User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 22920
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:06 pm

The Seattle Times Business Digest for January 25, 2008 noted that Boeing and Lockheed-Martin are entering a joint development program to replace the B-2 Spirit strategic bomber. Northrop Grumman, who developed the B-2 (with Boeing) is also bidding on the RFP, expected to be worth up to $10 billion.

Boeing would be the lead contractor, with 60% of the work. LM would have the remaining 40%.

The bomber will be manned, with an un-refueled range 2000 miles (  Wow!  Confused ) and would be subsonic.

Reuters has a more in-depth article on the RFP here -
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssI...tilitiesNews/idUSN2562232220080125

As Boeing worked on both the B-2 and the F-22 program, I tend to think they and LM have the inside track over NG. The bomber is expected to leverage the systems of the F-22, so that favors Boeing and LM even more, I would think. With such a short range, I have to guess it will be much smaller then the B-2 and B-1, to say nothing of the B-52H.

[Edited 2008-01-25 09:07:28]
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:13 pm

I think that's pretty much monopolizing the market isn't it?
 
ebj1248650
Posts: 1517
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:44 pm



Quoting Stitch (Thread starter):
As Boeing worked on both the B-2 and the F-22 program, I tend to think they and LM have the inside track over NG. The bomber is expected to leverage the systems of the F-22, so that favors Boeing and LM even more, I would think. With such a short range, I have to guess it will be much smaller then the B-2 and B-1, to say nothing of the B-52H.

Might it be more accurate to say they're developing a stealth fighter-bomber? Something akin to the F-111 in load carrying capability but with subsonic performance. I can't imagine a strategic bomber with a mere 2,000 mile range.
Dare to dream; dream big!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 22920
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:41 pm



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 1):
I think that's pretty much monopolizing the market isn't it?

Well there are only three US companies with the expertise to do it. LM has not built a strategic bomber since WWII. Boeing has built two (the B-52 and B-1) and if you add in that they bought Convair's aerostructures unit, that would be four (the B-36 and B-58). And Northrup Grumman only has the B-2, which they shared to a great extent with Boeing.

Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 2):
Might it be more accurate to say they're developing a stealth fighter-bomber? Something akin to the F-111 in load carrying capability but with subsonic performance. I can't imagine a strategic bomber with a mere 2,000 mile range.

Well they do refer to it as a replacement for the B-2 and it is supposed to be "long range". It is possible Reuters is mistaken in the 2000 mile range figure.

The mythical "A-17" was supposed to be a swing-wing plane based on the YF-23 that would have replaced the F-111. So it is possible this could be the base design. If the goal was to make a small plane with a large internal bomb-load (to maintain stealth), then volume for fuel tanks would be limited so I could see the range dropping a great deal. A 2000 mile range would allow the plane to tank-up well outside enemy defenses and then penetrate, attack, and egress to re-tank for the flight home.
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:26 pm

I started a thread on Gen-Av a year or so back on the possibilities of a LM-Boeing joint venture on the next generation narrow body. Most who replied dismissed the idea out of hand. Maybe I should resurrect the thread? This could point the way to something more than just cooperation in the defense sector?
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
RIXrat
Posts: 670
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 10:20 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:16 pm

The Seattle Post Intelligencer story, however, says that the range should be 2,800 miles, still about 1,100 miles short of the B-52H without refueling. Here is an out-take from that story:

"The Air Force has provided only general design parameters for the new bomber. For example, the new plane shouldn't be capable of breaking the sound barrier and must have a range of about 2,800 miles. Manufacturing a supersonic bomber adds to the cost of the program."

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/busine...s/348773_boeing26.html?source=mypi
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:53 pm



Quoting Stitch (Thread starter):
The Seattle Times Business Digest for January 25, 2008 noted that Boeing and Lockheed-Martin are entering a joint development program to replace the B-2 Spirit strategic bomber. Northrop Grumman, who developed the B-2 (with Boeing) is also bidding on the RFP, expected to be worth up to $10 billion.

What a waste - tell me again how it wouldn't be wiser and less expensive to just build more new model B-2's? If we go ahead with a replacement bomber program than how can we be assured we don't spend the outrageous amount that we did on the B-2 only to cut the final buy down to just 20 when all is said and done?

Quoting Stitch (Thread starter):
The bomber will be manned, with an un-refueled range 2000 miles ( ) and would be subsonic.

Guess we'll be need a lot more of those tankers, maybe we can RFP a few stealth tankers to go along with the new replacement bombers?!
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:44 am



Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
LM has not built a strategic bomber since WWII.

Lockheed built 392 B-47 bombers in the 1950's, will after the end of WWII.
 
Flighty
Posts: 7648
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:07 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sat Jan 26, 2008 3:13 am



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 6):

What a waste - tell me again how it wouldn't be wiser and less expensive to just build more new model B-2's?

Exactly. The B-2 is barely in service as it is. It is still the bomber of the future.

If there needs to be a B-2 Mark II, then call it that, and get to work on it.

These companies are getting so large and powerful it is truly scary. This has nothing to do with national defense. It is all about money. Our B-52s are unchallenged. Our B-2s are unchallenged (and largely unbuilt). There is no need for anything beyond the B-2 since we hardly even need that.

If more bombers are needed, let them be refined B-2s. This is ludicrous to go again down the road of "future tech" when our present tech is not even utilized nor needed.
 
L-188
Posts: 29870
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sat Jan 26, 2008 4:30 am



Quoting 474218 (Reply 7):
Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
LM has not built a strategic bomber since WWII.

Lockheed built 392 B-47 bombers in the 1950's, will after the end of WWII.

But they didn't design it, Boeing did.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sat Jan 26, 2008 4:35 am

Are you sure this isn't the F-15E replacement that Boeing and LM are going into business together for?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 22920
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sat Jan 26, 2008 4:24 pm



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 6):
What a waste - tell me again how it wouldn't be wiser and less expensive to just build more new model B-2's? If we go ahead with a replacement bomber program than how can we be assured we don't spend the outrageous amount that we did on the B-2 only to cut the final buy down to just 20 when all is said and done?

One of our local Congresscritters - Norm Dicks - has been championing more B-2s. Last I heard, to produce 40 more B-2s would run $28 billion, or $700 million per frame.

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 10):
Are you sure this isn't the F-15E replacement that Boeing and LM are going into business together for?

It certainly sounds like it. The Seattle Times had a more in-depth article today and noted range was 2000 miles and payload was 14,000-28,000lbs which is similar to the F-15E and F-111. The plane would need to be larger to carry that store internally, but it would certainly be a much smaller plane then any of our current strategic bombers.
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sat Jan 26, 2008 4:37 pm



Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
It certainly sounds like it. The Seattle Times had a more in-depth article today and noted range was 2000 miles and payload was 14,000-28,000lbs which is similar to the F-15E and F-111. The plane would need to be larger to carry that store internally, but it would certainly be a much smaller plane then any of our current strategic bombers.

if that is what they are going to built (subsonic?!) they would be much better of with an F-22B Strikeraptor
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 22920
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sat Jan 26, 2008 8:22 pm



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 12):
if that is what they are going to built (subsonic?!) they would be much better of with an F-22B Strikeraptor

The problem with that is most of that ordnance would need to be carried on the outside, which would ruin it's low radar profile.
 
L-188
Posts: 29870
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:26 pm



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 10):
Are you sure this isn't the F-15E replacement that Boeing and LM are going into business together for?

Sure sounds like it.

Quoting AirRyan (Reply 10):
The Seattle Times had a more in-depth article today and noted range was 2000 miles and payload was 14,000-28,000lbs

Especially based on those numbers.

Which wouldn't be a bad thing, the USAF has been short a true medium bomber since the F-111 retired (No I don'te count the F-15E).

Actually wouldn't it be great if a follow-on to the old EF-111 was build on this airframe?
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
ebj1248650
Posts: 1517
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:30 pm



Quoting Stitch (Thread starter):
I tend to think they and LM have the inside track over NG. The bomber is expected to leverage the systems of the F-22, so that favors Boeing and LM even more, I would think.

I wouldn't be too quick to rule out Northrop-Grumman.

Quoting L-188 (Reply 14):
Quoting AirRyan (Reply 10):
Are you sure this isn't the F-15E replacement that Boeing and LM are going into business together for?

Sure sounds like it.

This being so, if it is, then we are talking about a fighter-bomber rather than a bomber in the classic sense?
Dare to dream; dream big!
 
A342
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 11:05 pm

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:49 pm

For what it's worth, Flight International is talking about an unrefueled 2000nm combat radius:

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...tin-team-for-next-usaf-bomber.html

Will the USAF consider a non-stealth design?
Exceptions confirm the rule.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7864
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sat Jan 26, 2008 10:16 pm

Is this an actual need for the USAF or is it just another very profitable program Boeing's and LM's lobbyists are pushing for?
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5179
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sat Jan 26, 2008 10:36 pm



Quoting PPVRA (Reply 17):
Is this an actual need for the USAF or is it just another very profitable program Boeing's and LM's lobbyists are pushing for?

Going by these previous reports about the project, the answer to both may be in the affirmative.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...r-will-be-subsonic-and-manned.html

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...usaf-rules-out-radical-bomber.html

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...s-modest-goals-for-new-bomber.html

We had started discussion on this earlier.....
Next U.S.A.F. Bomber (by DEVILFISH May 6 2007 in Military Aviation & Space Flight)
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 22920
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:36 pm



Quoting A342 (Reply 16):
Will the USAF consider a non-stealth design?

I suppose they could, since the F-111 and F-15E are both un-stealthy.

However, with the advances in air defenses, stealth is more and more becoming a requirement to survive. Even though the F-22 is expected to attain complete air superiority over a combat zone, the F-35 is stealthy to help protect her from ground-based anti-air defenses. I would expect the same would be required of a larger penetrator, especially if she was meant to go in with the F-22s at the outset of the battle.

The B-1 and B-52 are plenty capable of precision moving mud in great amounts once the air and ground defenses have been neutralized and stealth is no longer necessary.
 
texl1649
Posts: 327
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 5:38 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sun Jan 27, 2008 2:18 am

If the A-17/F-23 attack derivative(s) do in fact exist in the black world, this requirement is definitely odd. Similarly, if you've actually got an SR-71 replacement flying around, it's tough to see why you need this aircraft.

I dunno, but carrying that much weaponry at sub-sonic speeds really would make me wonder if the US would in the future be willing to risk pilot's lives. That F-16 tail and ejection seat in the Kosovo museum comes to mind.
 
r2rho
Posts: 2439
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:13 pm

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Mon Jan 28, 2008 7:40 pm



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 1):
I think that's pretty much monopolizing the market isn't it?

Wait a minute... if this happens, then the only competing bid could come from NG... with EADS support???  duck 
 
GDB
Posts: 12652
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Mon Jan 28, 2008 9:51 pm

It does seems more sensible to go for those 40 more B-2's, replacing some of the legacy heavy bombers.
Covering the very upper end of this new requirement.
But, re-jigging an existing (if dormant) production programme means little in the way of tax $ for an all new design & development, all the poor lawyers and 'consultants' not needed, including for no loser to challenge the winner either.

For the lower end, I too think a FB-22 would be a good idea, it might have to carry stores internally, say a bunch of JDAMs, but any bigger stand off weapon would surely be stealthy as well as having a decent range.
Allowing their external carriage not undermining LO, remembering the stand off capability too.
The US has programmes for these, the European Storm Shadow is similar in concept (and used in action), so that's hardly a potential problem 10 years hence.

No all new type needed, for what is a quite small, narrow requirement with no exports, can this be a good use of Defence $ when existing programmes are under pressure, like F-22 and F-35?
Which are needed in numbers to replace an aging fleet of types like F-15/F-16.
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Tue Jan 29, 2008 5:16 pm



Quoting Stitch (Reply 13):
The problem with that is most of that ordnance would need to be carried on the outside, which would ruin it's low radar profile.

for 10 G$ they'd be more than able to design and built a slightly bigger strike raptor. It would sure beat the slow small concept they invisage now.
 
wvsuperhornet
Posts: 517
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 4:18 pm

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Tue Jan 29, 2008 8:27 pm

Guys and Gals (if any) keep in mind our military is the king of mis-information its been long know that the USAF has been looking for a meduim range bomber to replace the F-111 and the funds havent been there maybe this is there way of trying to sneak one in. I cant imagine anyone being dumb enough to replace an intercontental bomber with a short range one especially after the trouble they had trying to secure air bases after 9/11. There is still also the Advanced bomber program that is still very much alive for long range needs so maybe they are trying to go 3 tier system like their nuke delivery systems Short Range: FA-22/F-35 Meduim Range: FB-22 (or something simular to the YF23) Long Range: A new bomber all together. We current have the B-1B/B-2/B-52H for long range the B-52 being the oldest would be the likely choice to be the first replaced by something the B-2 and the B-1B would do the long leg work while the new meduim bomber is put into service then by that time most of the work designing and building a new long range bomber would be done to replace the other two. Just my thoughts on it.
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5179
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Wed Jan 30, 2008 4:51 am

Are they going to replace one of these.....

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_B-52H_B-1B_B-2_Together_lg.jpg

.....with this?.....



.....or this?.....

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2006/q4/061027b_pr.html

Quote:
" While a commercial passenger application for the BWB concept is not in Boeing's current 20-year market outlook, the Advanced Systems organization of Boeing Integrated Defense Systems' (IDS) is closely monitoring the research based on the BWB's potential as a flexible, long-range, high-capacity military aircraft.

'The BWB concept holds tremendous promise for the future of military aviation as a multi-purpose military platform in 15 to 20 years,' said Darryl Davis, Boeing IDS Advanced Systems vice president and general manager of Advanced Precision Engagement and Mobility Systems."
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Wed Jan 30, 2008 5:46 pm



Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 25):
Are they going to replace one of these.....

well, the spec posted here doesn't suggest anything near strategic bombers. A blended wing body with an F-111 payload would be nice for boeint to mature the technology so they can launch an airliner with it, but it wouldn;t bring the USAF anything.

If I was a US taxpayer and the requirements posted here are correct, i'd say strikeraptor!
 
cloudy
Posts: 1613
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 3:23 pm

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sun Feb 03, 2008 6:04 am



Quoting PPVRA (Reply 17):
Is this an actual need for the USAF or is it just another very profitable program Boeing's and LM's lobbyists are pushing for?

Both. Technology like this has such a long development lead time that it is worth pursuing even if there is no current need. Yet because of the huge economic interests involved, it is hard to find unbiased opinions about what future needs will truly be.

As others have pointed out, this more of a replacement for the F15E than of the B1 and B2. I doubt there will ever be a new penetrating bomber with the B1 or B2's range and payload capacity. It is too hard and expensive to make them stealthy. Ironically, the B52 is more likely to see a direct replacement then the B2 is. There probably will be a need for a long range, heavy payload platform that can launch UAV's and missiles from standoff distances, and act as a "bomb truck" once air supremacy is achieved. A blended wing body would be ideal for this role because only a small part of a bomber needs to be pressurized.

My guess is that proposals to build more B2's don't get much traction is because the beast is so hard to maintain.

As for it being subsonic, the F15E and the F111 are effectively subsonic planes with a supersonic dash capability. Perhaps the air force thinks that stealth is more important than supersonic performance, especially if all that can be hoped for is an afterburner-fired, fuel hogging dash. Why they arn't asking for supercruise is a bigger question. That would be a more useful capability. Perhaps a plane that small can't carry the required payload internally, and enough fuel to supercruise to the required range at the same time.
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sun Feb 03, 2008 11:34 am



Quoting Cloudy (Reply 27):
Perhaps a plane that small can't carry the required payload internally, and enough fuel to supercruise to the required range at the same time.

the F-22 more or less already does that
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sun Feb 03, 2008 3:46 pm



Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 25):
" While a commercial passenger application for the BWB concept is not in Boeing's current 20-year market outlook, the Advanced Systems organization of Boeing Integrated Defense Systems' (IDS) is closely monitoring the research based on the BWB's potential as a flexible, long-range, high-capacity military aircraft.

'The BWB concept holds tremendous promise for the future of military aviation as a multi-purpose military platform in 15 to 20 years,' said Darryl Davis, Boeing IDS Advanced Systems vice president and general manager of Advanced Precision Engagement and Mobility Systems."

And if they have any brains they'll make it crewed by at least two persons.
 
cloudy
Posts: 1613
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 3:23 pm

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sun Feb 03, 2008 3:49 pm



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 28):
the F-22 more or less already does that

Not with an F111 size payload
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13173
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sun Feb 03, 2008 4:03 pm



Quoting Cloudy (Reply 30):
Not with an F111 size payload

With today's JDAM's and other such accurate munitions does a FB-22 need to have the same payload capacity as the F-111 to be just as if not more effective?
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
F27Friendship
Posts: 1098
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:45 pm

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sun Feb 03, 2008 4:29 pm



Quoting Cloudy (Reply 30):
Not with an F111 size payload

it does meet the payload range mentioned in the requirement for the new bomber. Also, it is a platform with growth potential.
 
User avatar
cpd
Posts: 4548
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:28 am



Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 12):
It certainly sounds like it. The Seattle Times had a more in-depth article today and noted range was 2000 miles and payload was 14,000-28,000lbs which is similar to the F-15E and F-111. The plane would need to be larger to carry that store internally, but it would certainly be a much smaller plane then any of our current strategic bombers.

This plane would be exactly what is needed to replace our F111s. We don't need something as big as the B2 Spirit, but we do need a plane more capable than the F18 Super Hornet.
 
r2rho
Posts: 2439
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:13 pm

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sun Mar 02, 2008 1:23 pm

The outcome of the KC-X competition makes my prediction at the beginning of the thread even more likely...

Quoting R2rho (Reply 21):
if this happens, then the only competing bid could come from NG... with EADS support??? duck

 
User avatar
Stitch
Topic Author
Posts: 22920
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sun Mar 02, 2008 3:15 pm

I just learned about the "B-1R" proposal - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-1_Lancer#B-1R. That looks like it could be a nice option - and cheaper then a new plane.
What Are The Chances Of The B-1R Being Built? (by 747400sp Apr 26 2006 in Military Aviation & Space Flight)
 
ebj1248650
Posts: 1517
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:17 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sun Mar 02, 2008 6:17 pm



Quoting Cpd (Reply 33):
This plane would be exactly what is needed to replace our F111s. We don't need something as big as the B2 Spirit, but we do need a plane more capable than the F18 Super Hornet.

My guess is we'll see a scaled down B-2A or a very scaled up F-22. I don't see a scaled up F-35; better to go clean sheet of paper than go that route.
Dare to dream; dream big!
 
MCIGuy
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:15 am

RE: Boeing And LM To Team-Up On Bomber RFP

Sun Mar 02, 2008 8:26 pm

The B-2 is a strategic bomber with 6000 mile reange. How are you going to replace it with something the 1/3 the range and less than half the load and call it "strategic". As planned now, this new one would be a tactical bomber.
BTW, Boeing did do substantial work on the B-2. The B-2 has 767 landing gear after all.  Smile
Airliners.net Moderator Team

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AERTANK, Google Adsense [Bot] and 9 guests