Our man Bob Cox at the Fort-Worth Star Telegram passes the following:
Lockheed Martin and Boeing will announce Friday that they will team up to “perform studies and system development” for a next generation long range bomber the Air Force wants to develop.
Bob also asks a fair question:
If the No. 1 and No. 2 defense contractors are teaming up, who is going to be the competition? Northrop Grumman perhaps?
– Ward
They are so smart!
This way they can both be sure to screw the government out of Billions.
Instead of taking turns like all the other times.…
Just think, between the two of them they must have everyone in the Air Force procurement system bought off!
Ok, in some regards I can see this, since it cost so much to make a new plane. With that said it could turn out like the Coast Guard turning over their boat building to the contractors. Ugly.
It may be better to split the plane up. Bid on the frame; bid on the avionics; bid on the landing gear; Bid on the engines.
I know this may sound complicated, but in many respects it may allow many companies to get into the game and keep competition alive.
We are talking at least a thirty year money maker.…
I get the impression that aircraft technology has kind of plateaued at the moment. Producing a new generation bomber is going to be insanely expensive. I doubt if the airforce could afford for two competing designs to be produced (except perhaps as basic computer models), so it probably doesn’t matter if LM and Boeing team up.
Why not get Northrop to produce some more B2s? Surely the B2 is still a state of the art, competitive design?
B-2s have a whole list of its own problems (one of which is RAM coating) thats keeping their sortie rate lower than the B-1B and even the B-52s. Also its unlikely for them to open up shop again seeing that it costs $$$ to do that and B-2s already cost over 2 billion and no sensible amount of final B-2s produced will bring that price down enough anyway.
Interesting point with technology plateauing, in a couple sources I’ve read the bomber is more of an interim thing until the “next generation everything” bomber comes out in 2030something when technologies for scramjets, lasers, etc have fully matured or at least become much more developed than where we are now, which is basically testing and experimenting. This stealth bomber here is going to be using mostly off the shelf stuff in order to make sure it meets the 2018 “deadline”.
Forgot to even comment on the topic…
LM + Boeing? One thing is for sure, however this plane turns out (aside from canceled) its going to be sick.
Personally, I’m betting on the boys who were out joyriding in their prototype a few weeks back over Texas.
one thing is for sure, their needs to be 2 different bombers made, so there can be a fly off.
raptor was (overall) better then the Blackwiddow.
X-35 was better then the X-32.
and so on.
If Lockheed & Boeing are teaming up…I would expect them to win. Although I also really like Northrop grumman.
If this is the “interim bomber”, then I am kinda expecting to see the FB-23 being proposed by Northrop.….That, I would like to see win. (unless Lock & Boeing come up with some crazy bas ass design.….but I doubt it, escpecially if its supposed to enter service in just 1 decade.
If I were the government, I wouldn’t allow major contractors to team up like Boeing and LM want to. Competition is a GOOD thing.
“I get the impression that aircraft technology has kind of plateaued at the moment. “
All technology (and technology to counter it) is on a plateau until you take the plunge to surpass it.
Hopefully it will use AURORA technology.
I Hope it has a LAMBDA driver
Mornin’ Boys,
It pisses me off that my first thoughts were that it will take 29 years to get to LRIP, the whole project will be 300% over budget, there will be a minimum of 5.7 minor scandals involving fraud or shoddy work, and a least 1.3 DOJ investigations of corporate officers, procurement wanks, and Pentagon bureaucrats.
I wish the good Lord would send Kelly Johnson back as an avenging angel to smite these guys with a flaming slide rule!
Should the program survive the bottomless perdition of “studies and system development,” the Air Force *might* see a few birds around mid-century. That ought to be about the time when we’re down to our last wing of B-52s.
Thinking critically rather than cynically, I’ll ask the obvious question: Why does the Air Force *need* this aircraft? Isn’t the trend away from big, ultra-stealthy birds dropping lots of ordnance and toward smaller, ultra-stealthy birds dropping PGMs?
What of an evolutionary plane that leverages what we have today? What became of the FB-22 concept?
Cheers,
Chief B.
The age of big-budget projects such as this one seems to have passed.
After the US declares bankruptcy (within a year or so) the World Bank and the US creditors are going to demand responsible spending and new bombers and other AF toys will be the first to go.
So, just what could we do with an unmanned long-range mach 8 stealth bomber with visibility cloaking???? “Hey Bubba, Didja hear bout them North Koreans? Musta had some kinda accident at that nuclear weapons factory they were working on.” “Wonder what happened?“
Stagnant technology? Dream on mofo. This is the USA and we will stay number one despite the liberals.
haha what a joke lm and boeing are going to screw the tax payer out of billions and we are going to get the equal to a b2 plus some trivial add ons. why do they even let both companys bid together?
Why bother?
Cheap, expendable UAVs are the future.
Gentlefolk!
No need to speculate wildly. You can get a pretty good idea of what is going to happen from just a few open sources. I recommend for starters two recent papers from the National Academy of Sciences :
Oh, and nobody works ‘with’ Boeing, except in the same sense that local law enforcement works ‘with’ the FBI. My LockMart friends call them “The Borg”
Many of the requirements outlined by the AF and the goal of attaining operational status by 2018 means that options such as UAVs don’t exactly fit the criteria. It seems to me they just want to find the “cheapest” way to getting this done with what they know. Smaller UAVs definitely are not bomb-truck capable (until they make SDBs the size of beer bottles)nor have the range to meet the requirements. FB-22 would be cheaper, but doesn’t meet range either. Also while UAVs are cheaper and unmanned I wouldn’t really view them as “expendable” cause even Predator drones cost about $5 million, Reapers almost 3 times that, I could only imagine what the cost of the Navy UCAS will be…
Why not setting a maximum price per unit today?
May sound like a dream, but they will accept it or their competitor does it. And at the beginning these guys always talk about low unit prices. Make them sign the contract based on that number and you can build and buy the plane without cost overruns.
I agree with Frank, why not just set a max price and if the primes go over they eat the cost? That might stop some of this behind schedule stuff. I understand that part of the problem is the customer (Air Force) tacking in extra capabilities etc. but still.…$2 Billion for 1 bomber, that seems way steep to me.
a Spirit bomber carries 40,000lbs payload (20 tons). A properly designed and constructed RIGID SHELLED airship can carry seven times that, would need no refueling, can remain in theater for weeks at a time, CAN BE STEALTHY, can carry both offensive and defensive weapons. And, (Navy? you listening in? can be AMPHIBIOUS)
Time to wake up and abandon the next step in airplanes. Build ships that fly. Not blimps, not zeppelins. think WIG, but with greater size and volumne for helium.
Stop reading fiction, airships as bombers, gosh. Way to big and slow to be of any use. Remember the enemy isn’t going to play nice, they will try to shoot you down, you need speed and a smaller size. It just could nit work, lets stop reading science fiction and start thinking about the real world.
Jeff and Frank,
What you are talking about is called Firm, Fixed Price contracting. That approach is OK if you are not doing anything new, all risks are known, and you are guaranteed a consistent funding level. Which is why it is an absolutely worthless in development programs, when you are fielding cutting edge APPLICATION of technology. Some of the tech employed is old and some is new — but to varying degrees it is ALL being integrated and employed like it has never been used before.
Up front, all anybody can do on these programs is ESTIMATE what the costs will be. It is one of the reasons weapon system cost and cost extimating remains a major topic of study at RAND and all the other think tanks.
Think how expensive things will be when half of the experienced people with about 70+% of the experience in aerospace is retired in the next 5 years, and EVERY program will have a steep learning curve.
FWIW, both Boing and LockMart were working on competing concepts for the next generation gunship platform, under a variety of names: AC-X, MACK, etc. A lot of that aircraft’s capabilities — range, stealth, subsonic speed — match the new “interim bomber”.
So they may have had something on the boards for awhile. If the two projects were similar enough in any respect — engines, materials, planform, etc. — they may have decided to combine them.
Plus, now they don’t have to wait until after the contract award to sue each other. They can start litigating right away.
It sounds like a mega project since the B-2 Spirit. Monopoly? Why not let Northrop join and call it Team America?
>B-2s have a whole list of its own problems (one of which is RAM coating) thats keeping their
>sortie rate lower than the B-1B and even the B-52s.
The coating has slightly improved for easiier maintenance and more sortie rate.
Apologies for the collateral damage Pedestrian. I just got up and misread your post. I had completely missed the point you were citing FoxThree.
Once again ther AF is involved in a friendly fire incident. Sheez
Well then, I guess I stand corrected!
Thanks for the heads up SMSgt Mac
Others playing RO, I also play RO, but I played the RO is very different of others. I have not practiced my own, did not earn my own IRO zeny. There are even some time even transferred I do not what is.
Buycheap aoc gold , Therefore we’ve been mindful from the outset to create a world which is true to Howard’s writing. There is majesty in Hyboria but it’s of a monolithic, brutal and primitive kind — it certainly isn’t “high fairie” where everything appears as though it was built only yesterday and is devoid of context.”
Things have changed, the content has grown and I had the privilege to be part of it. It is indeed a very special feeling when you can see your ideas coming to live Tibia Gold.
In response to its rapid growth the company added three new worlds, tripled its Knight gold operation and support staff and completely revamped the game with a major upgrade called return of King, exceeding customers expectations.
I and the
because I spend my pin money to bought the 2moon dil, maybe some people said that I was very foolish, but I did not care about other people
he did not know how to do could let the girl no longer apartness. So he decided to spend much more money to buy the Archlord money for the girl.