Skip to comments.
US earmarks billions for new bomber
Herald Sun ^
| 21 July 2006
Posted on 07/20/2006 5:16:22 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-112 next last
Bring it on!
To: Aussie Dasher
Redevelop the B-70 with todays technology.
2
posted on
07/20/2006 5:19:41 PM PDT
by
mountn man
(Growing old is mandatory. Growing up is optional.)
To: Aussie Dasher
Despite the protestations in the article I'm betting it will be unmanned.
3
posted on
07/20/2006 5:20:07 PM PDT
by
saganite
(Billions and billions and billions-------and that's just the NASA budget!)
To: Aussie Dasher
Those parts from the 1947 Roswell UFO crash are coming in handy!
To: Aussie Dasher
It is always easier to improve upon an existing design, than to create a new design from scratch. From what I know about the F-22 (which is darn'd little) it appears to be a good platform to work from.
5
posted on
07/20/2006 5:21:13 PM PDT
by
Hodar
(With Rights, come Responsibilities. Don't assume one, without assuming the other.)
Comment #6 Removed by Moderator
To: Aussie Dasher
What's wrong with the Bone (B1B)? I think that's a great platform.
But I'm a sailor...what do I know.
7
posted on
07/20/2006 5:23:00 PM PDT
by
CrawDaddyCA
(Tancredo/Paul 2008)
To: Aussie Dasher
Somehow I think all these prognostications will come for naught.
It will be unlike anything flying today.
8
posted on
07/20/2006 5:23:58 PM PDT
by
tet68
( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
To: Aussie Dasher
My beloved B-52 cannot go on forever, even though it has already outlived everybody's expectations. I always thought Carter killing the B-1 program (or limiting it severly) was a mistake and I still do.
9
posted on
07/20/2006 5:24:11 PM PDT
by
corbe
(mystified)
Comment #10 Removed by Moderator
To: Aussie Dasher
I would like to see the U.S. build a fleet of at least 8,000 bombers that are triple the wingspan of the B-52, can travel around the world three times without refueling and that can drop over 800 two-ton bombs.
That's 1.6 million tons of bombs.
To: Aussie Dasher
Well, if the Democrats achieve power and draw our forces back to Okinawa, then we'll definitely need this baby for aftermath, when the Dems are nuked and dead and patriotic Americans, Aussies and Brits and maybe India are reestablishing order in the world.
Maybe India and Japan will have waded in by then, too.
12
posted on
07/20/2006 5:27:09 PM PDT
by
patriciaruth
(http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1562436/posts)
To: Aussie Dasher
Why does the US need another Bomber? The B2 is deployed from MO to the Mid East on 24 to 36 hour missions with 3 or 4 mid air refueling operations to drop some bombs. The only reason that we need another Bomber is in case they do a sequel to Dr. Strangelove and the offspring, if there are any, of those wonderful characters come back to reprise the role of their fathers.
13
posted on
07/20/2006 5:32:47 PM PDT
by
joem15
(If less is more, then what is plenty?)
To: Aussie Dasher
The only arm of the govenment that I endorse.
More toys for our boys who protect the
![](http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c2/Davis1950/40USA_E7e1.gif)
And to Liberals:
14
posted on
07/20/2006 5:36:50 PM PDT
by
Cobra64
(All we get are lame ideas from Republicans and lame criticism from dems about those lame ideas.)
To: SamAdams76
I would like to see the U.S. build a fleet of at least 8,000 bombers that are triple the wingspan of the B-52, can travel around the world three times without refueling and that can drop over 800 two-ton bombs It would probably look like a flying saucer, and not make any noise. ;o)
15
posted on
07/20/2006 5:37:49 PM PDT
by
Dumpster Baby
("Hope somebody finds me before the rats do .....")
To: Aussie Dasher
we need a bomber with scramjets... like the X43 :)
To: SamAdams76
How about a stealthy ramjet powered space plane.
Able to take off in the midwest, climb directly into space then either drop back into the atmosphere or stay there until needed. Could even have an anti-satellite ability?
Additional capability - effective rapid global pinpoint delivery of whatever, whenever from a 100% standing start.
To: Dumpster Baby
Triangular, silent........could it be?
18
posted on
07/20/2006 5:39:25 PM PDT
by
tet68
( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
To: SamAdams76
I would like to see the U.S. build a fleet of at least 8,000 bombers that are triple the wingspan of the B-52, can travel around the world three times without refueling and that can drop over 800 two-ton bombs.Where did you buy your weed?
19
posted on
07/20/2006 5:40:45 PM PDT
by
zarf
To: AntiSheehan
It would be nice to get a very long range, supercruise mach 2 bomber, stealthy, and with a B1's payload capacity. I wonder if they can pull that off.
How about Mach 7-10? :D
LOOK :P
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-112 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson