Comments on: Next-Gen Bomber to Carry Nukes

By: a@b.com

a@b.com — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 13:16:49 +0000

“…all the hostile countries will start to figure a way to defeat its advantages.“
There is something that even american soldiers must understand: Since around 1930, the USA have develloped themselves into the most hostile country ever. Its not the american people, its the USA. No country has actively attacked more other countries, none has a higer killcount, none has assassined more innocent people.
So, cowboys: nobody else wants you to be able to “go into China or Iran”. If you go on like you do, you will loose all sympathy, and the peoples of the world will defeat you.

By: Graham Strouse

Graham Strouse — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 09:58:48 +0000

Just shoot some people in the head and put an end to it.
Stalinism works for some things.

By: murc

murc — Sat, 08 Dec 2007 08:40:56 +0000

cthelmax — its still stealth on radar.
plus you could go mach 6, then once your close to the country/target, slow down to mach .9, and either take pictures, drop bombs, loiter for further instructions, watch a target, ect.
we DO have the tech for a mach 6 bomber.
I wish the AF would disclose some more information on PDE’s.…I’m sure they have that engine in an operational aircraft by know.
But I guess once you reveal it…then all the hostile countries will start to figure a way to defeat its advantages.

By: Rod From God

Rod From God — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:36:33 +0000

We’re really suffering from diminishing returns with the increasingly large investments in stealth technology that rapidly becomes unstealthy due to the accelerating rate of technological progress.
Time for some fresh ideas? Here’s a few:
* Bring back Project Thor — orbital kinetic weapons. Bonus: non-nuclear bunker-busting capability.
* Sub-orbital, fast-launch unmanned delivery platform. Recallable post-deployment.
* Back to basics: Fast and cheap nuclear drones. Just wrap a nuke in ramjet and make allot of them. But probably a bit too “Soviet” for modern U.S. military tastes.

By: cthelmax

cthelmax — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 10:32:22 +0000

A mach 6 stealth aircraft is impossible, as the SR-71 demonstrated. You can be radar stealthed, sure, but you show up like a meteorite on IR. Thats why the F-117 and B2 are subsonic.

By: murc

murc — Fri, 07 Dec 2007 02:47:02 +0000

hmmmmm.
I to would have thought it to be unmanned.…but yeah, when you

By: Cervantes LeRoi

Cervantes LeRoi — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:04:37 +0000

I’d like to see the Army or Marines request something like an AT-AT that costs a bomb but can do all sorts of wondrous things, like take out Chinese Power Generators. I’d honestly get piss happy if that happened. If the Air Force can ask for the sun, I don’t see why the Army or Marines can’t. Worth a try, at least.

By: DC2 Jennings

DC2 Jennings — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 20:14:12 +0000

How about we try to find a replacement for the conventional B-52s that are nearing 100 years old. I think the Wright brothers helped design the original one.
We have the B-2 for strategic and non-strategic stealth strike missions.
We do not have a replacement for a long loiter low cost bomber. Of course that would require less of the defense budget pie too.
DC2

By: Joe

Joe — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 19:36:19 +0000

Can we give the pilots X-Ray vision as part of their HUD?
This is the Air Force hustling for a mission.
I like these services who always talk about what their ‘mission’ is and then cry when it is budget time they cannot fund their pet projects because there is no immediate need for their self imposed mission requirements.
I am thinking here of recent marine requests to move their troops to Afganistan. SO they can repeat their successes in Tora Bora? Oh yeah, the marines refused to participate in that battle because they did not have secure logistical support etc. etc. etc.
I won’t even bring up the Marine special(ed) operations forces. What is THEIR mission again?

By: BT

BT — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 18:58:31 +0000

Somehow, this feels like a B-2 program, but even more absurd, and useless. Nuclear, Conventional, Manned, Unmanned, ‘Stealthy’?
This project has about as much chance of becoming a reality as sending a human to Mars.
The only reason to use a manned, stealth nuclear armed bomber is to drop precision low yield nuclear bunker busters. ICBM/SLBM/CM/UCAV can’t do that unique mission. Every other mission can be done with the tools we already have.