MILAVIA Forum - Military Aviation Discussion Forum

Author Topic: The Next Generation Bomber Joke (It's on us!)  (Read 6480 times)

Offline shawn a

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 898
  • Country: us
The Next Generation Bomber Joke (It's on us!)
« on: March 05, 2010, 08:34:42 AM »
Well, folks, How about that NGB? Oh, excuse me, it's now called "the Long Range Strike Concept"
"Originally to be a manned, stealthy, subsonic, nonnuclear bomber ready for service in 2018, it is now proposed to be an optionally-manned, supersonic, more surveillance than strike oriented, and not on the ramp until the LATE 2020s" This is according to AW&ST
Is the US Air Force now wandering aimlessly like NASA?
I KNEW the damn thing had a snowball's chance in hell of being ready by 2018, even if the original concept was adhered to. Now the whole concept has changed, and in my opinion will change again before "metal is cut".
Don't get me started on the "Tanker Joke"!

Offline F-111 C/C

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: us
Re: The Next Generation Bomber Joke (It's on us!)
« Reply #1 on: March 05, 2010, 05:49:08 PM »
Think they'll call it the B-3? I say save the money and utilize what we have. The fact that the B-52H is still around is a PERFECT example of being able to adapt the mission without building a new platform. I say upgrade the B-1s and B-2s to get lifespans out of them like the B-52.
Wars are won by carrying the 'heavy iron' downtown!

Offline shawn a

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 898
  • Country: us
Re: The Next Generation Bomber Joke (It's on us!)
« Reply #2 on: March 05, 2010, 09:32:20 PM »
I like the B-1, even with it's complexity. But it seems to be a hassle to maintain.
The B-2 is like a bat--in more ways than one. Useless in daylight, but hard to see at night.
The -52 is a great platform in SECURE airspace.
The NGB will supposedly have directed energy weapons as part of it's repertoire.
The "optionally manned" part is worriesome to me. Does that mean 2 different models?
I see the directed energy weapons as possibly being used as a method of self defense. The ABL just shot down a couple of targets, but the real useful laser will be the solid state variety, the kind that was fired from a Herk recently. If the NGB takes until the "late 2020s", then directed energy weapons will most definitely be aboard.
Electronic attack should also be aboard the plane. I wonder if enemy planes will be susceptible to a form of EA that would render their guns useless, or maybe just turn the whole darn plane off, or maybe just activate the enemy's ejection seat! The B-2 could use that kind of stuff. (Actually, I hope it has that kind of stuff on it now).

Offline Webmaster

  • MILAVIA Webmaster
  • Administrator
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2843
  • Country: nl
Re: The Next Generation Bomber Joke (It's on us!)
« Reply #3 on: March 10, 2010, 04:21:56 AM »
Good points. I sometimes wonder if the B-1B fleet would have gotten just as much love as the B-52/KC-135, whether there would be as much complaints. Also, the article "lemon bombers" or something is now dated with the B-1B fully adapting its new role and logistical issues sorted (I think). The Bone has kicked butt since after Desert Storm, nevertheless it's still remembered/known as the big bomber that couldn't, just because it was not yet ready for conventional warfare and its complicated EW system didn't quite work. But this had such a big impact, that it became popular to talk down the B-1B. Yes, it's complicated and thus costly, but is it really compared to for example the B-2? B-52 is a workhose for sure, but we should not forget the limitations. And yeeha, the B-1B got Sniper now, it's basically doing CAS nowadays with its huge payload!

The original 2018 bomber draft almost sounded to me like either a FB-111-gone-stealth, or simplified B-1B type, also I thought about a more basic concept similar to the P-8. Either way I got excited, been a while since we've seen a really new bomber. But I was already regarding 2018 as first flight date at the most optimistically possible scenario. But now it all got changed, it looks to me they want that FB-22. Or just that Darkstar thingy or whatever it's called. Ah well, basically they end up with something as expensive and complicated as the B-1B, as costly to maintain as the B-2 probably, so let's hope it will at least be useful. Better investment than Star Wars imho, but still questionably. I suppose you can always cancel it if there's no need, then shelve it, and then redo it 10 years later.

So mixed feelings, not expecting much, definately not soon or exciting, but enthusiastic about the fact that we'll have a new bomber to explore, probably the last to be manned (even though optionally is the design aim).

What do you think is the ETA on the first "cost overruns" article? 2014?
« Last Edit: March 10, 2010, 04:39:01 AM by FF Admin »
  • Interests: Su-15, Su-27, Tu-22, Tornado, RNLAF
Niels Hillebrand
MILAVIA Webmaster

Offline F-111 C/C

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: us
Re: The Next Generation Bomber Joke (It's on us!)
« Reply #4 on: March 10, 2010, 06:30:53 PM »
Have faith! These things always come in on time and under budget ;D ;D
Wars are won by carrying the 'heavy iron' downtown!

Offline shawn a

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 898
  • Country: us
Re: The Next Generation Bomber Joke (It's on us!)
« Reply #5 on: March 10, 2010, 08:27:51 PM »
Obviously, there's a nitrous oxide leak at F-111 C/C's house!!  :laugh:

Offline Raptor

  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 1388
  • Country: sg
  • What's the next big thing?
Re: The Next Generation Bomber Joke (It's on us!)
« Reply #6 on: March 23, 2010, 03:49:19 AM »
Electronic attack should also be aboard the plane. I wonder if enemy planes will be susceptible to a form of EA that would render their guns useless, or maybe just turn the whole darn plane off, or maybe just activate the enemy's ejection seat! The B-2 could use that kind of stuff. (Actually, I hope it has that kind of stuff on it now).

I would think that the ejection seat would be pretty much shielded from any form of external *electronic* input... And by external I mean even from the pilot's own mobile phone. :P Still, it would be quite funny to see a pilot pop out of his cockpit, looking around in sheer and utter confusion...
-JCLim

Offline SukhoiLover

  • Fighter Ace
  • *****
  • Posts: 268
  • Country: pt
Re: The Next Generation Bomber Joke (It's on us!)
« Reply #7 on: December 13, 2010, 11:22:26 PM »
So far sounds more like a Lemon, but i sure hope its not, it would be exciting to see a new machine out there, specially a bomber!
http://sukhoitribute.blogspot.com/

English version: http://sukhoitributeenglish.blogspot.com/


Pavel be proud of your legacy!!!!

Offline shawn a

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 898
  • Country: us
Re: The Next Generation Bomber Joke (It's on us!)
« Reply #8 on: December 14, 2010, 07:29:46 AM »
Yeah, right now the NGB seems to be on hold while various issues (such as the basic mission and purpose and design) are sorted out. But, slightly off topic... do you think the pak-fa will be demonstrated in the air at MAKS 2011?
Hey, you're called "SukhoiLover", right?
If it's gonna fly there, that's worth a trip!!

Offline shawn a

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 898
  • Country: us
Re: The Next Generation Bomber Joke (It's on us!)
« Reply #9 on: March 15, 2012, 09:42:38 PM »
Santa Claus, The Easter Bunny, The Tooth Fairy, Alien technology at Area 51, A 200 aircraft fleet of NGBs (today called LRS-B), with directed energy defensive weapons, supersonic-dash capable from it's variable cycle engines, at a unit price of $550 million by the early 2020s ( this info courtesy of DTI's March issue)..... Hell, I guess there IS alien technology at Area 51  ;)

Offline shawn a

  • Hero of Flight
  • ******
  • Posts: 898
  • Country: us
Re: The Next Generation Bomber Joke (It's on us!)
« Reply #10 on: April 05, 2012, 07:49:22 AM »
Well, the Pentagon is still pursuing the end of the "Next Generation Bomber Rainbow" by implying that the NGB will not use new technologies, but instead use already existing technology to keep the price at the $550 million level. There goes the supersonic dash capability, and ,I suspect, the directed energy weapons capability.
 One former pentagon official says the price could be as high as $2-$3 billion per copy.
 One analyst feels the buy would have to double to 200 planes in order to replace B-52s and AGING(?) B-2s.
 David Van Buren, the OUTGOING senior acquisition executive for the USAF says the service will take an approach more like the development of the F-117, using technology work already completed. (there must be a good reason why he's OUTGOING) ;)
 However, Winslow Wheeler, director of the Strauss Military Reform Project at the Center for Defense Information, says "If their model (for development) is the F-117, then they are headed for disaster"
All this from the April 2nd issue of AW&ST.
There is one design issue that makes me wonder--A subsonic, stealthy bomber better damn well attack only at NIGHT!-- This gives any country with an air defense system a serious clue as to when, and from what direction an attack will come. (gotta enter enemy airspace in the dark, attack in the dark, and leave before it gets light).
 Stealth is a "fragile" technology. Well financed potential enemies are surely giving much thought and effort to destroying this fragile advantage.
So, are we all laughing at this joke?
I know china is.

Offline Webmaster

  • MILAVIA Webmaster
  • Administrator
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2843
  • Country: nl
Re: The Next Generation Bomber Joke (It's on us!)
« Reply #11 on: April 06, 2012, 02:51:03 AM »
If I remember correctly the "aging" part of the B-2 has to do with some OEM(s) parts (soon) no longer being produced, don't recall if the companies went out of business or they just stopped supporting. I cannot imagine that nobody else in the industry would have a solution. I suppose it's just not worth to keep whatever is required around to fulfill a rare order (fleet size being 20, and then MTBF being many years?) for a big company, but surely some smaller more flexible company can take over. But from the info I read, it seems they wouldn't even go that route and are perfectly fine accepting sourcing problem in order to justify the new bomber?

The other thing aging were the computers and sensors, but Boeing is upgrading those. Just the fact that you can't stick a TGP on it like they did on the BUFF and BONE because it would compromise stealth... doesn't make it need replacement.

Or are we also talking other issues, wing replacement? That's a costly affair, especially on a blended wing design?

Back to the new thing, so basically: they haven't agreed on why it would be better? they don't know what they want? only know they cannot afford a lot of stuff that would make it perfect? Mentioning of F-117... was that another April 1st joke? Or maybe they just means the skunk work way of starting it.

So it will end up overbudget, late, underperforming, and difficult to maintain? That makes it fragile to "enemies within"... congress.

It's difficult to feel good about this one. 200 planes to replace some 80? Is it that pathetic? Or is the analyst taking into account like you have to start high to end up with a decent fleet, like F-22 case?

Clearly there's no funding for new technology, and current tech is pretty powerful if put together and not just bolted on and tied together 20 years too late. So I don't have a problem with that. Subsonic is the answer to keep it on budget, but certainly it limits its potential in a full-scale conflict.

Can't they just put those funds towards reworking the couple of B-2s? And make this thing a mini B-1B that is less costly to maintain? Mixed fleets for multirole fighters in small countries don't make sense... but with these kind of unit prices, why want one type to do all? You can say a lot about the Soviets, but I think long-range tactical bombers to complement the strategic bombers makes a lot of sense, especially today. Translate that to USAF, and there appears to be a gap between F-15E and the bomber fleet. If they would have anything in between (up-to-date of course), it would have done great in the conflict of the past 20 years and saved time on the B-1B/B-52 (plus more retirements would have been possible) and B-2. Or am I wrong? I thought the NGB would do that, instead of being a replacement for the three types (B-1B isn't mentioned, but another crisis and it's gone I suspect as NGB will need the funds).

Some of it is in line with my first impressions when hearing about it, but it seems not everyone is on the same page.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2012, 02:58:28 AM by Webmaster »
  • Interests: Su-15, Su-27, Tu-22, Tornado, RNLAF
Niels Hillebrand
MILAVIA Webmaster

 



AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com click to vote for MILAVIA