CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4385 posts, RR: 5 Posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 7683 times:
Within the past few days, some things in military aviation seemed to have changed. The Air Force is moving production of its new bomber foward two decades. It should now enter service in 2018. Does anyone have any idea on what ideas are front running right now?
Also, the J-UCAS program has been cancelled and both the Navy and Air Force have been told to go about starting their own unmanned programs.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
N328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6222 posts, RR: 3 Reply 1, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7432 times:
So does this mean the X-45 and X-47 themselves are cancelled, or will they be used on these separate projects?
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
FlyingHooker From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 15 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7397 times:
Where are you getting this information? I would like to read more on this. Especially on the J-UCAS cancellation. Thanks.
Longbow From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 23 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7391 times:
I also read that the program was cancelled, but I'm unsure what it means for the actual X-45 and X-47 programs themselves. Here's a little bit of info on the cancellation; I couldn't find that much.
CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4385 posts, RR: 5 Reply 4, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7390 times:
If you do a google search, you should be able to find it. This information was in numerous articles and online sites. Nothing is final yet, as this information will be released when the QDR is finished shortly.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
FlyingHooker From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 15 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 7382 times:
Thanks Longbow for the link. Interesting. Im very curious to see if that will cancel the X-45 and X-47 programs too. If so, there's a lot of the defense budget cuts that they need to implement. It will be interesting to see though if they use its budget directly on the new bomber program, or if they will use it to free up cash for a few years and start the bomber program after the war. Look forward to more info.
Flyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7342 times:
One I hear spoken of often is the idea of an FB-23. It is essentially a YF-23 expanded greatly and turned into a bomber. Roughly halfway between an F-111 and B-1.
There is also the idea of a B-1R. It would be a B-1 with some overall improvements in many areas, including engines from the F-22 and advanced systems.
And, there is also the group that is proposing that we just build more B-2s.
Although I haven't been paying too much attention to this, it seems like currently the FB-23, B-1R, and B-2 are in the running. I'd put my money on nothing at all being built and the winning program being cancelled in roughly 2030. That seems to be how the DoD works lately I'd personally like to see an airliner converted into a bomber. We need 2 broad categories. 1) Stealthy penetration bombers to get into heavily defended airspace. The B-2 does this well. 2) Dumptrucks in the air to fly to an area, deliver their munitions, and fly back. The B-52 does this role well. I don't see why this second category could not be fulfilled with a long range airliner (747/777/787) outfitted with bomb bays and the appropriate systems. I'd be cheap and it'd get the job done.
Of course, as always, there are also many rumored "black" airplanes out there. Most, if not all, are probably nothing but rumors, but to feed your curiosity...
Northrop AX-17. F-111 size and capability, stealth.
The B-3. Although there are lots of proposals/ideas for it, it is generally accepted to be a roughly mach 2 / 300,000lb mtow bomber.
Lockheed Brilliant Buzzard. Picture an XB-70 scaled down, with higher speed and altitude capabilities.
CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4385 posts, RR: 5 Reply 7, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7322 times:
There will be manned platforms, unmanned platforms and space based platforms competing for this order. I'm looking forward to seeing more information on the types of aircraft being proposed. I know that Northrop Grumman is offering a FB-23 styled platform. Boeing is working on several unmanned platforms along with the B-1R bomber which would be an updated B-1 with new engines etc. Several other ideas have been for a "bomb truck" ala a C-17 being turned into a BC-17. This idea was floated before, but is now being taken more seriously.
Personally, I'm pulling for the FB-23.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4385 posts, RR: 5 Reply 8, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7316 times:
I forgot to mention that Lockheed Martin is pushing forward the FB-22. The FB-22 would be a two seated version of the Raptor and would not have vertical stabilizers. It would have 75% more range and be able to carry a far great payload. Supposedly, this version has fallen out of favor because it is not an actual long-range bomber.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4385 posts, RR: 5 Reply 9, posted (7 years 4 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 7313 times:
Here is a link to an extremely educated web page. It pretty much has all of the possible aircraft.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4385 posts, 
I'd personally like to see an airliner converted into a bomber. We need 2 broad categories. 1) Stealthy penetration bombers to get into heavily defended airspace. The B-2 does this well. 2) Dumptrucks in the air to fly to an area, deliver their munitions, and fly back. The B-52 does this role well. I don't see why this second category could not be fulfilled with a long range airliner (747/777/787) outfitted with bomb bays and the appropriate systems. I'd be cheap and it'd get the job done.
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
