Read the forum code of contact
By: - 25th June 2006 at 11:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Manned or not?
By: - 25th June 2006 at 12:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Well, that sort of thing is in development for decades now. As far as official info goes, it may be in development for decades more. Article itself is from popularscience, which is known to dig out various hi tech projects with lots of 'wow' value. Not to say they're not gonna happen, but it looks to me they just picked a project that loooked cool and put it in the timeframe USAF said it wants to field its new bomber.
And the article says it'd be unmanned. I would guess it could go either way, really, depending on AI.
By: - 25th June 2006 at 12:57 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Not to mention that it shows cruise missiles being deployed from between the engines? Clearly there isn't room even in the picture. It's just another Popular "Science" fantasy.
By: - 25th June 2006 at 13:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Did not NASA build a test aircraft to trial that Wing configuration at low speed (XD-1 was the designation if I remember correctly) in the late 1970's? The plan was then to build a supersonic version based on the F-8. I never heard what happened after that.
By: - 25th June 2006 at 17:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This is not fantasy, a subscale oblique wing UAV is being prepared for flight as we speak.
By: - 25th June 2006 at 19:03 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Is the US looking at new bomber program to replacing its existing B-52 or B-1 ?? Considering that they have mentioned the schedule and are developing a 1/5 demonstrator it looks quite real.
By: - 25th June 2006 at 19:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The USAF is looking at the "B-3", to come online around 2025 I think. One of the concepts under study is a Mach 2.4 cruise aircraft.
By: - 25th June 2006 at 19:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
This is not fantasy, a subscale oblique wing UAV is being prepared for flight as we speak.
The part that is fantasy is that they are planning a bomber like this one. There is simple no room for a bombay between the engines big enough to carry multiple cruise missiles.
By: - 25th June 2006 at 19:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That's just a typically asinine media interpretation, that's all.
By: - 25th June 2006 at 19:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
That's just a typically asinine media interpretation, that's all.
Well no kidding :) But the guy who posted this doesn't know that so I thought I'd break the news to him. ;)
By: - 25th June 2006 at 19:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I see absolute no need for something like this, why don't they just produce more B-2 then?
By: - 25th June 2006 at 20:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I see absolute no need for something like this, why don't they just produce more B-2 then?
A Mach 2.4 aircraft will have a much shorter reaction time than a subsonic B-2. That's the idea, at least. This is potentially part of the USAF's Prompt Global Strike initiative.
By: - 25th June 2006 at 23:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Be interesting to see how it refuels. A there-and-back trip out of Diego or Guam could use a bit more than a 5,000 mile range. Our list of allies to help us on our next big adventure/ "threat" presented by Microsoft Powellpoint 2003 seems to get shorter. Diego and Guam might be it at the rate we are going. I would rather see the above working hand in hand with a super jumbo of some kind as an arsenal ship, both firing off long range hyperonic shapes of the kind that was tested off of the NASA B-52 a few years back.
By: - 25th June 2006 at 23:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A Mach 2.4 aircraft will have a much shorter reaction time than a subsonic B-2. That's the idea, at least. This is potentially part of the USAF's Prompt Global Strike initiative.
I don't think anyone will question its capabilities, but it looks like one of those programs that will get huge development cost and cancelled in the middle. If something like this comes out, it's unit cost might balloon to something like 5 billion each. But then again, you might only 6 B-3s to do all the striking you need.
By: - 26th June 2006 at 04:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A lot of the early developmental work can be drawn from the NASA/DARPA QSP program, which is researching quiet supersonic aircraft primarily for civil use.
By: - 26th June 2006 at 08:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Two things are confused here: Yes, the USAF is thinking about a new bomber which might or might not be supersonic, often referred to as LRSA, Long Range Strike Aircraft. See http://www.strategypage.com/messageboards/messages/512-12026.asp
What we talk about here is a test aircraft built by Northrop Grumman, see
http://www.sflorg.com/aviation/av032306_01.html
By: - 26th June 2006 at 09:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Another article about what we already discussed: http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=55320&highlight=Switchblade
By: - 26th June 2006 at 15:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Two things are confused here: Yes, the USAF is thinking about a new bomber which might or might not be supersonic, often referred to as LRSA, Long Range Strike Aircraft. See http://www.strategypage.com/messageboards/messages/512-12026.aspWhat we talk about here is a test aircraft built by Northrop Grumman, see
Not built yet and personally I'll be surprised if it doesn't get cancelled. What's it going to tell us that the NASA test vehicle didn't? BTW where do the landing gear go? :confused:
By: - 26th June 2006 at 15:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What's wrong with the B1?
By: - 28th June 2006 at 06:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The USAF is looking at the "B-3", to come online around 2025 I think. One of the concepts under study is a Mach 2.4 cruise aircraft.
Maybe they should dust off the plans for the XB-70 and get a Mach 3 cruise aircraft. :D I suppose they want something stealthy, though.
Posts: 6,186
By: Austin - 25th June 2006 at 10:20
Pentagon developing supersonic shape-shifting assassin
With a shift of its wing, Switchblade goes from long-range endurance flyer to Mach-speed assassin.
SWITCHBLADE FACTS:
Objective: To function efficiently as both an endurance aircraft and as a supersonic airplane by changing its shape midflight.
Time frame: Design by 2007; one-fifth-scale technology demonstration vehicle by 2010; ready for service as early as 2020.
Wingspan: 200 feet
Range: 5,000 nautical miles
Max. altitude: 60,000 feet
Max. speed: Mach 2