

>>27714874
>It's way cheaper and more practical to go with a clean sheet design.

Oh wow that proves it. You're obviously a genius and I'm obviously an idiot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:00:03 No.27714899 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714921

>>27714890
Basically, yes. You clearly have no fucking clue how airframe design and avionics/sensor integration works.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:00:23 No.27714904 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714921

>>27714882
>These are the same people that think driving around in humvees looking for trouble in the middle east is a good strategy. Or that launching a couple hundred airstrikes is going to defeat ISIS.

Operations are very political. Operational needs are not. The answers to those needs are inevitably politicized. No one here knows what the Air Force actually needs, because no one truly knows on a technical level where the Air Force believes its most important weaknesses lie.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1424777210632.jpg, 71KiB, 448x597

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:00:45 No.27714906 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714890
>and I'm obviously an idiot.
ya

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:01:27 No.27714912 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714890
Yeah, its pretty fucking obvious.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:01:44 No.27714915 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714890

>I'm obviously an idiot.

True.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:01:52 No.27714917 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714890
>and I'm obviously an idiot.

The first correct thing you've said in this thread.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:02:08 No.27714921 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714899
>Basically, yes. You clearly have no fucking clue how airframe design and avionics/sensor integration works.

Yeah totally bro.

>>27714904
>No one here knows what the Air Force actually needs

They need the 2037 bomber 8-10 years from now.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:02:22 No.27714922 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714950

>>27714837
>I find it hard to believe that the b2s could not be upgraded and the production of them started up again.
The b2 could be built again. However it's still be a 30 year old design. If they upgrade it what is going to change? Nothing: because the b2 was purpose built to bypass 80s soviet detection systems and drop bombs.

>>27714848
>And the industrial base for the LRSB does?
I am 100% sure there will be enough parts contracts to go around.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:04:20 No.27714950 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27714970 >>27714987 >>27714996

>>27714922
>I am 100% sure there will be enough parts contracts to go around.

Remember I'm an idiot because the b2 can't be built again because the "industrial base doesn't exist for it anymore" but inventing an entirely new aircraft with similar capabilities does somehow have an existing industrial base.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:05:45 No.27714970 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714950

>Remember I'm an idiot

We never forgot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:06:42 No.27714983 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714890
he's right you know. the expertise to essentially redesign a 30+ year old plane doesn't exist anymore. everything would have to be reworked from scratch, and I'm betting that many of the original design documents aren't even in a digital form that can be used these days. so a lot of the design work needs to be re-learnt, and new design work must to be done to create and integrate upgrades.

then all the tooling would need to be rebuilt. why not build tooling for new and better parts at this stage?

soooo the effort involved not far off from building from scratch, except that the upgrade is constrained by design ideas and engineering limitations of the 1970s-1980s.

besides, why would the US want their first strike bomber to be based on anything but the best technology?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:07:14 No.27714987 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715017

>>27714950
Why try to set up infrastructure to build an obsolete plane when you can start from the ground up with a new design purpose built to take advantage of modern technology? You are probably one of those idiots who thinks the Silent Eagle is an honest to god improvement over the F-22 and F-35.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:07:20 No.27714988 Report Delete

Quoted By:

Let me also preface everything I've said by saying it is based off of the assumption that defense spending actually matters.

If the economy really is what it appears to be now, an incredibly corrupt national ponzi scheme, then the military should be literally given a blank check to build whatever the fuck they want.

In that case the LRSB is still an overpriced retarded idea, but in a situation with unlimited funds it's drawbacks are eliminated.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:08:18 No.27714996 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715005 >>27715039

>>27714950
the difference being that the new aircraft will have improvements over a 30 year old airframe.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:08:56 No.27715005 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714996

And it will be cheaper as well.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:09:47 No.27715017 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715035

>>27714987
>You are probably one of those idiots who thinks the Silent Eagle is an honest to god improvement over the F-22 and F-35.

No I'm one of those idiots who see all the preceding stealth programs before the LRSB as some of the greatest weapon systems in the history of warfare, followed by one of the dumbest. Much like Desert Storm was one of the greatest victories in the history of warfare, and the 2003 invasion and occupation was one of the dumbest things in the history of warfare.

Things really can change that quickly.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO CSQDiX7UwAAz2No.png, 216KiB, 525x582

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:10:17 No.27715025 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715105 >>27715126 >>27715186 >>27716390 >>27716480

Boing/Lockmart buttblasted;

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2015-10-27-Boeing-and-Lockheed-Martin-Statement-on-U-S-Air-Force-Long-Range-Strike-Bomber-Decision

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:11:15 No.27715035 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715017

Brilliant strawman, Armchair General Dingus.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:11:40 No.27715039 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715067 >>27715073 >>27715100 >>27715132 >>27719130

>>27714996
>the difference being that the new aircraft will have improvements over a 30 year old airframe.

Remember its going to be much better because it just has to be.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:12:16 No.27715043 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715060

>>27714798

B-2s don't even have S-ducts - they've got the advanced stealthy coating of the F-22, but the airframes are kinda stuck in the f-117 "4th gen" stealth era, and they've got a much smaller payload than B-52s, and I'd be surprised if the avionics aren't getting on a bit, as well as the control surfaces.

Plus the B2s been a bit of a logistical monstrocity - it's so fucking wide the current B2 fleet has to all fly from a small number of airfields in the US that actually has hangars wide enough for them to fit in.

If NG can deliver a stealthy plane with a payload as big as if not bigger than the B2 but with an on the ground footprint comparable to the B-52 it'll be a good plane.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:12:51 No.27715048 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27724971

>>27714868
The Pentagon is renowned for making terrible choices motivated as much by politics as by the actual capabilities of the weapons they choose to procure.

>you will never live in an alternate universe where the standard infantry rifle is based on the Stoner 63, the main fighter is the YF-23, the main tank is a modernized MBT-70, and the Sea Control Ship program was never cancelled

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:13:57 No.27715060 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715043

Nowhere do I see this plane being billed as anything more than more economical and practical than building more b2s*

*building the fucking number they asked for in the first fucking place

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:14:34 No.27715067 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715182

>>27715039
>Remember its going to be much better because it just has to be.

The B-2's shaping was done with the computational capabilities of the 1980s. They did not have the processor cycle time to optimize the shaping to nearly as large of a degree as they can today at low cost. The airframe's stealthing materials are extremely primitive compared to developments made in recent aircraft like the F-35, which have radar absorbing chemistry baked into the aircraft's skin rather than needing to be re-applied and touched up after every mission because it's peeling off.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:14:55 No.27715073 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715498

>>27715039

>Remember its going to be much better because it just has to be

The B-52 and B1 are both very old planes. It would be hard to not improve on them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:15:39 No.27715086 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714467
*20, one crashed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:16:35 No.27715100 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715131

>>27715039
"technology hasn't improved in 3 decades"

-- anon

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:17:07 No.27715105 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715025
Literally 12 year old kids, what the fuck. I would expect more from people like that.
>Bawww, Northrup won over us
>Better make comments of disappointment!

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:18:05 No.27715126 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27716882

>>27714244
>>27715025
As a boeing employee watching them hire like 1000 people and remodel an entire building in anticipation for a victory I find this news pretty damn funny.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:18:12 No.27715127 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27722663

>>27714857
The air force really doesn't want countries flying civilian planes for war roles ( read : bombing) since if America started flying 747s filled with ICBMs and Cruise missiles a few ones with people might get shot down.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:18:41 No.27715131 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715154 >>27715193

>>27715100
>"technology hasn't improved in 3 decades"

Nowhere is this plane being billed as anything more than more economical than building more b2s. What about that do you refuse to understand?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:18:44 No.27715132 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715161

>>27715039
>What is 35 years of supercomputing advancement

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:19:59 No.27715150 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715407 >>27715504 >>27722684

>>27714878
is the tacit blue the futuristic paratrooper plane from empire earth 2?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:20:21 No.27715154 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715177

>>27715131
>Nowhere is this plane being billed as anything more than more economical than building more b2s. What about that do you refuse to understand?

That isn't true. The stealth, operational logistics, mission availability, and airframe affordability are all supposed to be better than the B-2. These are not insignificant improvements. Maintaining a technological leading edge while making the weapon more practical is a strategic masterstroke.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:20:49 No.27715161 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715182 >>27715193 >>27715251

>>27715132

How could it not be way better right? It just has to be way better!

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:22:25 No.27715177 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715236

>>27715154
>That isn't true. The stealth, operational logistics, mission availability, and airframe affordability are all supposed to be better than the B-2. These are not insignificant improvements. Maintaining a technological leading edge while making the weapon more practical is a strategic masterstroke.

The LRSB is the fucking aborted fetus of the 111 b2s that they canceled. /k/ is dressing up that fetus and trying to pass it off as a baby.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:22:40 No.27715182 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715205

>>27715161
>How could it not be way better right? It just has to be way better!

Go look at >>27715067

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:22:55 No.27715186 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715916

>>27715025
How did they ever think they stood a chance?

Northrop has had the heavy bomber game on lockdown for the last 25 years.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:23:22 No.27715193 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715228

>>27715131
Did you even watch the press conference?
Did you read the recap?
Have you read anything about it?

>>27715161
You are literally the dumbest motherfucker on /k/

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:24:17 No.27715205 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715221 >>27715245 >>27715398

>>27715182
>Go look at

Oh yeah I'm sure as fuck sold thanks.

The LRSB supporters are actually fucking stealth, stealth crybabys who don't want to admit that the original plan for the b2 would have worked fine had it not been gutted.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:25:01 No.27715221 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715240 >>27715259

>>27715205
>who don't want to admit that the original plan for the b2 would have worked fine had it not been gutted.

What

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:25:26 No.27715228 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715267

>>27715193
>You are literally the dumbest motherfucker on /k/

You are literally a Nazi. How does Stalin's cock taste?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:26:05 No.27715236 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715177

>The LRSB is the fucking aborted fetus of the 111 b2s that they canceled. /k/ is dressing up that fetus and trying to pass it off as a baby.

Dude, just shut up. You don't even know anything about the aircraft because it is highly classified. Stop pretending that you know more about this super top secret project than anybody else here.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:26:13 No.27715240 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715290

>>27715221
He's just angry his planefu is not getting the respect it deserves.

He also thinks rebuilding a 30 year old plane is as easy as digging your old legos out of the closet.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:26:53 No.27715245 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715276

>>27715205
>The LRSB supporters are actually fucking stealth, stealth crybabys who don't want to admit that the original plan for the b2 would have worked fine had it not been gutted.

Literally what

The LRSB's existence is the correct course of action for industrial, engineering, logistics, and computer science realities. Making more B-2s does not make sense.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:27:04 No.27715251 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715161
I wish I could filter reality as good as you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:27:53 No.27715259 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715274 >>27715279 >>27715287

>>27715221
>What

Let's see.

-100 LRSB planned
-LRSB not intended to be a replacement for the b2
-111 b2s not built due to cuts

If only someone could figure out this puzzle. The bottom line is that this also sends a horrible fucking political message that they can just gut any program they feel like gutting and it will all be made better in the future, probably with an inferior program that ends up being more expensive giving them more political ammunition for further cuts.

So what I'm saying is everyone that is disagreeing with me here is a Nazi shit that hates America.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 6d9.jpg, 8KiB, 200x300

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:28:24 No.27715267 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715228
You can't even shitpost correctly.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:28:57 No.27715274 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715292

>>27715259

>The B-2 is the only answer and if you disagree, you hate America!

Get the fuck out.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:29:10 No.27715276 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715304 >>27715307 >>27715329

>>27715245
>Making more B-2s does not make sense.

If the program had not been cut this would have not even be a fucking issue Ahmed. The LRSB would not even be developed and the talk would be with a b2 replacement where the talk should be.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Top Cryptologists.jpg, 128KiB, 700x700

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:29:30 No.27715279 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715259

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:29:30 No.27715280 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715308 >>27715309 >>27715318

>building new strategic stealth nuclear bombers
>when we have ICBMs and cruise missiles

Literally why.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:29:50 No.27715287 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715314

>>27715259
Calm the fuck down.
The LSR-B isn't even a b-2 replacement. That's the 2037 bomber.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO avro-arrow3.jpg, 120KiB, 620x465

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:29:58 No.27715290 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715329 >>27715665

>>27715240
I think we found an American counterpart to Arrowfags

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:30:15 No.27715292 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715274
>Get the fuck out.

I think you should be the one to get out tbh. Plenty of room in Germany for people like you, they just let 800,000 in.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:30:54 No.27715304 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715276
>If the program had not been cut this would have not even be a fucking issue

Well guess what? The B-2 program was cancelled TWENTY YEARS AGO and it does not make sense to bring it back. Get over it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:31:13 No.27715307 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715276

We can't go back anon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:31:16 No.27715308 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715280
>strategic range
>bombers

Because the F35 covers tactical ranges and strike fighting.

>nuclear
Because why not? It's a easy patch.

>stealth
Because if you don't have stealth, you're cannon fodder.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:31:20 No.27715309 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715359

>>27715280
try a conventional bombing strike with an ICBM and see how well that goes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:31:45 No.27715314 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715341

>>27715287
>The LSR-B isn't even a b-2 replacement.

That is my fucking point. They are building 100 LRSB. As it turns out the b2 program is around 100 planes short.

Had they built the amount of b2s they asked for in the first fucking place none of this would even be an issue.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:31:54 No.27715318 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715280
>building ICBM's
>when we could just detonate a 10 gigaton nuke right here

Literally why.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:32:50 No.27715329 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715339

>>27715276
What this nigga needs is a Delorean.
>>27715290
next thing you know he's going to bring out the CG renders of an "upgraded' B2.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:33:00 No.27715331 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715472

What it amounts to is people don't want to admit how right the Reagan era planners were with regards to the lifespan of stealth aircraft.

So basically eat shit and die because Reagan was a god.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:34:23 No.27715339 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715351

>>27715329
>nigga

Remember I was just joking when I called you a Nazi, not serious. Make sure to "ironically" use "nigga" more often it makes you're argument that much more correct.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:34:27 No.27715341 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715361

>>27715314
>Had they built the amount of b2s they asked for in the first fucking place none of this would even be an issue

BUT THEY DIDN'T BUILD THE 100 B-2'S. DID THEY?

ARE YOU PROPOSING THEY SPEND THE MONEY TO BUILD A TIME MACHINE INSTEAD, SO THE CAN GO BACK AND FIX IT?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:34:55 No.27715347 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714244
>Northrop Grumman
>YFW it's just another B-2 Bomber with some minor cosmetic changes

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:35:19 No.27715351 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715380

>>27715339

You're talking back and forth with more than one person.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:36:02 No.27715359 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715386

>>27715309

Just use the fucking B-52's for conventional bombing, the only thing you'd need a stealth bomber for is to attack another nuclear advanced state at which points the rockets will be flying anyway.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:36:09 No.27715361 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715374

>>27715341
>ARE YOU PROPOSING THEY SPEND THE MONEY TO BUILD A TIME MACHINE INSTEAD, SO THE CAN GO BACK AND FIX IT?

They should build the number they intended to in the first place so that type of needless budget slashing behavior is discouraged.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:37:10 No.27715374 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715380

>>27715361
>They should build the right number of B-2s because B-2s

Why do you hate America?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:37:23 No.27715378 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715389 >>27715402

>>27714857

>Be Durka
>See 747 flying over your sand hut
>Fire CIA provided stinger missile at it
>Dragon dildos, niggers and scarves fall out of the sky
>yfw the plane was a flight from sweeden and not a USAF Missile truck

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:37:41 No.27715380 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715351
>You're talking back and forth with more than one person.

Nazis are all the same. If the communists didn't get you, smallpox or something would have.

>>27715374
>Why do you hate America?

Your America isn't really America.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:38:20 No.27715386 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715394

>>27715359
I'm sorry that the DoD has a higher regard for crew survivability than you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:38:38 No.27715389 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715378
The whole point of cruise missiles is so it wouldn't have to fly over their sand huts.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:39:29 No.27715394 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715406 >>27715408

>>27715386
>I'm sorry that the DoD has a higher regard for crew survivability than you.

b52s are probably theoretically better in a total war scenario

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:40:02 No.27715398 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715435

>>27715205
Key word is "would" the situation as it is means that an entirely new plane would be cheaper and better than trying to build reverse engineered b-2s from basically nothing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:40:15 No.27715402 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715378
>hitting an airliner at cruising altitude with MANPADS

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:40:26 No.27715406 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715435

>>27715394
>b52s are probably theoretically better in a total war scenario

How?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:40:35 No.27715407 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715843

>>27715150
i think it was the tech demonstrator for the shielded duct engine concept for the B2

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:40:38 No.27715408 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715435 >>27716023

>>27715394
Total war can't happen anymore because of globalization of economies.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:41:55 No.27715426 Report Delete

Quoted By:

CUCKHEED/BAWWING BTFO

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:43:14 No.27715435 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715449 >>27715485 >>27715543

>>27715398
>reverse engineered b-2s

Yeah because they burnt all the blueprints and you need the original engineers to understand the ayy lmao technology.

Do you actually think about anything you post or do you just plug into the hive mind and go about your business?

>>27715406
>How?

Cheaper with almost 2x the payload. Total wars are won by brute strength and attrition.

>>27715408
>Total war can't happen anymore because of globalization of economies.

Oh ok thats a load of my mind then.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:44:35 No.27715449 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715462

>>27715435
>because they burnt all the blueprints and you need the original engineers to understand the ayy lmao technology

It's not unlikely.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:44:43 No.27715451 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715499

Am I the only one who thought this was already a foregone conclusion, and was only surprised that it's being formally announced just now?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:45:19 No.27715457 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715480 >>27715486 >>27715506

Guys I haven't been following the threads.

Do we know what the bomber is like yet?

Does it have lasers, supercruise and optical camo??

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:45:32 No.27715462 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715470

>>27715449
>It's not unlikely.

Well then I'm really glad I'm not more involved in this three ring circus.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:46:03 No.27715468 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714244
Their stock shot up 40 bucks I'm so mad I'm poor. I fucking knew it was going to happen and now I lost another opportunity to make money

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:46:09 No.27715470 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715492

>>27715462
Thank you for leaving.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:46:18 No.27715472 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715331
god didnt spend his second term as a babbling idiot with alzheimers and an official white house psychic on staff

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:46:34 No.27715480 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715457
>Guys I haven't been following the threads.
>Do we know what the bomber is like yet?
>Does it have lasers, supercruise and optical camo??

That is the 2037 bomber.

The LRSB is the "oops we shouldn't have cut all those b2s from the budget Reagan is always right" bomber

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1433019532950.png, 466KiB, 619x706

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:46:45 No.27715485 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715492

>>27715435
Do you not understand that conventional total war is an oxymoron?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:47:00 No.27715486 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715457
Subsonic, Lasers and remote hacking are confimed, also optionally manned.

Optical stealth is unlikely.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:47:36 No.27715492 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715470
>Thank you for leaving.

I'll leave when you people are hanging at nuremberg.

>>27715485
>Do you not understand that conventional total war is an oxymoron?

Cool anime you should post more.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:47:52 No.27715496 Report Delete

Quoted By:

first for saying that the new bomber is too multirole and doesn't do anything right we should stick with the B2 and ICMBs

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:47:55 No.27715498 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715073
One is more than half as old as manned flight and the other is already in a few museums...their twilight is coming.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:47:55 No.27715499 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715553

>>27715451
>Am I the only one who thought this was already a foregone conclusion
Just confirmation bias. If boeing or Lockheed won then the ng fags would be talking about bribes or regulatory capture.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:48:21 No.27715504 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715843 >>27722500

>>27715150
No, it was the sort of precursor to the F-117, like the have blue. Similar intended role. But lockmart won that contract.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:48:26 No.27715506 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715523

>>27715457
Long range, VLO, subsonic, twin engine. Expect 20 to 30k lb payload and AESA, maybe EODAS too.

It's a combined AWACS/B2/B1/F35; but with cheaper, better modern computers and stealth.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:49:01 No.27715514 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714822

what's next, Wintermute gives them a new identity and has us go find Neuromancer in Villa Straylight?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:50:34 No.27715523 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715506
>subsonic
really dobuting

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:51:46 No.27715535 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714447

Thats for the first lot. You buy planes in batches.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:52:16 No.27715543 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715550 >>27715573

>>27715435
Yea cause the coumputer systems they used to design it are compatable with nidern systems and the tools to make it still exist. Most of the people who worked on it are probobly gone. You will have to sort through paper records thst might nit exist anymore.You have no idea how any to build of it and its spread out over all the contractors that worked on the b-2 in the first place.You dont have the tools to make it anymore so you will have rebuild those from scratch at great cost in both time and money. Face it kid there will be no more b-2s the industrial base knowledge and technology to make it is gone. Thats just how engineering works. It you dont keep whats needed to make somthing togather you lose the ability to make it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:53:07 No.27715550 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715543
>kid

Cool swastika can I touch it?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:53:18 No.27715553 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715658

>>27715499
No I just mean I thought they had already won it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:54:52 No.27715573 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715586 >>27715632

>>27715543
I've an inkling this anon was the one crowing about his ban from SA for shitposting and a mod's later death as some kind of karmic validation for his ego. Don't expect him to admit institutional knowledge is a thing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:55:59 No.27715586 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715573
>I've an inkling this anon was the one crowing about his ban from SA for shitposting and a mod's later death as some kind of karmic validation for his ego. Don't expect him to admit institutional knowledge is a thing.

Did it hurt when you fell from heaven?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:56:45 No.27715593 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715603 >>27715671

>>27714527
Preventing spying ain't that bad
Just don't employ foreigners in any sensitive location

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 19:57:51 No.27715603 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715593
>Just don't employ foreigners

lol

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:00:14 No.27715632 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715651

>>27715573
> l know who this anon is! Dont listen to him.
no you don't
I'm an anon shitlord there are a lot of us. If you actualy stoped and thought about how many people think that you are a retard you would kill yourself. Have fun with your delusions.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:01:51 No.27715651 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715872

>>27715632
>no you don't
>I'm an anon shitlord there are a lot of us. If you actualy stoped and thought about how many people think that you are a retard you would kill yourself. Have fun with your delusions.

I've been shitposting on the internet since before 9/11.

boy

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:02:21 No.27715658 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715553
Pretty sure the airforce knew the winner a while ago but they only let the contestants know today. Also the whole "windtunnel models so far" is horseshit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:02:50 No.27715665 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715718 >>27715735

>>27715290
Some thing you should know about Arrow fags is that Canadian school systems shill the arrow so fucking hard. I spent at least two fucking hours learning about how it was the best plane that ever was and ever will be and that the government at the time was basically just fucking stupid.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:03:12 No.27715671 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715689 >>27715690

>>27715593
>implying citizens can't be recruited by foreign intelligence agencies

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:04:36 No.27715689 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715703 >>27715734 >>27722145

>>27715671
>implying that is anything near as common as a jew, or a muslim, or a chinaman spying for their home country

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:04:37 No.27715690 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715671

Benedict Arnold was born in Connecticut.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:05:39 No.27715703 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715723 >>27715805 >>27715891

>>27715689
>a jew, or a muslim, or a chinaman

Remember I was totally joking and wrong when I said everyone arguing with me in this thread was a racist.

Totally joking and wrong.

>a jew, or a muslim, or a chinaman

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:06:32 No.27715718 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715735

>>27715665
Don't forget those mean Americans making us get rid of them because they were just that jelly :(

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:06:54 No.27715723 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715750

>>27715703
You are probably a jew yourself, going on and on about racists and Nazis.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:07:34 No.27715734 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715754

>>27715689
jews and chinamen i can understand, but I haven't heard of a sand person stealing tech from us.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:07:36 No.27715735 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715760 >>27715772 >>27715806 >>27715847

>>27715718
>>27715665

I've seen so many Canucks cry over the Arrow on aviation threads. What really happened?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO ronald-reagan-laughing-and-point (...).jpg, 7KiB, 234x216

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:08:44 No.27715750 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715723
>You are probably a jew yourself,

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO vl3mn5jfsr7ewyzeq3l6.jpg, 164KiB, 706x442

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:09:03 No.27715754 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715811 >>27715860

>>27715734
They don't have to.
We deliver it right to them.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:09:21 No.27715760 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715735
The program was full of communist spies, and its role was basically turned obsolete because of ICBM's.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:10:19 No.27715772 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715735
The project was so infested with Soviet spies that the Americans asked Canada to shut it down so it would stop bleeding aerospace technology to the reds.

It later became the Mig 25.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 4LKO6iO.jpg, 44KiB, 1024x853

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:12:43 No.27715802 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715817 >>27716199 >>27724899

Now B-2 won't be the only flying wing bomber.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:12:53 No.27715805 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715830 >>27723520

>>27715703
>ignore reality because its "racist"
kk
How many communist spies in the cold war were ignored because they were jewish?
Prolly in the thousands.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:12:58 No.27715806 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715852

>>27715735
> canada built a neato interceptor for taking out Russian nuclear bombers
> Russia launched sputnick
> Interceptors are now invalid because ICBM's are now a thing
> Canada scraps Arrow
> Canadian tears

It's been a while since I've been in a history class somebody correct me if I'm wrong

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:13:27 No.27715811 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715754
I still want to see this goddammed thing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:13:44 No.27715817 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715802
>Now B-2 won't be the only flying wing bomber.

If that anime was based on RCS the two blonde whores would each be 400 lbs.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:14:24 No.27715825 Report Delete

Quoted By:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFM1BiyctJU

C'mon OP, we knew that would happen since 2013.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:14:47 No.27715830 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715842

>>27715805
>How many communist spies in the cold war were ignored because they were jewish?

I don't know you should work on some kind of final solution to that problem though. Hurry though Zion gets stronger by the minute.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:15:35 No.27715842 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715867

>>27715830
didn't you hear what the jew president said?
It was the muslims responsible for the holocaust

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Usaf.e8.750pix.jpg, 91KiB, 1095x800

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:15:35 No.27715843 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27716129

>>27715407
>>27715504

Nope. It was tech demonstrator for stealth surveillance plane with LRIP ground scanning radar. It's radar tech ended up in JSTARS.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:15:55 No.27715847 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27716586

>>27715735

It was inferior to the vastly cheaper F-106.

I honestly don't understand the Canadians trying to hype it. The F-106 was faster, more manuverable and had a vastly further range.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:16:25 No.27715852 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715806
You forgot the part where the Arrow program was so massively infiltrated by Soviet agents that they were actually getting engine alloy samples out of it.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1305790341004.jpg, 24KiB, 600x376

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:16:47 No.27715858 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715884

just letting you know that you should have made this thread at night. day/k/are shitstorm of slack-jawed faggotry in here. theres hardly 1:2 discussion to shitpost ratio

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:16:57 No.27715860 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27719515

>>27715754

I'd love to see Pakistan's attempt at copying that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:17:15 No.27715867 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715895

>>27715842
>didn't you hear what the jew president said?

Yeah totally. Is being a Nazi tough? Are you also a Cubs fan?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:17:56 No.27715872 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715887

>>27715651
In that case your clearly senile. Enjoy getting your pension cut fag.

Has the price of tinfoil gone up much?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:19:04 No.27715884 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715928

>>27715858
There would be no fucking difference.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Oh,_the_Places_You'll_Go.jpg, 60KiB, 400x554

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:19:22 No.27715887 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715926

>>27715872
>Has the price of tinfoil gone up much?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:19:38 No.27715891 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715917

>>27715703
You must be some really brainwashed pogue. You can't think in terms of noble lies when you're dealing with nukes. It's not racism either.

Jews are notoriously disloyal to host nations and suffer from mental illnesses and passive aggression, even Nixon said they spied like crazy. Chinamen are amoral lemmings. Because of Muslim ideology they lack self-preservation instincts to the point it should disqualify them from going anywhere near something sensitive or nuclear.

Black people have high T so they don't tend to sabotage like little bitches cuz they gud bois

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:20:01 No.27715895 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715917

>>27715867
I'm more of a handegg guy myself.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:21:29 No.27715916 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715186
to be fair I think in terms of historical success Northrop has a few decades to go before they even come close to tying Boeing for years dominating the industry... yes they've done well recently, but when your talking about a company 25 years is really short....

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO tell-me-more.jpg, 83KiB, 460x196

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:21:31 No.27715917 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715891
>Jews are notoriously disloyal to host nations

Tell me more.

>>27715895
>I'm more of a handegg guy myself.

I can't believe I've gone 8 whole months without watching my team win an owl tbh.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image.png, 289KiB, 970x1505

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:22:14 No.27715926 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715957

>>27715887
>meme arrows repeating I said
You will have to do better than that my friend.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO laughing sluts.jpg, 45KiB, 441x408

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:22:21 No.27715928 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715957

>>27715884
said day/k/are extraordinaire

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:22:26 No.27715932 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27715955 >>27716084 >>27716105

Speculate with me /k/: kite vs cranked kite vs flying wing, or will it be something else?

Cranked kite had a good demo in the X47, that's what I'm thinking.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Northropcargowing1-490x371.jpg, 13KiB, 490x371

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:23:46 No.27715955 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715932
It's NG. It's a flying wing.

Probably something like this, but smaller.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:23:54 No.27715957 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27716028

>>27715928
>said day/k/are extraordinaire

Oh cool some star trek shit glad to see the pedos are represented here too.

>>27715926
>You will have to do better than that my friend.

I'm not here to please you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:29:34 No.27716023 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715408
never understimate the power of stupid people in high places....

and if history has any say... the safe bet is that there will be another world war.. it's in our nature...

remember the world is gonna be a scary place as the oil runs out...

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1304836058394.png, 178KiB, 380x288

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:29:44 No.27716028 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27716050 >>27716059

>>27715957
>star trek shit
why are you even arguing with me? this thread is infested with day/k/are. its plain to see. its painful to watch. theres no serious discussion here, just uninformed children banging on keyboards before beddy-bye. night /k/ is only /k/

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:31:02 No.27716050 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27716028
>>star trek shit

stay naive friendo

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:31:55 No.27716059 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27716087 >>27716703

>>27716028
>night /k/ is only /k/
what if you night /k/ is day /k/ for someone else?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO giphy.gif, 962KiB, 400x225

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:33:41 No.27716079 Report Delete

Quoted By:

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO X-47B_receiving_fuel_from_a_707_ (...).jpg, 2MiB, 3420x2095

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:34:02 No.27716084 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715932

Probably a supersized version of this.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1362977724344.jpg, 82KiB, 500x600

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:34:14 No.27716087 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27716059
then somebody else is fucking retarded & wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:35:24 No.27716103 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27716156 >>27716272 >>27716299 >>27716313 >>27716409 >>27716797 >>27716960

>>27714244

Oh great, $21.4 billion USD that could have gone to improving the lives of the people of Ferguson and Baltimore is being spent on 21 bombers that the US doesn't even need. Look at China, who are still using and upgrading bombers from the mid 20th century. What a waste of money.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1zq8vut.png, 96KiB, 639x466

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:35:26 No.27716105 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715932
I'm hoping cranked kite. NG seems to like it; I like it, too.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:36:57 No.27716129 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27716266

>>27715843
It was supposed to be capable of interdiction

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:39:20 No.27716156 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27716103
>Ferguson and Baltimore
they made their bed, now they must lie in it

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:42:33 No.27716199 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715802
B-2 is adoreable.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO cddr_mda-ngc-bae_012.jpg, 56KiB, 370x480

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:42:42 No.27716203 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27716308 >>27716703

The Northrop Grumman/McDonnell Douglas/British Aerospace JSF design that could have been.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:47:32 No.27716266 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27716129

It was supposed to designate targets for stand off weaponry of other aircraft and artillery systems. It was recon component of assault breaker program.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:47:50 No.27716272 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27716285

>>27716103
whole generations of negros living on the tax payer dollar is what created their problems in the first place
m8

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO giphy.gif, 421KiB, 500x300

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:48:56 No.27716285 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27716272
>negros

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:50:02 No.27716299 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27716103
I'd rather my money go towards blowing up people who aren't me rather then helping people who aren't me

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:50:47 No.27716308 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27716203

That really doesn't look too different from the F-35.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:50:56 No.27716313 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27716103
>Oh great, $21.4 billion USD that could have gone to improving the lives of the people of Ferguson and Baltimore is being spent on 21 bombers that the US doesn't even need. Look at China, who are still using and upgrading bombers from the mid 20th century. What a waste of money.

Chinese bombers are good bit newer than B-52's and also probably B-1B's despite being as dated designs as B-52.

B-1B's and B-52 will sooner or later run out of flight hours and service life extension programs for those will become more and more expensive while tech in 'em gets older.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:57:06 No.27716390 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715025
>We're so miffed that Northrop out-shilled us
>We're gonna go grease a few more palms, maybe they'll change their minds
Blown so far the fuck out that their hurt asses are catching up to NASA's New Horizons probe.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 20:58:07 No.27716409 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27716103

Boeing shill detected!

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1440201684056.jpg, 22KiB, 200x200

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:01:17 No.27716462 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>Assblasted RIDF BTFO
>Assblasted CIDF BTFO
>Assblasted MUH UPGRADES BTFO
>Assblasted MUH ICBMFAGS BTFO

And Lockmart too. It would be really bad for Lockheed's business model for this program to go smoothly.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:02:20 No.27716480 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715025
The Lockmart-Boeing butthurt is gonna be great for the next few months.

This is from a Boeing shill back in march:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthompson/2015/03/09/the-air-forces-b-3-bomber-isnt-as-secret-as-it-seems/

>It will be built by Boeing. Two industry teams are vying to build the B-3 bomber: one led by Northrop Grumman the other led by Boeing (Boeing and team-mate Lockheed Martin contribute to my think tank; Lockheed is a consulting client). These teams are not evenly matched. Boeing and Lockheed delivered over 300 military aircraft last year, including some of the stealthiest fighters in the world; Northrop Grumman delivered nine aircraft, none of them stealthy. Between the two of them, Boeing and Lockheed have been prime contractors on 95% of the Air Force’s fighters and bombers over the last 30 years, at a time when Northrop Grumman was publicly declaring its intention to cease being a prime contractor on military aircraft. So as industry analyst Byron Callan observed earlier this year, it’s questionable whether Northrop Grumman has “the infrastructure in place to manage as complex a program as LRS-B may turn out to be.”

>Having already stipulated a demanding unit cost and development schedule for the new bomber, it isn’t likely the Air Force will want to add further risk to its plan by selecting a prime contractor that brings far less financial resources to the table than the competing team. When the Air Force’s top acquisition official told Congress last week that it is hard to project costs on cutting-edge programs like the bomber, he was in effect warning contractors they had better show up with deep pockets. They’ll make money in the end, but the early years could involve significant financial sacrifice — sacrifice that the Boeing-Lockheed Martin team looks far better positioned to absorb.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:05:16 No.27716522 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>Grumman

Thank you based god

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:10:51 No.27716586 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715847
National pride, really. The F-106 was better, but it was still a decent platform and made in Canada. Killing the Arrow killed our aviation industry, really.

Think of it as a bit of a "little brother" syndrome, too. We want to be able to produce our own shit too, but, y'know, big bro America is right next to us, so why not just buy Freedom straight from the source?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:14:01 No.27716623 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714412
Boeing and Lockheed were teamed up.

>>27714244
No real surprise there. It prevents defense sector consolidation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:17:39 No.27716672 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27716724

http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/626131/air-force-awards-lrs-b-contract.aspx

> Based on current LRS-B independent cost estimates, the Air Force projects the APUC for the program will be approximately a third of the previous B-2 stealth aircraft.

Here's hoping. High cost amidst a disappearing threat environment is what killed the B-2.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO FS2020-111454_copy1.jpg, 12KiB, 450x253

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:19:27 No.27716703 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27716059

Then someone is australian and wrong and probably a spider.

>>27716203
Looks a lot like Saab's F-2020

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:20:55 No.27716724 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27716672
>amidst a disappearing threat environment
Not gonna be a problem here. Compared to 2000, we got threats coming out of our ears.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO in-flight.jpg, 19KiB, 867x620

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:20:55 No.27716725 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27716945

Boeing should have just resubmitted this guy

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1444767757705.jpg, 18KiB, 392x500

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:25:53 No.27716797 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27716103
>Ferguson and Baltimore

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:26:46 No.27716810 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714244
As a guy who works on the B-52 and was wanting to transfer to structure development, this dashed all my hopes...

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:32:48 No.27716882 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715126
OKC?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:37:13 No.27716945 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27717025

>>27716725
The fucking Valkyrie

Just looking at that thing makes it explode.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:38:23 No.27716960 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27716103
Nigger detected

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO F-104_right_side_view.jpg, 992KiB, 2458x1780

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 21:43:26 No.27717025 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27718905

>>27716945

Hi there.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 23:15:42 No.27718425 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714412
Why? Lockheed won the ATF and JSF, Grumman's been due a big project for a while.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 23:38:26 No.27718815 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27718874 >>27719329

I pray to god and will write my congressman that they give the CAP some surplus B-52s after these come online. We are in desperate need of an aircraft that can loiter for long amounts of time and is built to .mil standards. I can't imagine what kind of SAR gear we could fit on there, and better yet, what kind of survival gear we could paradrop out of its bays. Imagine being in an area devastated by a flood or earthquake and a B-52 in CAP White comes in at low altitude and precision drops 2 tons of MREs and water on your front lawn. This would be a game changer.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1411118794647.jpg, 17KiB, 317x265

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 23:42:27 No.27718874 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27718815

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Joseph_Albert_Walker.jpg, 285KiB, 640x640

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 23:44:07 No.27718905 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27718931

>>27717025
>You are now aware that the F-104 pilot was also an X-15 pilot and astronaut
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_A._Walker

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 23:45:22 No.27718931 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27718905
>be adviiiiiiiiiiised

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 27 Oct 2015 23:57:56 No.27719130 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715039
It might be better because the general understanding of how to build a stealth aircraft has evolved over the 30+ years since the B2 was designed.
It's not like they're going to lose their fucking mind and build a giant Have Blue and ignore everything that has been developed since 1981. Yeah the B2 was and is a great aircraft but it's based on old technology and ideas and building a new aircraft that takes advantage of 30+ years of progress isn't going to somehow produce an inferior aircraft.

Contrary to what you seem to believe this isn't the 1930's and you can't just afro-engineer new parts into an old airframe in an afternoon and see a marked improvement.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 00:12:32 No.27719329 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27718815
u shud write ur congressman and ask him to define whether interceptors are fighters

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1439858214309.gif, 109KiB, 209x193

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 00:17:28 No.27719394 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27719409 >>27719610

>>27714244

>new US bomber
>being made by the same company that built the sex as fuck YF-23
>mfw northrop makes a hypersonic stealth bomber

yesssss

PLEASE MAKE THE B-3 A HYPERSONIC STEALTH BOMBER AMERICA

PLEASE

I have a huge fetish for the YF-23 and the B-1, and I will suck cocks for the chance to see a cross between the two but sub orbital and hypersonic, and I'm not even a clap, I'm a goddamn slav.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 00:18:07 No.27719409 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27719525

>>27719394
subsonic

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 00:26:52 No.27719515 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715860

They give it to china for for lots and lots of yuans.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 00:27:38 No.27719525 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27719675 >>27719741 >>27720807

>>27719409
>subsonic

How disappointing, although this is what I get for not reading the fucking article and jumping to conclusions as soon as I heard "NEW BOMBER"

Perhaps next time.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 00:28:27 No.27719534 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714822
Cruise missiles are actually more expensive for a given throw weight of high explosive

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 00:34:19 No.27719610 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27719795

>>27719394
You know what I'd like to see just for shits and giggles?

Stealth variable-wing strategic bomber.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 00:40:32 No.27719675 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27719525

The 2037 bomber will be supersonic, anon.

You just have to wait until 2037 to see it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 00:45:57 No.27719741 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27720009 >>27720346

>>27719525
It's hard to stay stealthy when moving fast, and there's no way they're going to be able to go fast enough to outrun modern missiles if detected. Better off just staying slow and stealthy.

There is the SR-72 in development though, if you like speed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_SR-72
It's going to be capable of at least mach 6.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 00:50:00 No.27719795 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27719610
I'd assume doesn't play well with very large moving parts, due to them serbs shooting down that F-117 when it opened its bomb bays.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 01:11:18 No.27720009 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27719741
So it's a Whitebird?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 01:44:57 No.27720346 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27720836

>>27719741

>SR-72
>mach 6

It would be cool as shit for Russia to build a hypersonic interceptor as a return to the coldwar days, but I fear that our government no longer has the know-how, industry, or money to do any of this. Maybe if our dumb as shit kleptocracy was capable of doing anything other than stealing and bombing ukrops and dune coons we might have actually gotten somewhere.

The accelerations associated with aerial combat and maneuvers at those speeds would be literally spine breaking, and probably impossible in the atmosphere. Imagine going so fast that you're burning up in the atmosphere while accelerating, not re-entering from orbit. We would need robots to fly these.

Blitz

Blitz Wed 28 Oct 2015 02:35:24 No.27720807 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27719525
You're expecting a supersonic bomber to have global reach? Sure, the B-1B can fly 6000 miles unrefueled but I have no idea if that is with a substantial payload or not. Yes, tankers are a thing the US has plenty of, but the ability to fly far and undetected throughout the entire mission is incredibly valuable since no time is wasted with an unstealthy and vulnerable tanker.

If it's supersonic, it's probably just a basic dash capability or maybe the first application of GE Adaptive Cycle Engine, which would be pretty neat.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 02:37:53 No.27720836 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27720938

>>27720346

>but I fear that our government no longer has the know-how, industry, or money

?

we are working on plasma cannons, rail guns, and lasers, and you think we can't go fast?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 02:49:53 No.27720938 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27720972

>>27720836
It is clear he was speaking of Russia.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 02:54:56 No.27720972 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27720989 >>27721137

>>27720938

oh my bad

its weird for me to think there are russians here

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 02:57:33 No.27720989 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27724748

>>27720972
Personally, before I believe that Russians actually visit here I need PROFFS.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 02:59:08 No.27721002 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27721051 >>27721176

>yfw Boeing and LockMart are going to tie this up for years with protest

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 03:04:29 No.27721051 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27721002
Hopefully they'll just forget it and put more effort into the UCLASS, 6th gen fighter and 2037 bomber rather than waste time bitching about something they already lost. They understand that Northrop needed this basically to survive while Lockheed is fine with the F-35 and Boeing can probably secure something for the F-18 to keep its St Louis factory open into the 2020s, enough time to try to win one of those other programs.

They didn't even have to build a working prototype, and whatever they have gained through any research they have done for this (which would be what, materials engineering? computational modeling?) can just be applied to those other projects all the same.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 03:16:03 No.27721137 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27720972
>its weird for me to think there are russians here
hownew.ru

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 03:24:20 No.27721176 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27721002
The state department or DoD should threaten to just pull their export licence then. Or use one of those national security letters.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 03:58:43 No.27721389 Report Delete

Quoted By:

Im glad Northrop got it. I would like to compared some details on the two proposals damn

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 04:25:52 No.27721509 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27721536

>>27714244
Oh, look, it's same shit again.
>WASHINGTON, Jan. 25 (UPI) -- Defense contractors Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp. announced they are embarking on a joint effort to develop a new U.S. Air Force strategic bomber.
>Plans call for the new airplane to be in service by 2018, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer said Friday in a report from the nation's capital.
>The two major defense contractors said they will join forces for research and development on "the anticipated U.S. Air Force next generation bomber program."
Just wait for another ten years for another next-gen bomber contract.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 04:33:32 No.27721536 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27721596

>>27721509
You're a fucking idiot.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 04:34:15 No.27721539 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714617
Can it make a sandwich?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 04:46:17 No.27721596 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27721611

>>27721536
Your dad is.
Name at least two large defense program who ended in time, in budget and with all planned units build. LRS-B will end like 2018 bomber or will be endless like F35.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 04:50:11 No.27721611 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27721894 >>27726893

>>27721596
Virginia Class submarine, which happens to be built by.....Northrup Grumman

http://lexingtoninstitute.org/the-virginia-class-submarine-program-is-a-model-for-acquisition-reform/

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 05:13:30 No.27721709 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714837
It is no more expensive to build a production line for a new plane than it would be to build a new production line to build new B2s. The B2 has been out if production for 15 years. Making more of them at this point is basically a whole new aircraft program, and the redesign work to make those hypothetical new build B2s fully modern is as involved as coming up with a new aircraft.

There's no advantages to building more B2s and some pretty big downsides. It might have been a good idea in the late 90s when we were still building them, but its retarded in the present.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 06:13:25 No.27721894 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27722067

>>27721611
And second one is?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 07:07:59 No.27722067 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27721894
P-8 Poseidon, T-AKE 1 Lewis and Clark-class dry cargo ship, U2, F/A-18.

Is that plenty enough for you?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 07:23:36 No.27722121 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27724692

>>27714640
Kat, I miss you... Come back to me, I swear I'll use you on every engagement.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 07:29:01 No.27722145 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715689
It's hard to judge how common something is when you don't get found out. The US government was so rife with spies under Reagan, they felt it better to put out schematics of failure-prone items than to try and eliminate spying.

Today I imagine secret selling is much easier to find.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 08:57:07 No.27722457 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27722492

WOULD YOU BUTTFUCKERS FINALLY START POSTING SOME DECENT RENDERINGS/DRAWINGS OF THE NG BOMBER?????

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 09:03:44 No.27722485 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714857
Because it triggers pilots. They would literally lose their minds over idea that they could be replaced with trucks and missiles.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 507.jpg, 205KiB, 1000x750

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 09:05:32 No.27722492 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27722579

>>27722457

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 09:07:48 No.27722500 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715504
>Similar intended role.
Tacit blue was flying radar. Like JSTARS but stealthy because fuck your S-200/300. F-117 is strike aircraft.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 09:19:22 No.27722565 Report Delete

Quoted By:

Then only way the LRSB would be a good idea at this point is if it was carrier capable.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 09:21:19 No.27722579 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27722599 >>27722725 >>27722732

>>27722492
w-where are the intakes?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 09:23:53 No.27722599 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27722579

They're so stealthy they're invivible.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 09:35:21 No.27722663 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715127
You do know that the 747 was in competition against the C-5 right? So civilian plane is correct, but it could withstand a military role

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 09:40:06 No.27722684 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715150
It was going to have the same role as the rivet joint

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 09:47:01 No.27722725 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27722579

Under wings just like in YF-23.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 09:48:26 No.27722732 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27722579
Bend over...ill show you

Son of Grumman

Son of Grumman Wed 28 Oct 2015 10:27:50 No.27722930 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714646
Grumman best man

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 10:35:25 No.27722967 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27723060 >>27723086

Is it just me or hast Northrop always that spoopy bearing since they brought the P61?

I mean, look at the better known planes of them. All but the F5 are some kind of non-standard shit.. I dont know how to describe this but their stuff always seemed to be spoopier than "normal" companie's shit

YB-35
YB-49
B-2
YF-23
F-89
XP-56
Tacit Blue

You know what I mean?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO texas_triforce_jet.jpg, 58KiB, 1024x882

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 10:37:18 No.27722983 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27723248

You know. That OP photo reminds me of a concept drawing I made last year after the aviationist published photos of an unknown delta shaped craft with very different angles than the B2. I couldn't get a sense of scale so I went with a single seat heavy fighter sized airframe.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 10:50:05 No.27723060 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27723086 >>27723103

>>27722967
nazi engineers, anon

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 10:53:16 No.27723086 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27722967
>>27723060
Northrop has exclusive rights to ayy lmao tech

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 10:55:35 No.27723099 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27723325

Why do they even release technical details about such projects anyway? Let them work for their information.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 10:56:00 No.27723102 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>cuckheed aren'twin

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO FS64VRIIAAWI0XS.RECT2100.jpg, 141KiB, 1296x1080

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 10:56:24 No.27723103 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27723060
Northrop:
>Hy, what plane can I build for you this time?
Air Force
>Have you ever played airplane with your triangle rule?
Northrop
>Sa no more, fam

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 11:19:21 No.27723248 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27725910

>>27722983
It's almost definitely a two seater with a bit of compartment space. Crew endurance is pretty important for a long range bomber.

NotAnonymous

NotAnonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 11:23:13 No.27723279 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27714244
If you throw black stripes on the wings it makes it go faster.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 11:29:24 No.27723325 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27723099
Because it's either wrong, or misleading. Once China manages to steal the real plans, at least they may be confused by contradicting designs. Like the J-31 being unable to integrate the right engines for the right effect. Or unintentionally leaving themselves exposed on radar due to deliberate design flaws in their stolen copies.

Way to go China.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 12:04:46 No.27723520 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715805
>make baseless claims with only your own conjecture to back it up
>reality
pick one. not even that anon

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Untitled.png, 606KiB, 1194x642

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 13:17:59 No.27724056 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27724081 >>27724094 >>27724095

Guys what is this? I couldn't find what it's named on wikipedia because I'm retarded.

pls respond

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 13:20:13 No.27724081 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27724104

>>27724056
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YB-35

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 26-8n.jpg, 60KiB, 496x532

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 13:21:13 No.27724094 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27724103 >>27724104

>>27724056
YB-35. Flying wing bomber that was cancelled in favor of the B-36. Wasn't really anything wrong with it, it's just it couldn't compete with the absolutely absurd payload of the B-36.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 13:21:16 No.27724095 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27724104

>>27724056
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YB-35

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO yb_35_b_17.jpg, 226KiB, 2400x1916

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 13:22:18 No.27724103 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27724094
>B-35 for ants
let's try that again

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1353567548074.jpg, 27KiB, 375x383

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 13:22:29 No.27724104 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27724081
>>27724094
>>27724095
Thanks guys, just thought it looked really cool in that ad.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 2247951.jpg, 1MiB, 7290x4865

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 14:39:25 No.27724692 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27722121
I think she whould just stay in the hangar...

But someones gotta do the work

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 14:49:20 No.27724748 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27720989
Personally I think it's just me and one other person browsing /k/

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 15:14:25 No.27724899 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27724966 >>27725000

>>27715802
B2 should be a little shy princess in a cute robe considering how much she costs.
>planeimouto.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 15:25:51 No.27724966 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27725000

>>27724899

>My Imouto can't possibly be this stealthy/expensive!

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 15:26:41 No.27724971 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27715048
Stoner 63 :( mi amor.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 15:30:55 No.27725000 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27724899
>>27724966

I would an B-2, just saying.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 17:45:06 No.27725910 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27723248
True, but angles and lines are similar. Stick a B2 cockpit on it and call it a day.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 28 Oct 2015 19:32:07 No.27726893 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27721611
They just build some of them in VA. General Dynamics Electric Boat designed and builds most of the Virginia Class submarines.

Subject

Name

E-mail

Password

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these boards

Your latest searches

A Winner Is Northrop Grumman