Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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

THE US Air Force will earmark billions of dollars in its next five year budget plan to help meet the Pentagon's goal to develop a new long-range bomber by 2018.

The timetable was aggressive but achievable, given the new bomber would be likely to include technologies already under development by the Pentagon's Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency and the US aerospace and defence industry, an official said today.

"Substantial resources will be dedicated across the future years defence plan from 2008-2013 to get there," the official said.< "It will be billions."

Defence analyst Loren Thompson of the Virginia-based Lexington Institute said it would cost around $US20 billion ($26.7 billion) to develop and build a new bomber, unless it was based on an existing aircraft such as the Lockheed F-22 fighter jet.

The air force began a formal analysis of the alternatives for long range strike last October that could help shape the requirements for a future bomber competition.

Officials now plan to split the analysis into separate sections addressing the need for new long-range missiles, which could hit targets within a few hours, and the requirements for a next-generation bomber, which would be able to loiter over a given area for a longer time.

Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman have already expressed interest in the bomber competition.

The idea of developing an F-22 bomber variant, first championed by former Air Force Secretary James Roche, was still being considered, Mr Thompson said.

The aircraft's radar-evading characteristics and its supersonic speed could be attractive features for a new bomber.

He predicted that the new bomber would be manned, despite increasing speculation about an unmanned aircraft that could be remotely piloted like the Predator flying missions over Iraq daily, or fly autonomous like the Northrop Global Hawk, which has also been used extensively in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"No amount of software is going to allow you to cope with all the things that come up in combat. You need a real pilot," Mr Thompson said.


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bomber; miltech; pentagon; us; usairforce; warplane
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-112 next last
To: NicknamedBob

It was clear from his pics that it was THAT SMALL.

But he did not go into details about the issues you mentioned. He did mention that shielding was a problem but, if my memory is accurate, evidently not as terminal a problem as some might suspect. Again, he didn't elaborate.

My impression was that he treaded secrecy lines very carefully though quite confidently and almost nonchalantly.

There are a few rumors that some of the ET craft use nuke engines--though that seems to conflict with the zero-point energy engines most supposedly run on.


61 posted on 07/20/2006 9:12:31 PM PDT by Quix (PRAY AND WORK WHILE THERE'S DAY! Many very dark nights are looming. Thankfully, God is still God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Quix
I wish I could tell you some of the stuff I've seen down here in Florida, but you may think its off the deep end

Anyways for starters there's a certain small aircraft I call the delta flyer with a 20 ft wingspan that I've seen for at least 8 years now. I've seen this black 'aircraft' loitering around at low altitude that you'd think its a large bird and then within moments it gets up to speeds of over 900mph and cross miles of sky within 5 seconds. I've observed it at altitudes from 400ft to over 15,000 ft.

And there are many other instances; since I first observed it back in 1998 or earlier there are several other types I've cataloged.....

62 posted on 07/20/2006 9:12:56 PM PDT by prophetic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: prophetic

No trouble believing you at all.

I forget the areas in FL that are supposed to be hot beds of such sightings.

Will FREEPMAIL you shortly.


63 posted on 07/20/2006 9:16:07 PM PDT by Quix (PRAY AND WORK WHILE THERE'S DAY! Many very dark nights are looming. Thankfully, God is still God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: saganite
"Despite the protestations in the article I'm betting it will be unmanned."

If they're smart, it will be. The age of manned combat aircraft is drawing to a close. Even today's fighters like the F-16 are capable of better performance, but are limited by human factors, such as G tolerance. An unmanned aircraft doesn't have that problem, and satellite controls are already good enough to steer them remotely at long distances, as Global Hawk has proved. The only problem is with the software that would be involved...it will inevitably be the biggest source of problems.
64 posted on 07/20/2006 9:19:22 PM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DesScorp

I'm expecting a more or less surprise meteor storm to sweep all satellites out of the skies in our era. Could complicate a lot of things.


65 posted on 07/20/2006 9:21:00 PM PDT by Quix (PRAY AND WORK WHILE THERE'S DAY! Many very dark nights are looming. Thankfully, God is still God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76
Good evening.
"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."

How about several satellites with lasers and Google Earth Plus?

Michael Frazier
66 posted on 07/20/2006 9:25:10 PM PDT by brazzaville (no surrender no retreat, well, maybe retreat's ok)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Czar
"What is your source/authority for these comments on the B-1B bomber?"

I work in Aviation, with ex-Air Force guys, and Air National Guard Viper drivers (who have experience around Bone crews). I've never heard of a problem with the swing-wings. The Zoomies tell me the problem is with those damn intake baffles we put on the B model to make them "stealthier". They're serpentine shaped, and that's what limits the top speed to Mach 1.3; they tell me this has caused problems operating about 28,000 ft or so. Boeing has proposed a new build model of the Bone that removes the baffles and restores a top Mach 2 speed, and gives those hungry GE F101's the airflow they need.

And please....making a bomber out of the Raptor is just stupid. They've already tacked on attack capability to it, but a dedicated bomber? That's just a damn excuse to get more funding for the whole Raptor program, which Congress hates. USAF chafes at the fact that they'll never get over 189 of their new sports cars.
67 posted on 07/20/2006 9:27:40 PM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Czar

I agree. I was on the flight test program.


68 posted on 07/20/2006 9:27:59 PM PDT by donmeaker (If the sky don't say "Surrender Dorothy" then my ex wife is out of town.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Quix

Again I guess I could see a motive force that small, but for power it would have to be coupled to dynamos. At the time, superconducting generators would not have been available, so he must have been talking about outboard devices.

Intriguing.


69 posted on 07/20/2006 9:28:10 PM PDT by NicknamedBob (Mom said to call a spade a spade. Dad taught me what to call it when you trip over it in the shed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Fiji Hill
Think BIG!


70 posted on 07/20/2006 9:35:41 PM PDT by uglybiker (Don't blame me. I didn't make you stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

How about a fleet of unmanned bombers based on the moon?


71 posted on 07/20/2006 9:37:20 PM PDT by maro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Quix
Good evening.
"It was clear from his pics that it was THAT SMALL."

Could it be the Holy Grail, controlled fusion?

Imagine the effect on the world's economic structure.

Michael Frazier
72 posted on 07/20/2006 9:38:05 PM PDT by brazzaville (no surrender no retreat, well, maybe retreat's ok)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: brazzaville; Quix

From the supplied hints, it wasn't fusion. If cold fusion could be made to work, it could be made that small, but it wouldn't be that powerful.

Think of a design that involves skirting the edge of excursion. A little whiplash from the dragon's tail.


73 posted on 07/20/2006 9:53:51 PM PDT by NicknamedBob (Mom said to call a spade a spade. Dad taught me what to call it when you trip over it in the shed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: uglybiker
The B-36 is one of the coolest bombers ever designed.

Sadly there are only a few left in existence.

74 posted on 07/20/2006 9:55:29 PM PDT by COEXERJ145 (Free Republic is Currently Suffering a Pandemic of “Bush Derangement Syndrome.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: NicknamedBob

Think of a design that involves skirting the edge of excursion. A little whiplash from the dragon's tail.
= = = =

I'm far from a physcist . . . but reading that and reflecting on other things I've read . . . it appears that you are either very well read or have some inside information or are an extremely good extrapolator.

And I can't even articulate why I'm convinced of that but I'm very convinced of that.


75 posted on 07/20/2006 10:01:39 PM PDT by Quix (PRAY AND WORK WHILE THERE'S DAY! Many very dark nights are looming. Thankfully, God is still God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: NicknamedBob
Good evening.
"A little whiplash from the dragon's tail."

Nice phrase. Fire away, I'm ready.

Good night, all.

Michael Frazier
76 posted on 07/20/2006 10:02:20 PM PDT by brazzaville (no surrender no retreat, well, maybe retreat's ok)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Quix

No inside information. I'll go with the well-read and good extrapolator explanation.

Thanks!


77 posted on 07/20/2006 10:09:53 PM PDT by NicknamedBob (Mom said to call a spade a spade. Dad taught me what to call it when you trip over it in the shed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: NicknamedBob

Actually, he alluded to NUKE engines MUCH smaller than that. And, there were some hints that some are deployed but I'm sure if he were queried about those hints he could have immediately denied them. I don't recall what they were specifically. I didn't take many notes.

My impression--and I don't know where it comes from in all this--my impression is that the power was immediately electricity and that the electricity powers very exotic UFO types of dynamics, technologies.

I have long had a hunch with scant verification from few puzzle pieces that the radiation aspect of nuclear technologies has been overblown. I don't know whether we or ET's shared technologies to minimize the problems but that those problems have been minimized.

As I understand it--much of my impression from extrapolation from very subtle and tiny bits of puzzle pieces; the oligarchy has not found it in THEIR interest for the general public to think that there are essentially no serious unsolved problems with having cheap nuclear generated electricity.

I believe that nuclear waste can be reduced by more than 95% in volume to what it routinely currently is.


78 posted on 07/20/2006 10:15:14 PM PDT by Quix (PRAY AND WORK WHILE THERE'S DAY! Many very dark nights are looming. Thankfully, God is still God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Dumpster Baby
My guess (based upon years of research, plus things I've seen and heard personally over the years) is that there are agencies within the federal government so secret that even the President and DoD don't know about them: their funding separate and unaccounted, their personnel sequestered and elite, their missions and ultimate ends unknown.

If I could have one wish (other than "to be a good Christian"), it would be to know the darkest secret in the world.

79 posted on 07/20/2006 10:17:08 PM PDT by B-Chan (Catholic. Monarchist. Texan. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: brazzaville

I don't really recall if I've ever come across puzzle pieces that hinted whether it was fusion or more conventional nuclear processes. I wouldn't be that surprised either way.

My impression is that the magnetic technologies the ET craft afforded us--whether reverse engineered or via directly taught/given technologies--that the magnetic technologies could readily be used to contain all manner of things and forces. Perhaps fusion it is. I just don't know at all.

I have never been able to resolve via any individual or collection of puzzle pieces the seeming contradiction between deployed nuclear engines vs zero-point/free energy engines using energies inherent in the quantum levels of reality.

I'm pretty well convinced that the latter are true in 2-3 DIFFERENT ways. I accept, having watched Stanton Friedman's presentation in March 06, that it is highly likely that the rumors of our having UFO type craft with nuclear engines in them--that that's also true. Why both is beyond even my puzzle piece collection and very risky extrapolations or even guided flights of fancy.


80 posted on 07/20/2006 10:20:42 PM PDT by Quix (PRAY AND WORK WHILE THERE'S DAY! Many very dark nights are looming. Thankfully, God is still God!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-112 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson