Posted on 06/25/2010 2:46:52 PM PDT by ErnstStavroBlofeld
The 2006 QDR called for the Air Force to develop a next generation bomber to be ready by 2018; an initiative that promptly went nowhere. Now, the very term “next generation bomber” is “dead” in the halls of the Pentagon, reports John Tirpak, citing comments made yesterday by Air Force Lt. Gen. Philip Breedlove, deputy chief of staff for operations, plans, and requirements.
Breedlove says what is being discussed is something much smaller than the NGB would have been, and though stealthy, it will not be designed to penetrate dense SAM belts like the NGB. It will be more of a “utility infielder” for a family of strike platforms under consideration.
There is a “lively debate” going on at the Pentagon regarding long range strike and penetrating platform cost (very high) versus the cost of enemy guided missile defenses and battle networks (very low). Importantly, Breedlove said that for the first time, requirements for a major aircraft are not coming from Air Combat Command, but are coming down from OSD.
(Excerpt) Read more at defensetech.org ...
With our defense budget, sometimes it seems we don’t get an awfully lot of good stuff for it. Anything we do get ends up being paired down to not enough units as well. Been that way since the 80’s.
Ping
NGB?
It’s called the B-52..
just slap some bondo and super glue on ‘em and keep ‘em flying..
Hell, the B-52 may outlive the Browning designed M2 .50 cal machinegun in service length.
The tech will exist to do that, even build wild weasel drones.
“am I missing something?”
Yes, an E4 with a HS education can pilot a drone, it doesn’t take an officer with a four year degree. So the officers mafia will fight it tooth and nail.
"Officers mafia".
Heh.
Actually...when my son was 16 and a big-time gamer....he was prepared to fly any drone that the AF had....for just a six-pack of beer and a pizza (no leather jacket required). He could memorize three times the amount of data to accomplish a flight and was willing to put eighty hours a week into practice.
I think the AF is missing what is available and ready to go.
The Air Force in general, and ACC (and its predecessors) in particular have been run by fighter pilots since the end of the Viet Nam war. These guys are center-line thrust and air-supremacy fixated; penetration, strike and multi-engine platforms simply do not do it for them. Don’t even mention drones / UAVs in polite company. Like the French after the WWI, they are still fighting the last war. Or even, in this case, the one before that.
Frankly, I think most of the OSD civilians are, have been, and will be, full of it.
But — on this issue the OSD types are correct. Left to its own devices, the corporate AF will not, in this generation, expend budgetary assets on the development of a new, manned, weapons launching/delivery platform (bomber). Period. Full stop. The B52 is well past its sell-by date. And there are a pathetically few number of airworthy later generation platforms of this type. And they too, even considering upgrades, are all well out of date in technological terms.
Given the lead time for development of a major weapons system, it is significantly past time to do something about this. Or we will be caught short not too many years into the future. Most likely by the Chinese.
True enough, but I think the vast majority of the missions the BUF's been flying for the last ten years could have been done just as well by a heavy-lifter tricked out as a weapons carrier, a la the AC-130. Or somebody could pull out the plans for the B-49 and throw in a computerized flight control system and some serious ECM....
>>Hell, the B-52 may outlive the Browning designed M2 .50 cal machinegun in service length.<<
There is nothing to replace either yet.
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.