FighterControl

Northrop Grumman has won the Pentagon contract for the Long Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) to replace the B-52 and B-1. It's thought to the biggest defence contract in a decade and could be worth at least $80bn. The Virginia firm beat off a rival bid from Lockheed-Martin and Boeing.

Surely the designs have already been tabled to win the contract, who in their right mind would commit that amount of money simply to an idea?

I am burning with curiosity myself though!!

Mark wrote:Surely the designs have already been tabled to win the contract...

Just not revealed to the public yet... until they take that poxy sheet off!

I'm ever so curious to see what they come up with. Are the tender requirements
publically known?

Some great big stealthy thing, optionally manned, one would imagine. But you never know. Could just roll out a reimagined Vulcan (I wish I know I know).

And Northrop Grumman wasted no time in posting the news on their Website ....

http://www.americasnewbomber.com/



The link above includes a letter to the US President, members of Congress and the Pentagon, whereby US citizens can voice their support. Only in America .... the Ray-Bans, the reflection of the Stars and Stripes .... the nuances of lobbying and marketing US style.

Cost in 2016 USD is $564 million = £368 million Sterling per plane.

I'd love it to be something like a stealthy, angular, Valkyrie (XB-70) but you would think it's not going to look terribly different to a B-2 - so a flying wing, perhaps more delta than a Spirit - like a BAE Taranis. No idea on specs but I guess the USAF will want something with a range of up to 8,000 miles or so and capable of at least a load of 50,000 pounds (22,700 Kg). Mission profile??? Not supersonic? Very high altitude, good for FL600? The price tag seems quite low (if that makes sense!), so I can't imagine it's going to be very revolutionary - they want a workhorse. All very interesting. And will it be the B-3?

or QB-3?
Freeman

At most, from what has been said about the program, it will be 'optionally manned' rather than fully unmanned.

That would make it a QB-x then! (Bit like QF-4s, QF-16s, etc.)

I wouldn't get too excited just yet,the political fall out and protesting against the award to NG hasn't started and that could drag on for many many months,even years, once Boeing/LM get their political allies and lawyers into the fight!

but don't you think that it was always going to go to Northrop irrespective of their recent experience of building stealth bombers? Won't the powers that be have 'agreed' that keeping two major military aircraft manufacturers in business is in Americas best interests?
Freeman

EGVP wrote:That would make it a QB-x then! (Bit like QF-4s, QF-16s, etc.)

I like your thinking
Freeman

Deja Vu?!
Aren't there three US major aircraft manufacturers? Hard to think that its not in their best interest to keep them all in business, for the benefit of competition. Mind you, i keep reading that Boeing might buy out NG anyway in the future!

Jazz,
Yes. Three,
Freeman

When they retire it the crews will be flown back to their bases by the B-52H

Given the longevity of the B-52 and Bear it suggests to me that a more conventional looking aircraft might be the best way forward. Although they'll probably come up with a cross between the Death Star and the Millenium Falcon.

Ive seen it at times with Uncle Sam, military contracts seem to awarded on a rotational basis, !! Was it NG's turn ?

Bushpilot wrote:Given the longevity of the B-52 and Bear it suggests to me that a more conventional looking aircraft might be the best way forward. Although they'll probably come up with a cross between the Death Star and the Millenium Falcon.

Perhaps Boeing should have pitched the 747-800B. At least they'd be able to keep the production line running a bit longer.